The House of Saud Do-Boy, Trump vetoes Yemen bill

[D 1 Wrestler]

Nice fall-back tag-line for not having anything to say.



Not to nit pick but Italy is...by a lot actually.



Not since the early 1990s.



I know, That is why I gave the example of how The U.S government should not be making deals so private companies can sell weapons...its not like they are being made by the government and the sales are going towards our GDP or towards our debt.



Nor does congress. Also, Pharma bad, pharma very bad.

lol wut? Your what-about ism is exactly that, a fall back with nothing to say, it's the definition of what-about-ism. Derp herp i got nothing to say but WHAT ABOUT OBAMA!!!

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Funny how I have nothing to say yet say a lot, enough to have 5 pages of discussion and all you have is a one-liner.



No really, we will all be talking about and expanding upon your post all the way into page 11. But really, thanks for your vast input, its as deep as always...but I will wager this, you will last longer than Trotsky and more than likely do better without actually trying to argue anything at all.

[smull1]

 

[hillelslovak87]

Fixed that for ya.

You go on with your delusion that Democrats are the bastions of loving human life and being anti-war. I am sure there are 4-5 other leftist morons on these boards that will believe you and give you the pat on the back you so deeply need for keeping their bubble intact.



For those that arent brain-dead twats, IE: Almost everyone not you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_drone_strikes_in_Yemen#2010
"2011-06-03
On June 3, 2011 American manned jets or drones attacked and killed Abu Ali al-Harithi, a midlevel al-Qaeda operative, and several other militant suspects, including Ammar Abadah Nasser al-Wa'eli, in a strike in southern Yemen.[10] Four civilians were also reportedly killed in the strike. The strike was reportedly coordinated by American special forces and CIA operatives based in Sana."

Lets see now, Obama was elected in 2008. That means his first term ended in 2012. Looks like first term.

You never get anything right.

The actions of one president do not negate the actions of another.

The distinct difference in this case is that when Obama bombed the shit out of other nations, something most ethical people would hate, he went through congress, and didn't have his son in law, someone most likely financially entangled to said nation's ruling family, doing much of the policy and diplomatic work with the nation. Remember, we still don't even have an ambassador to SA because A. Trump couldn't find anyone worthwhile and B. had his son in law. Quite important differences in the two cases.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

The actions of one president do not negate the actions of another.

The distinct difference in this case is that when Obama bombed the shit out of other nations, something most ethical people would hate, he went through congress, and didn't have his son in law, someone most likely financially entangled to said nation's ruling family, doing much of the policy and diplomatic work with the nation. Remember, we still don't even have an ambassador to SA because A. Trump couldn't find anyone worthwhile and B. had his son in law. Quite important differences in the two cases.

Only he did not go through congress as Trotsky pointed out...Obama acted on his own on the many Yemen bombings, and all the aid given to Saudi Arabia against them...hence my point...Trump is continuing what Obama was doing, including his blockade. Obama created this mess, Trump isnt cleaning it up like he should be and did for Syria and Afghanistan.

 

[IGIT]

hello EradiatedHaggis,

Not to nit pick but Italy is...by a lot actually.

then sub out Italy (or Spain) for France.

Not since the early 1990s.

http://www.worldstopexports.com/car-exports-country/ but either way, i think you get my point.

I know, That is why I gave the example of how The U.S government should not be making deals so private companies can sell weapons

but it does, and has done so, for many, many decades. this will continue, too. so i just figured, "what the heck, why don't we discuss this topic within the parameters of reality, instead of what we wish were true".

i understand that you wish Boeing and Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, etc, weren't making these stupendous weapons sales across the planet. but they are.

and since they are, and since the Saudis want to buy weaponry and they are going to get it one way or another, what is your argument against having American companies reap the benefits?

i'm not challenging, i am honestly curious how you see things, my friend.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

hey hey Skarr,

Obama banned the sale of those weapons to the Sauds((not even sure how that can happen since Saudi Arabia is an american ally and the american weapons manufacturers arent owned by the government))but probably opened the way for sale of a different comparable munition or....have directed that the supply of that particular munition to be made/sent from a different manufacturer that would allow the US to plead innocent in any possible future scenarios like what happened in Yemen....

none of that is what happened, my friend.

President Obama did indeed suspend the sale of these munitions on the way out the door (obviously the Oval Office, along with the Sec of State has to green light the sale of 500 lb laser guided bombs. Lockheed Martin can't just sell an F-35 to whatever nation it wants to)...

...and what happened is the next guy, President Trump, reversed our former President's position.

no guesswork necessary, and no conspiracies afoot.

Obama was just as much of a puppet as trump as George W as Reagan as Clinton....etc etc...so to think he just did something because it was the right thing to do and there wasnt some alterior motive going on aside from how it appeared...is madness in the face of what the real trend is

President Obama had a pretty thorny relationship with the Saudis, actually. very, very, very different than the one that President W Bush enjoyed with his buddy Prince Bandar, so...

...agree to disagree.

- IGIT

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

hello EradiatedHaggis,
but it does, and has done so, for many, many decades. this will continue, too. so i just figured, "what the heck, why don't we discuss this topic within the parameters of reality, instead of what we wish were true".

i understand that you wish Boeing and Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, etc, weren't making these stupendous weapons sales across the planet. but they are.

and since they are, and since the Saudis want to buy weaponry and they are going to get it one way or another, what is your argument against having American companies reap the benefits?

i'm not challenging, i am honestly curious how you see things, my friend.

- IGIT

Ok, I think we have both understood each other the last few posts just wondering why you keep asking while agreeing with the same points.



I am all for the US to stop being the worlds police, though unlike many here, I actually know where and why it started and it was a good thing at the time but its escalated far beyond its original intent, of protecting the worlds shipping lanes to end full blown wars based on trade and to free everyone to trade with everyone else.

 

[IGIT]

hi again EH!

Ok, I think we have both understood each other the last few posts just wondering why you keep asking while agreeing with the same points.

because the reality is that the United States is the top dog in arms dealing. so i'm trying to go from there with that reality in mind - your rebuttal, "i don't think we should do those things", whilst succinct, seems a bit unmoored from the world you and i live in.

I am all for the US to stop being the worlds police

that is unrelated and irrelevant. we are the world's Tony Stark though, that's for sure.

, though unlike many here, I actually know where and why it started and it was a good thing at the time but its escalated far beyond its original intent, of protecting the worlds shipping lanes to end full blown wars based on trade and to free everyone to trade with everyone else.

i know why it started too. anyone who is curious can use google and just read the history. i agree that it escalated beyond its original intent, but the rationale has shifted over the years, from Truman to the Cold War to the War on Terror to present day.

currently Mr. Trump is okie dokie with the arms sales to the Saudis, because its a means to an end (the end being the Saudi's smashing the Houthi rebels into smithereens - poking a stick in the eye of Rouhani).

i think its bad policy, because all it does is weaken the moderates in Iran.

aye?

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

How is Saudi Arabia’s track record when it comes to fighting the war on terror?

hi Son of Jamin,

how is the United States' track record when it comes to fighting the war on terror?

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

So it wasn't important then...

hi Rex is the Puerto Rican,

i think it was on the front page of the New York Times.

i thought it was an interesting a question, and a moral conundrum - that's why i made a post about it.

lets say you're a gun dealer and you sell me a gun knowing that i'm going to use it to blow my neighbor's brains out. you also know that if you refuse to sell me the gun, i'll just go somewhere else to get it.

is the dealer culpable? if not legally, morally? and if so, does it matter?

in Yemen, we're the gun dealer.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

hi sweede!

Well, I recognize what you are writing, and was not asking for a short summary of history in the region..

i apologize. i just think its an interesting topic and you asked a question that many Americans are asking. so i figured i'd answer it.

Realpolitik for whom?

for the United States and Saudi Arabia.

