28 ms·

Saudi Operatives Who Killed Khashoggi Received Paramilitary Training in U.S.

245 points by bigpumpkin 5y ago

pope_meat 5y ago
Why is keeping nice with the Saudi family so important? Why does the US government bend over backwards to cover up for them?
- seibelj 5y ago
  One theory is “petro dollars” - Saudi Arabia mandates all of their oil is purchased in dollars, thus ensuring global demand for dollars as every country needs oil. In return, the US has their back unconditionally. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_recycling#Petrodollar_warfare https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_recycling#Petrod...
  - smcl 5y ago
    I’m sure it’s been asked and answered before but is there a realistic alternative to USD for such transactions? I imagine Euros would be the next-best bet, being the second-most traded currency. Edit: While I don’t agree with the person below who replied saying crypto could fill this gap, I don’t think they should be downvoted to the point where we can’t reply. I even hit the “vouch” button but it’s still not possible.
    - fit2rule 5y ago
      This is what crypto rose to challenge.
    - juki 5y ago
      See the "Political events" section in that wikipedia page.
      - smcl 5y ago
        So back in the 00s Iraq tried to use Euros then got invaded and then reverted to USD. A couple of other near-pariah states (Iran and Libya) have offered to accept Gold and/or Euro but it hasn’t taken off. It’s interesting right enough and should maybe considered a warning to anyone who does think about shifting away from USD, but I’m still curious if there’s even a small amount of consideration given to alternatives today
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      The serious proposal is that the petrodollar be replaced with a basket of currencies, rather than one single foreign currency.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    There are some who believe that this is the real reason why we invaded Iraq; Saddam kept trying to sell oil for Euros instead of dollars.
- michael1999 5y ago
  Because they have lots of money and spread it around generously.
- SkyMarshal 5y ago
  For most of recent history they've been a major supplier of oil to the US. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mttimussa2&f=m https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=m...
  - bobsil1 5y ago
    They aren’t anymore, are more dependent on US weapons and parts than vice versa
    - emptyfile 5y ago
      Nah, rich Arabs always diversify their weapons suppliers. If the US doesn't want to earn tens of billions of dollars there's always France, Russia, etc.
      - newsclues 5y ago
        Vendor lock in. It’s hard to walk away from billions of dollars of hardware… And just because the USA does buy and use Saudi oil, doesn’t mean American oil companies aren’t pumping it, shipping it or profiting from its sale. And it’s sold in US dollars
      - wil421 5y ago
        No they can’t. If they buy certain Russian things the US will stop. Look at what happened when Turkey bought Russia’s air defense systems. They lost F-35s over it[1]. [1] https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/12/14/us-sanctions-nato-ally-turkey-over-purchase-of-russian-missile-defense-system/ https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/12/14/us-sanctions...
    - dredmorbius 5y ago
      "Major US Supplier" is the shorthand. It's strictly inaccurate, but not a bad first gloss. The deeper reality is that Saudi Arabia have provided (or occasionally withheld) stability to global oil markets since the early 1970s. KSA are the world's reserve capacity supplier of oil. Given that world transacts globally and is a highly liquid commodity (in the economic sense), *even where KSA don't directly provide the US with much of its oil, the Kingdom's management of production and leadership in OPEC have a profound impact on global oil and through it, global economic and strategic stability. There are countries with larger total oil reserves, more exports, and greater production (Venezuela, Russia, and the United States, respectively). Saudi Arabia's strengths are the quality of its oil ("light sweet crude", as contrasted with heavy sour crude from Venezuela, which requires light volatiles simply to extract it from the ground, hence periodic headlines about the US "selling oil to Venezuela", which is more misleading than informative), and the low cost of extraction. Additionally, Saudi Arabia have excess capacity --- their pumps are not running full out --- which means that by increasing or decreasing their supply, they can effectively set global oil prices. (Again: liquid assets, it's possible to move $100 of oil by tanker for about $1 in fuel, making arbitrage and cross-supply highly viable, unlike far less readily handled fuels including coal and natural gas, both of which require special handling.)
- reducesuffering 5y ago
  Historically, the least bad option in maintaining supply of the fuel of civilization and countering Iran, Russian, and Chinese influence. Such is geopolitics.
  - gonzo41 5y ago
    The next ~30 years are going to be pretty interesting if EV and Green tech scales down oil requirements.
    - smegger001 5y ago
      My guess is the slack in the oil supply will be taken up by other industries as the reduced demand from transport will leave large supply dropping the price for them. So I expect various chemical, plastic, pharmaceutical, pesticide, and fertilizer companies will use all of that oil.
      - beerandt 5y ago
        You already can see companies, eg Shell and Exxon investing heavily in their "chemical complex" refineries, and selling off refineries that only process fuel.
    - gampleman 5y ago
      I suspect that many oil rich countries have been anticipating this development and have been heavily investing elsewhere.
    - mkhpalm 5y ago
      I think a bigger concern these days is how Europe gets natural gas (LNG).
  - valuearb 5y ago
    Oil is a fungible market. The Saudis have to sell it to someone, and selling it to someone besides the US just frees up other suppliers to sell to the US.
- bsder 5y ago
  Because the last time the US let a Middle East Country fall into complete chaos it didn't work out very well for the US. Sadly, the US didn't learn from this and then went and turned Iraq into complete chaos.
