Should the U.S. provide military aid to Saudi Arabia during its conflict with Yemen?
In March 2015, Yemeni President Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi was removed from office during a civil war with the Shiite Houthis movement. The Houthis were led by former President Ali Abdullah Saleh who was removed from power during the 2011 Arab Spring. Neighboring Sunni Saudi Arabia viewed President Hadi’s removal as a threat and responded by conducting airstrikes against the Houthi’s in Yemen. Saudi Arabia’s allies, including the U.S., U.K. and Egypt, suspected Iran was behind the Houthi uprising and responded by providing military aid to the Saudi armed forces. The United…
Read more15% Yes |
85% No |
13% Yes |
72% No |
3% Yes, this will prevent Iran from gaining too much power in the Middle East |
10% No, we should stay out of conflicts that are not an immediate threat to our security |
1% No, and cut ties with Saudi Arabia until they end their human rights violations |
|
1% No, Saudi Arabia has more than enough money to fund their own wars |
|
1% No, Saudi Arabia is a false ally terrorist state and we should immediately cut ties with them |
See how support for each position on “Yemen” has changed over time for 143k America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Yemen” has changed over time for 143k America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from America users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@58J4H653yrs3Y
NO - Let the Arab countries settle their own conflicts! Keep all jihadists that support sharia law out of our country and our allies countries!
@7PTCG389mos9MO
No, we should stay out of this conflict as the airstrikes being conducted are killing hundreds of innocent civilians
@7PTCG3810mos10MO
No, we should stay out of conflicts that violate federal law by killing hundreds of innocent civilians in airstrikes.
@5VC4HYM4yrs4Y
We should provide aid when necessary but reduce our foreign involvement.
Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Yemen” news articles, updated frequently.
@ISIDEWITH5 days5D
Commandos from Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard rappelled from a helicopter onto an Israeli-affiliated container ship near the Strait of Hormuz and seized the vessel Saturday in the latest attack between the two countries.The seizure followed a suspected Israeli strikethis month on an Iranian consular building in Syria that killed 12 people, including a senior Guard general.Israel’s war on Hamas in the Gaza Strip has inflamed decades-old tensions across the region. With Iranian-backed forces like Hezbollah in Lebanon and Yemen’s Houthi rebels also involved in the fighting, any new attack in the Mideast threatens to escalate that conflict into a wider regional war. Iran’s state-run IRNA said a special forces unit of the Guard’s navy carried out the attack on the Portuguese-flagged MSC Aries, a container ship associated with London-based Zodiac Maritime.
@ISIDEWITH1wk1W
At least 38 migrants, including children, have died in a shipwreck off the Djibouti coast, the United Nations migration agency said on Tuesday.The International Organization for Migration (IOM) said at least six other people were missing and presumed dead, and that 22 survivors were being assisted by the IOM and local authorities.Yvonne Ndege, regional spokesperson for the IOM, said the shipwreck happened about 200 metres off Djibouti and that the boat carrying the migrants had left Yemen around 2 a.m. local time on April 8.It sank about two hours later with around 66 people on board, predominantly from the Horn of Africa region. They were believed to be mostly Ethiopian nationals, she said."Every year tens of thousands of migrants leave the Horn of Africa, mainly from Ethiopia and Somalia trying to reach the Gulf nations," Ndege said."(But) thousands are stuck in Yemen. It's rational to conclude that the group of migrants who perished in this tragedy were trying to return to Djibouti to buy time and try again later or return home."
@ISIDEWITH3wks3W
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday asked Israel's top court to defer a March 31 deadline for the government to come up with a new military conscription plan that would address mainstream anger at exemptions granted to ultra-Orthodox Jews.The decades-old controversy has become especially sensitive as Israel's armed forces, made up mostly of teenaged conscripts and older civilians mobilised for reserve duty, wage a nearly six-month-old war in Gaza to try to eliminate the Islamist Hamas movement that rules the Palestinian enclave.While the Supreme Court did not immediately respond to Netanyahu's request, it ruled separately that state subsidies for military-age ultra-Orthodox men studying in seminaries rather than serving in uniform be suspended as of Monday.The two ultra-Orthodox parties in Netanyahu's religious-nationalist coalition, United Torah Judaism and Shas, denounced the ruling as a "mark of Cain." They vowed to fight for what they deemed their constituents' "right" to stay in seminaries - but stopped short of threatening to walk out of the government.Piling on the pressure, Netanyahu's attorney-general, Gali Baharav-Miara, wrote in a submission to the court that she saw no legal basis for deferring the ultra-Orthodox conscriptions.The Supreme Court in 2018 found in favour of appellants who argued that the waiver was discriminatory. Parliament failed to come up with a new arrangement, and a government-issued stay on mandatory conscription of the ultra-Orthodox expires on Monday.Those favouring a review of the exemption include Netanyahu's defence minister and other cabinet members managing the war. They predict months of more fighting that will strain manpower and stoke public demands for more equitable call-ups.One senior Israeli official estimated that 5% of the population was taking part in the Gaza conflict, which has spread to Lebanon and Syria and drawn missile salvoes from other Iranian-aligned groups as far away as in Yemen and Iraq.
Explore other topics that are important to America voters.
@ISIDEWITH2yrs2Y
@ISIDEWITH3wks3W
In a series of developments that have stirred the political landscape, former President Donald Trump has publicly endorsed the presidential bid of independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., describing it as 'great for MAGA.' Trump's remarks came after Kennedy announced his vice-presidential pick, further intensifying the political discourse. Trump, in his characteristic style, took to social media to express his views, labeling Kennedy as the 'most radical left' candidate in the race and highlighting the liberal credentials of Kennedy's running mate, Nicole Shanahan. Despite his criticism of their political stance, Trump views Kennedy's candidacy as beneficial for his MAGA movement, suggesting it could potentially divide the Democratic vote.Kennedy, a figure who has long been associated with controversial views, particularly on the rule of law and established science, has drawn criticism and concern from various quarters. His decision to run for president and the subsequent endorsement by Trump has sparked a flurry of reactions, with some seeing it as a strategic move that could impact the Democratic Party's chances in the upcoming elections. Allies of President Joe Biden have expressed alarm over Kennedy's bid, fearing it could siphon off crucial votes from the left, thereby posing a significant threat to Biden's reelection efforts.The political dynamics surrounding Kennedy's candidacy and Trump's endorsement underscore the complex and often unpredictable nature of American politics. As the race for the presidency heats up, the strategies employed by candidates and their supporters are coming under increased scrutiny. The potential impact of Kennedy's run on the Democratic vote is a topic of much speculation, with analysts and political observers closely monitoring the situation.Trump's support for Kennedy, despite their ideological differences, highlights the former president's tactical approach to politics. By endorsing a candidate who could potentially weaken his opponents, Trump is playing a strategic game, aiming to maximize his own chances of success. This move has not only added a new dimension to the political landscape but has also raised questions about the future direction of both the Republican and Democratic parties.As the United States gears up for another presidential election, the emergence of candidates like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the reactions they provoke from figures like Donald Trump are indicative of the shifting sands of American politics. With the electorate increasingly polarized, the outcome of the election remains uncertain, and the strategies adopted by candidates will be crucial in determining the path forward.