• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Out of Yemen, U.S. is Hobbled in Terror Fight

Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

Yeah, that was afterwards. ;)



Yemen's new national unity government, comprised of an equal number of opposition and loyalist ministers, approved the law in accordance with the transfer agreement that Saleh signed in neighboring Saudi Arabia late last year.

The agreement, brokered by Yemen's powerful Arab neighbors and backed by the United States, grants Saleh immunity in exchange for him hand handing over powers to his deputy. Saleh is scheduled to hand over the presidency to his vice president, Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, on Feb. 21.....snip~

Yemen Cabinet grants president, aides immunity - SFGate

Immunity to ensure a peaceful transition signed off by the government of Yemen, while the situation has deteriorated since he's left if him stepping down led to prosecution I doubt he would give up power.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

Immunity to ensure a peaceful transition signed off by the government of Yemen, while the situation has deteriorated since he's left if him stepping down led to prosecution I doubt he would give up power.

People wanted him tried for Crimes against Humanity with the UN.....which we prevented that with a few others so he could make that Peaceful transition of power. Keeping the Sunni in control. All it took was a few major powers saying they would grant full immunity.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

The only people the U.S. is standing up to is Israel.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

What makes you think the chaos would have been there if troops had remained? The fact is that all of this happened after Obama withdrew.

We have 125 troops there, and they were pulled out as a result of the chaos. I'm not asking what you think should be done because I disagree with you, but it's pretty easy to sit on the sideline and act like anything that happens in the world is a result of Obama. The fact is, these events happen in sovereign nation the role of Obama alot of times is to determine how we should react. Would you keep those troops there? Increase the number of troops in the middle of a Yemeni civil war? Would you also remove those troops out of harms way?
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

If you've been propping them up for decades, yes. If they're your dictators, yes.

Or you ensure that you're part of the uprising and part of what results.

You don't just sit back preparing your March Madness brackets and practicing your putting.

So the US should of taken an active role in fighting against a public uprisings?

As far as being a part of the uprising, sure, I agree to an extent, but largely it is out of your hands when it comes to who the uprising decides to put into power.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

People wanted him tried for Crimes against Humanity with the UN.....which we prevented that with a few others so he could make that Peaceful transition of power. Keeping the Sunni in control. All it took was a few major powers saying they would grant full immunity.

I'm not sure what stance you would prefer? The US and Britain to state they wouldn't give him immunity and that he would be tried? Are we also going to provide troops for the overthrow or just allow them to fight among themselves?
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

So the US should of taken an active role in fighting against a public uprisings?

As far as being a part of the uprising, sure, I agree to an extent, but largely it is out of your hands when it comes to who the uprising decides to put into power.

My point is that, for better or worse, the US was actively involved in a lot of these Middle Eastern countries either supporting the powers that be or opposing them. In Egypt, as an example, the US was propping up Mubarak for decades, primarily as a rational Arab voice in the Middle East and as a partner in peace with Israel and then, when trouble arose, rather than try to work with Mubarak to change and to ease his rule, the US abandoned Egypt to its own devices and when Mubarak fell chaos reigned. Had the US been more actively involved, the Muslim Brotherhood may not have been elected and even if it was it would not have felt free to brutally go after Christians and others leading to them being toppled by the military. Leaving the scene in a vacuum has caused America to be hated and distrusted by both sides.

The same can be said in Yemen except in that case the US weakly propped up the leader for a while and then negotiated his weak replacement on condition of cooperation with the US military to go after terrorist elements in country. That may not have been a bad goal, but how it was handled made it almost inevitable that unrest in Yemen would topple the leadership and with a little help from Iran that's exactly what has happened.

