Read on Twitter
This tweet (and the comments under), is a good illustration of the far left's foreign policy views: self-righteous, oblivious to reality, intolerant. Proponents seek instant gratification to feel good about themselves but neither care nor understand what is actually going on (1/) https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/1381791875661713412
The Saudi war in Yemen, including the blockade, is a strategic disaster for Saudi Arabia and it has had devastating humanitarian consequences for Yemen. Absolutely true, and I've written this on Twitter many times. But to say "the US must pressure Saudi to lift the blockade"...
...is counterproductive. The logic is appealing but this is where having an idea of what is going on in Yemen would be useful. The Houthis are brutal and corrupt. If you give them more space, they will seize it. That will NOT improve the humanitarian situation in the long run.
It's easy to criticize "the 104th nuance brigade" (I take that as a compliment) but reality is messy. From 10,000km away it may make you feel good about yourself to oppose imperialism but you and your Chavista friends - the caviar left - don't seem to care about the actual...
...impact of the policies you propose. So - in response to @ErikSperling - yes, I absolutely would like the war to stop. But US pressure has to be on all actors involved, and the solution has to be comprehensive. Only pushing Saudi is not a good solution. How you actually...
... do that is the tougher question (read the comments to some of those tweets and you get the impression it would be so easy if only the US pushed Saudi a bit more, but in the real world, it doesn't work like that).
What is also interesting here - in @adamjohnsonNYC's virtue signaling and in the comments that follow it - is what it tells us about the far left's foreign policy views.
1. It is totally US-centric - it neither understands nor cares about Yemenis (reminds you of neocons?)
1. It is totally US-centric - it neither understands nor cares about Yemenis (reminds you of neocons?)
2. Very simplistic, yes-or-no worldview: if the Saudis are bad (which they are, on this we agree), then the Houthis must be OK? (no) https://twitter.com/g4rg4ntu4/status/1381859441298051072
3. Dozens of examples, but its proponents are not really into respectful debate: https://twitter.com/alexthistlewood/status/1381807406980665344
3 (b). and there is one of these nice fellows suggesting someone do an MbS on me: https://twitter.com/pomobobomofo/status/1381812397682393088
4. You also have weird (ie, the pro-Assad crowd) friends: https://twitter.com/RaniaKhalek/status/1381954687360897025
5. And far left dudes in their basements obviously understand Yemen better than Yemenis: https://twitter.com/rfaison33/status/1381933978333151234
6. OK, last one, another good example of what ideological blinkers do. "big garfield guy", how about asking Yemenis - or Syrians, or others - what Iran-backed militias do? https://twitter.com/coolgeese/status/1381950474186805252
7. Not surprising that Russian puppets are on this one too, but here is a perfect example of precisely what I mean with this thread: https://twitter.com/BenjaminNorton/status/1384575362865287168
8. Another perfect example of dogma shaping one's views independent of fact: dude in Australia chooses that it must be "non-sense", "absurd" that Houthis could be violent; they are RESISTING superpower-backed Saudi aggression so LOGICALLY they must be OK https://twitter.com/NeotipPro/status/1384694870921474051
9. This is exactly what I mean with this thread. No desire or ability to understand the implications of your foreign policy (very American of you). You want to do something, which is fair, but you don't care that what you prescribe will make things worse. https://twitter.com/ErikSperling/status/1384902466622394371
