Cocked and Loaded on Behalf of the Saudis

[Derec]

No, you're going to attack Iran for being supportive to the Yemenis who attacked an oil refinery in Saudi Arabia in retaliation for sustained Saudi attacks on Yemen.

Quite the opposite. It is Iran that attacked Yemen using their subsidiary the Houthis who deposed the internationally recognized government. It is KSA that supports the legitimate government of Yemen.
Of course, the only reason Iran wants to control Yemen is that they want a foothold in the Arabian peninsula. They have been waging a low-level war against KSA for decades, usually using subsidiaries like Hezbollah.

The Saudis are royally (literally) pissed off that they haven't been able to crush the Houthi/Zaidi movement like a bug, and they blame Iran (probably justly - the Iranians won't go to war to support the Zaidis, but they will provide assistance to them in order to prevent the Wahhabis from gaining any further strength on the Arabian peninsula).

First off, Houthis are a wholly owned subsidiary of the IRGC. Second, it is the Houthis that want to take over Yemen - they want to do to Yemen what they tried to do (and partially succeeded in doing) in Lebanon via Hezbollah.

The Saudis don't have the clout to go to war with Iran over this petty factional squabble - but they would dearly love to get the USA to do it for them.

Iranians are getting bolder and bolder and just like Nazi Germany they will be more difficult to stop the more we hesitate.

That the USA should absolutely not get into a dispute between two equally crazy and extreme Islamic sects,

If KSA falls, the successor will be likely something akin to IS.
If the Islamic regime in Iran falls, there is a chance of a restoration of the more liberal pre-revolutionary Iran.
KSA is also an ally, while Iranian regime is an enemy which threatens us and our allies (not just KSA but specifically also Israel).
There shouldn't be any question that we need to support KSA here.

 

[bilby]

Quite the opposite. It is Iran that attacked Yemen using their subsidiary the Houthis who deposed the internationally recognized government. It is KSA that supports the legitimate government of Yemen.
Of course, the only reason Iran wants to control Yemen is that they want a foothold in the Arabian peninsula. They have been waging a low-level war against KSA for decades, usually using subsidiaries like Hezbollah.


First off, Houthis are a wholly owned subsidiary of the IRGC. Second, it is the Houthis that want to take over Yemen - they want to do to Yemen what they tried to do (and partially succeeded in doing) in Lebanon via Hezbollah.

The Saudis don't have the clout to go to war with Iran over this petty factional squabble - but they would dearly love to get the USA to do it for them.

Iranians are getting bolder and bolder and just like Nazi Germany they will be more difficult to stop the more we hesitate.

That the USA should absolutely not get into a dispute between two equally crazy and extreme Islamic sects,

If KSA falls, the successor will be likely something akin to IS.
If the Islamic regime in Iran falls, there is a chance of a restoration of the more liberal pre-revolutionary Iran.
KSA is also an ally, while Iranian regime is an enemy which threatens us and our allies (not just KSA but specifically also Israel).
There shouldn't be any question that we need to support KSA here.

With allies like KSA, you don't need enemies.

I mean, literally. Your "allies" are the only foreign nation to successfully attack a US city since WWII. They killed thousands, attacked two of your most important cities, including your national capital, and you still want to fight a war on their behalf?

Americans are nuts.

 

[ZiprHead]

I think if I was in the military, I'd rather face a courts martial than fight for KSA.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

How many empty threats of war is Trump going to make before people just stop paying attention to him?

 

[barbos]

Quite the opposite. It is Iran that attacked Yemen using their subsidiary the Houthis who deposed the internationally recognized government. It is KSA that supports the legitimate government of Yemen.

Sorry, "internationally recognized government" ran away and as "Yanukovich vs. protesters" precedent shows they are no longer recognized.

 

[Patooka]

Never thought I'd see Derec defending the bastion of everything that is wrong with Islam. Personally, I think "both sides" are equally fucked in this particular dispute.

 

[Jarhyn]

Never thought I'd see Derec defending the bastion of everything that is wrong with Islam. Personally, I think "both sides" are equally fucked in this particular dispute.

