The House of Saud at it again (Khashoggi disappearance)

[Tiberius]

On 10/20/2018 at 2:36 AM, Doc Brown said:

It's a ludicrous connection to make.  You can point out the hypocrisy with Trump generalizing that all Democrats are a mob (while it's just a sliver of people with nothing else better to do) while he praises a GOP congressman for attacking a journalist which he plead guilty to a misdemeanor for. 

 

A foreign government we're in bed with possibly killing a Washington Post reporter and chopping him into little pieces is completely different than a Congressman who lost his cool and bodyslammed a reporter.

A physical assault on anyone is really something the President of the United States should not be praising. It's a green light to attack. If Obama had done something like that you guys would be--rightly--calling him out and probably calling for impeachment. The timing is almost disgusting. A murder happens to a jounalist and our worthless president praises an attack on a journalist. I'm sure its a coincidence. 

 

How much have the Saudis shipped to Trump through his hotels? 

[Wacka]

Not as much as they shipped to the Clinton Foundation (er ...I mean slush fund).

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Warren Zevon]

 

#MAGA

 

[keepthefaith]

On 10/21/2018 at 6:43 AM, Thurmal34 said:

I do have to say, these posts will be useful artifacts to look back on when my kiddos get married and move on to successful careers.

 

This board’s posts capture the “angry white man” ex majority narrative better than I could ever articulate. Best bet is to just watch Gangs of New York to figure out what is happening.

 

Im a registered republican and have been since I was 18, but I have to wonder why my party wants so badly to find ways to deny Americans the right to vote.

 

That’s not too impressive...what are you afraid of? 

 

 

Yes, murder!

 

State TV for everyone!

 

How exactly are people being denied the right to vote? 

 

 

On 10/20/2018 at 11:45 PM, Thurmal34 said:

 

I agree, we have anyone looking for the truth!

 

 

A fist fight. Right. 18-1, with a bone saw. 

 

Why is killing reporters is being normalized?

 

What the hell is happening?

 

 

 

 

 

Not normalized.  It was a murder in another part of the world.  How many of those happen every day?   The reality is that in every part of the world if you piss off the wrong person you might end up dead.  Not legal, but it happens a lot.  He must have really pissed somebody off and maybe didn't consider the risks.  In this case it's more evidence that parts of the islamic world are 500 years behind the times. 

[IDBillzFan]

Just now, keepthefaith said:

 

How exactly are people being denied the right to vote? 

 

 

 

They make it difficult to find the things to vote for on a two-page ballot. You can't expect people to actually find the Senate race in the lower left corner of ballot any more we could ever expect...The Spanish Inquisition!

[Tiberius]

1 hour ago, peace out said:

 

#MAGA

 

His business interest are our foreign policy. Seriously! 

[plenzmd1]

 

 

1 hour ago, keepthefaith said:

 

  In this case it's more evidence that parts of the islamic world are 500 years behind the times. 

2

And looks like those are the parts of the Islamic World Trump is lining up behind.

23 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

His business interest are our foreign policy. Seriously! 

 

and in his statement implied that Khashoggi was " an enemy of the state" hmm ..a reporter gets killed and Trump says "he is an enemy of the state" as maybe justification. 

 

Where have I heard that "enemy of the people" thing before

[TakeYouToTasker]

4 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

 

 

And looks like those are the parts of the Islamic World Trump is lining up behind.

 

and in his statement implied that Khashoggi was " an enemy of the state" hmm ..a reporter gets killed and Trump says "he is an enemy of the state" as maybe justification. 

 

Where have I heard that "enemy of the people" thing before

 

If a Presidential Administration had placed an incredibly high priority on breaking up and ending a global human trafficking ring run at the highest levels by bad actors in what were considered totalitarian dictatorships, and sought to avoid a full scale world war in the process; would it not make complete sense that he would seek to help them first break loose of chains binding those actors themselves which tied them to those trafficking routines, and then to help them purge out the true bad actors within?  Even if it meant forging relationships with individuals/nations whom may still have human rights abuses, so long as it worked on a macro level towards the end goals of eliminating modern slavery?