In country after country, since Obama was elected, the US has lost valuable influence through inattention. The vacuum created by the US sitting out has been filled by others in the region, primarily Iran, Russia and terrorist elements. Perhaps this is concerted US foreign policy in action, but it looks like one inattentive mistake after another. The difference between GW Bush and Obama in the region is quite stark and it's hard to support Obama's position as the preferable one, at least for me.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

I'm not sure what stance you would prefer? The US and Britain to state they wouldn't give him immunity and that he would be tried? Are we also going to provide troops for the overthrow or just allow them to fight among themselves?

The Sunni was who the West was backing and The Saud did have the influence with Selah in the first place......what was different that Selah did, that Gadhafi did? Other than not having as much star power.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

I knew all of that already. How is it his fault that Yemen collapsed? As I said, the issue of the Houthis is separate from that of AQAP - the Houthi takeover just makes it more difficult to coordinate with a stable Yemeni government. We had SF and drones in Yemen, and they did a good job of preventing AQAP from becoming like al-Qaeda pre-9/11. And Yemen is not yet a lost cause: I anticipate that if the Houthis are not serious about a unity government, which I doubt they are, the Saudis will come in and wipe away the Iranian encroachment on their border.

KSA has ISIL on their northern border, a semi-hostile "frenemy" relationship with Washington, an ongoing threat to Bahrain, and need to pour resources into maintaining a capability against a surging Iran across the strait.

I'm not saying they won't project force - but capability and sustainability for what you are talking about becomes a question.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

The Sunni was who the West was backing and The Saud did have the influence with Selah in the first place......what was different that Selah did, that Gadhafi did? Other than not having as much star power.

Gadhafi was talking about genocide in order to protect his seat of power.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

Again: how is this his fault? Does the President of the United States have the power to magically affect everything that happens in some other sovereign nation? I feel the same way when people blame Bush and Blair for ISIS, and even then our involvement was much more direct than it ever has been in Yemen.

Bush and Blair only turned the vacuum on. Obama administration policies in the Middle East have stuck the hose end (with a little help from Arab countries, to be sure) in Egypt, Libya and Syria. It's in the wake of these power vacuums that the Islamic State has blossomed. Russia and China have been steadfast to point this out, but nobody's listening. And nobody's paying attention to the fact that USFP is at least in part responsible for some of the actions we see by Russia and China of late.

In 2001, for the first time since 1950 Russia and China signed an alliance/treaty, that had at its heart, beneath the flowery title, aim at checking US hegemony. BRICS, AIIB are amongst the actions to address this.

Both Russia and China have dramatically increased their military expenditures post 9/11 and the rampant US military adventurism in the ME.
 
Last edited:
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

Gadhafi was talking about genocide in order to protect his seat of power.

He was? When was he doing that? What year was that? Plus how wasn't Selah talking the same?
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

In Egypt, as an example, the US was propping up Mubarak for decades, primarily as a rational Arab voice in the Middle East and as a partner in peace with Israel and then, when trouble arose, rather than try to work with Mubarak to change and to ease his rule, the US abandoned Egypt to its own devices and when Mubarak fell chaos reigned.

All true. And that happened under Limpwrist's administration.

Had the US been more actively involved, the Muslim Brotherhood may not have been elected and even if it was it would not have felt free to brutally go after Christians and others leading to them being toppled by the military.

I think you have that part just backwards. It was B. Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton who helped usher in Mohammed Morsi's brief rule. The Belle of Benghazi's go-between with the Muslim Brotherhood in doing this was her adviser Huma Abedin, aka Mrs. Anthony Weiner, several members of whose family in Egypt have extensive connections with the Brotherhood. I suspect the fact both of them were married to men who were obsessed with showing their private parts to any woman who would look made them sympathetic to each other.

In country after country, since Obama was elected, the US has lost valuable influence through inattention. The vacuum created by the US sitting out has been filled by others in the region, primarily Iran, Russia and terrorist elements. Perhaps this is concerted US foreign policy in action, but it looks like one inattentive mistake after another. The difference between GW Bush and Obama in the region is quite stark and it's hard to support Obama's position as the preferable one, at least for me.

