The US-Saudi Alliance Under Pressure

[Wirey]

The mask of U.S.-Saudi friendship is finally slipping - World - CBC News

 

[BSM1]

So where do you see us going with this?

 

[Wirey]

Officially, the US needs the Saudis unless they decide to allow Keystone t go through, and even then, there might not be enough oil. I am curious as to how the average American would react if it was proven that the Saudi government was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.

 

[Iti oj]

Officially, the US needs the Saudis unless they decide to allow Keystone t go through, and even then, there might not be enough oil. I am curious as to how the average American would react if it was proven that the Saudi government was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.

Keystone oil won't be seen on America. What are you talking about?

 

[BSM1]

Officially, the US needs the Saudis unless they decide to allow Keystone t go through, and even then, there might not be enough oil. I am curious as to how the average American would react if it was proven that the Saudi government was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.

Good point. Stay tuned.

 

[Flankerl]

If the Sauds ever fall to crazy Islamists the battle of Mecca will be hilarious.
Due to its vicinity to the Kaaba there is a huge chance that one of the most ugliest buildings in the whole world falls onto the Kaaba.


Seriously I will never understand how the pious Muslims on their Hajj can accept what the Sauds to do Mecca. If Israel did the same to Jerusalem the Haredim would go bonkers.

 

[metis]

The Saudis have always been fair-weathered friends, and much the same can be said of our attitude towards them. Hey, if it wasn't for oil, which the Saudis need to sell and we have often needed to buy, does anyone here actually think we'd have an alliance with them?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I hope I'm not picking out champagne too early. We really shouldn't even be allies with them in the first place, and we should send a message (which I know this is the absolute last reason the alliance is slipping) that we won't side with European Medieval minded theocracies (The Muslim world actually flourished during that time, and they have largely went in the wrong direction) as policy, which is a very laughable policy that we will not negotiate with terrorists but we will cozy up with them.
But, then again, in the long run, it may just concentrate power even further if the economy were to shift away from oil should the alliance fail and oil prices go up without hope of them ever going back down. The oil tycoons would get kicked out of the club, and those remaining would just pick themselves up even higher as they buy up the markets that replace oil.

 

[gsa]

I love Michelle Obama. She of course knew that appearing unveiled would be a huge insult to Saudi sensibilities. And also that there was nothing they could do about it.

The Kingdom of Horrors is a nasty theocratic bully, and its leaders deserve every bit of what is coming to them. They built the very ideology that is now knocking on their front door. The only thing that we should be doing is arming actual dissidents, however few there may be, so that they can liberate their own people.

Our own government has known about Saudi complicity in the 9/11 attacks since the attacks took place. It is the worst kept secret of this "special relationship."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The only thing that we should be doing is arming actual dissidents, however few there may be, so that they can liberate their own people.

Dear god, no! The last thing we need to do is arm another group who becomes a bigger problem late. Just think, how much of this would be going on had the US not helped to prop up Bin Laden?

 

[esmith]

If you agree that the current brand of Islamic terrorist are to be defeated and you do not want US ground troops to be involved then it must be the surrounding Muslim nations that must supply those ground forces, air power alone will not stop them. If you agree with this then Saudi Arabia has to be involved. The only problem is that there are very few Muslim countries that have the material and training (ground forces) to accomplish this. Now if you feel that ISIS should be left to their own devices and let them do what they want, then you would welcome the break-up of Saudi and US relations.

 

[gsa]

Dear god, no! The last thing we need to do is arm another group who becomes a bigger problem late. Just think, how much of this would be going on had the US not helped to prop up Bin Laden?

There are people in Saudi Arabia who suffer under the tyranny of theocracy. They yearn for liberation. We should help them. That is what we are supposed to do. That is the entire purpose of the existence of the United States.

We are bogged down in relativism and so-called "realism." Here is the reality: Women are property in Saudi Arabia. Gays, atheists and liberals are subject to execution. Their state-approved educational materials denounce Jews as apes and Christians as swine. The Saudi government also promotes this version of Islam across the globe.

You and I would both be executed if we didn’t cloak our identities in this Kingdom of Horrors. And for what? For existing. For daring to breath and not praise their false god and his immoral decrees. Sorry, but **** that. No one deserves to live in this state of perpetual ignorance and misery. You know what the problem is? We backed the wrong horse. We went the route of "realism" and refused to make the hard choices, the choice to back liberals and socialists who want to change the Middle East. We decided to back theocrats who hate women, gays, religious minorities and dissidents.

That hasn’t worked. So I’m proposing an alternative: Give the dissidents the means to liberate themselves.

 

[metis]

If you agree that the current brand of Islamic terrorist are to be defeated and you do not want US ground troops to be involved then it must be the surrounding Muslim nations that must supply those ground forces, air power alone will not stop them. If you agree with this then Saudi Arabia has to be involved. The only problem is that there are very few Muslim countries that have the material and training (ground forces) to accomplish this. Now if you feel that ISIS should be left to their own devices and let them do what they want, then you would welcome the break-up of Saudi and US relations.