 

The truth is that if we want to end human trafficking, we have to make strong ties with the leaders of nations who had been the most heavily involved, and give them a way out.  We cannot isolate them and find a way forward.  We need to bring those nations towards us, even if there are pain points along the way.

[keepthefaith]

5 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

 

 

And looks like those are the parts of the Islamic World Trump is lining up behind.

 

and in his statement implied that Khashoggi was " an enemy of the state" hmm ..a reporter gets killed and Trump says "he is an enemy of the state" as maybe justification. 

 

Where have I heard that "enemy of the people" thing before

 

To which I say: What does any of this have to do with $22T in debt and climbing, giant annual increases in health insurance costs and out of control illegal immigration?  We all really need to focus on the big stuff and ask our government to simply focus on getting a few big things right.  Khashoggi matters less to me than the next person in Chicago that nobody knows that gets killed.   In terms of foreign policy, Trump is doing pretty well overall.  He's taking on the larger tougher stuff.   

[plenzmd1]

3 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

If a Presidential Administration had placed an incredibly high priority on breaking up and ending a global human trafficking ring run at the highest levels by bad actors in what were considered totalitarian dictatorships, and sought to avoid a full scale world war in the process; would it not make complete sense that he would seek to help them first break loose of chains binding those actors themselves which tied them to those trafficking routines, and then to help them purge out the true bad actors within?  Even if it meant forging relationships with individuals/nations whom may still have human rights abuses, so long as it worked on a macro level towards the end goals of eliminating modern slavery?

 

The truth is that if we want to end human trafficking, we have to make strong ties with the leaders of nations who had been the most heavily involved, and give them a way out.  We cannot isolate them and find a way forward.  We need to bring those nations towards us, even if there are pain points along the way.

I will freely admit to not being well versed on the "global human trafficking ring" as you describe..more than open to being educated.

Just now, keepthefaith said:

 

To which I say: What does any of this have to do with $22T in debt and climbing, giant annual increases in health insurance costs and out of control illegal immigration?  We all really need to focus on the big stuff and ask our government to simply focus on getting a few big things right.  Khashoggi matters less to me than the next person in Chicago that nobody knows that gets killed.   In terms of foreign policy, Trump is doing pretty well overall.  He's taking on the larger tougher stuff.   

The 3 things you point to in sentence one all exasperated by Trump and his administration/policies no?

 

Khashoggi matters precisely because of his profession...we can disagree on Trump's foreign policy wins..but his attack on the press and his reference to "enemy of the state" in his statement I find abhorrent.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, plenzmd1 said:

and in his statement implied that Khashoggi was " an enemy of the state" hmm ..a reporter gets killed and Trump says "he is an enemy of the state" as maybe justification. 

 

Where have I heard that "enemy of the people" thing before

 

He was an AQ sympathizer and likely IC asset. He wasn't just a reporter. Khashoggi was working on behalf of bin Talal, who has a serious ax to grind against not only MBS but Trump and the west. We're being told about 1/10th of the truth about this story, and most of the mainstream reports are just parroting Erodgan talking points without identifying them as such. 

 

Calling him a journalist without filling out the rest of his CV is a dead giveaway that this is an information campaign. 

 

(imo)

[plenzmd1]

33 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He was an AQ sympathizer and likely IC asset. He wasn't just a reporter. Khashoggi was working on behalf of bin Talal, who has a serious ax to grind against not only MBS but Trump and the west. We're being told about 1/10th of the truth about this story, and most of the mainstream reports are just parroting Erodgan talking points without identifying them as such. 

 

Calling him a journalist without filling out the rest of his CV is a dead giveaway that this is an information campaign. 

 

(imo)

I can’t just buy that at face value. Dude was a journalist as far as any knows... unless you have evidence to the contrary. 

 

And it really pains me to see refer to him as “ an enemy of the state”. Does that not scare you that he uses the same rhetoric when a journalist gets assassinated as when he talks about the American press corps?  

 

 

[Wacka]

40 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Calling him a journalist without filling out the rest of his CV is a dead giveaway that this is an information campaign. 