  - nickik 5y ago
    Saudi Arabia was literally never unstable, the idea that it is US relationship that is preventing Saudi Arabia from collapsing is very questionable.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- runawaybottle 5y ago
  The Saudis are kind of like a Bishop (our chess piece) checking a Knight (Iran) from doing anything too nuts (and once upon of time, Iraq). I’d also say they act a little bit like West Germany as a forward base against the Soviet threat (kind of an old model at this point, Obama mostly wanted to steer our forces east toward China going forward). Israel got hip to this too. The alliance is really Saudi Arabia, America, Israel. In fact, I’d say they are a check on a region that could easily fall under the influence of Iran, Russia, and China. Global oil supply being messed with in a destabilized region is a concern, and festering of Islamic terrorism (think about how Russia let’s ransomware terrorists fester). Russia would go pretty far to destabilize oil in that region. Plus, they are for sale. If we don’t pay them, China will. The price for all of this is the same price the devil always charges - your soul and values. Genocide in Yemen in 2020, murdering of journalists (in an embassy, goodness), all done with impunity.
  - reducesuffering 5y ago
    The one other comment alluding to the geopolitical concerns that seemed to be missed by many.
  - cycomanic 5y ago
    The thing is to use the Saudis to keep Iran in check is like using the devil to keep a daemon in check. Iran (as bad it may be) is a much freer society than Saudi Arabia, and support for terrorism can't be an argument either because Saudi Arabia is a primary supporter of Islamic terrorism in the world. Moreover, the demonisation of Iran together with the support for Saudi Arabia has likely strengthened the hardliners in Iran and made the region much less stable.
- CalChris 5y ago
  If you go to Washington DC and go to the Watergate Hotel, right across the street and not on Embassy Row is the massive Saudi Embassy, reminding everyone who comes in over Teddy Roosevelt Bridge who runs barter town.
  - knownjorbist 5y ago
    To be fair "Embassy Row" is just a road with a lot of embassies. Embassies and consulates are all over the place in DC.
  - yaitsyaboi 5y ago
    I don't feel like this answers the question. Saudis have outsized influence on the US because they have a large building as their embassy?
    - atlasunshrugged 5y ago
      There is a really interesting dynamic where the Saudis have basically pushed the line of thinking that they have a special relationship with us going back to WWII or WWI. I generally am a bit skeptical of Cato Institute but they had a great podcast with Prof Robert Vitalis about this that shed a ton of light on exactly this question for me. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/americas-oil-myths/id1282100393?i=1000523782536 https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/americas-oil-myths/id1...
    - pasttense01 5y ago
      No: they do it the old fashioned way: lobbying and political contributions.
  - ceilingcorner 5y ago
    Embassy size doesn’t correlate with power. This is easy to observe in various European countries, where the Russians managed to hold on to their huge Soviet-era embassies, even though their contemporary influence is far lower.
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  They are a client kingdom loyal to the US. How have we bent over backwards to cover up for them? The general consensus seems to be that Saudi Arabia was definitely responsible, and very little is being done about that.
- baybal2 5y ago
  > Why is keeping nice with the Saudi family so important? Why does the US government bend over backwards to cover up for them? Because they spawn outfits who ram airplanes into skyscrapers. I see no logic in this, but some "expert geopolitical strategists" do. Same with Israel, sinks USS Liberty, and then people on the hill go orgasmic, because "higher meaning" — whatever that means. A simpler explanation which seems to be much more believable: great amounts of money spent by them to keep the whole US political establishment wined, dined, well moneyed, and happy.
  - rjzzleep 5y ago
    One of the teachers at a major Israeli military university claims that Israel is intentionally acting like a mad dog i.e. willing to take down the rest of the world with them should they go down, and that most European capitols are a target for their airforce. Whether that's rhetoric or reality, I don't think anyone intends to find out.[0] [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/sep/21/israelandthepalestinians.bookextracts https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/sep/21/israelandthepa... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - geoduck14 5y ago
      People said that about Trump. I don't think that strategy paid off for him
      - mywittyname 5y ago
        He was not threatening enough, nor possess the mental capabilities to pull off that strategy. That strategy only works if you display the willingness to act, and the cleverness to act in such a way that demonstrates you know exactly where your opponent is weakest. He was willing to act, his actions just always missed their mark.
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
- LatteLazy 5y ago
  Who do you think finances US debt, public and private? Who do you think pours money into defense contractors, financial services and politicians pockets? Who do we rely on to control the oil price for us? Who else is an important ally in the region for Israel? I dispise the Saudis, we should drop them and warm up to Iran, but that above 3 points are why no one has done it yet (plus momentum/tradition).
  - RobertoG 5y ago
    The US public debt is denominated in Dollars, does the Saudi manufacture Dollars? If not, how could then they finance the public debt?
    - LatteLazy 5y ago
      They sell oil for dollars. They give the dollars to the fed and 101 other institutions as loans, those institutions lend the money to the government and private groups. China does the same only they sell goods for dollars instead of oil.
      - LatteLazy 5y ago
