• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

T

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
The U.S. Senate cleared the way for a $1.15 billion sale of tanks and other military equipment to Saudi Arabia on Wednesday, defending a frequent partner in the Middle East recently subject to harsh criticism in Congress.
The Senate voted 71 to 27 to kill legislation that would have stopped the sale.
The overwhelming vote stopped an effort led by Republican Senator Rand Paul and Democratic Senator Chris Murphy to block the deal over concerns including Saudi Arabia's role in the 18-month-long war in Yemen and worries that it might fuel an ongoing regional arms race.
The Pentagon announced on Aug. 9 that the State Department had approved the potential sale of more than 130 Abrams battle tanks, 20 armored recovery vehicles and other equipment to Saudi Arabia.
The Defense Security Cooperation Agency said General Dynamics Corp would be the principal contractor for the sale.
Paul, Murphy and other opponents of the arms deal were sharply critical of the Riyadh government during debate before the vote, citing Yemen, the kingdom's human rights record and its international support for a conservative form of Islam.
Click to expand...


Read more @: Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

A damn shame. I applaud Rand Paul and Chris Muphy's efforts in attempting to stop this sale of weapons to one of the worst human right abusing countries on this planet. While Saudi Arabis drops bombs indiscriminately in Yemen and commits war crime after war crime in Yemen, our government believes that we should be arming them with more weapons to commit war crimes with in Yemen. One thing is for sure, the military industrial complex is sure as **** going to be happy with some new contracts. This is so ****ed up.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

A damn shame. I applaud Rand Paul and Chris Muphy's efforts in attempting to stop this sale of weapons to one of the worst human right abusing countries on this planet. While Saudi Arabis drops bombs indiscriminately in Yemen and commits war crime after war crime in Yemen, our government believes that we should be arming them with more weapons to commit war crimes with in Yemen. One thing is for sure, the military industrial complex is sure as **** going to be happy with some new contracts. This is so ****ed up. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

I disagree with the analysis that Saudi Arabia drops bombs 'indiscriminately' on Yemen. I think they have committed some violations but that by and large the air campaign has been carried out under extremely difficult circumstances and casualties are actually much lower than would have been expected. I support this arms sale.

I recommend reviewing the TWI analysis, it's brief and highly readable. An excerpt:

"The global perception of the coalition air effort is highly negative. Earlier this month, the Houthi-controlled Ministry of Public Health claimed that around seven thousand civilians had been killed by airstrikes; in January, the UN put the number at 2,682. Wherever the truth lies, a number of high-profile strikes against Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) clinics between October and January effectively cemented international opinion against the air campaign. As of this writing, strong condemnations have been issued by MSF, Human Rights Watch, the UN secretary-general, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the European Parliament, with the latter seeking an EU arms embargo against Gulf coalition states.

Yet looking at the UN's numbers from January -- 2,682 civilians reportedly killed by coalition airstrikes after around 275 days of operations -- the average daily death toll (9.75) was not greatly higher than that of the 78-day NATO air operation in Kosovo in 1999 (6.7 civilian deaths per day), and significantly lower than for Operation Desert Storm in 1991 (85 civilian deaths per day). In other words, air operations over Yemen resemble a 1990s NATO air campaign. In preprogrammed strikes, care has been taken to vet targets, select weapons, and time attacks in a manner that limits civilian casualties. Yet not all casualties can be averted, partly because the Houthis sometimes place military units in civilian locations, but also because mistakes happen in war, particularly during a campaign involving coercive targeting. The Gulf coalition seems to be relearning the lessons that NATO forces learned in their numerous air operations, in terms of both avoiding collateral damage and transparently explaining such instances to the international public."