 

(imo)

He was as much of a journalist as Jim Acosta is!

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, plenzmd1 said:

I can’t just buy that at face value. Dude was a journalist as far as any knows... unless you have evidence to the contrary. 

 

He interviewed OBS before 9/11. Was pictured openly with AQ members and an RPG launcher:

(center)

 

Due to the inherent western IC connections between the Mujaheddin and OBS prior to 9/11 - as well as his employment in the Langley owned WaPo - it's 99% certain he was an intelligence asset himself. A go-between to spin stories that need spinning. This is more common than you'd think. 

 

His relationship with bin Talal is also well documented. Bin Talal - who at one point owned CitiBank and the largest shares of Twitter, 20th Century Fox, and other US media corporations - has not just blood on his hands as a known financier of both Shia and Sunni terror groups (including AQ), he also work(ed) closely with the USIC for many, many years and was an active donor to many political campaigns. Bin Talal was confined, fined, and tortured for days by MBS in 2017 for these crimes. 

 

He has a serious ax to grind with both MBS and Trump. Khshoggi was one of his mouthpieces in KSA (and the west). 

 

This is spook on spook crime - not an innocent journalist getting whacked. You just won't hear it reported that way. 

 

7 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

And it really pains me to see refer to him as “ an enemy of the state”. Does that not scare you that he uses the same rhetoric when a journalist gets assassinated as when he talks about the American press corps?  

 

As a writer (even in fiction) my entire job depends on freedom of expression and the press, so I'm sensitive to it. But Trump's words don't bother me because I've heard them in context. He's never referred to the press corps or the press as an enemy of the people. He very clearly defines a subset of the press that intentionally misleads the public (in stories just like this) to cover up the sins of spooks and nation states across the world.

 

To me, that's a very clear distinction - but it's intentionally conflated by the press because "Orange man bad". 

[GoBills808]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He was an AQ sympathizer and likely IC asset. He wasn't just a reporter. Khashoggi was working on behalf of bin Talal, who has a serious ax to grind against not only MBS but Trump and the west. We're being told about 1/10th of the truth about this story, and most of the mainstream reports are just parroting Erodgan talking points without identifying them as such. 

 

Calling him a journalist without filling out the rest of his CV is a dead giveaway that this is an information campaign. 

 

(imo)

It's also fair to mention he supported AQ's goals wrt opposing Soviet occupation, and distanced himself from the group and UBL around the time they pivoted from revolutionaries to jihadists. 

 

...don't want to say 'I told you so' but I voiced my reservations about MbS to you a while back, notwithstanding recent Saudi-led efforts to discredit Kashoggi I'd say this is a bad look for the 'reformist'. 

[Deranged Rhino]

8 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

It's also fair to mention he supported AQ's goals wrt opposing Soviet occupation, and distanced himself from the group and UBL around the time they pivoted from revolutionaries to jihadists. 

 

...don't want to say 'I told you so' but I voiced my reservations about MbS to you a while back, notwithstanding recent Saudi-led efforts to discredit Kashoggi I'd say this is a bad look for the 'reformist'. 

 (on PPP you should always say "I told you so". It's deserved here.)

 

It's fair to mention that - but he never distanced himself from the IC or bin Talal. Both of those elements dabble on all sides of every conflict (they go where the money is). 

 

And I agree it's a bad look because no one will ever get the full story (that I'm laying out above). If people understood who he really was, and who's pushing this story in the news cycle (and why) - the outrage would be pretty minimal. Because the system that's pushing this all is exactly the system MBS is trying to reform... that's why he's a threat. Putting a wedge between the US and KSA is important for the (imo) group/system he's trying to reform. 

 

 

 

Also - related to Plenz -  I just saw this was tweeted today by G-Pap: 

 

(Mifsud = western intelligence, not Russian. More evidence he was a spook more so than a journalist.)

Edited November 20, 2018 by Deranged Rhino

[GoBills808]

5 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It's fair to mention that - but he never distanced himself from the IC or bin Talal. Both of those elements dabble on all sides of every conflict (they go where the money is). 