        (not sure why people are down voting this, it's pretty straight forwards factual stuff?)
- RobertoG 5y ago
  The Saudis are the chosen ally in the region, that have nothing to do with moral values or the interest of the average American, also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia_lobby_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia_lobby_in_the_Unit...
- nickik 5y ago
  Let me give a little more context. Saudi Arabia had a relationship with the US early on and it was US contractors who developed the oil there initially. This is a very old relationship, basically it is the bases of Saudi Arabia, the realized early how powerful to US was and attached themselves. The Saudi were very anti-Communist and opposed Arab nationalist (a 'socialist' type regime) in Egypt. In a period known as 'Arab Cold War'. There was a fear that most of the middle east would unify under Arab nationalism. The Saudi were opposed that. A second important part is the sale of oil, people will often argue that this is less important now because domestic production. However it was always more about European and later Asian allies of the US and ensuring oil for them. The relations were at is worse during the oil crisis. However once the Iranian revolution happened, and Iran was no longer an US ally there was major fear of Soviet invasion or Iranian revolution spreadng. Jimmy Carter declared the 'Carter doctrine': > Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force. Since their major client Iran was gone the US basically 'had to' depend on Saudi Arabia. This was then majorly expanded upon by Reagan. While up to this point, relation were diplomatic (and CIA blabla) under Reagan there was a militarization. Bases were starting to build in the region and the US wanted to sell more weapons to the Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain as well. The US started to build bases in Saudi itself during the first Golf War (that was the major reason for 9/11 btw). Since 9/11 despise what the general population wants (and correctly believes), politically the US sees Saudi as a major ally in the 'fight for terrorism' when it is convenient but the consistent opposition to Iran is arguably the more important part. Saudi Arabia has also totally sold out the Palestinians and has been practically allied with Israel. So here are why the US politicians continue this 'partnership': - Major oil state that insures sale to European and Asian allies - Oppose Iran - Oppose the Islamic Brotherhood (Saudi paid for the overthrow of the Egyptian 'democracy') - Saudi regime drove AQAP (Al Quida Arab Peninsula) out of Saudi and pretends to fight them in Yemen - Saudi (and golf state) buy a gigantic amount weapons to the point where Trump basically treated the Crown Prince like cash cow and made him do TV ads with him - Saudi spend a lot of lobbying and fund many of the 'think tanks' - Saudi and Israel get along However, this episode here that so many people car about is literally never what the US cared about. An allied regime killing journalist is about as interesting as empty glass of water. To me this is a total non-story. This is only a media outrage story. The US routinely helps in repression of journalists and what the US/Saudi are doing in Yemen is about a million times were the this Khashoggi thing. Not to mention that they are also oppressing and killing journalist there too, but I guess there are not good videos of it so it can be safely ignored. In my opinion the whole strategic approach the US has towards the Saudi and the Middle East in general is fundamentally flawed and pilled on top of a whole bunch of wrong assumption. Unfortunately realignment in foreign policy is very difficult. With Israel and Saudi (and co) money continually buying of congress/Washington while Iran and others don't have such powerful lobbying organizations within the US.
- newsclues 5y ago
  Oil and arms sales.
- jillesvangurp 5y ago
  Oil is often singled out and important not because the US is dependent on Saudi oil but also because it depends on the Saudi's not dumping oil and undercutting the prices of US producers (and thus bankrupting them). But, I'd say it's more complicated than that and also is related to trillions of dollars in trade, military funding, contracting, etc across the region. The Saudi's are a very loyal supporter of US policy for all of that and their country is very strategically located in the region and a big reason why the US has been able to exert power there for so long. E.g. Saudi support was crucial for both Gulf wars, the Sudan invasion, and more recently the conflicts in Syria, Afghanistan, Lebanon, etc. Being able to park some aircraft carriers off the coast of Saudi Arabia is also helpful when it comes to controlling the Iranians of course. That's technically a long series of proxy wars but of course the US has been battling with them ever since the Iranian revolution all over the region in a long series of proxy wars that usually also involve the Saudis. Ugly but very profitable. So, oil, money, and strategic value basically. You could pass some moral judgement on that but in the end most wars are about economic interests. And the interests of the US are worth trillions of dollars.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    CA consumes a non trivial amount of KSA oil, 21% of total supply in 2018.
- ridiculous_lol 5y ago
  The family calls the shots there and I don't think many people will appreciate a Saudi Arabia which is in a military alliance with Russia or China. To a considerable extent, the family also ensures a stable leadership and rule of law. A decade back, I would have supported forceful overthrow of the family. However, after observing Arab "Spring" and its implications in Syria and Libya, I am dead certain that I do not want a power vacuum in Saudi Arabia.
michael1999 5y ago
I clicked expecting to enjoy another public black eye for the School of the Americas, and instead I’m left with dread that the USA has privatized that training. Because of course you have.
- SkyMarshal 5y ago
  If it makes you feel any better, many US citizens hate it too. It's stupid both to privatize the military, and to provide military training to repressive authoritarian regimes. America and our democratic allies spent half a century fighting totalitarianism, only to turn around and treat the post-Cold War "peace dividend" as carte-blance to sell out everything we had just finished fighting for. Now authoritarianism is on the rise again as a result. This has to be most idiotic own-goal in history.
