Big things often happen in small places, and the US-backed Saudi bombing and possible invasion of Yemen carries the possibility of a much more significant international clash. Here's what happens when interventions backfire (as they always do).
Big things often happen in small places, and the US-backed Saudi bombing and possible invasion of Yemen carries the possibility of a much more significant international clash. Here's what happens when interventions backfire (as they always do).
Big things often happen in small places, and the US-backed Saudi bombing and possible invasion of Yemen carries the possibility of a much more significant international clash. Here's what happens when interventions backfire (as they always do).
Hello everybody and thank you for tuning in to the Ron Paul Liberty Report.
Today with me is Daniel McAdams who is the co-host.
He's also the executive director of the Institute for Peace and Prosperity.
Welcome Daniel.
Thanks.
Good to be back.
Good.
Today we're going to follow up on a subject that's been in the news and you and I have both spent some time on trying to expose to the people exactly what's going on because we've decided it's a very dangerous part of the world.
And I've even suggested could this be the beginning of the big war?
I think that still is the danger.
But sometimes that isn't the easiest thing to pick because we have a lot of danger spots.
Although we're not engaged literally right now with tens of thousands of people being killed, the fragility of the system I think is a serious matter because we have a problem in Syria.
Something could happen there.
You know, ISIS is very strong there.
We also have Ukraine.
That hasn't gone away and that's continuing to be in turmoil and not settled.
And yet Yemen seems to continue and I'm concerned that it's different because we have a government that's threatening with troops to invade a sovereign country with various excuses and all.
And I just wanted you to give us your opinion about this and how this might be involved with the negotiations going on with our government and the Iranians, because it looks like they want to blame Iran right now for everything.
Yeah, exactly.
And as you point out, you know, Saudi Arabia started bombing Iran with U.S. backing yesterday or the day before.
It's not pointed out, but this is an illegal act according to international law.
You're not allowed to bomb another country that hasn't attacked you.
So it is that.
But as you say, it's very much tied in with the Iran negotiations.
And I think the neocons, the Saudis, and the Israelis want to tie it in even further.
They want to suggest that the Houthis, who have taken over a good part of Yemen and have kicked out the president or forced him to leave, that they are just simply Iran's proxies.
And I think Senator Lindsey Graham, our favorite senator, even said that much.
The Israelis said that the U.S. should suspend its talks with Iran right now because Iran's proxies are taking over Yemen.
So this is a great deal for them.
It's a great deal to scuttle the talks.
And it also forces Iran into a box because as the leaders of the Shia, the world leaders of the Shia movement, their hands are tied because if they do anything in Yemen, then the neocons will point out, see, we told you.
Yet if they sit by and watch Saudi Arabia and its allies take over more area, then they will be certainly much more vulnerable.
This is a 30-year war really between Iran and Saudi Arabia, so it's very dangerous.
You know, when this is discussed in Washington, in particular, and the pundits on TV, there's two factions.
One says, well, we didn't send them enough weapons and guns and money and soldiers.
And others would argue that we've done too much.
Of course, we're on the side of saying, well, we've done way too much already.
But that seems to be where the argument is.
And if it's a total failure, which almost all our policies in the past 10 years have been a failure, and the neoconservatives are just saying, see, I told you we need to go in.
We need boots on the ground.
We need more of this and more of that.
And, you know, the argument for non-intervention, which is our position, doesn't imply that this would bring about perfect peace in all these countries.
But it might be less chaotic.
I believe it would be less chaotic.
But even if you did have this going on in that country and you had the Sunnis, well, aligned with Saudi Arabia and contesting with Iran, which has been going on for a long time.
If that were the case, I would think that the people in this country would be much better off if we didn't feel like we're obligated to pick sides.
I mean, you might have sympathy for one side or the other.
I think our job is to point out this, but it is just sometimes so unnecessary and causes us so much trouble to say, all right, we've got to find out, are we with the Sunnis or are we with the Shia in the Yemen civil war?
Same way in Ukraine.
Do we have to be on one side or the other?
And I just see this as a continuation of a flawed foreign policy.
Well, it just shows you how what the neocons say and reality are so divorced.
You know, McCain would like us to believe that the U.S. can always pick the perfect side.
But look at his own personal behavior as senator.
He went to Syria and he met with some people that were involved with jihadism.
He went to Ukraine and was involved in these protests.
Turns out the guys he was having his picture taken with were founders of neo-Nazi parties in Ukraine.
So even in his personal life as a senator, he can't pick the right side.
But just to show you what a mess it is in Yemen, you know, ISIS and al-Qaeda are a problem in Yemen.
That's why the U.S. believes that it's doing the right thing by bombing them for a number of years since 2010.
So what do they do?
They give the green light to Saudi Arabia to start attacking the Houthis, who are the ones who are fighting ISIS and al-Qaeda in Yemen.
And then meanwhile, next door, not next door, but meanwhile in Iraq, the U.S. is bombing ISIS into Crete to the benefit of Iran-allied militias.
You know, I made fun the other day of a statement that that country may be slipping into a civil war.
I think they've been in civil war, but I think it's drifting very rapidly into being a geopolitical conflict of that whole region.
And, you know, the Arab League is something that I think might be able to provide some answers.
At least it's a local approach.
And it looks like it's been given new life on this because now there's, I think, about 10 nations that have joined with Saudi Arabia.
And they're getting involved.
But of course, if they're doing the wrong thing, it's not going to help either if you have that.
But it seems like a regional group of individuals could sort this problem out rather than us being so involved.
Well, the problem with the Arab League is that they've been able to rely on U.S. backing.
If you remember, it was when the Arab League signaled its agreement with the attack on Libya that the U.S. pointed to, see, even the Arab League supports it.
So this is not a unilateral.
We're helping the Arabs solve their own problem.
So the problem is the moral hazard associated with them viewing the U.S. military as their private army.
But once again, I hope I'm wrong on being concerned that this may be expanded into a much bigger war.
I think that is something we should be concerned about.
But right now, it seems like none of us should be surprised if troops go over the border in the next few days or this next week or so, because that certainly is a threat.
I see no way all of a sudden the Houthis are going to back down and say, oh, okay, and have them back off and have ISIS just walk away from this.
And that's when the expansion is going to come.
Look at all the support the Saudis are getting for dropping these bombs and all.
And yet, it's always our money behind this.
I mean, even the enemy is probably getting our money.
They end up with our weapons, and the American taxpayer suffers.
And it's usually always this propaganda to get the American people excited and fearful.
Well, we got to go, we have to go.
They're a bunch of evil people.
You know, the answer, of course, is simple: secession.
You know, Yemen is a country where there are a lot of tribes.
They have competing interests.
They have cooperated on a number of issues.
But they're a sort of a warring tribe that was cobbled together from the outside, like Iraq, like Libya.
The answer would be if we would just butt out of it, they would have to find a way to live together, to trade together, and to do these sorts of things.
The same is true in Ukraine.
If you would simply allow people to secede from a government they don't wish to be part of.
You know, and I'm optimistic enough if that were the case and the Europeans stayed out and the Russians stayed out, that the people would come together and they might separate, but they might not, they might also live in the same country but have separation of their local governments and all.
So it's not always has to be complete secession and separation, even though that's the way it should go.
The outsiders should stay out.
We can't tell the others what to do, but we certainly should have an influence on our own government and we should have a say and we should try to wake up the American people to the dangers that we're moving toward.