 

And I agree it's a bad look because no one will ever get the full story (that I'm laying out above). If people understood who he really was, and who's pushing this story in the news cycle (and why) - the outrage would be pretty minimal. Because the system that's pushing this all is exactly the system MBS is trying to reform... that's why he's a threat. Putting a wedge between the US and KSA is important for the (imo) group/system he's trying to reform. 

I don't dispute for a minute that MbS benefits from a good relationship w/ the US

[keepthefaith]

17 hours ago, plenzmd1 said:

I will freely admit to not being well versed on the "global human trafficking ring" as you describe..more than open to being educated.

The 3 things you point to in sentence one all exasperated by Trump and his administration/policies no?

 

Khashoggi matters precisely because of his profession...we can disagree on Trump's foreign policy wins..but his attack on the press and his reference to "enemy of the state" in his statement I find abhorrent.

 

Trump is guilty of not yet addressing fiscal responsibility.  Trump has made some tiny efforts to address health insurance costs but his administration does not appear to be engaged in a solution.  Trump is making efforts to solve illegal immigration and being stonewalled at every turn obviously.  At the very least he is exposing that our laws and courts somehow don't allow us to simply turn away people who enter or stay improperly.

 

As for the dead reporter he doesn't matter more to me because of his profession.  In my view he matters less than the part time waitress/waiter that serves lunch.  The journalist profession is heavily soiled IMO due to so many bad actors within it.  It is a ***** industry.  

 

 

 

16 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He was an AQ sympathizer and likely IC asset. He wasn't just a reporter. Khashoggi was working on behalf of bin Talal, who has a serious ax to grind against not only MBS but Trump and the west. We're being told about 1/10th of the truth about this story, and most of the mainstream reports are just parroting Erodgan talking points without identifying them as such. 

 

Calling him a journalist without filling out the rest of his CV is a dead giveaway that this is an information campaign. 

 

(imo)

 

If this is true then it easily explains why Trump hasn't had a strong public response. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by keepthefaith

[boyst]

This ***** doesn't matter.  Why do we care?

[GG]

16 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

He interviewed OBS before 9/11. Was pictured openly with AQ members and an RPG launcher:

(center)

 

Due to the inherent western IC connections between the Mujaheddin and OBS prior to 9/11 - as well as his employment in the Langley owned WaPo - it's 99% certain he was an intelligence asset himself. A go-between to spin stories that need spinning. This is more common than you'd think. 

 

His relationship with bin Talal is also well documented. Bin Talal - who at one point owned CitiBank and the largest shares of Twitter, 20th Century Fox, and other US media corporations - has not just blood on his hands as a known financier of both Shia and Sunni terror groups (including AQ), he also work(ed) closely with the USIC for many, many years and was an active donor to many political campaigns. Bin Talal was confined, fined, and tortured for days by MBS in 2017 for these crimes. 

 

He has a serious ax to grind with both MBS and Trump. Khshoggi was one of his mouthpieces in KSA (and the west). 

 

This is spook on spook crime - not an innocent journalist getting whacked. You just won't hear it reported that way. 

 

 

As a writer (even in fiction) my entire job depends on freedom of expression and the press, so I'm sensitive to it. But Trump's words don't bother me because I've heard them in context. He's never referred to the press corps or the press as an enemy of the people. He very clearly defines a subset of the press that intentionally misleads the public (in stories just like this) to cover up the sins of spooks and nation states across the world.

 

To me, that's a very clear distinction - but it's intentionally conflated by the press because "Orange man bad". 

 

Stop perpetuating myths.  Bin Talal never "owned" Citicorp.  He had a large passive stake in the bank after one of its many missteps.

[Deranged Rhino]

43 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Stop perpetuating myths.  Bin Talal never "owned" Citicorp.  He had a large passive stake in the bank after one of its many missteps.

 

Bin Talal was heavily invested and the major shareowner of major financial institutions, media conglomerates, and Silicon Valley tech companies for decades- while being heavily involved in financing political campaigns on both sides of the aisle. He was one of the richest men in the world. 

