6 ms·

Chances are good these US ex-military are not loyal to Saudi Arabia. They're only doing it for the money, not fanatical idealisms. We have the Logan Act and Esp

Chances are good these US ex-military are not loyal to Saudi Arabia. They're only doing it for the money, not fanatical idealisms. We have the Logan Act and Espionage Act to protect us, and we benefit from these activities through income taxes.

olliej 4y ago
Those only work for people in the US or countries that will extradite which I would guess SA would be unlikely to do in this case. I’m not saying that there’s going to be a bunch of treasoning or anything, just that the laws you’re citing wouldn’t be particularly useful if said treasoning did happen.
- vsareto 4y ago
  Doing anything remotely perceived as treasonous seems dumb. More than likely they are acting closer to spies for the US (against SA) in these positions.
- kelnos 4y ago
  > Those only work for people in the US or countries that will extradite which I would guess SA would be unlikely to do in this case. I wouldn't be so sure. SA depends on the US for a significant amount of military equipment and training. They might turn over a US traitor if they got even a whiff of that help being threatened.
mytailorisrich 4y ago
It's not uncommon for ex-military to take such jobs as a way to insulate the Pentagon (or your favourite government) even though they in fact still 'work'for them. This was (still is?) a classic of French influence in Africa, for instance. Here my interpretation is that the US keep a close watch on the Saudis...
- atlasunshrugged 4y ago
  That's an interesting interpretation and I hope you're right. I read it and just assumed it was people finally cashing out after public service and going to the highest bidder.
  - mytailorisrich 4y ago
    Oh they do get a great payday, but that does not necessarily mean that they cut informal ties with the Pentagon or do things against the wishes of the Pentagon. In this case, the US and the Saudis have been 'tight' for 70 years so one can imagine it is all very friendly...
    - wahern 4y ago
      And Michael Flynn? > do things against the wishes of the Pentagon I'm betting that the Pentagon prefers their retired senior staff don't whore themselves out to potential adversaries. But unless and until they cross a formal line, what are you gonna do? If the Pentagon comes across as punitive, e.g. by revoking any latent security clearances, there'll be a huge backlash. This form of consulting and liaising with international groups by retired military is nothing new, and there are legions of retired staff leveraging their status one way or another. It's a perk of the job. It's also not new that it can sometimes be rather unseemly, to say the least. What might be new is the amount of money being thrown around. These relationships are quite valuable because while it may not seem that way in our social media bubbles and among our international cosmopolitan peers, the day-to-day cultures and administrative machinations of various governments and militaries can be extremely opaque simply because of the huge differences in presumptions and expectations. And this is true even among allies with seemingly similar cultures, which is why even a country like the U.S. with veritable armies of intelligence analysts do ridiculous *hit like bug Angela Merkel's cellphone. Retired personnel don't need to divulge secrets to provide extremely valuable and timely insights, especially as between countries like the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.
    - GartzenDeHaes 4y ago
      > does not necessarily mean that they cut informal ties with the Pentagon Just the opposite, it's those ties and connections that the Saudi's are buying.
- lnwlebjel 4y ago
  This would be my first assumption - if not the pentagon then the CIA.
- pyuser583 4y ago
  The US Army let soldiers take leave to fight in Afghanistan’s during the 1980s. This is small potatoes compared to that.
Philorandroid 4y ago
Law is only a paper veneer to keep honest people honest. Legal acts do about as much to deter desertion and security leaks as speed limit signs keep people from speeding.
- Maursault 4y ago
  > Law is only a paper veneer to keep honest people honest. Not all laws.[1] > Legal acts do about as much to deter desertion and security leaks as speed limit signs keep people from speeding. Seems to be working well so far. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gr...
  - hnfong 4y ago
    But I hear that black holes are *notoriously* dishonest...
    - thisiscorrect 4y ago
      Because you can't get any accurate information out of them?
      - hnfong 4y ago
        I was thinking that they don't obey Newton's laws...
        Maursault 4y ago
        They obey his Law of Gravity and his Laws of Motion. Newton was not incorrect and Einstein did not invalidate Newton's laws. It's only that Newton could not explain the source of the "force" of gravity, and he was honest about this.
- nonameiguess 4y ago
  That's an awfully bold statement. It'd be nice if you showed some evidence that classified information leakage and military desertion rates are anywhere near the rate of speed limit violations, which at a first approximation I would guess is pretty near 100% of licensed drivers doing it at least once. As a person who served in the military and still holds a clearance, I don't know the true rates, but in 15 years I have so far witnessed 0 desertions and 0 classified spills (caveat that I did witness one accidental copy of a classified course catalog onto an unclassified e-mail that was self-reported and immediately resulted in every unclassified workstation and hard drive in the 1st CAV headquarters being quarantined and wiped until it was determined the spill went no further, and we had no network access for a week while that was happening).

olliej 4y ago

Those only work for people in the US or countries that will extradite which I would guess SA would be unlikely to do in this case. I’m not saying that there’s going to be a bunch of treasoning or anything, just that the laws you’re citing wouldn’t be particularly useful if said treasoning did happen.

vsareto 4y ago
Doing anything remotely perceived as treasonous seems dumb. More than likely they are acting closer to spies for the US (against SA) in these positions.
kelnos 4y ago
> Those only work for people in the US or countries that will extradite which I would guess SA would be unlikely to do in this case. I wouldn't be so sure. SA depends on the US for a significant amount of military equipment and training. They might turn over a US traitor if they got even a whiff of that help being threatened.

mytailorisrich 4y ago

It's not uncommon for ex-military to take such jobs as a way to insulate the Pentagon (or your favourite government) even though they in fact still 'work'for them. This was (still is?) a classic of French influence in Africa, for instance. Here my interpretation is that the US keep a close watch on the Saudis...

atlasunshrugged 4y ago
That's an interesting interpretation and I hope you're right. I read it and just assumed it was people finally cashing out after public service and going to the highest bidder.
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  Oh they do get a great payday, but that does not necessarily mean that they cut informal ties with the Pentagon or do things against the wishes of the Pentagon. In this case, the US and the Saudis have been 'tight' for 70 years so one can imagine it is all very friendly...
  - wahern 4y ago
    And Michael Flynn? > do things against the wishes of the Pentagon I'm betting that the Pentagon prefers their retired senior staff don't whore themselves out to potential adversaries. But unless and until they cross a formal line, what are you gonna do? If the Pentagon comes across as punitive, e.g. by revoking any latent security clearances, there'll be a huge backlash. This form of consulting and liaising with international groups by retired military is nothing new, and there are legions of retired staff leveraging their status one way or another. It's a perk of the job. It's also not new that it can sometimes be rather unseemly, to say the least. What might be new is the amount of money being thrown around. These relationships are quite valuable because while it may not seem that way in our social media bubbles and among our international cosmopolitan peers, the day-to-day cultures and administrative machinations of various governments and militaries can be extremely opaque simply because of the huge differences in presumptions and expectations. And this is true even among allies with seemingly similar cultures, which is why even a country like the U.S. with veritable armies of intelligence analysts do ridiculous *hit like bug Angela Merkel's cellphone. Retired personnel don't need to divulge secrets to provide extremely valuable and timely insights, especially as between countries like the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.
  - GartzenDeHaes 4y ago
    > does not necessarily mean that they cut informal ties with the Pentagon Just the opposite, it's those ties and connections that the Saudi's are buying.
lnwlebjel 4y ago
This would be my first assumption - if not the pentagon then the CIA.
pyuser583 4y ago
The US Army let soldiers take leave to fight in Afghanistan’s during the 1980s. This is small potatoes compared to that.

Philorandroid 4y ago

Law is only a paper veneer to keep honest people honest. Legal acts do about as much to deter desertion and security leaks as speed limit signs keep people from speeding.

Maursault 4y ago
> Law is only a paper veneer to keep honest people honest. Not all laws.[1] > Legal acts do about as much to deter desertion and security leaks as speed limit signs keep people from speeding. Seems to be working well so far. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gr...
- hnfong 4y ago
  But I hear that black holes are *notoriously* dishonest...
  - thisiscorrect 4y ago
    Because you can't get any accurate information out of them?
    - hnfong 4y ago
      I was thinking that they don't obey Newton's laws...
      - Maursault 4y ago
        They obey his Law of Gravity and his Laws of Motion. Newton was not incorrect and Einstein did not invalidate Newton's laws. It's only that Newton could not explain the source of the "force" of gravity, and he was honest about this.
nonameiguess 4y ago
That's an awfully bold statement. It'd be nice if you showed some evidence that classified information leakage and military desertion rates are anywhere near the rate of speed limit violations, which at a first approximation I would guess is pretty near 100% of licensed drivers doing it at least once. As a person who served in the military and still holds a clearance, I don't know the true rates, but in 15 years I have so far witnessed 0 desertions and 0 classified spills (caveat that I did witness one accidental copy of a classified course catalog onto an unclassified e-mail that was self-reported and immediately resulted in every unclassified workstation and hard drive in the 1st CAV headquarters being quarantined and wiped until it was determined the spill went no further, and we had no network access for a week while that was happening).