PDA

View Full Version : US, British Embassies in Yemen Close Due To al-Qaida Threat


noonereal
01-03-2010, 09:02 AM
Is this the right approach?

When threatened run?

What do you think?

Boreas
01-03-2010, 09:46 AM
Is this the right approach?

When threatened run?

What do you think?

That's a tough call. Embassies are almost totally dependent upon the host government for protection. Clearly, Yemen isn't up to the job.

Still, it's not like we're actually leaving. We have plenty of special ops personnel there.

John

Charles
01-03-2010, 10:01 AM
I would imagine that whoever made the decision to close them knows something that we don't. Nations don't like to close their embassies.

Chas

noonereal
01-03-2010, 11:45 AM
Yes you both make good points but my instinct would be to not evacuate on a threat.

We all know NYC and DC are are being targeted by al Qaeda with nuclear weapons and we are not evacuating.
I know it's not the same thing but it's not all that different either.

Boreas
01-03-2010, 11:57 AM
Yes you both make good points but my instinct would be to not evacuate on a threat.

It seems to me that, if you're going to evacuate, that's the time to do it, not after it's too late.

We all know NYC and DC are are being targeted by al Qaeda with nuclear weapons and we are not evacuating.
I know it's not the same thing but it's not all that different either.

I think it's totally different. As I said earlier, in Yemen we're largely dependent on the Yemenis for the security of the embassy. Here in New York and DC, or anywhere else, we can handle it ourselves.

If you want an example of what depending on other countries for security can mean, look at the "boxer bomber" (I think I just made that up) incident. It was the Dutch who cleared him to board the flight.

John

noonereal
01-03-2010, 12:06 PM
It seems to me that, if you're going to evacuate, that's the time to do it, not after it's too late.



I think it's totally different. As I said earlier, in Yemen we're largely dependent on the Yemenis for the security of the embassy. Here in New York and DC, or anywhere else, we can handle it ourselves.

If you want an example of what depending on other countries for security can mean, look at the "boxer bomber" (I think I just made that up) incident. It was the Dutch who cleared him to board the flight.

John

Well then let's jump in bed and pull the covers over our heads???

I would not leave. I would bring in the necessary protection and retaliatory capability.

One thing I do agree with is Israel's policy of responding to attacks excessively.

Boreas
01-03-2010, 12:21 PM
I would not leave. I would bring in the necessary protection and retaliatory capability.

Yemen is a sovereign nation. There are limits to what we can do there. Were we to move large numbers of troops into the country to protect our interests it would definitely be a violation of their sovereignty and could be viewed as an act of war.

Even if we did move troops in with the permission of the government we'd have jihadis streaming into Yemen by the thousands - right now al Qaeda in the Arabian Penninsula numbers less than 500 - and we'd find ourselves opening up a full fledged third front in the so-called war on terror. That would drain resources from Iraq and Afghanistan, allowing an increase in enemy activity in those two countries. We'd have to be crazy to do that, a real Bush league move.

John

merrylander
01-03-2010, 12:31 PM
If you want an example of what depending on other countries for security can mean, look at the "boxer bomber" (I think I just made that up) incident. It was the Dutch who cleared him to board the flight.

John

Interestingly enough it was a Dutch passenger who took him down.

noonereal
01-03-2010, 12:37 PM
Yemen is a sovereign nation. There are limits to what we can do there. Were we to move large numbers of troops into the country to protect our interests it would definitely be a violation of their sovereignty and could be viewed as an act of war.

Even if we did move troops in with the permission of the government we'd have jihadis streaming into Yemen by the thousands - right now al Qaeda in the Arabian Penninsula numbers less than 500 - and we'd find ourselves opening up a full fledged third front in the so-called war on terror. That would drain resources from Iraq and Afghanistan, allowing an increase in enemy activity in those two countries. We'd have to be crazy to do that, a real Bush league move.

John

You always MAKE GOOD ARGUMENTS AND THIS IS ANOTHER.

never THE LESS, I would not leave.

I would also stay within the bounds of international law.

But I would not run.

(excuse my caps, my keyboard needs repair nd I am tired of running back to correct it when it goes zooy.)

Boreas
01-03-2010, 12:54 PM
You always MAKE GOOD ARGUMENTS AND THIS IS ANOTHER.

never THE LESS, I would not leave.

I would also stay within the bounds of international law.

But I would not run.

(excuse my caps, my keyboard needs repair nd I am tired of running back to correct it when it goes zooy.)

Pulling out could just be a recognition of the inevitable. Yemen is about to become a failed state like Somalia. Right now I'd say there was a better than even chance that Yemen will fall into total chaos within the next 90 days.

The government is weak and unpopular. In addition to the presence of al Qaeda, there are two separate rebellions in progress within the country. One of those is more or less a proxy war between the Saudis* and the Iranians.

