SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Journal by DeathMonkey
President Joe Biden will announce an end Thursday to U.S. support for a grinding five-year Saudi-led military offensive in Yemen that has deepened human suffering in the Arabian peninsula’s poorest country, national security adviser Jake Sullivan said.
Biden ending US support for Saudi-led offensive in Yemen
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 60 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Forms follow function, and often obliterate it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 05 2021, @03:53AM (20 children)
Reasonable like they were during the Iran hostage crisis? Or the many terrorism games Iran has played from then to the current day? Or Iran's support for some shifty governments of the world (Assad's Syrian faction and Venezuela). Sorry, I don't buy that argument in the least.
Both Israel and Saudi Arabia are heavily trade-dependent nations. They rely on their word and reputation. They have to be pretty reasonable in order to negotiate for what they want. Not so for Iran.
Here, what's the "strong negative" to regional peace from the Israel-Saudi axis? Answer: Iran. Yemen would probably be at war no matter what happened. But the Saudis are there because Iran is there. It's a mini-cold war with moves by one power opposed by the other.
And really, what does Iran have to offer in the way of peace?
(Score: 2, Touché) by fustakrakich on Friday February 05 2021, @04:43AM (6 children)
Hey, they kept the Russians out when the shah got sick and died, didn't they? That's what Khomeini was there to do. Worked better than it did in Afghanistan
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 05 2021, @10:07PM (5 children)
That's true. Though the Russians probably would have been kept out no matter who was in power. That was a bridge too far with the USSR at the end of its life.
By whose point of view?
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday February 05 2021, @10:45PM (4 children)
The government's, he was an asset. This is Brzezinski's work [arizona.edu], and it's still paying huge dividends
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday February 06 2021, @05:04AM (3 children)
No. In the link, Brzezinski discusses Afghanistan not Iran, and Mujaheddin not Khomeini. It's not relevant.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Saturday February 06 2021, @05:44AM (2 children)
So what? He did both. Same process for both for the same purpose. All your other "color revolutions" (including Ukraine) were for the same thing too, to chase off the competition. Of course you are expected to create a distraction
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday February 06 2021, @11:57AM (1 child)
You say he did both without proof for Iran. That's a huge difference from you claimed with that link.
Funny how democratic movements around Russia ("including Ukraine") are dismissed as US meddling.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Saturday February 06 2021, @08:25PM
"democratic movements" ha ha. You're parroting propaganda again.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 05 2021, @07:31AM (3 children)
Obvious counter-offer: More than khallow does? Quit mongering the war, khallow! We are men of action, lies do not become us! And just because fomenting war is a profession with a long history, that does not mean you can get Florin to go to war against Gilder by killing a Princess Bride! You keep using these words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean. You are a political lightweight, khallow. You should send a letter to Jared. The screaming of the eels always gets louder when they are about to feed!!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 05 2021, @03:18PM (2 children)
I wasn't an option. And what is Iran really offering? It sounds like a nuclear arms race and mini-cold war to me.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday February 05 2021, @04:07PM (1 child)
That's because your head is filled with mass media garbage.
We have Iran surrounded
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 05 2021, @10:01PM
"We" is not Saudi Arabia. They can't count on the US to always be around to protect them. Nuclear weapons would be a counter to Iran's superior military power even if Iran also has nuclear weapons. Turkey and Egypt may well decide they need nuclear weapons as well due to Iran. It's not that big a region.
Or a better understanding of the military problems of the region.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 05 2021, @11:17AM (5 children)
They were certainly more reasonable when they had a democracy. And then the CIA overthrew it.
As for terrorism, I could point out that 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Or that Saudi Arabia is the largest exporter of terrorism in the world.
Or the US's support for the authoritarian terrorist state of Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia is doing a genocide in Yemen. There can be no justification for that.
I mean, it's not that Iran is good, but since when does someone have to be good for us to have relations with them?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 05 2021, @09:56PM (4 children)
Which isn't saying much since that democracy got into trouble in the first place because they stole a massive amount of oil infrastructure from the UK. That's not reasonable in the first place.
You could also point out that it was done on US soil and therefore makes it somehow a US scheme, right? What you insinuate is irrelevant without evidence to back it up. The citizenship of some terrorists doesn't imply national involvement. And as far as "exporting" terrorism goes, I have to go with Iran as the bigger player due to their explicit support for Hezbollah and Hamas (particularly, the "military wing" which is classified widely as a terrorist organization).
The other choice given here was Israel and Iran. Only one of these three states is a democracy. The other two are pretty ugly (though I grant the republic structure of Iran is relatively more appealing in the long run than the monarchy of Saudi Arabia). And only one, Saudi Arabia is willing to play ball with Israel.
I recall someone asking "When does someone have to be good for us to have relations with them?" There's two problems with statements like this. First, it cheapens the meaning of genocide. Yes, there are serious war crimes (particularly attacks on what appear to be civilian targets). No, the war crimes do not amount to a case of genocide.
