4 ms·

It's clear that the US government has no intention of stirring up trouble inside Saudi Arabia because they're the middle east country that likes money more than

It's clear that the US government has no intention of stirring up trouble inside Saudi Arabia because they're the middle east country that likes money more than religion, and that makes them an important partner if not ally in taming the bat-shit crazy governments of other local countries, some of which we actually put in place. So you can see how dedicated we are to 9-11 justice when it's not a goat path wasteland or an oil dictatorship that had nothing to do with the attack.

gleenn 4y ago
It seems so wild that part of the US government was so happy to start wars in irrelevant countries despite the fact that it appears pretty obvious the real perpetrators hit the Pentagon with a plane. I wonder how conversations go between people in both those departments/branches.
- Geonode 4y ago
  Yeah I think Afghanistan was just a place they could safely drop a lot of expensive bombs. Iraq, and later see Libya, Syria, and others, ongoing, are places where they don't want strong dictators who are against the international monetary monopoly. Just look at the shenanigans African dictators get up to and we just send trainers, because it's the only effective solution over time.
  - dhzhzjsbevs 4y ago
    Everyone always forgets Yemen. Why does everyone forget Yemen? Is it because it's the Saudis again? Or is it because Obama did it? Or because Trump continued it? Or is it because Biden said he would end it but didn't? https://youtube.com/watch?v=hFkngrRDdaA https://youtube.com/watch?v=hFkngrRDdaA Inflammatory comment I know. Tell that to the 100s of thousands being genocided.
    - ars 4y ago
      Everyone ignores Yemen for the same reason they ignore Syria: It's bad guys attacking bad guys. Edit: I appear to be wrong about this: America would not support either side in those wars, so they just leave them alone to fight.
      - mardifoufs 4y ago
        This is false and a false equivalence. It's like saying that we shouldn't care about ukraine since they have azov actively fighting on the frontline, so both sides are just bad. There's mostly one side that's doing the "bombing civilians" and "invade your weaker neighbor " part. And it's not like America is neutral here. They are actively supporting the saudi/anti houthi coalition, with intel and weaponry. It's fine to say that you just don't really care because we can't care about everything, which is true, but there's no need to rationalize that choice.
      - vaidhy 4y ago
        Really?? I thought US is supplying most of the weapons and logistics for Saudi Arabia to fight in Yemen while Russia is supporting Iran which supports the Houthis. In the end, both sides are bombing the hell out of that country which has no recourse.
        ars 4y ago
        I looked into it, just in case I was wrong, and it's certainly not "most of the", but there is some American support for Saudi Arabia fighting Yemen, so I was partially wrong.
    - boomboomsubban 4y ago
      There seems to be some disconnect with Yemen as we aren't doing the bombing, we're merely supplying the bombs and planning the bombing. It's not our fault that the Saudi's are dropping US bombs on US targets. This justification falls apart with the blockade though.
      - markdown 4y ago
        Same deal as the Palestinian genocide. Merely supplying the bombs.
      - justsomehnguy 4y ago
        > There seems to be some disconnect with $somesuddenlyeuropeancountry as we aren't doing the bombing, we're merely supplying the bombs and planning the bombing. It's not our fault that the $somesuddenlyeuropeancountry's are dropping US bombs on US targets. LOL EDIT: and with M777 and HIMARS it's quite literal US bombs.
        ncmncm 4y ago
        Yet, not genocide. Unless targeting invading Russian tanks and warships counts as trying to eliminate Russians in general.
        justsomehnguy 4y ago
        Yeah, exactly. Compare the civilian losses in these two conflicts and remember who is running around with 'genocide'.
      - reducesuffering 4y ago
        If you want to advocate for the Yemeni Civil War issue, why don’t you commenters start with the reasons why Saudis and US are involved. Houthi’s are a foreign-backed (Iran) insurgency attempting to overthrow the government, with the racist slogan “Death to America, Death to Israel, Cursed be the Jews, Victory to Islam". With that said, lots more needs to be done to prevent innocent civilians from the atrocities from both sides. Nobody likes having to realpolitik with Saudi. They’re a shitty necessity to counter Iran’s attempt at stirring the pot with global Muslim caliphate nonsense.
