Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That's complete nonsense. Neither the Hadi (Saudi-backed) nor STC (UAE-backed) types are particularly Islamist; ISIS and al-Qaeda are a third bloc in the rural/desert east that the US periodically bombs, while the Saudis are busy generally bombing Houthi-governed civilians.


That's the official Saudi line and it doesn't take a genius to see its BS:

This whole mess escalated when houthi rebels tried to stop ISIS from taking over the government. Where did those come from? What did the Saudis do? At what point did they started bombing civilians??

Do you see the red line?


The whole mess escalated from fuel price rises, with the help of the former president who had been ousted by the Arab Spring revolt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthi_takeover_in_Yemen

ISIS and al-Qaeda were not involved in any of the maneuvering around Sana'a, and the Saudi intervention kicked off when they realized that a) Hadi still had a power base in the south, and b) the Houthis were about to capture it


>ISIS and al-Qaeda were not involved in any of the maneuvering around Sana'a,

While true, in many countries a group like Al-Islah would probably be described in the Western media as "linked to ISIS" or something similar. They're part of the Muslim Brotherhood also regularly maligned in the West.


Only by Western media that doesn't know what it's talking about.


Or media that views their connection to the Saudi spread of Wahhabism as similar to ISIS'.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: