US closes embassy in Yemen, evacuates staff

[webfact]

US closes embassy in Yemen, evacuates staff

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States has shut down its embassy in Yemen indefinitely and evacuated its staff and their families due to the worsening security conditions in the country, the State Department said Tuesday.

"On February 11, 2015, due to the deteriorating security situation in Sanaa, the Department of State suspended embassy operations and US Embassy Sanaa American staff were relocated out of the country," a State Department travel warning said.

"All consular services, routine and/or emergency, have been suspended until further notice," it added.

The Shiite Muslim militia that has grabbed power in Sanaa warned Tuesday against any attempts to "destabilise" Yemen as the UN brokered a second day of talks aimed at resolving the crisis.

The country has never managed to achieve stability since longtime president Ali Abdullah Saleh stepped down in early 2012 after a bloody year-long popular uprising.

This includes battling an Al-Qaeda insurgency and facing a separatist movement in the formerly independent south.

Matters worsened in September when the Huthi militia, fearful of being marginalised by a proposed new constitution, seized control of the capital and began pushing southward into Sunni Muslim areas.

UN envoy Jamal Benomar has warned that Yemen is at a "crossroads", and urged political leaders to "take up their responsibilities and achieve consensus" as he battles for a negotiated solution.

The United States pressed for progress on that front.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/US-closes-embassy-in-Yemen-evacuates-staff-30253842.html


-- The Nation 2015-02-11

[arjunadawn]

Seven years ago we trained their counter terrorism unit; created them actually. We see how that turned out. In fact, it seems that all we are doing is training our avowed enemies and we give our allies just enough support to lose, every time, every where there is muslim terrorists... ah, terrorists! In the entire history of military science, how can the current state of us foreign affairs be rationalized as incidental, meaningless setbacks, poor policy, or tactical error? Every single action the US takes abroad to further US and Western interests results in furthering the aims of our avowed enemies. At what point does is it no longer incredulous but illustrative?

[Credo]

The enemy is not necessarily a country, it is an ideology and it doesn't have fixed borders. Like a political party or a coalition gov't, people and groups switch sides.

Can you name any power that has had any success in the ME?

[Seastallion]

Seven years ago we trained their counter terrorism unit; created them actually. We see how that turned out. In fact, it seems that all we are doing is training our avowed enemies and we give our allies just enough support to lose, every time, every where there is muslim terrorists... ah, terrorists! In the entire history of military science, how can the current state of us foreign affairs be rationalized as incidental, meaningless setbacks, poor policy, or tactical error? Every single action the US takes abroad to further US and Western interests results in furthering the aims of our avowed enemies. At what point does is it no longer incredulous but illustrative?

I could be wrong and will readily stand to be corrected, but it seems to me to be a Republican thing. Whenever a Republican government is in power is when these things start. When the Dems get in, they just inherit the chaos.

[arjunadawn]

The enemy is not necessarily a country, it is an ideology and it doesn't have fixed borders. Like a political party or a coalition gov't, people and groups switch sides.

Can you name any power that has had any success in the ME?

You are correct.

Yes, I can name a power: IS and AQ and the MB. All are having success.

[arjunadawn]

Seven years ago we trained their counter terrorism unit; created them actually. We see how that turned out. In fact, it seems that all we are doing is training our avowed enemies and we give our allies just enough support to lose, every time, every where there is muslim terrorists... ah, terrorists! In the entire history of military science, how can the current state of us foreign affairs be rationalized as incidental, meaningless setbacks, poor policy, or tactical error? Every single action the US takes abroad to further US and Western interests results in furthering the aims of our avowed enemies. At what point does is it no longer incredulous but illustrative?

I could be wrong and will readily stand to be corrected, but it seems to me to be a Republican thing. Whenever a Republican government is in power is when these things start. When the Dems get in, they just inherit the chaos.

Oh, I dont know. Really. I am neither party but there may be some truth to what you say as it is generally held that Repubs are more hawkish, though US history has parties often going back and forth inheriting each other's mess. Mostly, foreign policy was often only tinkered about the edges with consisent US positions on this or that clear and unwavering. This may or may not be Obama's fault but he is doing more than tinkering. Again, facts on the ground are changing so quickly and dramatically that he may have no choice but to plug the dike where its hemorrhaging. Possible. However, I remain unconvinced he is choosing the correct options. But you are not wrong, only its a bit of both sides. The program I referred to trains counter terrorism units around the world under an Anti Terrorism Assistance program that survives many executives; not Bush nor Obama. But the exec chooses where it is employed.