    - JacobThreeThree 4y ago
      >Why does everyone forget Yemen? Most people have their worldview spoonfed to them by the media, who are almost universally not interested in the Yemen war.
  - q1w2 4y ago
    > Afghanistan was just a place they could safely drop a lot of expensive bombs Afghanistan is literally where Al-Quaeda was based. It wasn't even the US alone - NATO allies also joined the war in Afghanistan because of the obvious connection with 9-11.
- tomohawk 4y ago
  Al Qaida is a mix of Saudi money and Egytian Muslim Brotherhood know how. It all mixed together in Afghanistan. The attacks were planned and prepped in Afghanistan, and the Taliban gave them sanctuary/protection there. This makes Afghanistan a relevant country. The initial strategy there was pretty good, and yielded good results. But the neocons couldn't resist doing a nation building exercise, and that didn't go so well. You didn't need any hindsight to see that coming.
  - Geonode 4y ago
    Yeah I agree. I was exaggerating too much. You are correct they deserved our attention but not a doomed attempt at civilizing a place that doesn't want it.
  - ch4s3 4y ago
    It was mostly planned in Germany, with leadership from the base in Afghanistan and was funded in KSA.
  - DSingularity 4y ago
    Where is your evidence of Muslim brotherhood involvement?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- cyanydeez 4y ago
  Really? I mean! Aren't we pretty far along the desire to attack things,, America is attacking itself
hackernewds 4y ago
And everything to do with being a scapegoat for massive pursing of public funds into private entities such as Lockheed and Halliburton
themodelplumber 4y ago
Still, this is looking like a hell of a lot of leverage that a dem presidency has over a country with leadership that historically loves republicans in office. To think that no one, anywhere in government, (to say nothing of multiple parties in various positions) will make use of this leverage seems a bit strange and goes against the very implications of holding any power at all.
- jhugo 4y ago
  What leverage exactly? Consider a major split between SA and US. Who do you think would come out worse off?
  - themodelplumber 4y ago
    I don't understand the questions. You can't see how knowing of a SA conspiracy against the US is leverage? Edit: Things you could do: - Increase cultural pressure within US SA community - Increase cultural pressure within US arab community - Tell SA you are wondering what Israel thinks about this - Incentivize new cultural narratives (film, books, etc) and redirect special funding to think tanks - Create a long-term partnership coalition - Behind the scenes: Find new weak spots in SA - Behind the scenes: Exploit new weak spots in SA, foment a renewed arab spring, etc. These are just the tip of the iceberg, there must be thousands more. The bad things that would happen as a result: - Reduced SA govt access to power - Reduced SA govt access to needed resources - Reduced SA govt image - Increasing trouble literally anywhere in or with SA.
    - jhugo 4y ago
      It's only leverage if you can describe the bad thing that would happen to SA if the conspiracy came out. From where I'm standing, the US has more to lose in this situation.
    - jhugo 4y ago
      What incentive does the US have to decrease SA power and stability, considering that they one of US's strongest partners in the region? All of the things you list seem like a negative outcome for the US.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
cyanydeez 4y ago
It's clear they aren't going to do the same in America because Americans like money?
itwasbush 4y ago
> It's clear that the US government has no intention of stirring up trouble inside Saudi Arabia because they're the middle east country that likes money more than religion, and that makes them an important partner if not ally in taming the bat-shit crazy governments of other local countries, some of which we actually put in place. The reason why the US doesn't go after them is because if they do, then it will bring to light USA's own role in these attacks.
- streamlining 4y ago
twoxproblematic 4y ago
moralestapia 4y ago
>taming the bat-shit crazy governments of other local countries Not taking any sides but you should really think about how much of this view is based on factual experience vs. how much could be due to propaganda or a shifted image that arrives after traveling halfway around the world.

