5 ms·

> But people seem to be blind to this very dark side of the Saudi leadership. He lets women drive. So that means he's an open minded liberal. What about every o

by danans 5y ago

> But people seem to be blind to this very dark side of the Saudi leadership. He lets women drive. So that means he's an open minded liberal. What about every other country in the world where women have been allowed to drive since forever? It's not by accident. After some increased scrutiny after 9/11, the Gulf oil states, Saudi being the most prominent, largely left the general public's awareness. Meanwhile, they started heavily investing in and marketing themselves as a technologically forward societies. They paid for many academics worldwide handsomely to move their research to satellite universities in the region, getting a foothold among intellectual elites. They created world class luxury airlines promoted by the most expensive western celebrity endorsements, gaining a foothold among upwardly mobile international travelers. This re-branding culminated with the much publicized, elaborate and warm Saudi reception of the previous US administration in the country, and the 2018 publishing of "The New Kingdom" magazine by the publisher of the National Enquirer (https://www.insider.com/inside-the-american-media-magazine-that-reads-like-saudi-propaganda-2020-2 https://www.insider.com/inside-the-american-media-magazine-t...), which was Saudi-royal-family propaganda targeted at common Americans in the grocery checkout aisle. This had the effect of normalizing the image of these regimes among the general public while papering over their history of repression of human rights at home and financing of religious and ethnic conflicts abroad.

mistrial9 5y ago
good list - also add big direct investment in the US smart phone ecosystem, therefore Board level and Angel'ish activities too
babesh 5y ago
Sly injection of American politics by the above poster and entirely bullshit. Biden’s administration has embraced Saudi Arabia just as much. In fact, if you actually look at history, you will see that the US has embraced Saudi Arabia for many decades (since at least the 80s). This is by BOTH parties. Secretary of State visit https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/07/09/saud-j09.html https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/07/09/saud-j09.html Brother of MBS visits and meets with Secretary of Defense https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2021/07/saudi-arabias-prince-khalid-describes-great-meeting-blinken https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2021/07/saudi-arabias-p...
- babesh 5y ago
  Look who voted for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It wasn’t just Republicans. Interesting which Democrats voted for it. Biden, Schumer, Clinton https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237 https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_...
  - undersuit 5y ago
    >Sly injection of American politics by the above poster Why just list those three Senators when 29 Democrats voted YEA? Sly injection indeed.
    - coryrc 5y ago
      Because every party can have dissenters, but these are the core, most powerful members.
    - babesh 5y ago
      Because one is the POTUS, another is the Senate Majority leader, and the third was the Presidential candidate. So basically the first and third most powerful politicians in the US.
- danans 5y ago
  > Biden’s administration has embraced Saudi Arabia just as much. In fact, if you actually look at history, you will see that the US has embraced Saudi Arabia for many decades (since at least the 80s). This is by BOTH parties. Absolutely. It's required that any US administration be at the table with the gulf oil states - that's just realpolitik. Better to be there than not. However the Republican party has been far more closely wedded to petroleum interests, especially those that provide oil infrastructure services to the Gulf states, in both policy and rhetoric. Don't you remember "drill baby drill", which while marketed as being about energy independence was anything but, because the price of oil is a global commodity, not something that the US has the capacity to change. Democrats were at one time too, but then they lost most of their political power in petroleum industry focused parts of the US. Perhaps Rep. Charlie Wilson of Texas was among the last of such Democrats. Most Democrats have now cast their lot with post petroleum aligned policies, technologies, and industries - look no further than the politically clearly aligned battle around fuel economy standards or the Keystone XL pipeline.

by danans 5y ago

mistrial9 5y ago

good list - also add big direct investment in the US smart phone ecosystem, therefore Board level and Angel'ish activities too

babesh 5y ago

Sly injection of American politics by the above poster and entirely bullshit. Biden’s administration has embraced Saudi Arabia just as much. In fact, if you actually look at history, you will see that the US has embraced Saudi Arabia for many decades (since at least the 80s). This is by BOTH parties. Secretary of State visit https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/07/09/saud-j09.html https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/07/09/saud-j09.html Brother of MBS visits and meets with Secretary of Defense https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2021/07/saudi-arabias-prince-khalid-describes-great-meeting-blinken https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2021/07/saudi-arabias-p...

babesh 5y ago
Look who voted for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It wasn’t just Republicans. Interesting which Democrats voted for it. Biden, Schumer, Clinton https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237 https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_...
- undersuit 5y ago
  >Sly injection of American politics by the above poster Why just list those three Senators when 29 Democrats voted YEA? Sly injection indeed.
  - coryrc 5y ago
    Because every party can have dissenters, but these are the core, most powerful members.
  - babesh 5y ago
    Because one is the POTUS, another is the Senate Majority leader, and the third was the Presidential candidate. So basically the first and third most powerful politicians in the US.
danans 5y ago
> Biden’s administration has embraced Saudi Arabia just as much. In fact, if you actually look at history, you will see that the US has embraced Saudi Arabia for many decades (since at least the 80s). This is by BOTH parties. Absolutely. It's required that any US administration be at the table with the gulf oil states - that's just realpolitik. Better to be there than not. However the Republican party has been far more closely wedded to petroleum interests, especially those that provide oil infrastructure services to the Gulf states, in both policy and rhetoric. Don't you remember "drill baby drill", which while marketed as being about energy independence was anything but, because the price of oil is a global commodity, not something that the US has the capacity to change. Democrats were at one time too, but then they lost most of their political power in petroleum industry focused parts of the US. Perhaps Rep. Charlie Wilson of Texas was among the last of such Democrats. Most Democrats have now cast their lot with post petroleum aligned policies, technologies, and industries - look no further than the politically clearly aligned battle around fuel economy standards or the Keystone XL pipeline.