  - drewcoo 5y ago
    > spent half a century fighting totalitarianism By destabilizing and ousting democratically elected leaders around the world and replacing them with our puppets? Or do you mean fighting those puppets when they became inconvenient? I suspect what happened is not the history you think it is.
    - knownjorbist 5y ago
      Your picture may be as narrow-minded as the person you're replying to, but in the other direction. The US also uses its economic clout to push for social, political and economic reforms in other countries as well.
      - yetihehe 5y ago
        Definitely, but it's very clumsy and many times it backfires.
      - cycomanic 5y ago
        The problem is if there is a conflict between economic and and "ethical" interests the economic interest always won (let's not even get into all the political reasons why totalitarian regimes were supported). The US (and much of the west by extension) certainly has a very spotty history of supporting democracy, especially if it was in their economic interest to support the totalitarian regime.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
throwaway210222 5y ago
Does America's ex-military personnel really teach people to dismember bodies? Is that an actual course, or did foreign psychopaths (albeit with state department approval) get training in actual military stuff (shooting, ironing beds, polishing boots, logistics, etc.) and then go on all by themselves to butcher journalists with a carving knife? I don't see the link here, other than a bit or outrage and a wee dopamine hit.
- fvdessen 5y ago
  Maybe not a training in ‘dismembering’ but America has a long experience in using torture and teaching it to allied military/paramilitary groups
- baybal2 5y ago
  At least in school of Americas, they did
- saiya-jin 5y ago
  Torture is/was definitely part of even standard military training ie prior to Vietnam deployment for common soldiers. Electric wires on genitalia for example. I would expect that if one dictator sends their spec-ops personnel for US training, the goal is not to improve their techniques of ironing beds or polishing boots, rather more practical topics useful to that dictator. I can easily see how an additional training in torture, logistics etc. could have helped perpetrators organize and perform the act. Although they would probably managed to kill him even without it in some way or the other. One of the things I would hate if living in US - not such a great feeling knowing some part of your taxes goes into directly supporting things like this, whether you like it or not...
  - throwaway210222 5y ago
    Sure, but I just cannot for the life of figure me out, how adults (the Saudi operatives) needed to go on the American course to work out that they can kill someone an chop him up with a really sharp knife. You only need to have one barbeque at your home to work that out. If training → crimes, then surely we should be more worried about training Saudi butchers and chefs? The real and IMO only reason the crime occurred as it did is that the Saudi's guessed correctly that the US (and others) would let them get away with it.
LatteLazy 5y ago
There seems to be a "perpetual surprise" around Saudi Arabia. Its a shitty regime, we support, train, arm and cover for their shitty behaviour. That's how it is. We're 2nd-order responsible for crushing any move towards democracy, for radicalising the population, for the horrific treatment for women and lgbt+, for their war against Yeman, all of it. None of this should be "news" any more than its news that the navy had ships.
- gherkinnn 5y ago
  It boggles the mind. But who cares if the Gulf states engage in all sorts of nastiness. SA is the apparent bastion against terror, Dubai is the place to visit and Qatar will host the 2022 Football World Cup.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
throwawaybchr 5y ago
Saudi Arabia routinely dismembers their criminals, and has done so for many decades. They don't need training to do this. Khaashoggi was working with the Qatari government against the interests of Saudi Arabia, in a very public way. He is no more important than the millions of women subjugated and tortured by the regime on a daily basis, whose stories nobody will ever hear. He is propped up as some kind of martyr of hero because it helps with some other associated narratives which the media has an interest in. The abstract story of Saudi Arabia butchers person who works against Saudi interests has been told countless times already.
reacharavindh 5y ago
Imagine if some sane US president threw his/her hands up in the air and manages to convince the congress and senate to simply leave the Middle East alone to figure their affairs out for themselves. Take all the money you were spending in maintaining your military presence in Middle East and say augment investments in geographically sensible defense systems, modern spy satellites and intelligence. With the left over money, perhaps implement a single-payer healthcare system. Oh well, political leaders are only short-term thinkers now. They only pander to those that will vote for them or their party in the next elections....
- danparsonson 5y ago
  I would venture to suggest that the Middle East as a whole is a cash cow for the US - oil, weapons contracts - so aint nothin' gonna change until that changes.
AzzieElbab 5y ago
So? US trains plenty of Saudis. One of the trainees killed 3 US soldiers on US soil not so long ago.
cblconfederate 5y ago
What is paramilitary training? Working at a butcher's?
ashtonkem 5y ago
I think the thing that surprises me the most about this situation is that people are surprised. KSA is a brutal, authoritarian regime currently waging a nigh genocidal campaign down in Yemen, and we keep selling them ungodly amounts of weapons no matter what they do. Why wouldn’t we train their assassination squads? It’s far from the worst thing we’ve enabled them to do. I think the blockade of food that’s caused roughly 100,000 children starve to death is probably a wee bit worse, all things considered.

