What are your thoughts on U.S. involvement in Yemen?
The U.S. has been providing Saudi Arabia weapons and refueling Saudi planes during their bombing of Yemen over the past 2.5 years. It’s taken place under both Obama and Trump administrations.
What are your thoughts?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
10 Answers
Your question is wrong. The US has no direct involvement in Yemen. As you noted, the US gives arms to Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia makes their own choices as to how to use them.
Since the conflict is basically a civil war, the US should have no role. Let them kill each other. Even before the rise of the Houthi rebels, Yemen was no great friend of the US.
@elbanditoroso: “Your question is wrong. The US has no direct involvement in Yemen. As you noted, the US gives arms to Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia makes their own choices as to how to use them.”
Interesting. So, the bombs dropping in Yemen are from the US, and the US is providing midair refuelling for Saudi warplanes bombing Yemen, but the “US has no direct involvement”?
Fascinating. Ok. Let’s call it indirect then.
@elbanditoroso: “Since the conflict is basically a civil war, the US should have no role.”
So, the US should stop its indirect involvement?
What are you really asking?
Should the US stop selling weapons to the Saudis because they might use them on Yemen?
No. Our weapon sales are not (should not) be predicated on where they will be used. Otherwise why do we sell to Israel, Egypt, Thailand, and 25 other countries around the world.
We have our own foreign policy to run. (and Trump and Tillerson are doing a lousy job at it). It is not our role to direct another country’s foreign policy.
@elbanditoroso: “What are you really asking?”
What are your thoughts on U.S. involvement in Yemen?
Because I consider arming and supporting someone in a conflict means involvement.
@elbanditoroso: “Should the US stop selling weapons to the Saudis because they might use them on Yemen?”
Are you asking me this question? If so, my answer is an unequivocal yes.
@elbanditoroso: “No. Our weapon sales are not (should not) be predicated on where they will be used.”
Really? We should just arm everyone and allow them to kill people with it, and claim that we are not responsible?
@elbanditoroso: “Otherwise why do we sell to Israel, Egypt, Thailand, and 25 other countries around the world.”
I couldn’t agree more!
@elbanditoroso: “We have our own foreign policy to run. (and Trump and Tillerson are doing a lousy job at it). It is not our role to direct another country’s foreign policy.”
Our Yemen involvement is our foreign policy. Don’t want to be involved? Don’t get involved.
The US has launched numerous drone strikes on Yemen over the years killing at least 100 people including, inadvertently, the deputy governor of Ma’rib Governorate. That is direct involvement. In May of last year Trump signed the biggest arms deal in US history, worth 350 billion dollars, with Saudi Arabia. That is indirect involvement.
The destruction of civilian infrastructure in air strikes and the Saudi blockade on food, medicine and fuel imports have led to 20 million people in the country requiring urgent humanitarian assistance and two million people being internally displaced.
It amounts to a crime against humanity.
You know when someone is an asshole, and somebody says “that’s just Larry being Larry.”
Being involved in Yemen, is just America being America.
The US does put some thought into arming rebels. They would only supply small arms, and air support for the rebels in Syria. The rebels needed anti-tank, and anri-aircraft weapons. The US wouldn’t give them those, because of the possibility/probability of the weapons being used against the US, or as weapons for terror attacks…
Military sales are a massive economic boon for the US. Why should ethics be a variable in whom is sold weaponry? ~
Hate celebrity endorsements, but this one isn’t that bad.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
