NationStates

Gormwood wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Where did you get that from what I said?
Not did you address the point.

Whataboutism is not a defense, it is an admission of guilt.

Both the Saudi regime and Houthi gangsters are horrible.

Defend what exactly? Supporting a foul regime that has actually contributed to crimes against the U.S. (9/11, Khashoggi) to stomp on a smaller foul regime that has probably never even hit Americans so far is a bit hollow.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Just more whataboutism.
Just admit the Houthis are scum too. Sometimes there are no good guys.

I don't particularly care for the Houthis, but you can be critical of them without taking Saudi propaganda that they're Iranian-puppet radical Islamists at face value. I prefer them to the Saudis.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Gormwood wrote:Defend what exactly? Supporting a foul regime that has actually contributed to crimes against the U.S. (9/11, Khashoggi) to stomp on a smaller foul regime that has probably never even hit Americans so far is a bit hollow.

And this means we should support a bunch of Shia militants who hate Jews and Bahai people because...

The Saudis are in this case actually supporting the secular government. The headchoppers are the ones you're trying to go to bat for.

Novus America wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:I don't particularly care for the Houthis, but you can be critical of them without taking Saudi propaganda that they're Iranian-puppet radical Islamists at face value. I prefer them to the Saudis.

Well you were before making claims about how good they are.
They are still scum. And the Saudis are not trying to annex Yemen. If the Houthis had not launched their failed coup in the first place, Saudi Arabia would not be there.

Get rid of the Houthis and you get the Saudis out.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:And this means we should support a bunch of Shia militants who hate Jews and Bahai people because...

The Saudis are in this case actually supporting the secular government. The headchoppers are the ones you're trying to go to bat for.

"Secular government" Not like Hadi has ties to Al Qaeda or anything.

Nova Cyberia wrote:

Gormwood wrote:Defend what exactly? Supporting a foul regime that has actually contributed to crimes against the U.S. (9/11, Khashoggi) to stomp on a smaller foul regime that has probably never even hit Americans so far is a bit hollow.

And this means we should support a bunch of Shia militants who hate Jews and Bahai people because...

The Saudis are in this case actually supporting the secular government. The headchoppers are the ones you're trying to go to bat for.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Nova Cyberia wrote:And this means we should support a bunch of Shia militants who hate Jews and Bahai people because...

The Saudis are in this case actually supporting the secular government. The headchoppers are the ones you're trying to go to bat for.

"Secular government" Not like Hadi has ties to Al Qaeda or anything.

Novus America wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:"Secular government" Not like Hadi has ties to Al Qaeda or anything.

Evidence? And even if the Houthis are not fully directly controlled by Iran, they absolutely have ties to it. So by your own argument if ties to Whabbis make Hadi not secular, then the Houthis cannot be secular either.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Well you were before making claims about how good they are.
They are still scum. And the Saudis are not trying to annex Yemen. If the Houthis had not launched their failed coup in the first place, Saudi Arabia would not be there.

Get rid of the Houthis and you get the Saudis out.

Hadi was ousted as President by parliament and his term had ended, but he refused to step down, which is why they launched their capture of Sana'a.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Evidence? And even if the Houthis are not fully directly controlled by Iran, they absolutely have ties to it. So by your own argument if ties to Whabbis make Hadi not secular, then the Houthis cannot be secular either.

The Saudi coalition has given money to AQAP to fight on Hadi's side.

Novus America wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Hadi was ousted as President by parliament and his term had ended, but he refused to step down, which is why they launched their capture of Sana'a.

Hadi is no hero either, never said he was. But the Houthis are the ultimate cause of Saudi involvement. So long as they are trying to seize power, Saudi Arabia will not and really cannot leave.

Novus America wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:The Saudi coalition has given money to AQAP to fight on Hadi's side.

Source? And that would only make them temporary allies of convenience, not sharing ideology.

Kaystein wrote:https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/14/business/saudi-oil-output-impacted-drone-attack/index.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQefB3IHw1Q

Abu Dhabi (CNN Business)Drone strikes on crucial Saudi Arabian oil facilities have disrupted about half of the kingdom's oil capacity, or 5% of the daily global oil supply, people with knowledge of Saudi's oil operations told CNN Business.
Yemen's Houthi rebels on Saturday took responsibility for the attacks, saying 10 drones targeted state-owned Saudi Aramco oil facilities in Abqaiq and Khurais, according to the Houthi-run Al-Masirah news agency.
Five million barrels per day of crude production have been impacted after fires raged at the sites, one of them the world's largest oil production facility, people with knowledge of the kingdom's operations said. The latest OPEC figures from August 2019 put the total Saudi production at 9.8 million barrels per day.
A source told CNN Business that Aramco "hopes to have that capacity restored within days."