[ggt]

Yemen was held up for all to see as proof that Obama's lack of leadership was a success:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/01/19/another-of-obamas-counterterrorism-success-stories-falls-apart/

[2fishin2]

Yemen was held up for all to see as proof that Obama's lack of leadership was a success:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/01/19/another-of-obamas-counterterrorism-success-stories-falls-apart/

I like your reference material title "HOT AIR" thats funny.

[rabid old goat]

france too http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/europe/europe/2015-02/11/c_133987565.htm

"The embassy has asked French citizens to leave Yemen as soon as possible."

this war on terror is really bringing some concrete results

Edited February 11, 2015 by rabid old goat

[pkspeaker]

So Yemen is constantly at civil war and alqueda and iran-backed shiite militia's so the US just pulled out-good idea..

Why can't they just do that with iraq ?

[Steely Dan]

Perhaps US interests in Yemen could be henceforth dealt with via an agency set up by the Iranian embassy. I mention the Iranians seeing as if aliens landed in Aden they would probably conclude that U.S policy had been to bring a situation a out where Yemen became a proxy state for Iran and AQIP, just to keep the Saudis extra happy.

[arjunadawn]

Perhaps US interests in Yemen could be henceforth dealt with via an agency set up by the Iranian embassy. I mention the Iranians seeing as if aliens landed in Aden they would probably conclude that U.S policy had been to bring a situation a out where Yemen became a proxy state for Iran and AQIP, just to keep the Saudis extra happy.

While I am unable to fully articulate it I am now aware of a very different set of facts emerging on the ground in the middle east; something quite different. As I learned today Iran has made nice with Hamas, et al., and is actually aggressively pursuing insurgency operations along Israel's borders in Syria and Lebanon; and again, now fully funding the payroll of the terrorists within Israeli interests- Hamas. Noting the Yemen has for the most part fallen to shia, I am not impressed with the useless drivel that the shia don't seem to be propelled from Iran- of course they are. So, Iranian influence has actually drastically escalated in the past 6 years. Iran now has literal hegemony in the region from Herat to Beirut, from Sanaa to the Golan, IAW Obama's policy of employing Iran as a strategic partner in the region for peace and stability.

But what is the dialectic? This is not happening without a response. Iranian ascendency cannot happen in a sunni vacuum. There is little doubt that very rich and ruffled sunni neighbors are wary if not alarmed at the possibility of an expansionist Iran getting "the bomb." Our ostensible sunni allies have pretty much given up on Obama's failed policies in the region- or have they? Are they really failed policies? Increasingly, I am not so sure any longer. Is it really possible that this audacious president has a plan quite different from what pundits muse? You see, Saudi Arabia has now for the first time today offered in public the previously absurd statement that the Muslim Brotherhood is okay with SA. Remember, the Muslim Brotherhood is basically synonamous with the Obama Administration. Clearly, millions, and millions of muslims think so; so do I. The Muslim Brotherhood goals are exactly the same with IS. The only difference is IS usurped a long sought after prize. With IS basically doing what was sought by the MB for a hundred years, what would be the mechanics to build upon this, under the guise of opposing it, only to insinuate the MB into the caliphate leadership later?

Whether Saudi Arabia always intended to embrace the Muslim Brotherhood or not it is now left with no choice but to embrace them to consolidate opposition to Iranian influence. One thing is overwhelmingly clear from the chain of events stemming from Saudi Arabia's back door fiasco- Yemen- the US and its sunni allies are intentionally building a caliphate, perhaps first as a lever locally, but now as the actual vehicle toward their regional goals. The current affairs enable the bipolar threat necessary to arouse sunni movement toward IS, incredibly, and in so choosing this now inescapable reality, SA, at least, is choosing to back the MB horse to later subsume into the IS caliphate. If this is the best bulwark against shia, they will move in this direction for certain. Of course, the goal would be the House of Saud to lead... but this is beyond my reasoning. Obama would be left with a bipolar middle east and in this notion of MAD, he probably reckons issues like the Palestinians and Israeli conflict can be managed, and a balance restored to the region. I now believe this to be very possible. I also believe it is madness to allow this jihad djinn out of the lamp; it will never return again.