I agree with all that. And I believe it is more than just incompetence at work. This is the first president in U.S. history who plainly dislikes the very country whose interests he is supposed to be upholding. Mr. Obama has a chip on his shoulder about whites and about America in general, and I think he gets a secret frisson out of seeing this country brought down a notch or two. That partly explains his appeasement of our adversaries, and I don't doubt for a moment that Mr. Putin sees what Obama is about and is trying to take advantage of it. The danger is that Russia may make some aggressive move--against Estonia, for example--that even Obama will not be able to ignore.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

My point is that, for better or worse, the US was actively involved in a lot of these Middle Eastern countries either supporting the powers that be or opposing them. In Egypt, as an example, the US was propping up Mubarak for decades, primarily as a rational Arab voice in the Middle East and as a partner in peace with Israel and then, when trouble arose, rather than try to work with Mubarak to change and to ease his rule, the US abandoned Egypt to its own devices and when Mubarak fell chaos reigned. Had the US been more actively involved, the Muslim Brotherhood may not have been elected and even if it was it would not have felt free to brutally go after Christians and others leading to them being toppled by the military. Leaving the scene in a vacuum has caused America to be hated and distrusted by both sides.
This is an issue I have with this line of thought. It seems like people in the West and people in countries hostile to the US have the same viewpoint. That the US pulls strings and has the power to dictate how events play out. In Iraq and Afghanistan a decade long occupation, tons of money, and a situation where the US was able to exert maximum influence outside of a puppet scenario we end up with a Kharzi that is anti-west when talking to his people and a Maliki. Both are poster boys of bad rule and even then they are limited in their influence. It doesn't even stop there. The Contra war raging in central America lasted for a long time and that's a country that is close to the US and has a fraction of the population of these countries.

How would the US stop the Muslim Brotherhood from taking over in a democratic election? If the US intervenes than we basically strengthen any group that can pander to arab nationalism and anti-western sentiment.

It's US intervention in the region and overall western intervention that has led to mistrust of the west in the first place...and it's worked out horribly for the US! We overthrew the Iranian government and it resulted in the Ayatollah taking over. We provided material support to Iraq to check expanding Iranian influence and strengthened Saddam. We overthrew Saddam which has resulted in the expansion of power by Iran and the rising of religious fundamentalist in Iraq.

These are all situation where the US took an active role in intervening and it turned into an even worse situation, not to mention created a lot of animosity towards the US as a kicker. If intervention was some tried and true way to influence the region I might support it but it's led to one disaster after another.

The same can be said in Yemen except in that case the US weakly propped up the leader for a while and then negotiated his weak replacement on condition of cooperation with the US military to go after terrorist elements in country. That may not have been a bad goal, but how it was handled made it almost inevitable that unrest in Yemen would topple the leadership and with a little help from Iran that's exactly what has happened.
You can point to any instance in the world and say the President could of acted differently and created some perfect situation but that's just not true. I can name you a laundry list of things that happened in the world that turned out badly under every President in spite of their actions. I'm not saying that presidents are absolved of any responsibility of the foreign policy decisions but the constant "he should of intervened more" is just faulty logic. Intervention has led to some of worse foreign policy blunders in history.

In country after country, since Obama was elected, the US has lost valuable influence through inattention. The vacuum created by the US sitting out has been filled by others in the region, primarily Iran, Russia and terrorist elements. Perhaps this is concerted US foreign policy in action, but it looks like one inattentive mistake after another. The difference between GW Bush and Obama in the region is quite stark and it's hard to support Obama's position as the preferable one, at least for me.
I think Bush was horrible, I think he's the poster boy for why constant intervention backfires and should be taken with extreme caution.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

He was? When was he doing that? What year was that? Plus how wasn't Selah talking the same?

