I don't know it to have happened in the contemporary, if not the entire, history of this nation that it stood with and gave support to taking action in another country to impose none democratic system until the actions of this president in Yemen.

Again, people here need to open their eyes and see that they, through their president, are supporting in Yemen an attack that is on its face is for a none democratic government that could even be worse than the one being attacked. The attack has the Saudi face on it which is far from being known for having a democratic system for itself let alone bringing it to other nations but instead is known for its targeting of any group classified as Shia whenever they make a sound for themselves even in their own countries. 

  

So now we have moved from not questioning the justice of those drone attacks to not caring about having a just cause to begin with?      

And the amazing thing is that some here are still calling their president "the leader of  the free world". Shouldn't he be on its side first? The guy is supporting what the Saudi government is trying to impose in Yemen. How differently you think not the uncaring but the enemy of the free world would act? 

Even if the question of justice and democracy is not the main focus, if you are already involved in fighting or supporting and backing a fighting for some kind of government why don't you make it a fight for a democratic one? Or is it merely seeking an evil path just for its evilness?    

Notice that, although you may see a reference to The Muslim Brotherhood here and there, like when you click on the "Islah Party" in the quote of the post below, keep in mind that the Egyptian one could be different and that in many issues it may have its own separate path from those associated with the Saudis or The Muslim Brotherhood of Syria.     

Even before this attack by the Saudis, look at its involvement and the kind of manipulation and control and creation of a system far from providing equality for all as could THIS from Wikipedia suggests:

"In the absence of strong state institutions, elite politics in Yemen constituted a de facto form of collaborative governance, where competing tribal, regional, religious and political interests agreed to hold themselves in check through tacit acceptance of the balance it produced.^[15] The informal political settlement was held together by a power-sharing deal between three men: president Ali Abdullah Saleh, who controlled the state; major general Ali Mohsen al-Ahmar, who controlled the largest share of the army; and sheikh Abdullah al-Ahmar, figurehead of the Islamist Islah party and Saudi Arabia's chosen broker of transnational patronage payments to various political players,^[16] including tribalsheikhs.^{[17][18][19][20]} The Saudi payments have been intended to facilitate the tribes autonomy from the Yemeni government and to give the Saudi government a mechanism with which to weigh in on Yemen's political decision making.^[21]

... Saudi Arabia's main concern was to maintain its influence in Yemen through some old regime figures and other tribal leaders who were part of the so-called "GCC initiative""

Remember, the actions and intentions mentioned here are not related to some democratic country that is also not known for targeting a specific group. On the contrary, this is a report suggesting talking and walking like a duck related to what we already know as a duck. 

And for the guy who describe himself as the legitimate president, HERE is how he was elected according to wikipedia

"A presidential election was held in Yemen on 21 February 2012. Acting President Abd Rabbuh Mansur al-Hadi was the only candidate in the election. He was sworn in as president of Yemen on 25 February 2012 in the Presidential Palace...Hadi won 99.8 percent of the vote."   

Like I said earlier that purpose also needs to be declared to that group because currently the action being taken has the Saudi face on it which clearly does not reflect democracy or justice.

One could also say that there were no signs to support that the group being attacked by the Saudis is a bad enough alternative to make taking control from it with no regard to the kind of system that would replace it a valid purpose.

Also, like I stated previously, there was no showing of crimes and atrocities for the group  being attacked by the Saudis in Yemen that could be used as an argument for its elimination being itself the purpose.   

People here need to ask this president what is that which he wants to do there? What are his objectives and how he intends to reach them? Suppose that those against whom he approves and supports the Saudi attacks are no longer in control of any place, what is the next step in his plan? Would we be the one building a government there or would we also just let that to the Saudis?   

This president may also needs to be told that he cannot attack an entity or stand with and support such attack in order to balance things out because you previously attacked an entity from the opposing side. People are not objects. Every person should be dealt with according to his own actions. 

This targeting to the Shia in their own countries by the Saudi government is one of the worst and most inexcusable discrimination in modern history and this president is condoning and supporting it. 

Even if not a democracy, in Afghanistan and Iraq was there any doubt that the system we are bringing is better than that which existed there at the time? Do we know here that the government system which the Saudis is fighting for is better than that which they are fighting against for us to stand with them on that?  

Was there any doubt when this country took its direct action in Iraq and Afghanistan that it intended to build democracy there? So why doesn't this president make clear what is his just intention for Yemen especially given that he is acting indirectly and using the least trust deserving proxy?   

Saudi government claim Iran interference in Yemen? How does that claim compare to even just what is established of its own interference there? In any case, does anyone see Iran's airplanes bombing targets there? If no, then why doesn't the Saudis limit themselves to the same level of interference?

I don't care whether the Saudi government claims Iran or even Satan himself being behind those they are targeting in Yemen, it still did not show any harm from them in its own country to justify attacking them in their own country. Of course that is not new since it also failed to give any justification for its action for same targeting  in Bahrain.  

How the world is tolerating one country singling out one group of people to go after and attack those who belong to it even in their own countries like this is beyond me. What century are we living in? 

Again, this guy in the white house has been severely degrading and making us guilty by associating us and making us stand with a none democratic force like that of Saudi Arabia. Power has apparently went to his head and he is acting like he thinks he can do whatever he wants. How many other countries currently having their airplanes bombing a neighbouring country like the action the Saudi government is doing in Yemen which we are supporting? It is clearly and in front of every body is involving itself directly where it has no business being, because of a claim regarding indirect involvement by another country? So if it is neither a question of justice between countries nor democracy, what is it then? Does this guy care to explain to us?

Moral values imposes a responsibility on those in congress to force the path of justice on this or any other president who diverge from it especially a divergence like this. It is not just about being strong and powerful. It is very important to me and every citizen with moral restrictions as well that if we face any reaction to our international actions, to at least be capable of saying that we do stand with democracy. But this president is not only not fulfilling that in Yemen but is instead standing with the opposite of it. 

Even if he wants to please the Saudi government, what does the Saudi government want? I have one policy for everywhere. I stand for democracy in Yemen where the Shia is a minority just as I stand for democracy in Iraq where the Shia is the majority. Why doesn't this president stand with democracy and tell the Saudi government don't you want democracy for Yemen? Don't you want the same thing that you were complaining about being given to the Shia majority in Iraq be given to the Ssunny majority in Yemen? Or were you pleased about the Iraq situation and we just missed that?