Gulf Coalition Operations in Yemen (Part 2): The Air War - The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
 
Sounds about right. I chuckle when people voice concern and discomfort concerning the U.S's allyship with KSA, betraying some sort of an American entitlement to some moral high-ground. But the reality is, both are like peas in a pod.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

A damn shame. I applaud Rand Paul and Chris Muphy's efforts in attempting to stop this sale of weapons to one of the worst human right abusing countries on this planet. While Saudi Arabis drops bombs indiscriminately in Yemen and commits war crime after war crime in Yemen, our government believes that we should be arming them with more weapons to commit war crimes with in Yemen. One thing is for sure, the military industrial complex is sure as **** going to be happy with some new contracts. This is so ****ed up. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Why would you say that? The Saudis are not along our libertine lines and rather traditional in many things we do not agree with them on. But compared to a number of countries I can think of, they are angels. Just take Assad, Sudan, Philippines etc and you will find far worse conditions. But the main thing is that you do not like them, methinks.
 
Sherman123 said:
I disagree with the analysis that Saudi Arabia drops bombs 'indiscriminately' on Yemen. I think they have committed some violations but that by and large the air campaign has been carried out under extremely difficult circumstances and casualties are actually much lower than would have been expected. I support this arms sale.

I recommend reviewing the TWI analysis, it's brief and highly readable. An excerpt:

"The global perception of the coalition air effort is highly negative. Earlier this month, the Houthi-controlled Ministry of Public Health claimed that around seven thousand civilians had been killed by airstrikes; in January, the UN put the number at 2,682. Wherever the truth lies, a number of high-profile strikes against Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) clinics between October and January effectively cemented international opinion against the air campaign. As of this writing, strong condemnations have been issued by MSF, Human Rights Watch, the UN secretary-general, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the European Parliament, with the latter seeking an EU arms embargo against Gulf coalition states.

Yet looking at the UN's numbers from January -- 2,682 civilians reportedly killed by coalition airstrikes after around 275 days of operations -- the average daily death toll (9.75) was not greatly higher than that of the 78-day NATO air operation in Kosovo in 1999 (6.7 civilian deaths per day), and significantly lower than for Operation Desert Storm in 1991 (85 civilian deaths per day). In other words, air operations over Yemen resemble a 1990s NATO air campaign. In preprogrammed strikes, care has been taken to vet targets, select weapons, and time attacks in a manner that limits civilian casualties. Yet not all casualties can be averted, partly because the Houthis sometimes place military units in civilian locations, but also because mistakes happen in war, particularly during a campaign involving coercive targeting. The Gulf coalition seems to be relearning the lessons that NATO forces learned in their numerous air operations, in terms of both avoiding collateral damage and transparently explaining such instances to the international public."

Gulf Coalition Operations in Yemen (Part 2): The Air War - The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Click to expand...

There are people that do not like the Kingdom and will always be against it. And it is true. The system is not ideal and we dislike many things they do. But they had been quite reliable allies and they do try to keep the area more or less quite, while holding a balance of power in the region. After Iraq 2 the Administration pushed that they open up some and liberalize, which they did start to do. But that slowed fast and was over before the Arab Spring for fear that an Arab Spring would engulf them.
There seems no doubt that we would want them to reform. But there is considerable doubt, whether it would make sense to push for change right now, while the region is in a rather volatile state. And as long as they are our allies, we should very much support them with weapons.
 
Saudi has all but used up several billions-worth of British weaponry in blockading and almost completely flattening Yemen. They need some extra to finish the job.
 
Gaztopian said:
Sounds about right. I chuckle when people voice concern and discomfort concerning the U.S's allyship with KSA, betraying some sort of an American entitlement to some moral high-ground. But the reality is, both are like peas in a pod.
Click to expand...

Not sure how you can make that claim when no religious freedom of any kind even exists in the KSA.

And don't forget that a lot of Islamisized hate preaching that inspired Al Qaeda and ISIS comes from the Wahhabist clerics in the kingdom. A theology developed out of the royal family's desire to retain absolute power.
 
If we don't sell it to them, somebody else will.
 
Selling weapons to the top instigators of international terrorism... what a great idea! :roll:
 
PoS said:
Selling weapons to the top instigators of international terrorism... what a great idea! :roll:
Click to expand...

