5 ms·

Utterly fascinating, both that this "special arrangement" has existed and has been kept out of general public awareness throughout all this time. Brought into

Utterly fascinating, both that this "special arrangement" has existed and has been kept out of general public awareness throughout all this time. Brought into context with the otherwise inexplicable tolerance for that regime's egregious human rights abuses, and the "delicateness" with which it was handled during the 9/11 investigations (extended the fact that its key people were allowed to slip out of the country in the immediate aftermath, despite a nation-wide travel ban on everyone else) -- it all starts to make sense. Not in any tinfoil kind of way. But in a more banal, mundane, "Why do we keep kissing this bloodthirsty, homophobic, misogynist and utterly decrepit regime's ass, for decade after decade?" kind of way. The U.S. started releasing data on foreign ownership of Treasuries in 1974. Since then, the Treasury’s policy had been to not disclose Saudi holdings, and it grouped them instead with those of 14 other mostly OPEC nations, including Kuwait, Nigeria and the United Arab Emirates, Bloomberg reported in January. The group held $281 billion as of February, down from a record of $298.4 billion in July. For more than a hundred other countries, from China to the Vatican, the Treasury had provided a detailed monthly breakdown of how much U.S. debt each owns. The figures for March are scheduled for release at 4 p.m. New York time Monday. The special arrangement was a product of the 1973 oil shock following the Arab embargo. It’s among concessions that U.S. administrations made over the years to maintain America’s strategic relationship with the Saudi royal family and access to the kingdom’s oil reserves.

peteretep 10y ago
Kissing their ass suggests they're getting more from the relationship than America which - while certainly not impossible - seems an odd assumption to make.
ArkyBeagle 10y ago
We seem to have two impulses: - Hold up a higher standard to nations and feel somehow entitled/obligated to "enforce" it. - Attribute such deviations from those standards to "culture". I'm not sure which is worse. Nation-states sort of don't judge other nation-states in that way. The US has been ... innovative in that, and it's been no end of trouble. Why Pearl Harbor? Because the US embargoed Japan after the Rape of Nanking. And that ended well... Maybe its changed since '73 but the "access to the kingdom's oil reserves" seems hollow, since my understanding is that there is a small army of engineers and workers who rotate in and out of Saudi to maintain the fields and other infrastructure. Second, there is that Dilbert cartoon about the meaning of "fungible" w.r.t oil. The '73 embargo was at least in part a reaction to the Six-Day War in '67 so it seems typically Kissingerian to pursue a balance of power rapprochement with one of the the seats of opposition to our friendly relations with Israel. The US also ... sort of "inherited" the British Empire after WWII, and Saudi was very much a part of the actions of those within the Empire. Again, I can't recommend "A Peace To End All Peace" enoughly.
twoodfin 10y ago
(extended the fact that its key people were allowed to slip out of the country in the immediate aftermath, despite a nation-wide travel ban on everyone else) This is an urban legend: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp
- raddad 10y ago
  Yet all of the listed sources on snopes say the opposite.
  - twoodfin 10y ago
    How so?
    - raddad 10y ago
      From snoopes, their sources. Andrews, Bill. "Bin Laden Family's US Exit 'Approved'." Edinburgh Evening News. 3 September 2003. Buncombe, Andrew. "Fears of Reprisal Force Bin Laden Family to Flee Homes in US." The [London] Independent. 26 September 2001 (p. 3). Cullen, Kevin. "Bin Laden Kin Flown Back to Saudi Arabia." The Boston Globe. 20 September 2001 (p. A29). Cullen, Kevin. "Saudi Diplomat: IDs Were Stolen." The Boston Globe. 29 September 2001 (p. A6). Hayward, Ed. "Hub Attack on Arab Student Investigated As Hate Crime." The Boston Herald. 18 September 2001 (p. 28). Kurz, Hank. "Organ Network Gets Clearance for Charter Flights." The Associated Press. 13 September 2001. Lichtblau, Eric. "White House Approved Departure of Saudis After Sept. 11, Ex-Aide Says." The New York Times. 4 September 2003. Steele, Kathy. "Phantom Flight from Florida." Tampa Tribune. 5 October 2001 (p. 1) Tyler, Patrick E. "Fearing Harm, Bin Laden Kin Fled from U.S." The New York Times. 30 September 2001 (p. A1). Associated Press. "FAA Allows Cross-Country Flight of Antivenin to Miami Victim." 13 September 2001. CBSNews.com. "Returning to the Air." 15 September 2001.
- acqq 10y ago
  The article just claims it's "false" that they flew out before 11:00 A.M. on September 13, 2001 (apparently the end of an "official" ban on air travel) not that it's false that they flew out of the country. So it happened, just not before that exact date and time.
Retric 10y ago
Yea, 281 billion is just not a lot of money when your talking US debt around ~1.5% federal and a little less if you toss in state and local. In just about any other context that's a lot of money.