The place is an absolute mess. The US and Britain are trying to keep the government duct taped together but, as history has shown, there's not a lot we can do.

[EDIT] *This is a clear example of a clash of interests between the Saudis and us. We know what Bush would have done in this instance (nothing) so it'll be interesting to see what Obama does.

John

noonereal
01-03-2010, 01:27 PM
good info
thanks

finnbow
01-03-2010, 09:58 PM
Think back for a moment to the Beirut, Nairobi and Dar es Salam embassy bombings. If we would have had intelligence on the threat at these 3 locations, might it not have been better to pull out? It is very difficult to stop a determined suicide bomber. We might think it shows resolve to stick it out, but once the bomb goes off the recriminations will fly, particularly if we have actionable intelligence.

BlueStreak
01-03-2010, 10:24 PM
Eh, I dunno. I would think that if intelligence indicates an attack is eminent, we would do something to stop the attack. But shutting down and buggin' out? I remember hearing "Better a live chicken, than a dead hero." a long time ago. And maybe it's true. But then you live with everyone knowin' you're a chicken.....

Dave

merrylander
01-04-2010, 06:54 AM
Does closing the embassies necessarily mean they also pulled out. We close our doors at night but we are still here.

noonereal
01-04-2010, 07:13 AM
Does closing the embassies necessarily mean they also pulled out. We close our doors at night but we are still here.

I don't know. Does it?

noonereal
01-04-2010, 07:14 AM
Think back for a moment to the Beirut, Nairobi and Dar es Salam embassy bombings. If we would have had intelligence on the threat at these 3 locations, might it not have been better to pull out? .

No.

..

finnbow
01-04-2010, 05:04 PM
No.

..

Tell that to the families of the hundreds of dead in those incidents. The Beirut incident was enough to send Reagan packing. Incidentally, Japan, France and Germany pulled out of Yemen today as well.

noonereal
01-04-2010, 05:11 PM
Tell that to the families of the hundreds of dead in those incidents. The Beirut incident was enough to send Reagan packing. Incidentally, Japan, France and Germany pulled out of Yemen today as well.

You are probably correct in your opinion on this. I would have felt better about it if we all announced a pull out at the same time however.

Boreas
01-04-2010, 09:08 PM
Originally Posted by merrylander
Does closing the embassies necessarily mean they also pulled out. We close our doors at night but we are still here.

I don't know. Does it?

No, it doesn't. Key personnel were probably evacuated to, for instance, the carrier we launched the cruise missiles from but there was probably a skeleton staff of communications and security personnel left behind. Also, I believe I heard that Americans living in Yemen were advised to stay indoors rather than being told to leave.

"Closing" an embassy isn't all that unusual in the face if an imminent threat like this one. It happens fairly often.

John

noonereal
01-04-2010, 09:14 PM
Originally Posted by merrylander
Does closing the embassies necessarily mean they also pulled out. We close our doors at night but we are still here.



No, it doesn't. Key personnel were probably evacuated to, for instance, the carrier we launched the cruise missiles from but there was probably a skeleton staff of communications and security personnel left behind. Also, I believe I heard that Americans living in Yemen were advised to stay indoors rather than being told to leave.

"Closing" an embassy isn't all that unusual in the face if an imminent threat like this one. It happens fairly often.

John

Well, after reading the posts here maybe my hard ass approach is indeed not the best course.

finnbow
01-04-2010, 09:19 PM
I just heard a "newsbreak" on CNN and they're planning to reopen the embassy tomorrow.

noonereal
01-05-2010, 08:47 AM
:confused:


Just when I decided it was ok to close it! :rolleyes:

JJIII
01-05-2010, 11:48 AM
Noon, I believe your timing chain has slipped. :)

Charles
01-05-2010, 12:47 PM
Noon, I believe your timing chain has slipped. :)

Noon does tend to backfire through his intake on occasion. But I tend to do the same thing when I start running on high octane.

Chas

Boreas
01-05-2010, 12:58 PM
Noon does tend to backfire through his intake on occasion. But I tend to do the same thing when I start running on high octane.

Chas

Retarded or advanced?

John

Charles
01-05-2010, 02:06 PM
Retarded or advanced?

John

Can't speak for Noon, but in my case I suffer from pre ignition.

Chas

Boreas
01-05-2010, 02:42 PM
Can't speak for Noon, but in my case I suffer from pre ignition.

Chas

Yeah, she said the same thing about me.

John

Charles
01-05-2010, 02:56 PM
Yeah, she said the same thing about me.

John

Well, she laughed at me and said "Who are you planning to satisfy with THAT?"

Chas

JJIII
01-05-2010, 04:02 PM
Well, she laughed at me and said "Who are you planning to satisfy with THAT?"

Chas

And you said "Myself"? :D

Charles
01-05-2010, 04:56 PM
And you said "Myself"? :D

I'm not that eloquent.

Chas