My source, the People's Mujahedin Organization of Iran website, is not The New York Times, but it is a source They are opposed to the current Iranian government.
The reason this is interesting is two-fold.
First there is the fact that a Saudi Arabian engagement in open warfare with Iran would not be good for the world oil markets. Thus, it would not be good for the rest of us if they get into a dustup.
Secondly, some argue that we will only get into long term trouble if we neglect Yemen and its problems, like Andrew Exum and Richard Fontaine, from the Center for a New American Security.
But, should we really care? Is this in America's vital interest?
And, here is a contrarian view, from an independent reporter:
The Yemeni rebels are not Shiite, they are Zaidi and the Yemeni government is not Sunni, in fact the president himself is Zaidi. Zaidis are an offshoot of Shiism but are very far removed from them and in some ways have more in common with sunnis than they do with Shiites the conflict in Yemen is not between Sunnis and Shiites at all, and there is no Iranian role, but the Yemeni government is blaming al Qaeda, Iran and anybody else they can find for what is an internal conflict, but that blame helps them get support from the Americans and the SaudisThis reporter forgot to mention that they are often Fivers, rather than Twelver Muslims.
And we don't have forces to spare for this problem, other than Air and Naval forces. If we did have ground forces to apply to this problem there are a whole bunch of other requirements out there.
But, if it comes to a Saudi-Iranian dustup, there is the oil to worry about.
This is why doing foreign policy is so hard.
Regards — Cliff