[Steely Dan]

Perhaps US interests in Yemen could be henceforth dealt with via an agency set up by the Iranian embassy. I mention the Iranians seeing as if aliens landed in Aden they would probably conclude that U.S policy had been to bring a situation a out where Yemen became a proxy state for Iran and AQIP, just to keep the Saudis extra happy.

While I am unable to fully articulate it I am now aware of a very different set of facts emerging on the ground in the middle east; something quite different. As I learned today Iran has made nice with Hamas, et al., and is actually aggressively pursuing insurgency operations along Israel's borders in Syria and Lebanon; and again, now fully funding the payroll of the terrorists within Israeli interests- Hamas. Noting the Yemen has for the most part fallen to shia, I am not impressed with the useless drivel that the shia don't seem to be propelled from Iran- of course they are. So, Iranian influence has actually drastically escalated in the past 6 years. Iran now has literal hegemony in the region from Herat to Beirut, from Sanaa to the Golan, IAW Obama's policy of employing Iran as a strategic partner in the region for peace and stability.

But what is the dialectic? This is not happening without a response. Iranian ascendency cannot happen in a sunni vacuum. There is little doubt that very rich and ruffled sunni neighbors are wary if not alarmed at the possibility of an expansionist Iran getting "the bomb." Our ostensible sunni allies have pretty much given up on Obama's failed policies in the region- or have they? Are they really failed policies? Increasingly, I am not so sure any longer. Is it really possible that this audacious president has a plan quite different from what pundits muse? You see, Saudi Arabia has now for the first time today offered in public the previously absurd statement that the Muslim Brotherhood is okay with SA. Remember, the Muslim Brotherhood is basically synonamous with the Obama Administration. Clearly, millions, and millions of muslims think so; so do I. The Muslim Brotherhood goals are exactly the same with IS. The only difference is IS usurped a long sought after prize. With IS basically doing what was sought by the MB for a hundred years, what would be the mechanics to build upon this, under the guise of opposing it, only to insinuate the MB into the caliphate leadership later?

Whether Saudi Arabia always intended to embrace the Muslim Brotherhood or not it is now left with no choice but to embrace them to consolidate opposition to Iranian influence. One thing is overwhelmingly clear from the chain of events stemming from Saudi Arabia's back door fiasco- Yemen- the US and its sunni allies are intentionally building a caliphate, perhaps first as a lever locally, but now as the actual vehicle toward their regional goals. The current affairs enable the bipolar threat necessary to arouse sunni movement toward IS, incredibly, and in so choosing this now inescapable reality, SA, at least, is choosing to back the MB horse to later subsume into the IS caliphate. If this is the best bulwark against shia, they will move in this direction for certain. Of course, the goal would be the House of Saud to lead... but this is beyond my reasoning. Obama would be left with a bipolar middle east and in this notion of MAD, he probably reckons issues like the Palestinians and Israeli conflict can be managed, and a balance restored to the region. I now believe this to be very possible. I also believe it is madness to allow this jihad djinn out of the lamp; it will never return again.

I have read about Iran backing Hamas again. If what you state is an accurate assessment of the picture it will be interesting to see whether the Saudi stance changes towards the Egyptian regime; remember the Saudis made up the revenue lost to Egypt when the U.S stopped granting it aid. A large scale Sunni -Shia war sounds like a Machiavellian aim for the West, providing it wasn't a nuclear one. The trouble with this one is that multiculturalism has rendered the whole world a battlefield In such a conflict.

Surely the plea of Al Sisi for Islam to modernize itself would be something the Saudis would like to pursue, but then again maybe it's impossible seeing as the tiny minority has never been a tiny minority and with the IS genie out of the bottle the only option is to run with it and hope to rule the Caliphate when the smoke clears.

Final thought, an Obama appointee was forced to resign after stating a Caliphate was inevitable, was this resignation for giving the game away?

Edited February 12, 2015 by Steely Dan

[Bwanatickey]

So the Drone strikes carried out by the U.S.A operatives destroyed the key enemy leaders here.

Funny that, who's leaving all those Humvees behind to the marauding victors.

[snarky66]

Talk about a group of clowns led by obama & kerry. They didn't fly helicopters in to pick up our marines. Our marines had to get on a commercial flight. These morons in the white house are beyond a disgrace.

Edited February 13, 2015 by snarky66

[Credo]

Talk about a group of clowns led by obama & kerry. They didn't fly helicopters in to pick up our marines. Our marines had to get on a commercial flight. These morons in the white house are beyond a disgrace.

