this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
198 points (97.1% liked)

World News

36968 readers
488 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I don't think it's technically correct to say that the US armed ISIS; ISIS seized weapons that the US provided to Iraq.

Israel does a pretty good job of opposing Iran, and we can be confident that weapons provided to Israel aren't going to be used against the US. I think it's likely that the Houthis are acting up now not because they're provoked by Israel but because Israel is preoccupied with something else.

As for Saddam Hussein... He did a very good job of opposing Iran. The threat of eight years of war and hundreds of thousands of Iranian soldiers dead would be a very effective stick if we still had access to it. It's ironic that the weak, pro-Iran government that is the result of US intervention in Iraq seems like it's worse for US interests than Saddam was.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

A lot of the people that now sympathize with ISIS are people that the US and other Western countries propped up in various ways to help fight the Soviets.

The Houthis were friendly with the Soviets. The Soviets were friendly with the imamate.

[–] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 1 points 2 years ago

It's ironic that the weak, pro-Iran government that is the result of US intervention in Iraq seems like it's worse for US interests than Saddam was.

Nailed it! (Aside from thinking it's ironic)

[–] gnuhaut@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago

a very effective stick if we still had access to it

We? Who is 'we'?