245 points by bigpumpkin 5y ago

Why is keeping nice with the Saudi family so important? Why does the US government bend over backwards to cover up for them?

seibelj 5y ago
One theory is “petro dollars” - Saudi Arabia mandates all of their oil is purchased in dollars, thus ensuring global demand for dollars as every country needs oil. In return, the US has their back unconditionally. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_recycling#Petrodollar_warfare https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar_recycling#Petrod...
- smcl 5y ago
  I’m sure it’s been asked and answered before but is there a realistic alternative to USD for such transactions? I imagine Euros would be the next-best bet, being the second-most traded currency. Edit: While I don’t agree with the person below who replied saying crypto could fill this gap, I don’t think they should be downvoted to the point where we can’t reply. I even hit the “vouch” button but it’s still not possible.
  - fit2rule 5y ago
    This is what crypto rose to challenge.
  - juki 5y ago
    See the "Political events" section in that wikipedia page.
    - smcl 5y ago
      So back in the 00s Iraq tried to use Euros then got invaded and then reverted to USD. A couple of other near-pariah states (Iran and Libya) have offered to accept Gold and/or Euro but it hasn’t taken off. It’s interesting right enough and should maybe considered a warning to anyone who does think about shifting away from USD, but I’m still curious if there’s even a small amount of consideration given to alternatives today
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    The serious proposal is that the petrodollar be replaced with a basket of currencies, rather than one single foreign currency.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  There are some who believe that this is the real reason why we invaded Iraq; Saddam kept trying to sell oil for Euros instead of dollars.
michael1999 5y ago
Because they have lots of money and spread it around generously.
SkyMarshal 5y ago
For most of recent history they've been a major supplier of oil to the US. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mttimussa2&f=m https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=m...
- bobsil1 5y ago
  They aren’t anymore, are more dependent on US weapons and parts than vice versa
  - emptyfile 5y ago
    Nah, rich Arabs always diversify their weapons suppliers. If the US doesn't want to earn tens of billions of dollars there's always France, Russia, etc.
    - newsclues 5y ago
      Vendor lock in. It’s hard to walk away from billions of dollars of hardware… And just because the USA does buy and use Saudi oil, doesn’t mean American oil companies aren’t pumping it, shipping it or profiting from its sale. And it’s sold in US dollars
    - wil421 5y ago
      No they can’t. If they buy certain Russian things the US will stop. Look at what happened when Turkey bought Russia’s air defense systems. They lost F-35s over it[1]. [1] https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/12/14/us-sanctions-nato-ally-turkey-over-purchase-of-russian-missile-defense-system/ https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/12/14/us-sanctions...
  - dredmorbius 5y ago
    "Major US Supplier" is the shorthand. It's strictly inaccurate, but not a bad first gloss. The deeper reality is that Saudi Arabia have provided (or occasionally withheld) stability to global oil markets since the early 1970s. KSA are the world's reserve capacity supplier of oil. Given that world transacts globally and is a highly liquid commodity (in the economic sense), *even where KSA don't directly provide the US with much of its oil, the Kingdom's management of production and leadership in OPEC have a profound impact on global oil and through it, global economic and strategic stability. There are countries with larger total oil reserves, more exports, and greater production (Venezuela, Russia, and the United States, respectively). Saudi Arabia's strengths are the quality of its oil ("light sweet crude", as contrasted with heavy sour crude from Venezuela, which requires light volatiles simply to extract it from the ground, hence periodic headlines about the US "selling oil to Venezuela", which is more misleading than informative), and the low cost of extraction. Additionally, Saudi Arabia have excess capacity --- their pumps are not running full out --- which means that by increasing or decreasing their supply, they can effectively set global oil prices. (Again: liquid assets, it's possible to move $100 of oil by tanker for about $1 in fuel, making arbitrage and cross-supply highly viable, unlike far less readily handled fuels including coal and natural gas, both of which require special handling.)
reducesuffering 5y ago
Historically, the least bad option in maintaining supply of the fuel of civilization and countering Iran, Russian, and Chinese influence. Such is geopolitics.
- gonzo41 5y ago
  The next ~30 years are going to be pretty interesting if EV and Green tech scales down oil requirements.
  - smegger001 5y ago
    My guess is the slack in the oil supply will be taken up by other industries as the reduced demand from transport will leave large supply dropping the price for them. So I expect various chemical, plastic, pharmaceutical, pesticide, and fertilizer companies will use all of that oil.
    - beerandt 5y ago
      You already can see companies, eg Shell and Exxon investing heavily in their "chemical complex" refineries, and selling off refineries that only process fuel.
  - gampleman 5y ago
    I suspect that many oil rich countries have been anticipating this development and have been heavily investing elsewhere.
  - mkhpalm 5y ago
    I think a bigger concern these days is how Europe gets natural gas (LNG).
- valuearb 5y ago
  Oil is a fungible market. The Saudis have to sell it to someone, and selling it to someone besides the US just frees up other suppliers to sell to the US.
bsder 5y ago