 

He did all that while also financing both Sunni and Shia terror cells around the region.

 

Bin Talal is not just a bad guy, he's the worst kind of guy you could hope to meet. Yet he was given a pass for years due to his investments and political connections. Don't try to pretend he wasn't a major player in finance, tech, and media. 

[3rdnlng]

Trump actually has a policy in the Middle East which includes an alliance with Israel, Jordan, Egypt, UAE and Saudi Arabia. This alliance basically opposes Iran and its nuclear ambitions and support of terrorism, not only in the ME but around the world. Saudi Arabia is a key part of that alliance. A murder happened in the Saudi embassy in Turkey. From all accounts it was horrific and caused and known about beforehand by the upper echelons of the Saudi government. With that said, a thousand people are killed or murdered every day in that area of the world. Should we as a country denounce it? Sure. Should we upset our alliance that includes Saudi Arabia over this? Hell no. The world's a tough place and adhering to well thought out policies is in our interest as a country. Trump has responded to this in the proper way. He's spoken out about and put sanctions on several Saudi citizens. As far as upsetting our alliance, he's not doing a damn thing. That's good.

 

Before Trump we were lacking any coherent policy. All  Obama did was draw red lines in the sand and ignore them while supplying our enemies with weapons. He "droned" indiscrimately and paid ransom money to our enemies. All the people getting their panties in a wad over the killing are about 10 years too late.

[GG]

4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Bin Talal was heavily invested and the major shareowner of major financial institutions, media conglomerates, and Silicon Valley tech companies for decades- while being heavily involved in financing political campaigns on both sides of the aisle. He was one of the richest men in the world. 

 

He did all that while also financing both Sunni and Shia terror cells around the region.

 

Bin Talal is not just a bad guy, he's the worst kind of guy you could hope to meet. Yet he was given a pass for years due to his investments and political connections. Don't try to pretend he wasn't a major player in finance, tech, and media. 

There's a world of difference between being one of the world's biggest dumb money investors and the Fed bailing out Citibank to hep Bin Talal.

[Deranged Rhino]

3 minutes ago, GG said:

There's a world of difference between being one of the world's biggest dumb money investors and the Fed bailing out Citibank to hep Bin Talal.

?

 

I didn't make the last point. It's irrelevant to the discussion. The point is Bin Talal and his money was at the forefront of several major industries in the west - including banks, social media, and entertainment - all the while he was cozying up to western politicians and the IC AND funding terrorism on all sides. 

 

He was and continues to be given a pass by the same media establishment and western politicians he used to own. 

 

That those media outlets and politicians are the ones most upset about this murder is telling. This isn't about a dead spook. It's about Bin Talal v MBS. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Deranged Rhino

[GG]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

?

 

I didn't make the last point. It's irrelevant to the discussion. The point is Bin Talal and his money was at the forefront of several major industries in the west - including banks, social media, and entertainment - all the while he was cozying up to western politicians and the IC AND funding terrorism on all sides. 

 

He he was and continues to be given a pass by the same media establishment and western politicians he used to own. 

 

That those media outlets and politicians are the ones most upset about this murder is telling. This isn't about a dead spook. It's about Bin Talal v MBS. 

 

You most certainly did in prior discussions.

 

 

[Witless Bills Fan]

A grown up assessment of this story

 

http://thefederalist.com/2018/11/21/dc-establishment-gets-almost-everything-wrong-trumps-saudi-posture/

 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 hour ago, GG said:

You most certainly did in prior discussions.

 

It's irrelevant to the discussion of Bin Talal v MBS and how Khashoggi ties in. It's also sidestepping the larger point: Bin Talal, a truly evil man (not a word I use lightly), owned politicians, Silicon Valley, and large swaths of the financial sector and entertainment sector for many years. He nurtured Obama's political career from the start, for example. And because of these compromising connections, he was given a free pass to finance terror around the globe by those very same politicians, media establishments, and tech companies. 

 

They're still covering for him. His affluence and influence is undeniable - as are his connections to terror financing, human trafficking, and all manner of evil. 