And the above is the problem in a nutshell. For all too long these countries relied on U.S. aid and military involvement while doing so little to help us or even help themselves by committing themselves to action. Take a look at what Turkey is doing-- or should I say not doing-- right now as an example.

The problem there is more their problem than ours. We can help them if they're willing to help themselves, imo, but I'll be darned if I'm willing to advocate us going it again solo or with only token help. As my Pappy used to say, "S**t of get off the pot!", and it's about time that most of the countries over there decide to go all in.

 

[columbus]

Officially, the US needs the Saudis unless they decide to allow Keystone t go through, and even then, there might not be enough oil. I am curious as to how the average American would react if it was proven that the Saudi government was complicit in the 9/11 attacks.

It is just not true that the USA needs Saudi Arabia.

We are one of the world's largest energy producers. There is enough domestic production to supply the USA at around the equivalent of other industrial nations. If the USA ever had the political will to cut per capita consumption to something resembling that of Germany or Japan we would not need to import any significant amounts.
Poof! A chance for peace in the middle east. Because we would stop funding terrorist groups like the wahabist billionaires in Saudi Arabia.

Tom

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There are people in Saudi Arabia who suffer under the tyranny of theocracy.

Afghanistan was suffering from an attack from Russia, and in the long run, look what happened. America supported Bin Laden, he turned rogue, formed the worlds most dangerous terrorist group, and its evil ******* child is even worse. It would be a better idea to send troops than to arm them, so long as the troops make sure to take everything back with them and not leave any weapons for them to claim. Somewhere that has seen a series of violent revolts and a constant flow of dangerous radicals, especially in the more recent times, is not a place we should be arming. Actually, alot of places tend to turn very nasty when America arms them, and a worse regime takes over.
This constant manipulation of global affairs is going to be part of the downfall of America. It's costly, dangerous, and such a vast super powered, ethnocentric hegemony has weakened the foundations of many empires.

 

[BSM1]

And the above is the problem in a nutshell. For all too long these countries relied on U.S. aid and military involvement while doing so little to help us or even help themselves by committing themselves to action. Take a look at what Turkey is doing-- or should I say not doing-- right now as an example.

The problem there is more their problem than ours. We can help them if they're willing to help themselves, imo, but I'll be darned if I'm willing to advocate us going it again solo or with only token help. As my Pappy used to say, "S**t of get off the pot!", and it's about time that most of the countries over there decide to go all in.

Although I do agree with you if some of these Mideast countries go "all in" it might be surprising as to which cards are turned over. I believe we must remain diligent and wary when it comes to our national defense.

 

[metis]

Although I do agree with you if some of these Mideast countries go "all in" it might be surprising as to which cards are turned over. I believe we must remain diligent and wary when it comes to our national defense.

Yes, but the key is exactly what's the best way to do it? I don't see having American troops returning in body bags because we think we can "Rambo" the region is the best way to go, as sooner or later our troops have to leave. Therefore, we need countries in that region to go all in, and for a prolonged period of time. The killing of the Jordanian pilot by ISIS has angered so many there that it appears that "all in" may indeed happen.

The country we need a commitment from is Turkey, and that hasn't happened as of yet. Maybe if both us and the EU would pretty much tell them "s**t or get off the pot", and threaten them with removal from NATO and a reduction in trading with them, this might help them to get "religion".

 

[BSM1]

Yes, but the key is exactly what's the best way to do it? I don't see having American troops returning in body bags because we think we can "Rambo" the region is the best way to go, as sooner or later our troops have to leave. Therefore, we need countries in that region to go all in, and for a prolonged period of time. The killing of the Jordanian pilot by ISIS has angered so many there that it appears that "all in" may indeed happen.

The country we need a commitment from is Turkey, and that hasn't happened as of yet. Maybe if both us and the EU would pretty much tell them "s**t or get off the pot", and threaten them with removal from NATO and a reduction in trading with them, this might help them to get "religion".

Again I agree. But if these countries refuse to act or turn against us we may have to reevaluate the severity of our actions in the Middle East. I don't believe just a show of force would be effective or productive, it may take a full on smack down. We may have to empty our bowels or move on.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Again I agree. But if these countries refuse to act or turn against us we may have to reevaluate the severity of our actions in the Middle East. I don't believe just a show of force would be effective or productive, it may take a full on smack down. We may have to empty our bowels or move on.

At this point, a show of force may be pressurizing under the surface. Americans do need to realize that the government alliances in the Middle East are often build on shakey and questionable grounds, and everyone's skeletons need to be ripped from the closet. However, ISIS can indeed grow into a very serious international threat once their expansion momentum wears down, and they will have to be dealt with.
However, because the big bad wolf is real, there will be a need for heroes, and the corruption that needs to be surface will remain hidden.
It may also prime us for further erosion of rights.

 

[metis]

We need to be very careful not to make the mistake again of making it our war (U.S. &/or European) because of the history and distrust of us in that region. This is why "leading from behind" is really preferable over playing Rambo.