Greetings, PoS. :2wave:

It seems that there's just no end to all these "great ideas" lately! :thumbdown: Stay tuned for further news.... :shock:
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

A damn shame. I applaud Rand Paul and Chris Muphy's efforts in attempting to stop this sale of weapons to one of the worst human right abusing countries on this planet. While Saudi Arabis drops bombs indiscriminately in Yemen and commits war crime after war crime in Yemen, our government believes that we should be arming them with more weapons to commit war crimes with in Yemen. One thing is for sure, the military industrial complex is sure as **** going to be happy with some new contracts. This is so ****ed up. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Go ahead and preemptively color me not surprised when our boys start getting shot with M_16's carried by ISIS members.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
Not sure how you can make that claim when no religious freedom of any kind even exists in the KSA.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about religious freedom? This topic is concerned with arms sales to be used in regional conflicts.

And don't forget that a lot of Islamisized hate preaching that inspired Al Qaeda and ISIS comes from the Wahhabist clerics in the kingdom. A theology developed out of the royal family's desire to retain absolute power.
Click to expand...

Oh the irony. Guess who helped the Saudis spread that ideology? Reagan in his effort to fight the godless communists. I rest my case - two peas in a pod.
 
Gaztopian said:
Who said anything about religious freedom? This topic is concerned with arms sales to be used in regional conflicts.
Click to expand...

You claimed that the US and Saudi were basically alike. If that's not what you meant, say so.


Oh the irony. Guess who helped the Saudis spread that ideology? Reagan in his effort to fight the godless communists. I rest my case - two peas in a pod.
Click to expand...
Reagan was being a fool at the time, as was his usual pattern.
 
joG said:
Why would you say that? The Saudis are not along our libertine lines and rather traditional in many things we do not agree with them on. But compared to a number of countries I can think of, they are angels. Just take Assad, Sudan, Philippines etc and you will find far worse conditions. But the main thing is that you do not like them, methinks.
Click to expand...
They execute their citizens in public squares by chopping their heads off for thing like worshiping the wrong god and playing musical Instruments in public. Women are regularly beaten and abused in public. And from the first day of school children are taught that Jews and Christians deserve nothing less than death. They are not angels, they are one of the worst in terms of oppression and human rights violations.
 
Last edited:
HenryChinaski said:
They execute their citizens in public squares by chopping their heads off for thing like worshiping the wrong god and playing musical Instruments in public. Women are regularly beaten and abused in public. And from the first day of school children are taught that Jews and Christians deserve nothing less than death. They are not angels, they are one of the worst in terms of oppression and human rights violations.
Click to expand...

And we kill the bad guys in small rooms with a selectspectator ship. We lock people in overpopulated confines, where we know they will be raped and contract all sorts of sickness. I see the difference you mean, but would not really make a qualitative difference out of it. It is just the quantity and presentation that we are looking at in that case.
 
Gaztopian said:
I chuckle when people voice concern and discomfort concerning the U.S's allyship with KSA, betraying some sort of an American entitlement to some moral high-ground. But the reality is, both are like peas in a pod.
Click to expand...

Since we're the Great Satan anyway, why not sell Saudi Arabia the weapons then? I mean, do we really want another Hezbollah or Badr Organization in Yemen, beholden to their benefactors in Tehran? No, we don't.
 
joG said:
There are people that do not like the Kingdom and will always be against it. And it is true. The system is not ideal and we dislike many things they do. But they had been quite reliable allies and they do try to keep the area more or less quite, while holding a balance of power in the region. After Iraq 2 the Administration pushed that they open up some and liberalize, which they did start to do. But that slowed fast and was over before the Arab Spring for fear that an Arab Spring would engulf them.
There seems no doubt that we would want them to reform. But there is considerable doubt, whether it would make sense to push for change right now, while the region is in a rather volatile state. And as long as they are our allies, we should very much support them with weapons.
Click to expand...