Kahdaffi sending his army against rebels in Benghazi and was stating there would be no mercy. There was supposedly intel picked up that he was going to raze the city. 700,000 people live there
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

Kahdaffi sending his army against rebels in Benghazi and was stating there would be no mercy. There was supposedly intel picked up that he was going to raze the city. 700,000 people live there

Yeah, and then they said he was bombing his people. But couldn't provide any video footage. He did tell the Rebels that there would be no mercy and for those who supported them and the Muslim Brotherhood. Yet no one has any video footage of this genocide. Oh and fighting rebels was what he was doing.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

Yeah, and then they said he was bombing his people. But couldn't provide any video footage. He did tell the Rebels that there would be no mercy and for those who supported them and the Muslim Brotherhood. Yet no one has any video footage of this genocide. Oh and fighting rebels was what he was doing.

The genocide was prevented by airstrikes that decimated the tanks and shot down the helicopters. So now...even taking down kahaddafi even with his history is a part of some conspiracy theory that makes Obama bad? On one hand conservatives mock "lead from behind" and the next question even participating in the overthrow in the first place?
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

It's obviously not desirable no longer to have 125 members of the special forces training the forces of Yemen's nominal government to fight jihadists. But I don't see how they could have been gathering intelligence. And Djibouti is still available as a drone base, as are U.S. ships. If the U.S. wanted to kill a jihadist in Shabwa province, a Fire Scout launched from a destroyer could do the job.

There must be locals in Yemen who can be recruited, for pay, to let us know what is going on there. I would think friendly Arab countries like Jordan or Oman might also be able to send someone who could blend in there and report back. After all, they have an interest in what is happening there, too. And obviously Saudi Arabia will have someone in Yemen watching events. This does harm the credibility of Mr. Obama's policy in the area, but how much credibility did it have to begin with?
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

The genocide was prevented by airstrikes that decimated the tanks and shot down the helicopters. So now...even taking down kahaddafi even with his history is a part of some conspiracy theory that makes Obama bad? On one hand conservatives mock "lead from behind" and the next question even participating in the overthrow in the first place?



That was a misnomer.....Gadhafi had no Helicopters that he was attacking forces with. The French made that BS up. He had not received the shipment from the Russians for the order he had placed.

They took Gadhafi out due to his plan for a United States of Africa. Which he was getting support for from those in the African League. The MB, the Saud, The French, Italians, and of course we were part of it.

Gadhafi gave up his Nuke plans and even sent troops to Iraq.....it was a clear stab in the back to oblige the Sunni and attempt to give them control of Libya.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/us/politics/out-of-yemen-us-is-hobbled-in-terror-fight.html?_r=0

This is what Obama said just a few months ago.

"This counterterrorism campaign will be waged through a steady, relentless effort to take out [the Islamic State] wherever they exist, using our air power and our support for partner forces on the ground. This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years"

It's not that Obama is just the most stupid president in US History, he is quite likely the stupidest leader of any democracy in world history. This man has blood all over his hands.

No he doesn't, it's someone else's fault because Obama can't do anything wrong. You're racist for saying that!

-Liberals
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

That was a misnomer.....Gadhafi had no Helicopters that he was attacking forces with. The French made that BS up. He had not received the shipment from the Russians for the order he had placed.

They took Gadhafi out due to his plan for a United States of Africa. Which he was getting support for from those in the African League. The MB, the Saud, The French, Italians, and of course we were part of it.

Gadhafi gave up his Nuke plans and even sent troops to Iraq.....it was a clear stab in the back to oblige the Sunni and attempt to give them control of Libya.

Well he definitely had tanks, artillery, and armored personnel carriers and there are plenty of pictures of them burning on the side of the road along with reporters on the ground watching the strikes take place
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

That was a misnomer.....Gadhafi had no Helicopters that he was attacking forces with. The French made that BS up. He had not received the shipment from the Russians for the order he had placed.

They took Gadhafi out due to his plan for a United States of Africa. Which he was getting support for from those in the African League. The MB, the Saud, The French, Italians, and of course we were part of it.

