What would you have the West do? You can’t just sit back and accept that a militia is disrupting the global commerce, and political pressure didn’t work. Not saying this is necessarily the right approach but what would be?
Whether you think the US should stop the war or not, surely they shouldn’t do so because they were bowing down to the Houthis?Stopping the genocide happening with full participation from them. I mean, they keep supplying weapons and bombs to a maniacal army that kills over a thousand every week. The political pressure is being applied on the wrong side.
The West loves to bomb their way out of the troubles they have created themselves.
What would you have the West do? You can’t just sit back and accept that a militia is disrupting the global commerce, and political pressure didn’t work. Not saying this is necessarily the right approach but what would be?
Whether you think the US should stop the war or not, surely they shouldn’t do so because they were bowing down to the Houthis?
Of course they are are a militia. That is why they have no clue how to rule their controlled areas and are instead using the Gaza war to pick another fight.Houthis aren’t a militia - they’ve effectively won the Yemeni civil war and are the government of Yemen. They’ve survived and out fought a saudi-led war, who used the latest Western tech.
Tell me why you think military action is going to have tangible benefits to the Red Sea, yet alone the region? Point to me one example in the last 20 years where military intervention in the middle east actually achieved the aims set out?
How about - I dunno - strategically thinking about the region holistically and try to bring stability to it through diplomacy rather than readying the jets to bomb an already bombed people into submission, something they’ve successfully withstood for 8 years.
But I suppose this time bombing the shit out of them will actually work (in fairness the Saudis were fecking clueless).
The British (and French) arbitrarily carving up countries and then proceeding to superimpose one where people already inhabit land (because they didn't want to take responsibility for a people who they've shafted after enduring a horrendous crime) certainly doesn't help. Nor do the decades of hegemonic foreign policy, overthrowing non-compliant leaders, playing both sides in a war and propping up tyrants help either. Religion and oil certainly haven't helped, but the foundations for the instability sources from a hegemonic and colonial origin.
Many thanks both of you for your inputI think it’s probably too reductive to singularly pin Middle Eastern wars on either religion or oil. Obviously each conflict has its own dynamic that needs to be understood on its own terms, and both religion and oil are often relevant factors, but they are rarely if ever sufficient to explain things on their own.
Taking a step back and thinking in broader, more general terms, you could say that Middle Eastern conflicts tend to be driven by a combination and interplay of unresolved internal issues and pervasive external intervention.
The former have their origins in the ongoing process by which the region is attempting to come to terms with a largely Western-shaped modernity that has completely undermined the traditional forms of social and political solidarity that shaped Middle Eastern societies for centuries (this is not necessarily unique to the Middle East and really applies everywhere including the “West” itself). Religion, fundamentalism, and sectarianism are obviously major elements in this, but their role has to be understood in the context of the appeal of competing forms of solidarity relating to nationalism, tribalism, and so on, of the spread of modern forms of communication and technology, and of the actions of external powers pursuing competing agendas in the region.
The latter has its origins in the relatively asymmetric power balance between the region and Europe that began to be seriously felt by the end of the 18th century, and to the unique and vital geostrategic location of the region. Obviously ensuring the smooth and continuing flow of the region’s oil to the world’s markets is a vital aspect of the region’s importance, but again this must be understood in a broader context of great power competition, global trade routes, and so on. Insidious Western imperial intervention in the region long predates the mass export of its oil, and the Middle East will probably always hold a unique place in Great Power consciousness.
Pre-90s Turkey and Israel aside, the most popular (though not necessarily politically dominant) ideological and political movements in the region over the last century or more have probably been those that have promised to transcend the internal divisions in order to challenge and successfully overcome the external interference, with a view to placing the destiny of the Middle East firmly back in the hands of the peoples of the region themselves. So far none of them have come close to succeeding in this.
Of course it matters. If the Houthis sense that they can dictate US foreign policy by attacking cargo ships in the Red Sea, it won’t be the last time they use that trick.The "why" doesn't matter. It wouldn't be framed as bowing down to the Houthis anyway if they applied actual pressure on the ones committing genocide. They have been bowing down to the latter group which is led by fascists for over 100 days now.
Bombing the poorest country in the region is definitely not the solution and it will make the situation worse.
Of course they are are a militia. That is why they have no clue how to rule their controlled areas and are instead using the Gaza war to pick another fight.
Obviously years of questionable US politics are partly responsible for creating this mess of a situation and I’m not saying taking on the Houthis directly will work or is the right course of action. But through the mistakes of the past we’ve arrived here where a militia is seriously disrupting the international trade, and they have done nothing to suggest this is about getting leverage for the Yemeni peace process. So what do you do?
Despite what the Houthis say (that this is solely about Gaza), it’s a common perception among analysts that the attacks on cargo ships also serve the Houthis domestically, at least in the eyes of the Houthis, in two ways. Firstly, it is a convenient distraction from the dire economic situation and general societal breakdown in Yemen, which the people will eventually start blaming the Houthis for, as they would any sitting government. Standing up for the Palestinians against Israel/the West is a popular thing to do and will earn the Houthis increased legitimacy domestically. Secondly, it gives the Houthis some sort of international legitimacy, or at least attention, perhaps with a view to position themselves as legitimate Yemeni rulers ahead of renewed peace talks.Not sure on what basis you claim they have no clue on how to rule. They are clearly the government in Saana and they’re ruling no differently to say the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Also they have clearly said that their attacks on international shipping has nothing to do with the Yemeni peace process, so not sure why you think it does?