Reliable allies don't fund terrorists to attack their allies. It makes me sick to think the US got suckered into fighting a proxy war in Iraq for Saudi Arabia and all the while they were supporting Al Qaeda and Sunni jihadists to attack our troops and other allies. The only reason they were our allies in the first place is because they had oil. But now we don't get our oil from them...so we don't need them to be our ally anymore and they can fight their own battles from now on....and I hope this will be the last sale of military weapons they will ever get from us.
 
HenryChinaski said:
They are not angels, they are one of the worst in terms of oppression and human rights violations.
Click to expand...

They're not angels, but they're killing Iranian proxies in Yemen, and that's a good thing. Plus they're keeping American defense workers employed so they can buy Christmas presents for their kids. That's good, too.
 
Moot said:
Reliable allies don't fund terrorists to attack their allies. It makes me sick to think the US got suckered into fighting a proxy war in Iraq for Saudi Arabia and all the while they were supporting Al Qaeda and Sunni jihadists to attack our troops and other allies. The only reason they were our allies in the first place is because they had oil. But now we don't get our oil from them...so we don't need them to be our ally anymore and they can fight their own battles from now on....and I hope this will be the last sale of military weapons they will ever get from us.
Click to expand...

Our relationship with Saudi Arabia is complicated. Are there Saudis, even members of the extended royal family, hostile to American interests or who support the spreading of Salafism beyond the borders of the Kingdom? No doubt. But does the Saudi government demonstrate antipathy towards the U.S. or its interests as a matter of policy? Unlike Iran, no, it does not. Meanwhile, everywhere we see the Iranians get their tentacles into a country, bad **** happens, whether it's in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, OR Yemen, where Iranian-supported rebels overthrew a friendly government. We KNOW, for example, that Iran supplied Shia militias in Iraq with powerful bombs used to kill and maim U.S. soldiers. And when the second line on the Houthi emblem following "God is great" says "Death to America," these aren't people we should be particularly troubled about killing. It's time for a little blow-back, and Saudi Arabia is willing to provide it.

Houthis_Logo.png
 
Moot said:
Reliable allies don't fund terrorists to attack their allies. It makes me sick to think the US got suckered into fighting a proxy war in Iraq for Saudi Arabia and all the while they were supporting Al Qaeda and Sunni jihadists to attack our troops and other allies. The only reason they were our allies in the first place is because they had oil. But now we don't get our oil from them...so we don't need them to be our ally anymore and they can fight their own battles from now on....and I hope this will be the last sale of military weapons they will ever get from us.
Click to expand...

I do not think that the Saudis were the main mover in the Iraqi imbroglio. And Bin Laden was certainly not supported by the Saudi King.
 
PoS said:
Selling weapons to the top instigators of international terrorism... what a great idea! :roll:
Click to expand...

Actually, Iran is #1. We paved the way for them to build a nuke.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

A damn shame. I applaud Rand Paul and Chris Muphy's efforts in attempting to stop this sale of weapons to one of the worst human right abusing countries on this planet. While Saudi Arabis drops bombs indiscriminately in Yemen and commits war crime after war crime in Yemen, our government believes that we should be arming them with more weapons to commit war crimes with in Yemen. One thing is for sure, the military industrial complex is sure as **** going to be happy with some new contracts. This is so ****ed up. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Yes, this is a perfect example of why the US government has so much blood on its hands, why we are perceived as criminal hypocrites blabbering off about human rights and such. Ike was so right.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Yes, this is a perfect example of why the US government has so much blood on its hands, why we are perceived as criminal hypocrites blabbering off about human rights and such. Ike was so right.
Click to expand...

Why ever, would anyone want to prevent supplying an ally and a good one at that? And what is this about "blood on one's hands"? That is such a false argument that one must almost suspect a lie.
 
apdst said:
Actually, Iran is #1. We paved the way for them to build a nuke.
Click to expand...

Yes. We did do a rather bad job there. But the country usually does not have the stomach for the things that are necessary.
 
And people bitched about cuba.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom