Matthew Yglesias » Attack in Yemen

Sep 17th, 2008 at 10:11 am

Attack in Yemen

Pretty daring attack on the US Embassy in Yemen today involving not only a car bombing but also followup gunfire. I guess I don’t have a grand point to make about this, but it’s a reminder that if you want to curb radicalism it makes more sense to focus on ways to reduce its appeal in the places where radical movements are already strong (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, etc.) rather than, say, by invading Iraq.

Comments
37

Filed under: iraq, terrorism,

37 Responses to “Attack in Yemen”

Dan Kervick Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:17 am
The fundamentals of the War on Terror are strong.
Don Williams Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:29 am
1) From survivalblog.com, a link to a Youtube video of REM’s song “It’s the End of the World As We Know It”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1TZsRPKkqA&feature=related

heh

2) Well, yes they are hiding out in Idaho. But last time I checked their hoards of gold is up 300 percent and their guns and amno are appreciating rapidly.

So how’s your Lehman stock doing?
Kurzleg Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:37 am
From the article: “The attack was especially shocking to many Yemenis because it came during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.”

I wonder how this sort of thing goes over with your average Yemeni citizen? They may not love the U.S., but do they have similar disdain for the sort of people who are supposedly holy warriors defiling Ramadan?
jeff Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:41 am
You are anti-American!

Any explanation for terroristic activity other than an invocation of “they hate us for our freedom” and the advocacy of any response other than swift, out-of-control violence against civilians is total capitulation.

And, any blog post about a new attack without:

(1) mention of how the war on terror curbed attacks like this from being daily occurrences on our soil

and

(2) how this attack represents some transnational threat by an all encompassing, single entity islamo-fascist regime

is total capitulation. What a pussy! Yglesias, get on board.
Notorious P.A.T. Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:47 am
But–but–but I thought we were fighting them in Iraq so we wouldn’t have to fight them anywhere else! ! !
E. O'Neal Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Yeah, Matt, if we had been defeated in Iraq by AQ, as the Dems wanted when they tried to cut off funding for the troops, this sort of thing wouldn’t be happening. We certainly never had embassy bombings during the Clinton administration or before we invaded Iraq. I suggest you Google “confirmation bias” because everything that happens seems in your mind to confirm your puerile leftism. How stupid does one have to be to get his own blog?
pimp hand strikes! Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Question: Matt, you supported the iraq war and opposed the surge. Despite achieving the distinction of being wrong in both SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION of the iraq war(wow!) why do you still think your BA in philosophy qualifies you as a foreign policy expert?

regards, yo ugly, fat mamma

ps - It was a real pleasure to not read your book and to see it flop so spectacularly
rmwarnick Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:51 am
I’ve been to the Yemen embassy– it’s a fortress, built with the expectation of a terrorist attack. Even as a U.S. citizen, I couldn’t get inside and was only able to converse with an embassy employee through bulletproof glass.

This isn’t the same kind of embassy attack that took place in Africa.
strasmangelo jones Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 10:55 am
it makes more sense to focus on ways to reduce its appeal in the places where radical movements are already strong (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, etc.) rather than, say, by invading Iraq.

Well, sure. Do you think the U.S. is going to reduce the appeal of radical movements in Pakistan and Afghanistan, though, by escalating its military presence there, as the new bipartisan consensus seems to favor? Wouldn’t there seem to be some easier, less expensive, less bloody way of reducing the appeal of extremism throughout the world? If these movements are largely reacting against American foreign policy, as they were in Iraq, wouldn’t it make sense to change American foreign policy, rather than to play a game of global whack-a-mole across a series of increasingly bloodied and beleaguered third world countries? Isn’t a change in foreign policy exactly what you advocate in regards to Iraq - stop trying to “beat the terrorists” and just get out of there instead? Why are Afghanistan and Pakistan any different?
kafka Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 11:05 am
“..reduce its appeal in the places where radical movements are already strong (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, etc.) rather than, say, by invading Iraq..”

Too bad for Matt people don’t get mulligans when it comes to invasions. Matt thought it was a splendid idea back in 2003. Having screwed that up, Matt’s not going to earn a lot of points by sniping at the same people he agreed with back then.
El Cid Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 11:14 am
If we had given Al Qa’ida control of the Moon and crowned Osama bin Laden the Emperor of All Space & Time, like Matt Yglesias and the Democrats wanted, we would have never have had the opportunity to implement The SURGE ™, the most important foreign policy in all of history and the thing which fixed everything that ever, ever needed fixing. Liberals. Hmpf.
Peter K. Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 11:20 am
The fundamentals of the War on Terror are strong.

They are if there hasn’t been another 9-11 type attack. If there had been some of the anti-war left would have jumped at the chance to blame it on Iraq.

It’s good that Saddam Hussein is gone. And no matter how much some people try to minimize how bad he was, the historical record is what it is.

And as I predicted a long time ago, a certain peacenik faction of the left will take all of their criticisms of Iraq, legitimate and illegitimate, and transfer them over to Afghanistan/Pakistan.

We’re creating more terrorists!
steve duncan Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 11:21 am
pimp hand strikes! is fun at parties. Tells all the girls they’re bad drivers and should do something with their hair.
Don Williams Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Anyone taken a glance at Gold this morning –taking off like the space shuttle — right through the roof:
http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html

I think Al Qaeda somehow infiltrated the Executive suites of Wall Street and fucked us. Must have gotten a bunch of guys into the Fed , Treasury, SEC and Congressional Banking Committees as well. Crafty fuckers, aren’t they?

Now about that slow motion run on the banks …
Don Williams Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 11:25 am
Re Peter K’s comment “It’s good that Saddam Hussein is gone. And no matter how much some people try to minimize how bad he was, the historical record is what it is.”
————
hee hee. Yep, it certainly is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Saddam_rumsfeld.jpg
Colonel Danite Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Too bad you can’t see Yemen from Wasila, Alaska. Otherwise Gov. Palin could of warned us of the attack.
steve duncan Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 11:58 am
“Too bad you can’t see Yemen from Wasila, Alaska.”`
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Touché! Colonel Danite wins the thread. Any snark that can be endlessly recycled plugging in any neocon idiocy gets my vote!
nukev Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
From the Washington Post: “It shook everything in my home,” said Saddam Hussein, a Yemeni man living about 200 yards from the embassy.

He ain’t gone yet….
Matthew Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Madness. I’m sure a few bombing runs and a brigade of troops will get them loving us again.

http://thesebastards.blogspot.com/
John Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
“It’s good that Saddam Hussein is gone.”

Agreed. But the question should not be whether it is good or bad, but was it worth the cost? Was it worth removing a minor third world despot who did not pose any significant threat to the US, knowing how many dollars we needed to borrow to do it, the lives lost on all sides, and the damage to the long-term financial stability and credibility of the US? If you are a well-connected defense contractor the obvious answer would be “sure!” I am not, so I say “no.”
Lionel Says:
September 17th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Would killing a big bunch of terrorists reduce the appeal?
Notorious P.A.T. Says:
September 18th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
if we had been defeated in Iraq by AQ, as the Dems wanted

You are stupid.
mamma.com Says:
December 2nd, 2008 at 5:44 pm
That’s one of the first questions coming up in today’s news, reported by the WSJ’s Kara Scannell, that Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban faces insider-trading charges related to the site. Mamma.com is a Canadian search
viagra Says:
March 11th, 2009 at 4:46 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
tramadol Says:
March 17th, 2009 at 2:29 am
I want to say - thank you for this!
tramadol
tramadol Says:
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:19 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
brand viagra Says:
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:23 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
buy cheap viagra
viagra brand Says:
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:16 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
cheap brand pfizer viagra

Matt Yglesias

Attack in Yemen

37 Responses to “Attack in Yemen”

Blogroll