4 ms·

The problem is these companies often claim liberal, progressive values and that they are forces for social good. On the other hand they are flattering and fawni

by simonh 6y ago

The problem is these companies often claim liberal, progressive values and that they are forces for social good. On the other hand they are flattering and fawning to a murdering oppressive brute in person. It's an exasperating situation to be in. We need Saudi oil so we need to be able to work with them, but they are a grievous threat to freedoms and civil society globally. It's not just MBS either, look at the way gulf rulers have their daughters abducted off the streets of England or international waters and locked and drugged up. Yet the livelihoods of millions of westerners depend on these people. Shunning them completely isn't practical, nor is turning away their money in every case, but that doesn't mean bowing and scraping to them is acceptable.

waynesonfire 6y ago
I see, that's a fair argument. Thanks missed that from the article which at the surface seemed to me like a great thing.
cheaprentalyeti 6y ago
Look, speaking as someone who had a customer in the area in 2010 who kept me alive... as in, their contracts kept me from homelessness... the US government in 2011 under Barack Obama supported a putsch against the government of Egypt in an attempt to turn the country over to the Moslem Brotherhood, which led to about 1300 deaths in Egypt on both sides at the time. In addition it cost my customer his business. The Arab world is split between groups that are basically catspaws for making the place a satrapy of Iran, and those that don't. What we tried to do in Egypt, what we did do in Libya, and what we paid the Iranians in 2015 greatly accelerated this. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed in Syria as Iran reestablished control. WITH US MONEY. And this wasn't done by the Orange Man Bad, it was done by Barack Hussein Obama, the guy who everyone thinks was healing all the rifts in the world. Please keep all of those conflicts (the ones in Syria and Libya are ongoing right now) in mind when you hear about what a tragic martyr Khasshogi was. It's just part of the Gleichschaltung and the poeple who generated it have plenty of blood on their hands themselves. (And even bombed, at the end of this week, the 'rebels' they funded with their payment to Iran back in 2015). Gleichschaltung: it's a hell of a drug.
- simonh 6y ago
  Egypt had an actual election, it was hardly a putch and it wasn't at all instigated by Obama, he just mildly cheered it along as you would any attempt to move towards democracy. Just as the Conservative British government here in the UK did. Any of his predecessors would have done exactly the same thing, so it's bizarre that you try to make a partisan point out of it. What exactly was Gorge Bush's "Freedom Agenda" policy about? As for funding Iran, this was to settle a legal case the US was very obviously losing. In any case, after Iran Contra I wouldn't have thought there were any more lessons to be learned about pragmatic deal making on Republican benches, but there you go. As a British conservative that grew up in the Reagan/Thatcher era, nowadays I find dealing with US Republicans so exasperating. It very much reminds me of dealing with ideologically programmed socialist students back when I was a student. So much of the can-do optimism and results based pragmatism has just gone.
  - cheaprentalyeti 6y ago
    1. I'm just repeating what I was told by the guy that temporarily saved me from homelessness back in 2010, who lives in the country in question, instead of "Conservative Britian." Whatever that means these days. 2. Obama did what the "international legal system" told him to do and it funded two entire new fronts in Iran's war with the Sunnis, leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths. (And at this point they use their "legally in the right/wrong" argument as if the deaths it led to don't matter.)
    - simonh 6y ago
      Do you really think the Obama administration wanted to do this? Let's look at the alternatives. International courts have the power to freeze and appropriate assets abroad, this has been used many times against various governments. If previous Republican administrations were not prepared to engage in the process, they could have withdrawn at any stage in the last 5 decades. The problem is, that would mean the US dealing with sanctions, or not being able to use the international court system or arbitration mechanisms in their own interests in future. Bear in mind it's these processes that are used to impose sanctions on Iran and other governments like North Korea. Are you really saying you'd rather walk out on having any influence on these systems? So what would you have done? It's easy to fling mud when you're unwilling to accept any responsibility for the consequences.
AzzieElbab 6y ago
Would you prefer those companies took Chinese money instead? Just like the universities that produce liberal and progressive values.
jdxcode 6y ago
> We need Saudi oil How much do we need oil vs wanting to sell them weapons?

by simonh 6y ago

waynesonfire 6y ago

I see, that's a fair argument. Thanks missed that from the article which at the surface seemed to me like a great thing.

cheaprentalyeti 6y ago

Look, speaking as someone who had a customer in the area in 2010 who kept me alive... as in, their contracts kept me from homelessness... the US government in 2011 under Barack Obama supported a putsch against the government of Egypt in an attempt to turn the country over to the Moslem Brotherhood, which led to about 1300 deaths in Egypt on both sides at the time. In addition it cost my customer his business. The Arab world is split between groups that are basically catspaws for making the place a satrapy of Iran, and those that don't. What we tried to do in Egypt, what we did do in Libya, and what we paid the Iranians in 2015 greatly accelerated this. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed in Syria as Iran reestablished control. WITH US MONEY. And this wasn't done by the Orange Man Bad, it was done by Barack Hussein Obama, the guy who everyone thinks was healing all the rifts in the world. Please keep all of those conflicts (the ones in Syria and Libya are ongoing right now) in mind when you hear about what a tragic martyr Khasshogi was. It's just part of the Gleichschaltung and the poeple who generated it have plenty of blood on their hands themselves. (And even bombed, at the end of this week, the 'rebels' they funded with their payment to Iran back in 2015). Gleichschaltung: it's a hell of a drug.

simonh 6y ago
Egypt had an actual election, it was hardly a putch and it wasn't at all instigated by Obama, he just mildly cheered it along as you would any attempt to move towards democracy. Just as the Conservative British government here in the UK did. Any of his predecessors would have done exactly the same thing, so it's bizarre that you try to make a partisan point out of it. What exactly was Gorge Bush's "Freedom Agenda" policy about? As for funding Iran, this was to settle a legal case the US was very obviously losing. In any case, after Iran Contra I wouldn't have thought there were any more lessons to be learned about pragmatic deal making on Republican benches, but there you go. As a British conservative that grew up in the Reagan/Thatcher era, nowadays I find dealing with US Republicans so exasperating. It very much reminds me of dealing with ideologically programmed socialist students back when I was a student. So much of the can-do optimism and results based pragmatism has just gone.
- cheaprentalyeti 6y ago
  1. I'm just repeating what I was told by the guy that temporarily saved me from homelessness back in 2010, who lives in the country in question, instead of "Conservative Britian." Whatever that means these days. 2. Obama did what the "international legal system" told him to do and it funded two entire new fronts in Iran's war with the Sunnis, leading to hundreds of thousands of deaths. (And at this point they use their "legally in the right/wrong" argument as if the deaths it led to don't matter.)
  - simonh 6y ago
    Do you really think the Obama administration wanted to do this? Let's look at the alternatives. International courts have the power to freeze and appropriate assets abroad, this has been used many times against various governments. If previous Republican administrations were not prepared to engage in the process, they could have withdrawn at any stage in the last 5 decades. The problem is, that would mean the US dealing with sanctions, or not being able to use the international court system or arbitration mechanisms in their own interests in future. Bear in mind it's these processes that are used to impose sanctions on Iran and other governments like North Korea. Are you really saying you'd rather walk out on having any influence on these systems? So what would you have done? It's easy to fling mud when you're unwilling to accept any responsibility for the consequences.

AzzieElbab 6y ago

Would you prefer those companies took Chinese money instead? Just like the universities that produce liberal and progressive values.

jdxcode 6y ago

> We need Saudi oil How much do we need oil vs wanting to sell them weapons?