peteretep 10y ago

Kissing their ass suggests they're getting more from the relationship than America which - while certainly not impossible - seems an odd assumption to make.

ArkyBeagle 10y ago

We seem to have two impulses: - Hold up a higher standard to nations and feel somehow entitled/obligated to "enforce" it. - Attribute such deviations from those standards to "culture". I'm not sure which is worse. Nation-states sort of don't judge other nation-states in that way. The US has been ... innovative in that, and it's been no end of trouble. Why Pearl Harbor? Because the US embargoed Japan after the Rape of Nanking. And that ended well... Maybe its changed since '73 but the "access to the kingdom's oil reserves" seems hollow, since my understanding is that there is a small army of engineers and workers who rotate in and out of Saudi to maintain the fields and other infrastructure. Second, there is that Dilbert cartoon about the meaning of "fungible" w.r.t oil. The '73 embargo was at least in part a reaction to the Six-Day War in '67 so it seems typically Kissingerian to pursue a balance of power rapprochement with one of the the seats of opposition to our friendly relations with Israel. The US also ... sort of "inherited" the British Empire after WWII, and Saudi was very much a part of the actions of those within the Empire. Again, I can't recommend "A Peace To End All Peace" enoughly.

twoodfin 10y ago

(extended the fact that its key people were allowed to slip out of the country in the immediate aftermath, despite a nation-wide travel ban on everyone else) This is an urban legend: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp

raddad 10y ago
Yet all of the listed sources on snopes say the opposite.
- twoodfin 10y ago
  How so?
  - raddad 10y ago
    From snoopes, their sources. Andrews, Bill. "Bin Laden Family's US Exit 'Approved'." Edinburgh Evening News. 3 September 2003. Buncombe, Andrew. "Fears of Reprisal Force Bin Laden Family to Flee Homes in US." The [London] Independent. 26 September 2001 (p. 3). Cullen, Kevin. "Bin Laden Kin Flown Back to Saudi Arabia." The Boston Globe. 20 September 2001 (p. A29). Cullen, Kevin. "Saudi Diplomat: IDs Were Stolen." The Boston Globe. 29 September 2001 (p. A6). Hayward, Ed. "Hub Attack on Arab Student Investigated As Hate Crime." The Boston Herald. 18 September 2001 (p. 28). Kurz, Hank. "Organ Network Gets Clearance for Charter Flights." The Associated Press. 13 September 2001. Lichtblau, Eric. "White House Approved Departure of Saudis After Sept. 11, Ex-Aide Says." The New York Times. 4 September 2003. Steele, Kathy. "Phantom Flight from Florida." Tampa Tribune. 5 October 2001 (p. 1) Tyler, Patrick E. "Fearing Harm, Bin Laden Kin Fled from U.S." The New York Times. 30 September 2001 (p. A1). Associated Press. "FAA Allows Cross-Country Flight of Antivenin to Miami Victim." 13 September 2001. CBSNews.com. "Returning to the Air." 15 September 2001.
acqq 10y ago
The article just claims it's "false" that they flew out before 11:00 A.M. on September 13, 2001 (apparently the end of an "official" ban on air travel) not that it's false that they flew out of the country. So it happened, just not before that exact date and time.

Retric 10y ago

Yea, 281 billion is just not a lot of money when your talking US debt around ~1.5% federal and a little less if you toss in state and local. In just about any other context that's a lot of money.