And when you’re unable to think of solutions beyond the military that doesn’t mean it’s the only solution. Libya was similar in 2011, a futile stupid intervention that further dramatically destabilised the region and sub-saharan Africa.
How about we work diplomatically to get Israel to cease their own futile and barbaric intervention in Gaza and then go from there? That’s the root cause of the current issues in the Red Sea.
War plays into the hands of hardliners across the region, including Iran. It’s a short sighted move and won’t degrade the Houthis - just as dropping megatons of munitions on the Taliban did feck all to prevent their eventual victory. And if you’re worried about prices going up because of shipping that pails into comparison to the potential cost of ongoing conflict, something we’ve been desperately trying to extricate ourselves from over the last 6 years.
Anyway, they’ll obviously bomb Yemen loads more. So guess we’ll see what happens.
Islamic Republic avenges having its IRGC commanders made into meatball by Israel in Syria by .... executing a 23-year old Political prisoner from Mahsa Amini protests.
This is his father, who fought 7 years in the Iran-Iraq war for the country and lost most of his hearing ability, walking to the Prison door in hope of a last minute miracle, that never happened. So alone ...
According to eyewitness who was near Prison area in the morning right after the execution (They always execute after their damned morning prayers) , the last thing he saw was Ghobadlou's father being beaten up by security forces and having their car windows broken. There are at least over 50+ of the parents of the executed and murdered protestors who have been jailed by the regime for the crime of wanting justice for the loss of their loves ones. Just some names you can google so you know I'm not making it up: Manouchehr Bakhtiari, Mashallah Karami, Nahid Shirpisheh, etc.
*** The day of revenge will eventually come, and I hope no one cries human rights when we send these mullahs and their apologists to the most hottest hell to exist in the most ruthless way to avenge 45 years of torture and misery. Khomeini's shrine will be a museum of the crimes against humanity IR committed in those years and hopefully his actual grave will become a public toilet.
And while at it, **** anyone who defends and white-washes these monsters in the name of being a woke Anti-imperialist like I've been noticing on Tiktok lately. Love the mullahs and think they are based? Go f**** live under their rule! Talk is cheap.
The US shared intel with Iran on the terror attack in Iran.
Gotta love that "law and order" touch.A bit like the FBI warning a mobster they have information a hit is about to take place on him.
Gotta love that "law and order" touch.
Last time I checked, 1736 was the last time Iran invaded another country (India). Now their regime might not be the most appealing one to say the least, but the actual mobsters on the international scene ain't exactly who you think they are.
Gotta love that "law and order" touch.
Last time I checked, 1736 was the last time Iran invaded another country (India). Now their regime might not be the most appealing one to say the least, but the actual mobsters on the international scene ain't exactly who you think they are.
I mean one of your frontrunners for the election this year is a known crook with an admiration for totalitarian despots, and the US has loved getting into bed with despots all across the globe pretty much over the last century. That's not even going into the fact that half your politicians are paid for by lobbyists. The US is also responsible for more deaths than pretty much any other power since the end of WW2. In fact you're currently sponsoring a genocide as we speak.There are no mobsters in this analogy given that the US is a democratic state and mobsters are totalitarian by nature. The religious fanatic post 1979 Velayat-e faqih flavor of Iranians are also not the same folks who lived hundreds of years ago. Khomeinite Iran has been in near constant conflict either directly with Iraq or indirectly in Lebanon, Gaza, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and in a regional cold war with the Saudis.
I mean one of your frontrunners for the election this year is a known crook with an admiration for totalitarian despots, and the US has loved getting into bed with despots all across the globe pretty much over the last century. That's not even going into the fact that half your politicians are paid for by lobbyists. The US is also responsible for more deaths than pretty much any other power since the end of WW2. In fact you're currently sponsoring a genocide as we speak.
The Iranian regime is a heinous one which the Iranians deserve to be free from, but let's not pretend that the US is this democratic bastion of stability. The damage they've done globally puts Iran to shame.
I sometimes wonder if you actually believe what you write or just are on the wind-up.There are no mobsters in this analogy given that the US is a democratic state and mobsters are totalitarian by nature. The religious fanatic post 1979 Velayat-e faqih flavor of Iranians are also not the same folks who lived hundreds of years ago. Khomeinite Iran has been in near constant conflict either directly with Iraq or indirectly in Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen, and in a regional cold war with the Saudis.
You somehow think or imply that being a democracy is some kind of magic spell that automatically gives you the moral high ground, and absolves you from any wrong doing or being compared to totalitarian regimes.
Well, when you formulate your thoughts this way, I'm more than open to hear them and actually happen to agree with a good part of what you're saying.That's how power works in the international system. In the absence of a world government, powerful states get to do what they want, which means the world's most powerful state can pretty much advance its own agenda at will. This is a basic tenet of structural realism in international relations if you're into that sort of thing. Power will always trump fairness and a lack of double standards. Its obvious the US has made plenty of mistakes along the way, but better the power at the top be in the hands of a pluralistic democracy than a totalitarian dictatorship or a religious theocracy. Whether you accept it or not, this is the predicament we are in until humans develop a new system (whether a world government or otherwise) where power is decentralized and democratized across the world and people's rights are equal irrespective of where they live. Until then, this is the system we are in.
Adonia Ayebare, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Uganda to the United Nations, said in a post on X: "Justice Sebutinde's ruling at the International Court of Justice does not represent the Government of Uganda’s position on the situation in Palestine.
"Uganda’s support for the plight of the Palestinian people has been expressed through Uganda ‘s voting pattern at the United Nations."
