Bear in mind that the red sea carries all kinds of shipping/cargo ... including food. So the issue is more nuanced than "Money over lives". This is also part of the wider hybrid war. Although related to the Palestinian conflict, it is also related to Russia's war against Ukraine and Russia's wider global ambition. And, aside for the disruption to shipping ... both ways.... consider the climatic implication of sending all that shipping around Africa instead.
I do agree that the US (and the rest of the Western world) should be doing more to moderate Israel's conduct in Gaza.
Anyways... here's my mate's take this morning
"Technically it is probably not a war in the parlance of people with their buttcheeks in a twist (politicians), but I am a simple general, so I use more common and direct vernacular.
Legality
First I want to get the legality of it out of the way.
By international law any naval power have both the right and the obligation to defend freedom of navigation on international waters, and to hinder piracy on open sea.
Let it here be clear that the Houthi's have performed both of those criminal acts several times over by attacking more than 40 individual ships, and by taking 3 ships captive and attempted to take two more.
This has been international law since mid 19th century.
The biggest proponents of this has historically been the Royal Navy, after 1945 most nations have done this.
The Why?
Why did the US participate in what they inherently see as a European problem?
There are two reasons for this.
The first is that the UK forced the issue the day before, as HMS Diamond of the Royal Navy started to blow up incoming missiles it also fired back at the launch sites.
The UK had "opinions" after the engagements about the US not also firing back, and Downing Street held a long call with the US about their obligation to Defend Freedom of Navigation.
Basically Sunak slut-shamed Biden into acting more forcefully.
The second reason is that China also had "opinions", and threatened to send in their navy to solve the problem.
Because yes, it is a European problem, but at the other end it is also a Chinese problem since it is mostly their goods that are being attacked on the ocean, and their economy can't take another interuption of international trade through the Red Sea.
The last part would have made it public that the US is no longer able to be a superpower, not from a military standpoint of course, but not able from the political standpoint.
Being a superpower turns out to be more of a "will-thing" compared to an "ability-thing".
War Powers Act of 1973
EU+Friends now has 60+30 days and counting to get our **** together and get enough warships down there to continue what was started yesterday.
The reason is that the US President can start a war on his own, that lasts for 60 days, after that he must either have congressional approval to continue, or he has 30 days to pull out of the war.
The chance of Biden getting any congressional approval is slim to nill, Chinese or not."