The Saudi interior ministry confirmed the drone attacks caused fires at the two facilities. In a statement posted on Twitter, the ministry said the fires were under control and that authorities were investigating.
"Abqaiq is perhaps the most critical facility in the world for oil supply. Oil prices will jump on this attack," Jason Bordoff, founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, said in a statement.

Wow. It shouldn't surprise anyone that yemen's Iranian-sponsored, Houthi rebels are responsible for this. Saudi Arabia has been at war with them for a few years now.

Anyway, how will this affect your daily lives, since oil prices will rise for at least the next few days or weeks? I'm guessing this won't effect many of you very much, but everybody's going to groan at having to pay more at the fuel pump.

Discuss.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Also, in reference to Hadi exceeding his constitutional term being the catalyst for the Houthi revolution, I'd like to point out that it was a peaceful transition of power into the hands of parliament up until Saudi Arabia intervened.

Novus America wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Also, in reference to Hadi exceeding his constitutional term being the catalyst for the Houthi revolution, I'd like to point out that it was a peaceful transition of power into the hands of parliament up until Saudi Arabia intervened.

Bullshit:
“Also known as the Houthis, these revolutionaries refused to participate in the "unity government", although they continued to occupy key positions and buildings in Sana'a and hold territory throughout northern Yemen.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdrabbuh_Mansur_Hadi

And launching a violent coup is not a peaceful transition of power.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Source? And that would only make them temporary allies of convenience, not sharing ideology.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/ ... 59521.html

Novus America wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/ ... 59521.html

That does not mention Hadi. And does not show Hadi has ideological support for them.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Bullshit:
“Also known as the Houthis, these revolutionaries refused to participate in the "unity government", although they continued to occupy key positions and buildings in Sana'a and hold territory throughout northern Yemen.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdrabbuh_Mansur_Hadi

And launching a violent coup is not a peaceful transition of power.

Hadi still breached the constitution and failed to step down. It was a justified seizure of power on behalf of parliament. And while not entirely peaceful, it wasn't a civil war until the Saudi intervention.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Novus America wrote:
That does not mention Hadi. And does not show Hadi has ideological support for them.

The Saudi coalition, of which Hadi is a puppet, did it.

Novus America wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:Hadi still breached the constitution and failed to step down. It was a justified seizure of power on behalf of parliament. And while not entirely peaceful, it wasn't a civil war until the Saudi intervention.

Who gave the Houthis the authority to act on behalf of the Parliament? And the Saudis only got involved AFTEr the Houthis refused to share power and failed to abide by the power sharing agreement. Also to Houthis have negligible support outside of North West Yemen.

They cannot possible bring peace and unity to the country.

Vetalia wrote:Also, riddle me this, how is it possible that a nation that has purchased vast quantities of advanced arms, missile defense systems and other materiel would permit its most critical oil processing facility that apparently is responsible for 50% of production to be attacked by drones, of all things, from countries that are at least several hundred miles away?

Methinks something is afoot.

United Muscovite Nations wrote:

Novus America wrote:
Who gave the Houthis the authority to act on behalf of the Parliament? And the Saudis only got involved AFTEr the Houthis refused to share power and failed to abide by the power sharing agreement. Also to Houthis have negligible support outside of North West Yemen.

They cannot possible bring peace and unity to the country.

What was the alternative? Allowing Hadi to become an unopposed dictator.

The Saudis got involved after Hadi had already been overthrown and released from Houthi custody. He left Yemen and solicited Saudi help. Saudi hadn't intervened when the Houthis actually seized power until then.

Novus America wrote:

United Muscovite Nations wrote:What was the alternative? Allowing Hadi to become an unopposed dictator.

The Saudis got involved after Hadi had already been overthrown and released from Houthi custody. He left Yemen and solicited Saudi help. Saudi hadn't intervened when the Houthis actually seized power until then.

I can see the argument for removing him but that does not justify their refusal to share power and abide by the power sharing agreement. It was clearly just a pretext, they had no intention of creating a fair government.

Yes the Saudis got involved after the Houthis tried to seize power and the country had fallen into civil war.
The Southeast had broken ties with Sana’a already.

A thing you failed to address (the fact the Houthis have negligible support in the South East).