What do you think of the situation yourself? Should saudi not be a country we should really stay far away from?

the situation, as i see it, is that the United States is the primary dealer of military weaponry on the planet. that's what we are, and that's what we do, and we do it to a tune north of 55 billion dollars per year.

i don't see any of this changing. military aerospace has a HUGE footprint in liberal California...its big business for the United States.

i'd say we just try to sell to our friends. more realistically, i'd say we just try to sell to our friends who will fight proxy wars for us.

as a cynic, i'd just sell them the weapons. they'll be high fiving each other at Lockheed Martin, and i figure its better they get the money than Beijing.

that's reality, isn't it?

- IGIT

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

because the reality is that the United States is the top dog in arms dealing. so i'm trying to go from there with that reality in mind - your rebuttal, "i don't think we should do those things", whilst succinct, seems a bit unmoored from the world you and i live in.

And yet it isnt, even by your own examples.

France does not go to war to aid a nation so they can sell wine to them.
Germany does not go to war to aid a nation so they can sell cars to them.

A government should not be doing such things to aid sales of private companies and thus, I am against it. Its government overstepping its powers.

that is unrelated and irrelevant. we are the world's Tony Stark though, that's for sure.

Its fully relevant, for the very reasons I gave.

i know why it started too. anyone who is curious can use google and just read the history. i agree that it escalated beyond its original intent, but the rationale has shifted over the years, from Truman to the Cold War to the War on Terror to present day.

Then show my your GoogleFu and name the event where it happened.

currently Mr. Trump is okie dokie with the arms sales to the Saudis, because its a means to an end (the end being the Saudi's smashing the Houthi rebels into smithereens - poking a stick in the eye of Rouhani).


i think its bad policy, because all it does is weaken the moderates in Iran.

aye?

- IGIT

Yes, I already stated in the thread this is being done to replace the now broken Iraq as a regional power to put Iran into check.

That is what the SJWs on this board doesnt understand...right now, Saudi is all the world has in the region to check Iran and for America? Its one of the few ports that is open to us for easy access to the region. I hate Saudi Arabia, with a passion but the enemy of my enemy is my friend and all...

 

[IGIT]

And yet it isnt, even by your own examples.

France does not go to war to aid a nation so they can sell wine to them.
Germany does not go to war to aid a nation so they can sell cars to them.

A government should not be doing such things to aid sales of private companies and thus, I am against it. Its government overstepping its powers.

i agree. that is not what is happening - Saudi Arabia is going to war, not the United States.

Its fully relevant, for the very reasons I gave.

this thread is not about a US military police action, or the US being the world's police, or any kind of police. it relates to the US being the planet's Tony Stark (in this case, a major arms dealer for Saudi Arabia).

Then show my your GoogleFu and name the event where it happened.

lol?

Yes, I already stated in the thread this is being done to replace the now broken Iraq as a regional power to put Iran into check.

yup. the policy debate is about whether Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen is "keeping Iran in check".

That is what the SJWs on this board doesnt understand...right now, Saudi is all the world has in the region to check Iran and for America? Its one of the few ports that is open to us for easy access to the region. I hate Saudi Arabia, with a passion but the enemy of my enemy is my friend and all...

i'm going to ignore whatever you've wrote, since you began with social justice warriors. this thread has nothing to do with SJW.

- IGIT

 

[My Spot]

hi Rex is the Puerto Rican,

i think it was on the front page of the New York Times.

i thought it was an interesting a question, and a moral conundrum - that's why i made a post about it.

lets say you're a gun dealer and you sell me a gun knowing that i'm going to use it to blow my neighbor's brains out. you also know that if you refuse to sell me the gun, i'll just go somewhere else to get it.

is the dealer culpable? if not legally, morally? and if so, does it matter?

in Yemen, we're the gun dealer.

- IGIT

So how come the liberals posting in this thread didn't care then? They all had accounts before January 2017.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

i agree. that is not what is happening - Saudi Arabia is going to war, not the United States.