Because the last time the US let a Middle East Country fall into complete chaos it didn't work out very well for the US. Sadly, the US didn't learn from this and then went and turned Iraq into complete chaos.
- nickik 5y ago
  Saudi Arabia was literally never unstable, the idea that it is US relationship that is preventing Saudi Arabia from collapsing is very questionable.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
runawaybottle 5y ago
The Saudis are kind of like a Bishop (our chess piece) checking a Knight (Iran) from doing anything too nuts (and once upon of time, Iraq). I’d also say they act a little bit like West Germany as a forward base against the Soviet threat (kind of an old model at this point, Obama mostly wanted to steer our forces east toward China going forward). Israel got hip to this too. The alliance is really Saudi Arabia, America, Israel. In fact, I’d say they are a check on a region that could easily fall under the influence of Iran, Russia, and China. Global oil supply being messed with in a destabilized region is a concern, and festering of Islamic terrorism (think about how Russia let’s ransomware terrorists fester). Russia would go pretty far to destabilize oil in that region. Plus, they are for sale. If we don’t pay them, China will. The price for all of this is the same price the devil always charges - your soul and values. Genocide in Yemen in 2020, murdering of journalists (in an embassy, goodness), all done with impunity.
- reducesuffering 5y ago
  The one other comment alluding to the geopolitical concerns that seemed to be missed by many.
- cycomanic 5y ago
  The thing is to use the Saudis to keep Iran in check is like using the devil to keep a daemon in check. Iran (as bad it may be) is a much freer society than Saudi Arabia, and support for terrorism can't be an argument either because Saudi Arabia is a primary supporter of Islamic terrorism in the world. Moreover, the demonisation of Iran together with the support for Saudi Arabia has likely strengthened the hardliners in Iran and made the region much less stable.
CalChris 5y ago
If you go to Washington DC and go to the Watergate Hotel, right across the street and not on Embassy Row is the massive Saudi Embassy, reminding everyone who comes in over Teddy Roosevelt Bridge who runs barter town.
- knownjorbist 5y ago
  To be fair "Embassy Row" is just a road with a lot of embassies. Embassies and consulates are all over the place in DC.
- yaitsyaboi 5y ago
  I don't feel like this answers the question. Saudis have outsized influence on the US because they have a large building as their embassy?
  - atlasunshrugged 5y ago
    There is a really interesting dynamic where the Saudis have basically pushed the line of thinking that they have a special relationship with us going back to WWII or WWI. I generally am a bit skeptical of Cato Institute but they had a great podcast with Prof Robert Vitalis about this that shed a ton of light on exactly this question for me. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/americas-oil-myths/id1282100393?i=1000523782536 https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/americas-oil-myths/id1...
  - pasttense01 5y ago
    No: they do it the old fashioned way: lobbying and political contributions.
- ceilingcorner 5y ago
  Embassy size doesn’t correlate with power. This is easy to observe in various European countries, where the Russians managed to hold on to their huge Soviet-era embassies, even though their contemporary influence is far lower.
boomboomsubban 5y ago
They are a client kingdom loyal to the US. How have we bent over backwards to cover up for them? The general consensus seems to be that Saudi Arabia was definitely responsible, and very little is being done about that.
baybal2 5y ago
> Why is keeping nice with the Saudi family so important? Why does the US government bend over backwards to cover up for them? Because they spawn outfits who ram airplanes into skyscrapers. I see no logic in this, but some "expert geopolitical strategists" do. Same with Israel, sinks USS Liberty, and then people on the hill go orgasmic, because "higher meaning" — whatever that means. A simpler explanation which seems to be much more believable: great amounts of money spent by them to keep the whole US political establishment wined, dined, well moneyed, and happy.
- rjzzleep 5y ago
  One of the teachers at a major Israeli military university claims that Israel is intentionally acting like a mad dog i.e. willing to take down the rest of the world with them should they go down, and that most European capitols are a target for their airforce. Whether that's rhetoric or reality, I don't think anyone intends to find out.[0] [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/sep/21/israelandthepalestinians.bookextracts https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/sep/21/israelandthepa... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_van_Creveld
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - geoduck14 5y ago
    People said that about Trump. I don't think that strategy paid off for him
    - mywittyname 5y ago
      He was not threatening enough, nor possess the mental capabilities to pull off that strategy. That strategy only works if you display the willingness to act, and the cleverness to act in such a way that demonstrates you know exactly where your opponent is weakest. He was willing to act, his actions just always missed their mark.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
LatteLazy 5y ago
Who do you think finances US debt, public and private? Who do you think pours money into defense contractors, financial services and politicians pockets? Who do we rely on to control the oil price for us? Who else is an important ally in the region for Israel? I dispise the Saudis, we should drop them and warm up to Iran, but that above 3 points are why no one has done it yet (plus momentum/tradition).
- RobertoG 5y ago
  The US public debt is denominated in Dollars, does the Saudi manufacture Dollars? If not, how could then they finance the public debt?
  - LatteLazy 5y ago