Second, the choice we were alleged to be given was Saudi Arabia and Israel, or Iran. If you could make a case for Iran and Israel, then I would be interested since that would imply some serious progress towards peace in the Middle East.
My take is that any lasting peace will require the effort of all the major powers of the area: Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, and Israel. And that may well require getting rid some of the more odious governments of the region, particularly Saudi Arabia's monarchy and Iran's theocracy. But right now the place is such a disaster that we're stuck working with who's there. Presently, for all their evil, Saudi Arabia has better connections, more interest in peace, and a better history than Iran does.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday February 06 2021, @08:07AM (2 children)
Dude. Think.
I come onto your land, I shoot you. I build oil pumps, I give your kid a cent or two on the dollar. I treat him like shit, boss him around, and eventually he just throws me off.
He keeps the oil pumps, well the 1 in 10 that I didn't manage to sabotage on the way out.
He "stole" them? Really?
This is boot licker logic. I thought better of you. Boot liquor, fine, but boot licker, no.
"The citizenship of some terrorists doesn't imply national involvement."
Sure, sure, just because most of them came from KSA doesn't mean the KSA government sent them. No necessarily.
What's funny is how the information about whether or not they were *actually* backed by the KSA government is still classified.
It's not that "we" don't know. "We" just decided not to tell you. Now shut up and forget about it.
"Second, the choice we were alleged to be given was Saudi Arabia and Israel, or Iran. If you could make a case for Iran and Israel, then I would be interested since that would imply some serious progress towards peace in the Middle East."
If I'm understanding this right you left a word out. A case for Iran and Israël coöperating? We've only been partners for centuries. Iran is the only large Muslim country that still has a significant Jewish population, and doesn't suppress them (at least notably moreso than the rest of the population.) Jews and Persians have been living side by side and respecting each other in Iran for well over 2k years. There's no reason the countries should not coöperate as well, in the large view. In the small view, they do not coöperate because the Israëli government feels perfectly safe within their US umbrella, feels no need to compromise with anyone.
Remove that US umbrella, let Yisraël feel fear for a moment, let us think who else might help us.
Oh Lord, the Persians. Sucks we've spent nearly 100 years making enemies of them. I really hope they can forgive.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday February 06 2021, @01:03PM (1 child)
This is what makes it theft. It wasn't that kid's oil pumps. The rest of that paragraph is just rhetorical flavor.
The non-retarded approach would have been to tax the oil wells. UK and the US wouldn't have sponsored a coup if there was a reasonable tax and regulation of those oil wells instead of a larcenous seizure of the whole deal.
Further, we just need to look at present day Venezuela to see where the "democracy" of Iran would have gone, if that coup hadn't succeeded. The present Venezuelan government succeeded where that Iranian government failed. And it's turned into a man-made disaster with something like 6 million refugees over the past ten years.
And by "backed" you mean what? If you merely mean that you don't know, well, so what? If you mean specific actions such as planning, funding, etc were carried out, then you'll need evidence not its lack.
I present as counterevidence, the fact [wikipedia.org] that the Jewish population in Iran went from ~140-150k in 1948 to under 10k by 2012, and the fact that Iran has been sponsoring enemies of Israel for decades (Hezbollah and Hamas). While there might have been this 2k years of peaceful cooperation, that no longer exists. And it sure looks to me like Iran is to blame.
Even in such a scenario, why in the world would they turn to Iran? Saudi Arabia (and perhaps Turkey and Egypt) still provides the better deal at present. That may include eventual nuclear weapon technology transfer, should (or rather when) Iran finally succeed at developing viable nuclear weapons.
I tire of how many decades of bad behavior on the part of Iran is excused merely because they got treated bad way back when. Iran needs to change.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday February 06 2021, @05:12PM
Actually, you're wrong. You build oil pumps on *my* land, those are *my* pumps buddy. Don't like it? Don't build on my land.
"And by "backed" you mean what? If you merely mean that you don't know, well, so what? If you mean specific actions such as planning, funding, etc were carried out, then you'll need evidence not its lack."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_28_pages
"I present as counterevidence, the fact [wikipedia.org] that the Jewish population in Iran went from ~140-150k in 1948 to under 10k by 2012"
Yes, many have left, for one country or another, for one reason or another. But they're neither expelled nor held, they're free to leave or to stay.
"While there might have been this 2k years of peaceful cooperation, that no longer exists."
No, it still exists, but it's between the peoples, not the states. The states hate each other, that's obvious.
"And it sure looks to me like Iran is to blame."
Only if your view is thoroughly coloured by the other sides propaganda. The Israëli state has some rather peculiar ideas, and it hasn't been at all shy about promoting propaganda to confuse the issues. That state has tried several times to spark an exodus from Iran, but it's never been successful there - as it has been elsewhere in the arab world.
"Saudi Arabia (and perhaps Turkey and Egypt) still provides the better deal at present."