 

You scoff (and I get it) when I bring up a cabal and ask for names. Bin Talal is one such name. He's a threat - not to this country but to humanity, and he's treated with kid gloves by the WaPo, NYTs, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, Obama, Bush, and the Clintons... because he owns them. 

[Deranged Rhino]

(yet again we were well ahead of the curve re: the fiance story)

 

[GoBills808]

My guess is that as time goes on it's going to be increasingly hard to sell MbS as a reformist, or even an ally. His military intervention in Yemen has exacerbated the civil war and contributed to the ongoing humanitarian crisis (not to mention entrench AQ/ISIS elements), his domestic platform wrt human rights issues is oxymoronic, and state-sanctioned assassinations of dissidents (however complicated and/or condoned by the US) is not a responsible method of governance. 

 

I believe he's vastly overplaying his hand. Those military contracts the president speaks of aren't going anywhere, that's entrenched policy and the lifeblood of the House of Saud. Reducing oil production to the US is an empty threat imo as it would directly contradict their ability to contain Iran via sanctions...Iranian oil gets more attractive as Saudi production decreases. 

[Nanker]

Remember, MBS had Alwaleed Bin Talal arrested in his  sweeping takeover of the Saudi Kingdom last year. He had to pay up $$$Billions to gain his release. I recall at the time that Gregg didn’t think he had that much cash and that he would likely end up dead or worse. 

 

Maybe ABT has a friend in Erdogan. They probably have ties that go back to the Ottoman Empire. 

[GoBills808]

3 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Remember, MBS had Alwaleed Bin Talal arrested in his  sweeping takeover of the Saudi Kingdom last year. He had to pay up $$$Billions to gain his release. I recall at the time that Gregg didn’t think he had that much cash and that he would likely end up dead or worse. 

 

Maybe ABT has a friend in Erdogan. They probably have ties that go back to the Ottoman Empire. 

Tough to make that connection resonate w/ DR's theory now that Erdogan has publicly accused Soros of inciting division in Turkey. The points don't match up.

[Deranged Rhino]

6 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

My guess is that as time goes on it's going to be increasingly hard to sell MbS as a reformist, or even an ally. His military intervention in Yemen has exacerbated the civil war and contributed to the ongoing humanitarian crisis (not to mention entrench AQ/ISIS elements), his domestic platform wrt human rights issues is oxymoronic, and state-sanctioned assassinations of dissidents (however complicated and/or condoned by the US) is not a responsible method of governance. 

 

I believe he's vastly overplaying his hand. Those military contracts the president speaks of aren't going anywhere, that's entrenched policy and the lifeblood of the House of Saud. Reducing oil production to the US is an empty threat imo as it would directly contradict their ability to contain Iran via sanctions...Iranian oil gets more attractive as Saudi production decreases. 

 

Yemen is an Iranian proxy war. MBS didn't start it, and the efforts of the GCC/West over the past two years in terms of hitting Hamas and Hezbollah in multiple theaters at once has brought Iran to the brink of losing in Yemen. 

 

With or without MBS, Yemen will not be fixed until Iran/Hezbollah backs off. That won't happen until the Mullahs are gone... and that's coming.

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

Tough to make that connection resonate w/ DR's theory now that Erdogan has publicly accused Soros of inciting division in Turkey. The points don't match up.

 

The cabal is not monolithic. They fight with each other often, and openly (through proxies). The only thing they agree on is the desire to remain in the shadows rather than on the front page. 

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Yemen is an Iranian proxy war. MBS didn't start it, and the efforts of the GCC/West over the past two years in terms of hitting Hamas and Hezbollah in multiple theaters at once has brought Iran to the brink of losing in Yemen. 

 

With or without MBS, Yemen will not be fixed until Iran/Hezbollah backs off. That won't happen until the Mullahs are gone... and that's coming.

I don't dispute that. It was more a call to question his capacity as a military policymaker/strategist (I believe he was Minister of Defense at the time they decided to get involved?)...motivations aside, wouldn't you conclude Saudi intervention in Yemen has not had the desired effect?

