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: 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?