Oh for God's sake, the embassy was closed, it was evacuated.

Get a grip.

[Steely Dan]

Talk about a group of clowns led by obama & kerry. They didn't fly helicopters in to pick up our marines. Our marines had to get on a commercial flight. These morons in the white house are beyond a disgrace.

Oh for God's sake, the embassy was closed, it was evacuated.

Get a grip.

The marines were not allowed to take their weapons with them so watch for them being recycled for attacks on shopping malls and such like.

[JingerBen]

So Yemen is constantly at civil war and alqueda and iran-backed shiite militia's so the US just pulled out-good idea..

Why can't they just do that with iraq ?

The US could further its interests in the Middle-East by pulling its forces out entirely, and concentrating on diplomacy.

The military doesn't solve problems in those countries, it creates them.

[Morch]

Talk about a group of clowns led by obama & kerry. They didn't fly helicopters in to pick up our marines. Our marines had to get on a commercial flight. These morons in the white house are beyond a disgrace.

Oh for God's sake, the embassy was closed, it was evacuated.

Get a grip.

The marines were not allowed to take their weapons with them so watch for them being recycled for attacks on shopping malls and such like.

According to marine reports, weapons were destroyed (or rendered more or less useless) at the airport, prior to leaving the country. Doesn't make the scene more palatable, but perhaps not quite on par with "recycled for attacks on shopping malls and such like".

[mania]

Seven years ago we trained their counter terrorism unit; created them actually. We see how that turned out. In fact, it seems that all we are doing is training our avowed enemies and we give our allies just enough support to lose, every time, every where there is muslim terrorists... ah, terrorists! In the entire history of military science, how can the current state of us foreign affairs be rationalized as incidental, meaningless setbacks, poor policy, or tactical error? Every single action the US takes abroad to further US and Western interests results in furthering the aims of our avowed enemies. At what point does is it no longer incredulous but illustrative?

I could be wrong and will readily stand to be corrected, but it seems to me to be a Republican thing. Whenever a Republican government is in power is when these things start. When the Dems get in, they just inherit the chaos.

Oh, I dont know. Really. I am neither party but there may be some truth to what you say as it is generally held that Repubs are more hawkish, though US history has parties often going back and forth inheriting each other's mess. Mostly, foreign policy was often only tinkered about the edges with consisent US positions on this or that clear and unwavering. This may or may not be Obama's fault but he is doing more than tinkering. Again, facts on the ground are changing so quickly and dramatically that he may have no choice but to plug the dike where its hemorrhaging. Possible. However, I remain unconvinced he is choosing the correct options. But you are not wrong, only its a bit of both sides. The program I referred to trains counter terrorism units around the world under an Anti Terrorism Assistance program that survives many executives; not Bush nor Obama. But the exec chooses where it is employed.

It is true that is the "general" consensus about Repubs but the reality is even under Obama's run the whole drone program etc has been stepped up

& counter-productive for the most part other than to enflame

Those that decide who your choices will be for next president as well as those who came before will always use either tool as they own them all.

[arjunadawn]

Seven years ago we trained their counter terrorism unit; created them actually. We see how that turned out. In fact, it seems that all we are doing is training our avowed enemies and we give our allies just enough support to lose, every time, every where there is muslim terrorists... ah, terrorists! In the entire history of military science, how can the current state of us foreign affairs be rationalized as incidental, meaningless setbacks, poor policy, or tactical error? Every single action the US takes abroad to further US and Western interests results in furthering the aims of our avowed enemies. At what point does is it no longer incredulous but illustrative?

I could be wrong and will readily stand to be corrected, but it seems to me to be a Republican thing. Whenever a Republican government is in power is when these things start. When the Dems get in, they just inherit the chaos.

Oh, I dont know. Really. I am neither party but there may be some truth to what you say as it is generally held that Repubs are more hawkish, though US history has parties often going back and forth inheriting each other's mess. Mostly, foreign policy was often only tinkered about the edges with consisent US positions on this or that clear and unwavering. This may or may not be Obama's fault but he is doing more than tinkering. Again, facts on the ground are changing so quickly and dramatically that he may have no choice but to plug the dike where its hemorrhaging. Possible. However, I remain unconvinced he is choosing the correct options. But you are not wrong, only its a bit of both sides. The program I referred to trains counter terrorism units around the world under an Anti Terrorism Assistance program that survives many executives; not Bush nor Obama. But the exec chooses where it is employed.