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt are oppressive ethnic states that actively discriminate against and persecute Jews. The Israëli state *likes* this because it gives them ready made excuses for implementing an ethnic state themselves, and discriminating against and persecuting arabs. "See, there's tons of nations for arabs, there's even several for Turks, there's only one for Jews" they like to say. Our neighbors sins provide covers for our own, you see.
But a decent state, a state of its citizens in that place, would be much more interested in dealing with a nation which is closer to our own ideals, which is not actively oppressive and tyrannical. And Iran would fit that bill much better than any of the states you mentioned.
"should (or rather when) Iran finally succeed at developing viable nuclear weapons."
If Iran wanted a nuclear weapon, they would have had one long before now.
The real reason they don't have one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Khamenei%27s_fatwa_against_nuclear_weapons
"I tire of how many decades of bad behavior on the part of Iran is excused merely because they got treated bad way back when. Iran needs to change."
Iran could say the same of you. How impressed would you be? How likely to care?
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 06 2021, @07:36PM
Oh, dear!
FTFY!
But it pissed of the Brits and their failing Empire, so the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (Now know as BP, British (former Empire) Petroleum) called in Kermit and the CIA, because the one thing American and the Rotting British Empire cannot stand, is democracy. That, and cleaning up massive Gulf oil-spills from exploding ocean platforms.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday February 06 2021, @05:58AM (2 children)
Ok, look. Think about this for a second. Right at the moment, a significant portion of our population believes an evidence-free conspiracy theory that says Russia interfered with the 2016 elections, overthrew our lawful government, and installed Trump in power.
Another, also significant, portion of the population believes a very similar evidence-free conspiracy theory that says that the Russians interfered with our election of 2020, overthrew our lawful government, and installed Biden in power.
Now, forget about the obvious criticisms of both theories; that's not the point. The point is a fair percentage of our population believes this, and as a result they're pretty damn hostile to Russia at this point.
Just imagine if it weren't an evidence-free conspiracy theory; but simply fact, that they overthrew our government and installed one or both of these bozos as our dictator. Can you imagine the response?
Well, in 1953, the US CIA, in coöperation with the UK Ministry of Intelligence et al, overthrew the Republic of Iran and installed a brutal dictator to rule the country. That's no evidence free conspiracy theory; it's known fact, even the CIA has acknowledged it at this point.
Now, understanding just that one tiny little datapoint, tell me again they were so unreasonable. Tell me we would have been a bit more reasonable in that situation. Try, try your best to believe it.
"Or the many terrorism games Iran has played from then to the current day?"
Name one?
And remember the old adage - one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. To make it mean something objective, it needs to be the deliberate use of violence to induce fear for a political purpose, and it needs to not be simply arming previously helpless peasants and helping them defend themselves from attack as they have done for instance in south Lebanon. By the objective definition, the US has played a lot more 'terrorism games' than Iran, and at the very least has no position from which to condemn them from.
"Or Iran's support for some shifty governments of the world (Assad's Syrian faction and Venezuela)."
And what make them particularly "shifty?" Making some attempt (however flawed) to serve their people, rather than simply kowtowing to D.C. and awaiting orders. You really think that's a crime?
"Both Israel and Saudi Arabia are heavily trade-dependent nations. They rely on their word and reputation."
Both have very soiled reputations, your thesis here is weaker than weak.
"They have to be pretty reasonable in order to negotiate for what they want. Not so for Iran."
Yeah, weaker than weak. You've got it exactly backwards. Medinat Yisraël and the KSA negotiate from positions of strength, with military force and the ability to call in the USA against anyone that displeases them. It's Iran that gets nothing without earning it.
"Yemen would probably be at war no matter what happened."
Nonsense. The current war in Yemen is entirely the creation of the KSA. Their puppet government had virtually no remaining support in Yemen, and could not have waged a war anywhere near this long without the KSA, and the US standing behind them.
"And really, what does Iran have to offer in the way of peace?"
Peace is peace. We offer peace, you offer peace, we all live in peace.
What's your idea? A system of compulsory bribes? Anyone that can't or won't afford the bribes, we just nuke?
I find it difficult to believe so poorly of you.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday February 06 2021, @01:07PM (1 child)
What would have been more reasonable is kicking all US embassy staff out of the country. Do they not have laws against kidnapping?
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday February 06 2021, @05:21PM
Well, sure, but if you understood the circumstances at the time it makes sense that it went down the way it did. Remember, this wasn't an action of the Iranian state - which was at that point in near anarchy and not capable of doing or commanding much at all. This was direct action by a committee of radical students.
They were not working under state authority but they *were* watching from the beginning for state disapproval, and expected to give up the position very quickly as soon as the state gave the signal. And the situation would have likely been resolved quickly as they expected, but for the Republicans who reached out under the table and told the mullahs "just hold onto them until after the inauguration and we'll give you a better deal." Effectively selling the hostages out, in order to make Carter look bad. It worked, of course. We elected Reagan, and started down the same long slide we're still on today.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?