3 ms·
I'm pretty confident that it has nothing to do with pay, but with geopolitics. In fact, I think the U.S. generally gives them more money (and other aid) than vi
by hackuser 10y ago
I'm pretty confident that it has nothing to do with pay, but with geopolitics. In fact, I think the U.S. generally gives them more money (and other aid) than vice versa. The former three are allies and provide essential value to the U.S. Off the top of my head:
Turkey gives NATO an very valuable geopolitical position, with leverage as the most powerful nation in the Mideast neighborhood, as well as dominating the Black Sea and eastern Mediterranean, and providing a position on the southern flank of Russia, eastern flank of the Balkans (less essential post-Cold War), and a stable border with countries to the east and south. Turkey as an enemy would be a serious headache.
Qatar and especially Saudi Arabia, the wealthiest and most powerful Arab state, give the U.S. leverage and stability (at least for decades until recently) in the Mideast, which, due to the oil supply, is essential to world peace and prosperity. They also counter-balance to Iran.
Those benefits don't necessarily justify supporting oppression, but those are very serious considerations.
- not_ed_snow 10y agoI believe that's what parent referred to as the "pay" part. Maybe more accurately would be "play ball with us or with nobody".
- hackuser 10y agoEDIT: That's not what the commenter says below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12869673 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12869673
- jospoortvliet 10y agoWith regards to Saudi Arabia and stability - that might have been a rather short term decision then... http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/saudi-connection-wahhabism-and-global-jihad http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/saudi-connection-...
- tdkl 10y agoWell, parent was trying to highlight that what you wrote should be a footnote every time there are big words of bringing "democracy" to other countries by the said actors.