    They sell oil for dollars. They give the dollars to the fed and 101 other institutions as loans, those institutions lend the money to the government and private groups. China does the same only they sell goods for dollars instead of oil.
    - LatteLazy 5y ago
      (not sure why people are down voting this, it's pretty straight forwards factual stuff?)
RobertoG 5y ago
The Saudis are the chosen ally in the region, that have nothing to do with moral values or the interest of the average American, also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia_lobby_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia_lobby_in_the_Unit...
nickik 5y ago
Let me give a little more context. Saudi Arabia had a relationship with the US early on and it was US contractors who developed the oil there initially. This is a very old relationship, basically it is the bases of Saudi Arabia, the realized early how powerful to US was and attached themselves. The Saudi were very anti-Communist and opposed Arab nationalist (a 'socialist' type regime) in Egypt. In a period known as 'Arab Cold War'. There was a fear that most of the middle east would unify under Arab nationalism. The Saudi were opposed that. A second important part is the sale of oil, people will often argue that this is less important now because domestic production. However it was always more about European and later Asian allies of the US and ensuring oil for them. The relations were at is worse during the oil crisis. However once the Iranian revolution happened, and Iran was no longer an US ally there was major fear of Soviet invasion or Iranian revolution spreadng. Jimmy Carter declared the 'Carter doctrine': > Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force. Since their major client Iran was gone the US basically 'had to' depend on Saudi Arabia. This was then majorly expanded upon by Reagan. While up to this point, relation were diplomatic (and CIA blabla) under Reagan there was a militarization. Bases were starting to build in the region and the US wanted to sell more weapons to the Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain as well. The US started to build bases in Saudi itself during the first Golf War (that was the major reason for 9/11 btw). Since 9/11 despise what the general population wants (and correctly believes), politically the US sees Saudi as a major ally in the 'fight for terrorism' when it is convenient but the consistent opposition to Iran is arguably the more important part. Saudi Arabia has also totally sold out the Palestinians and has been practically allied with Israel. So here are why the US politicians continue this 'partnership': - Major oil state that insures sale to European and Asian allies - Oppose Iran - Oppose the Islamic Brotherhood (Saudi paid for the overthrow of the Egyptian 'democracy') - Saudi regime drove AQAP (Al Quida Arab Peninsula) out of Saudi and pretends to fight them in Yemen - Saudi (and golf state) buy a gigantic amount weapons to the point where Trump basically treated the Crown Prince like cash cow and made him do TV ads with him - Saudi spend a lot of lobbying and fund many of the 'think tanks' - Saudi and Israel get along However, this episode here that so many people car about is literally never what the US cared about. An allied regime killing journalist is about as interesting as empty glass of water. To me this is a total non-story. This is only a media outrage story. The US routinely helps in repression of journalists and what the US/Saudi are doing in Yemen is about a million times were the this Khashoggi thing. Not to mention that they are also oppressing and killing journalist there too, but I guess there are not good videos of it so it can be safely ignored. In my opinion the whole strategic approach the US has towards the Saudi and the Middle East in general is fundamentally flawed and pilled on top of a whole bunch of wrong assumption. Unfortunately realignment in foreign policy is very difficult. With Israel and Saudi (and co) money continually buying of congress/Washington while Iran and others don't have such powerful lobbying organizations within the US.
newsclues 5y ago
Oil and arms sales.
jillesvangurp 5y ago
Oil is often singled out and important not because the US is dependent on Saudi oil but also because it depends on the Saudi's not dumping oil and undercutting the prices of US producers (and thus bankrupting them). But, I'd say it's more complicated than that and also is related to trillions of dollars in trade, military funding, contracting, etc across the region. The Saudi's are a very loyal supporter of US policy for all of that and their country is very strategically located in the region and a big reason why the US has been able to exert power there for so long. E.g. Saudi support was crucial for both Gulf wars, the Sudan invasion, and more recently the conflicts in Syria, Afghanistan, Lebanon, etc. Being able to park some aircraft carriers off the coast of Saudi Arabia is also helpful when it comes to controlling the Iranians of course. That's technically a long series of proxy wars but of course the US has been battling with them ever since the Iranian revolution all over the region in a long series of proxy wars that usually also involve the Saudis. Ugly but very profitable. So, oil, money, and strategic value basically. You could pass some moral judgement on that but in the end most wars are about economic interests. And the interests of the US are worth trillions of dollars.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  CA consumes a non trivial amount of KSA oil, 21% of total supply in 2018.
ridiculous_lol 5y ago
The family calls the shots there and I don't think many people will appreciate a Saudi Arabia which is in a military alliance with Russia or China. To a considerable extent, the family also ensures a stable leadership and rule of law. A decade back, I would have supported forceful overthrow of the family. However, after observing Arab "Spring" and its implications in Syria and Libya, I am dead certain that I do not want a power vacuum in Saudi Arabia.

michael1999 5y ago

I clicked expecting to enjoy another public black eye for the School of the Americas, and instead I’m left with dread that the USA has privatized that training. Because of course you have.

SkyMarshal 5y ago
If it makes you feel any better, many US citizens hate it too. It's stupid both to privatize the military, and to provide military training to repressive authoritarian regimes. America and our democratic allies spent half a century fighting totalitarianism, only to turn around and treat the post-Cold War "peace dividend" as carte-blance to sell out everything we had just finished fighting for. Now authoritarianism is on the rise again as a result. This has to be most idiotic own-goal in history.
- drewcoo 5y ago
  > spent half a century fighting totalitarianism By destabilizing and ousting democratically elected leaders around the world and replacing them with our puppets? Or do you mean fighting those puppets when they became inconvenient? I suspect what happened is not the history you think it is.
  - knownjorbist 5y ago
    Your picture may be as narrow-minded as the person you're replying to, but in the other direction. The US also uses its economic clout to push for social, political and economic reforms in other countries as well.
    - yetihehe 5y ago
      Definitely, but it's very clumsy and many times it backfires.
    - cycomanic 5y ago
      The problem is if there is a conflict between economic and and "ethical" interests the economic interest always won (let's not even get into all the political reasons why totalitarian regimes were supported). The US (and much of the west by extension) certainly has a very spotty history of supporting democracy, especially if it was in their economic interest to support the totalitarian regime.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

throwaway210222 5y ago

Does America's ex-military personnel really teach people to dismember bodies? Is that an actual course, or did foreign psychopaths (albeit with state department approval) get training in actual military stuff (shooting, ironing beds, polishing boots, logistics, etc.) and then go on all by themselves to butcher journalists with a carving knife? I don't see the link here, other than a bit or outrage and a wee dopamine hit.

fvdessen 5y ago
Maybe not a training in ‘dismembering’ but America has a long experience in using torture and teaching it to allied military/paramilitary groups
baybal2 5y ago
At least in school of Americas, they did
saiya-jin 5y ago
Torture is/was definitely part of even standard military training ie prior to Vietnam deployment for common soldiers. Electric wires on genitalia for example. I would expect that if one dictator sends their spec-ops personnel for US training, the goal is not to improve their techniques of ironing beds or polishing boots, rather more practical topics useful to that dictator. I can easily see how an additional training in torture, logistics etc. could have helped perpetrators organize and perform the act. Although they would probably managed to kill him even without it in some way or the other. One of the things I would hate if living in US - not such a great feeling knowing some part of your taxes goes into directly supporting things like this, whether you like it or not...
- throwaway210222 5y ago
  Sure, but I just cannot for the life of figure me out, how adults (the Saudi operatives) needed to go on the American course to work out that they can kill someone an chop him up with a really sharp knife. You only need to have one barbeque at your home to work that out. If training → crimes, then surely we should be more worried about training Saudi butchers and chefs? The real and IMO only reason the crime occurred as it did is that the Saudi's guessed correctly that the US (and others) would let them get away with it.

LatteLazy 5y ago

There seems to be a "perpetual surprise" around Saudi Arabia. Its a shitty regime, we support, train, arm and cover for their shitty behaviour. That's how it is. We're 2nd-order responsible for crushing any move towards democracy, for radicalising the population, for the horrific treatment for women and lgbt+, for their war against Yeman, all of it. None of this should be "news" any more than its news that the navy had ships.

gherkinnn 5y ago
It boggles the mind. But who cares if the Gulf states engage in all sorts of nastiness. SA is the apparent bastion against terror, Dubai is the place to visit and Qatar will host the 2022 Football World Cup.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

throwawaybchr 5y ago

Saudi Arabia routinely dismembers their criminals, and has done so for many decades. They don't need training to do this. Khaashoggi was working with the Qatari government against the interests of Saudi Arabia, in a very public way. He is no more important than the millions of women subjugated and tortured by the regime on a daily basis, whose stories nobody will ever hear. He is propped up as some kind of martyr of hero because it helps with some other associated narratives which the media has an interest in. The abstract story of Saudi Arabia butchers person who works against Saudi interests has been told countless times already.

reacharavindh 5y ago

Imagine if some sane US president threw his/her hands up in the air and manages to convince the congress and senate to simply leave the Middle East alone to figure their affairs out for themselves. Take all the money you were spending in maintaining your military presence in Middle East and say augment investments in geographically sensible defense systems, modern spy satellites and intelligence. With the left over money, perhaps implement a single-payer healthcare system. Oh well, political leaders are only short-term thinkers now. They only pander to those that will vote for them or their party in the next elections....

danparsonson 5y ago
I would venture to suggest that the Middle East as a whole is a cash cow for the US - oil, weapons contracts - so aint nothin' gonna change until that changes.

AzzieElbab 5y ago

So? US trains plenty of Saudis. One of the trainees killed 3 US soldiers on US soil not so long ago.

cblconfederate 5y ago

What is paramilitary training? Working at a butcher's?

ashtonkem 5y ago

I think the thing that surprises me the most about this situation is that people are surprised. KSA is a brutal, authoritarian regime currently waging a nigh genocidal campaign down in Yemen, and we keep selling them ungodly amounts of weapons no matter what they do. Why wouldn’t we train their assassination squads? It’s far from the worst thing we’ve enabled them to do. I think the blockade of food that’s caused roughly 100,000 children starve to death is probably a wee bit worse, all things considered.