Apparently, Yemen is the new front in the War on Terror. It was a rather obscure country to most Americans before recent events – much like any country that doesn’t have terrorists, or plans to nuke us to the Stone Age.
Invading or bombing the country seems to have become a new battle cry for the GOP, along with a slew of racial profiling demands against Muslims.
Now I enjoy blowing stuff up as much as the next guy, but invading another country when we have trouble handling the two wars we’re in now?
Yes those fights are supposedly winding down, but it seems a bit much to invade three countries in 10 years, unless the GOP is going for a Guinness record.
If the idea of a third war makes you uneasy, hearing about Yemen will make you queasy.
The country faces civil war, a large population sympathetic to Arabic terrorists, and the country is hills, sand and unpaved roads.
At least the government is U.S.-friendly, but then, they’re probably scared we’ll invade.
I’m not really surprised about the GOP’s actions, but I think it’s going about this the wrong way. Invading a country is expensive and bombing it is inefficient, and not very good PR. But I am a fan of good old subterfuge, like the old days of the CIA during the Cold War. But instead of causing revolution, help stop it. Deal with the terrorists, help solve Yemen’s unemployment, maybe sell some pro-U.S. books and help the Yemen government deal with its civil wars.
If we’re going to get involved let’s do it in a way that stabilizes the country and stops the source of terrorism: ticked off guys with guns.
A simplification, yes, but if the government is strong, stable and able to defend and help its citizens, the sympathy to terrorists and their ability to function in a country shrivels and dies.
Now, most of the time when America has supported a government or revolution, it was because a company’s profits were at stake or the Soviet Union was trying to spread Communism.
But it seems terrorism has replaced Communism in terms of fear and media paranoia, only the “Cold” part is definitely out the window – unless climate change turns the Middle East into a frozen tundra – but that doesn’t negate all that shooting.
My point is, you don’t have to outright invade a country when you can just send your best spy with a British accent and have him fix everything. Or send some advisers, something to set things right.
If you’re going to insist on meddling, at least meddle in the most constructive, and least destructive, way possible.
Now there may come a time when outright war is the only answer, but hopefully that time will not come.
If we try other methods before getting trigger happy, we might be able to change things for the better – more so than if we just bomb everything flat. Besides, when those bombs miss they have a really annoying habit of creating new terrorists.