Perhaps war is too strong of a word for some...I call dropping bombs in a sovereign nation to be an act of war...and thousands were dropped by the American military in Yemen...I have a feeling that the Yemenis people would say America is basically at war with them.

this thread is not about a US military police action, or the US being the world's police, or any kind of police. it relates to the US being the planet's Tony Stark (in this case, a major arms dealer for Saudi Arabia).

Some people like to take notice of Step 1 and not just the step they are currently on...this all started with America becoming the worlds grand protector and thus, it is related.

lol?

Prove to me "Anyone' can figure out how it got started via a Google search.

yup. the policy debate is about whether Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen is "keeping Iran in check".

i'm going to ignore whatever you've wrote, since you began with social justice warriors. this thread has nothing to do with SJW.

If even one is posting here and engaging...it does...and there are. Thus point stands, people do not understand the whys behind the actions of what Trump is doing. Disagree with it, but at least understand it and they dont.

 

[IGIT]

hi EradiatedHaggis,

Perhaps war is too strong of a word for some...I call dropping bombs in a sovereign nation to be an act of war...and thousands were dropped by the American military in Yemen...I have a feeling that the Yemenis people would say America is basically at war with them.

we're talking about the current conflict in Yemen, right? if so, i'd like to know more about the thousands of bombs dropped by the American military in Yemen.

- IGIT

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

hi EradiatedHaggis,

we're talking about the current conflict in Yemen, right? if so, i'd like to know more about the thousands of bombs dropped by the American military in Yemen.

- IGIT

Look at my early posts. I posted one about Obama dropping 26k bombs in 2016 (in 6 countries) as well as a link to a list of just Drone strikes in Yemen since 2010.

 

[IGIT]

So how come the liberals posting in this thread didn't care then? They all had accounts before January 2017.

hi again Rex,

its hard to say, for i am not them.

if you're asking me to answer for them, i'll give it a try. maybe its because at the time i made that thread, only 550 civilians had been killed in Yemen...now the total is well over 5000.

maybe its because the refugees fleeing the area have multiplied in the last four years...or maybe its because the current Saudi regime assassinated a Washington Post Journalist.

maybe its because posts relating to Black Lives Matter obscured any other dialogue that was going here in the war room back in 2015.

i'm just guessing.

at any rate, i have a problem with the current arms to the Saudis. i get what the President is trying to do, but i think he's really taking the wrong route.
all he's doing is empowering the very elements that he seeks defang.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

Look at my early posts. I posted one about Obama dropping 26k bombs in 2016 (in 6 countries) as well as a link to a list of just Drone strikes in Yemen since 2010.

hi EradiatedHaggis,

i shall go take a look.

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

Look at my early posts. I posted one about Obama dropping 26k bombs in 2016 (in 6 countries) as well as a link to a list of just Drone strikes in Yemen since 2010.

hi EH!

alrighty. i was curious, since your initial phrasing was that the US was at war with Yemen.

regarding the drone strikes?

yes, President Obama continued Bush's doctrine of bombing Al-Qaeda in Yemen. currently, the Trump administration is on pace to more than quintuple the amount of munitions dropped by US drones in Yemen during the Obama years. i was not critical of President Obama for his drone program, nor am i criticizing Mr. Trump for his.

to try and circle back to the OP...

...i was critical of US arms dealing with the Saudis back when Mr. Obama was POTUS - but i understood the rationale behind it. to my way of thinking, in the end, he was proved correct (as was, in this case, Sec of State Clinton).

the international pressure bought to bear forced Iran to the table and the JCPOA was born. war was averted, along with the problematic specter of Iran with nuclear weapons (for now).

Mr. Trump is fighting a proxy war with Iran in Yemen. he's dramatically ramping up the drone "war" there too. his stated reason for arming the Saudi's to the teeth?

jobs.

“I would prefer that we don’t use, as retribution, canceling $110 billion worth of work, which means 600,000 jobs."
— Trump, during a defense roundtable at Luke Air Force Base, Oct. 19

- IGIT