It is true that is the "general" consensus about Repubs but the reality is even under Obama's run the whole drone program etc has been stepped up

& counter-productive for the most part other than to enflame

Those that decide who your choices will be for next president as well as those who came before will always use either tool as they own them all.

Those who suggest one party or another may be partly responsible for building the current fiasco are not wrong, but miss a vital point: these same neocons recycling in and out of government for decades, and otherwise occulting in think tanks when not employing their dastardly deeds upon the world, are the same people acting levers in Hillary's camp, and others- Obama? A bit. So, its really not an issue of Repub or Dem. Its this palpable psuedo, pro Israel, group that is moving behind the scenes. This is simply a fact: from Wolfowitz to Rumsfeld to Kristol, Kissinger, and others, these hawks influence multiple camps.

In the past this had the intended result of steadying policy and since it was a bipolar there were not great, frequent or dramatic shifts, just the steady drum of war and buildup and demonizing. But the ground plan is now changed and inventing empire in the new fractured world requires the one standard that worked so well before- a bipolar axis to ensure the nationalist glue to bind us to war prep, the demonization of the "other," and arguably some form of MAD that enabled a steady state world where the US slowly prevailed. In this regard, I think they intentionally want a caliphate. I am convinced the US believes a regional superstate in the Mideast would facilitate mature, self interested control of the surrounding vassal states. The major miscalculation with this concept is Islam. You cannot negotiate with Islam. In fact, within Islam, there is a considerable school of jurisprudence dictating the Machiavellian manner one must negotiate with non muslims. There is simply zero reason to believe this is a good idea. Treating Islam as just another religion that people "do" or "have" within the jurisdiction of those you negotiate with is suicide. Islam is always the only thing that matters!

[Chicog]

It is true that is the "general" consensus about Repubs but the reality is even under Obama's run the whole drone program etc has been stepped up

& counter-productive for the most part other than to enflame

Since you appear to have access to the intel on who has been droned and what acts or terror they might have been planning, please feel free to share.

[mania]

It is true that is the "general" consensus about Repubs but the reality is even under Obama's run the whole drone program etc has been stepped up

& counter-productive for the most part other than to enflame

Since you appear to have access to the intel on who has been droned and what acts or terror they might have been planning, please feel free to share.

I don't appear anything in particular

News is news & who would say the drone program has not been increased dramatically these last years?

Don't confuse me with someone who leans to the left or right side. As the rest of my post suggested the whole bird is co-opted

But if your interested in the drones comment as a side bar here ya go

[Chicog]

It is true that is the "general" consensus about Repubs but the reality is even under Obama's run the whole drone program etc has been stepped up

& counter-productive for the most part other than to enflame

Since you appear to have access to the intel on who has been droned and what acts or terror they might have been planning, please feel free to share.

I don't appear anything in particular

News is news & who would say the drone program has not been increased dramatically these last years?

Don't confuse me with someone who leans to the left or right side. As the rest of my post suggested the whole bird is co-opted

But if your interested in the drones comment as a side bar here ya go

You stated that the drone strikes are 'counter productive'. I simply asked you to provide some evidence.

[mania]

It is true that is the "general" consensus about Repubs but the reality is even under Obama's run the whole drone program etc has been stepped up

& counter-productive for the most part other than to enflame

Since you appear to have access to the intel on who has been droned and what acts or terror they might have been planning, please feel free to share.

I don't appear anything in particular

News is news & who would say the drone program has not been increased dramatically these last years?

Don't confuse me with someone who leans to the left or right side. As the rest of my post suggested the whole bird is co-opted

But if your interested in the drones comment as a side bar here ya go

You stated that the drone strikes are 'counter productive'. I simply asked you to provide some evidence.

And as I said Here ya go

Both you & I have been around long enough not to go off the ranch too far only to have all the work to type it deleted for being too far off the ranch eh?

[Chicog]

So you have none. Just say so.

[mania]

So you have none. Just say so.

555 I have opinions based on what has been reported.

You can go get one of your own too

....or not

[Chicog]

I don't have clearance for the Intel that says who was targeted and why. And neither do you.

[mania]

I don't have clearance for the Intel that says who was targeted and why. And neither do you.

My goodness you read fast....Or do you not have clearance to go read?

Ok have a nice night