Gadhafi gave up his Nuke plans and even sent troops to Iraq.....it was a clear stab in the back to oblige the Sunni and attempt to give them control of Libya.

I can't quarrel with France. I suspect it has had a lot to do with the joint operations involving its old colonies Chad and Cameroon in the fight against Boko Haram. And that fight seems to be making progress.
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

Well he definitely had tanks, artillery, and armored personnel carriers and there are plenty of pictures of them burning on the side of the road along with reporters on the ground watching the strikes take place

Yes he did and when attacking rebel forces. They never showed any pics of him just bombing civilians. Moreover.....his youngest son ran all the Youth groups in Benghazi. His other son with Intelligence Forces inside Benghazi. Even the latest that came out with Hillarys emails. The Romanian hacker even showed how the MB was all involved. The Saud, and Hillary set that play in motion after getting tricked by the French in the UN. Which was when they officially declared the TNC as the ruling government of Libya. Over Gadhafi.....who was not removed from power.

But now even here in Yemen up until yesterday BO touts Yemen as a success. A template for the rest of the world. So says Goash.



White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest described the Obama administration's policies towards Yemen as a "template" for the rest of the world Monday, even as United States personnel evacuated the country and al Qaeda seized control of a key city.

"The case that we have made is that Yemen did serve as a template for the kind of strategy that we would employ and have employed to mitigate the threat from extremists around the world," Earnest said when asked if President Obama still considered Yemen a model of success.

"Ultimately our goal here is to build up the capacity of local countries so that they can assume responsibility for their own security situation," Eranest continued. "And that has both the effect of stabilizing the country so that extremists can't use it as a safe haven to plot and carry out attacks agains the west, but it also means that these countries can better provide for the security situation inside them so they aren't vulnerable to extremist actions on their own.".....snip~

As Al Qaeda Seizes City, Obama White House Still Holds Out Yemen As "Template" - Conn Carroll
 
Re: U.S. Flees Yemen

Yes he did and when attacking rebel forces. They never showed any pics of him just bombing civilians. Moreover.....his youngest son ran all the Youth groups in Benghazi. His other son with Intelligence Forces inside Benghazi. Even the latest that came out with Hillarys emails. The Romanian hacker even showed how the MB was all involved. The Saud, and Hillary set that play in motion after getting tricked by the French in the UN. Which was when they officially declared the TNC as the ruling government of Libya. Over Gadhafi.....who was not removed from power.

But now even here in Yemen up until yesterday BO touts Yemen as a success. A template for the rest of the world. So says Goash.



White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest described the Obama administration's policies towards Yemen as a "template" for the rest of the world Monday, even as United States personnel evacuated the country and al Qaeda seized control of a key city.

"The case that we have made is that Yemen did serve as a template for the kind of strategy that we would employ and have employed to mitigate the threat from extremists around the world," Earnest said when asked if President Obama still considered Yemen a model of success.

"Ultimately our goal here is to build up the capacity of local countries so that they can assume responsibility for their own security situation," Eranest continued. "And that has both the effect of stabilizing the country so that extremists can't use it as a safe haven to plot and carry out attacks agains the west, but it also means that these countries can better provide for the security situation inside them so they aren't vulnerable to extremist actions on their own.".....snip~

As Al Qaeda Seizes City, Obama White House Still Holds Out Yemen As "Template" - Conn Carroll

There's only been two major strategies in the war on terror as it's only been around for two presidents. One used boots on the ground and American forces to directly involve itself in the fight against terror organizations and the Obama administration has used partnerships, drone attacks, and a much less direct involvement of ground troops.

I personally prefer the seconds as the first hasn't exactly been a smashing success and the US has spent a lot of blood and treasure for those results.

As for Libya, I'm not sure MMC, I remember conversations about Libya and I was against intervention, I believe you were as well, but every argument floated was based on humanitarian reasons. What exactly are you saying was the reason we deposed Gadhafi? That we were pandering to Shiite's?
 
Back
Top Bottom