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

I don't dispute that. It was more a call to question his capacity as a military policymaker/strategist (I believe he was Minister of Defense at the time they decided to get involved?)...motivations aside, wouldn't you conclude Saudi intervention in Yemen has not had the desired effect?

 

Oh, I'm no fan of what's been happening in Yemen. Spilled a lot of digital ink here bashing the Saudis for their waging of that war in 2015-2016. But there's been a marked change in tactics, and success since MBS took over in November of '17. The Houthis have been on the run (and are talking peace for the first time) because their funding from Iran has dried up as the Iranian economy has plummeted. 

 

War's terrible. Proxy wars even more so because they're brutal for the civilian populations. But removing MBS only strengthens the Mullah's hold on power in Iran, and would allow them to reestablish supply lines and funding into Yemen, further exacerbating the war. 

 

MBS is trying to end not just one war, but several. All at once. He's not a reformer for how he wages war, he's a reformer for how he's changing and opening the Saudi culture to the west. 

 

If you want to end the war in Yemen, and I think we both do, we need to focus on ousting the Mullahs, not MBS. 

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Oh, I'm no fan of what's been happening in Yemen. Spilled a lot of digital ink here bashing the Saudis for their waging of that war in 2015-2016. But there's been a marked change in tactics, and success since MBS took over in November of '17. The Houthis have been on the run (and are talking peace for the first time) because their funding from Iran has dried up as the Iranian economy has plummeted. 

 

War's terrible. Proxy wars even more so because they're brutal for the civilian populations. But removing MBS only strengthens the Mullah's hold on power in Iran, and would allow them to reestablish supply lines and funding into Yemen, further exacerbating the war. 

 

MBS is trying to end not just one war, but several. All at once. He's not a reformer for how he wages war, he's a reformer for how he's changing and opening the Saudi culture to the west. 

 

If you want to end the war in Yemen, and I think we both do, we need to focus on ousting the Mullahs, not MBS. 

I disagree with you fundamentally on MbS and his motivations but there's a ton of common ground between us about how violence and the threat of violence is used politically. It's one of the reasons I jumped in this thread. 

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

I disagree with you fundamentally on MbS and his motivations but there's a ton of common ground between us about how violence and the threat of violence is used politically. It's one of the reasons I jumped in this thread. 

 

 

 

Topics like this are so complex and divisive that disagreements are to be expected. I try to learn as much as I can from other people's perspectives, to better inform my own, so I'm never afraid of that. 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[GoBills808]

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

This statement is a poignant example of the collective schizophrenia our country is suffering from due to hyper-partisanship.

 

It's 100% true. It's also pretty transparent attempt to justify the long-standing brutality of US foreign policy through equivocation. And people eat it up.

 

The continuation of a decades old campaign of using military and quasimilitary assets to 'manage' our interests abroad deserves a MUCH better lens than which side of the aisle you tend to agree with.

[Deranged Rhino]

5 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

This statement is a poignant example of the collective schizophrenia our country is suffering from due to hyper-partisanship.

 

It's 100% true. It's also pretty transparent attempt to justify the long-standing brutality of US foreign policy through equivocation. And people eat it up.

 

The continuation of a decades old campaign of using military and quasimilitary assets to 'manage' our interests abroad deserves a MUCH better lens than which side of the aisle you tend to agree with.

 

Agreed for the most part - and it's posts like this that make me want to suggest you take an honest look at the changes to US foreign policy since Trump took over despite your feelings about the man. He ran on changing precisely that long standing, bipartisan agenda. And now he's made tremendous strides to achieve what he campaigned on. It's why he's such a threat to both sides and the media. It's why the coverage is 94% negative and the comparisons to Hitler began on day one (despite no evidence of his policies/leadership being in any way fascist or repressive to civil rights/liberties). America First isn't isolationist, it isn't even nationalist as much as it is about changing that exact agenda.

 

Really smart men and women who spent their lives fighting for this country realize the truth of what you said above - and it's why they are working with Trump to change it despite the tremendous risk. The last president who so blatantly attempted to buck this bipartisan agenda wound up shot in Dallas.