gleenn 4y ago

It seems so wild that part of the US government was so happy to start wars in irrelevant countries despite the fact that it appears pretty obvious the real perpetrators hit the Pentagon with a plane. I wonder how conversations go between people in both those departments/branches.

Geonode 4y ago
Yeah I think Afghanistan was just a place they could safely drop a lot of expensive bombs. Iraq, and later see Libya, Syria, and others, ongoing, are places where they don't want strong dictators who are against the international monetary monopoly. Just look at the shenanigans African dictators get up to and we just send trainers, because it's the only effective solution over time.
- dhzhzjsbevs 4y ago
  Everyone always forgets Yemen. Why does everyone forget Yemen? Is it because it's the Saudis again? Or is it because Obama did it? Or because Trump continued it? Or is it because Biden said he would end it but didn't? https://youtube.com/watch?v=hFkngrRDdaA https://youtube.com/watch?v=hFkngrRDdaA Inflammatory comment I know. Tell that to the 100s of thousands being genocided.
  - ars 4y ago
    Everyone ignores Yemen for the same reason they ignore Syria: It's bad guys attacking bad guys. Edit: I appear to be wrong about this: America would not support either side in those wars, so they just leave them alone to fight.
    - mardifoufs 4y ago
      This is false and a false equivalence. It's like saying that we shouldn't care about ukraine since they have azov actively fighting on the frontline, so both sides are just bad. There's mostly one side that's doing the "bombing civilians" and "invade your weaker neighbor " part. And it's not like America is neutral here. They are actively supporting the saudi/anti houthi coalition, with intel and weaponry. It's fine to say that you just don't really care because we can't care about everything, which is true, but there's no need to rationalize that choice.
    - vaidhy 4y ago
      Really?? I thought US is supplying most of the weapons and logistics for Saudi Arabia to fight in Yemen while Russia is supporting Iran which supports the Houthis. In the end, both sides are bombing the hell out of that country which has no recourse.
      - ars 4y ago
        I looked into it, just in case I was wrong, and it's certainly not "most of the", but there is some American support for Saudi Arabia fighting Yemen, so I was partially wrong.
  - boomboomsubban 4y ago
    There seems to be some disconnect with Yemen as we aren't doing the bombing, we're merely supplying the bombs and planning the bombing. It's not our fault that the Saudi's are dropping US bombs on US targets. This justification falls apart with the blockade though.
    - markdown 4y ago
      Same deal as the Palestinian genocide. Merely supplying the bombs.
    - justsomehnguy 4y ago
      > There seems to be some disconnect with $somesuddenlyeuropeancountry as we aren't doing the bombing, we're merely supplying the bombs and planning the bombing. It's not our fault that the $somesuddenlyeuropeancountry's are dropping US bombs on US targets. LOL EDIT: and with M777 and HIMARS it's quite literal US bombs.
      - ncmncm 4y ago
        Yet, not genocide. Unless targeting invading Russian tanks and warships counts as trying to eliminate Russians in general.
        justsomehnguy 4y ago
        Yeah, exactly. Compare the civilian losses in these two conflicts and remember who is running around with 'genocide'.
    - reducesuffering 4y ago
      If you want to advocate for the Yemeni Civil War issue, why don’t you commenters start with the reasons why Saudis and US are involved. Houthi’s are a foreign-backed (Iran) insurgency attempting to overthrow the government, with the racist slogan “Death to America, Death to Israel, Cursed be the Jews, Victory to Islam". With that said, lots more needs to be done to prevent innocent civilians from the atrocities from both sides. Nobody likes having to realpolitik with Saudi. They’re a shitty necessity to counter Iran’s attempt at stirring the pot with global Muslim caliphate nonsense.
  - JacobThreeThree 4y ago
    >Why does everyone forget Yemen? Most people have their worldview spoonfed to them by the media, who are almost universally not interested in the Yemen war.
- q1w2 4y ago
  > Afghanistan was just a place they could safely drop a lot of expensive bombs Afghanistan is literally where Al-Quaeda was based. It wasn't even the US alone - NATO allies also joined the war in Afghanistan because of the obvious connection with 9-11.
tomohawk 4y ago
Al Qaida is a mix of Saudi money and Egytian Muslim Brotherhood know how. It all mixed together in Afghanistan. The attacks were planned and prepped in Afghanistan, and the Taliban gave them sanctuary/protection there. This makes Afghanistan a relevant country. The initial strategy there was pretty good, and yielded good results. But the neocons couldn't resist doing a nation building exercise, and that didn't go so well. You didn't need any hindsight to see that coming.
- Geonode 4y ago
  Yeah I agree. I was exaggerating too much. You are correct they deserved our attention but not a doomed attempt at civilizing a place that doesn't want it.
- ch4s3 4y ago
  It was mostly planned in Germany, with leadership from the base in Afghanistan and was funded in KSA.
- DSingularity 4y ago
  Where is your evidence of Muslim brotherhood involvement?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
cyanydeez 4y ago
Really? I mean! Aren't we pretty far along the desire to attack things,, America is attacking itself

hackernewds 4y ago

And everything to do with being a scapegoat for massive pursing of public funds into private entities such as Lockheed and Halliburton

themodelplumber 4y ago

Still, this is looking like a hell of a lot of leverage that a dem presidency has over a country with leadership that historically loves republicans in office. To think that no one, anywhere in government, (to say nothing of multiple parties in various positions) will make use of this leverage seems a bit strange and goes against the very implications of holding any power at all.

jhugo 4y ago
What leverage exactly? Consider a major split between SA and US. Who do you think would come out worse off?
- themodelplumber 4y ago
  I don't understand the questions. You can't see how knowing of a SA conspiracy against the US is leverage? Edit: Things you could do: - Increase cultural pressure within US SA community - Increase cultural pressure within US arab community - Tell SA you are wondering what Israel thinks about this - Incentivize new cultural narratives (film, books, etc) and redirect special funding to think tanks - Create a long-term partnership coalition - Behind the scenes: Find new weak spots in SA - Behind the scenes: Exploit new weak spots in SA, foment a renewed arab spring, etc. These are just the tip of the iceberg, there must be thousands more. The bad things that would happen as a result: - Reduced SA govt access to power - Reduced SA govt access to needed resources - Reduced SA govt image - Increasing trouble literally anywhere in or with SA.
  - jhugo 4y ago
    It's only leverage if you can describe the bad thing that would happen to SA if the conspiracy came out. From where I'm standing, the US has more to lose in this situation.
  - jhugo 4y ago
    What incentive does the US have to decrease SA power and stability, considering that they one of US's strongest partners in the region? All of the things you list seem like a negative outcome for the US.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

cyanydeez 4y ago

It's clear they aren't going to do the same in America because Americans like money?

itwasbush 4y ago

> It's clear that the US government has no intention of stirring up trouble inside Saudi Arabia because they're the middle east country that likes money more than religion, and that makes them an important partner if not ally in taming the bat-shit crazy governments of other local countries, some of which we actually put in place. The reason why the US doesn't go after them is because if they do, then it will bring to light USA's own role in these attacks.

streamlining 4y ago

twoxproblematic 4y ago

moralestapia 4y ago

>taming the bat-shit crazy governments of other local countries Not taking any sides but you should really think about how much of this view is based on factual experience vs. how much could be due to propaganda or a shifted image that arrives after traveling halfway around the world.