You forgot that SA, the government behind funding 9/11, buys American guns (and a lot of them), and sells America oil (and a lot of it), therefore they can do no wrong.

Instead, look at Iran, Iraq Palestine. Pay no attention to the Saudi Prince behind the curtain.

 

[Patooka]

Never thought I'd see Derec defending the bastion of everything that is wrong with Islam. Personally, I think "both sides" are equally fucked in this particular dispute.

You forgot that SA, the government behind funding 9/11, buys American guns (and a lot of them), and sells America oil (and a lot of it), therefore they can do no wrong.

Instead, look at Iran, Iraq Palestine. Pay no attention to the Saudi Prince behind the curtain.

That's kinda my point. Saudi Arabia is despised by every muslim I know. I understand that is anecdotal, but SA is pretty much a shithole country. And everything wrong with it is what people like Derec and others say is also what is fundamentally wrong with Islam. And yet they are the goodies and Iran is the baddies? I'm pretty confused.

 

[James Brown]

"We need to fight them over there so that they don't immigrate here."

Seen on a FoxNews comment.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

"We need to fight them over there so that they don't immigrate here."

Seen on a FoxNews comment.

Maybe I'm missing something but SA would probably allow Trump and Co. to build towers in the kingdom, and that's good for America. Plus we get to sell them lots of bombs and spend lots of money defending them militarily. Plus we get to spend lots more money making war on their enemies.

Looks like a win, win, win, win, win for all the right-wingers out there. You ain't no kinda right-winger if you ain't got enemies.

 

[Gun Nut]

"We need to fight them over there so that they don't immigrate here."

Seen on a FoxNews comment.

Maybe I'm missing something but SA would probably allow Trump and Co. to build towers in the kingdom, and that's good for America. Plus we get to sell them lots of bombs and spend lots of money defending them militarily. Plus we get to spend lots more money making war on their enemies.

Looks like a win, win, win, win, win for all the right-wingers out there. You ain't no kinda right-winger if you ain't got enemies.

The US can make FAR, FAR more money rounding up all the black and brown people in the country and selling them individually as slaves to SA. So... that's an even better idea, according to your logic.

 

[Derec]

That's kinda my point. Saudi Arabia is despised by every muslim I know.

Are "Muslims you know" Shiites and Muslim Brothers?

I understand that is anecdotal, but SA is pretty much a shithole country.

In many aspects yes, in others no. And MbS has been instituting some reforms. Pity that he is in the international dog house just because he had a propagandist for the Muslim Brotherhood killed.

In truth, Khashoggi never had much time for western-style pluralistic democracy. In the 1970s he joined the Muslim Brotherhood, which exists to rid the Islamic world of western influence. He was a political Islamist until the end, recently praising the Muslim Brotherhood in the Washington Post. He championed the ‘moderate’ Islamist opposition in Syria, whose crimes against humanity are a matter of record. Khashoggi frequently sugarcoated his Islamist beliefs with constant references to freedom and democracy. But he never hid that he was in favour of a Muslim Brotherhood arc throughout the Middle East. His recurring plea to bin Salman in his columns was to embrace not western-style democracy, but the rise of political Islam which the Arab Spring had inadvertently given rise to. For Khashoggi, secularism was the enemy.

And everything wrong with it is what people like Derec and others say is also what is fundamentally wrong with Islam.

To a great extent this is true. But the Saudi government is more moderate than Arabia would be if the monarchy were overthrown. And for the last few decades it has been playing nice with the West, even with Israel.

And yet they are the goodies and Iran is the baddies? I'm pretty confused.

They are certainly not "goodies", but the weird beards running Iran are certainly "baddies".

 

[Derec]

Maybe I'm missing something but SA would probably allow Trump and Co. to build towers in the kingdom, and that's good for America.

US is already involved in building towers in KSA. For example in the Jeddah Tower project.

Plus we get to sell them lots of bombs and spend lots of money defending them militarily.

And selling weapons to our allies is wrong because?

In addition, Saudis spend a lot of money in US (as well as in Europe) on things other than weapons.

Plus we get to spend lots more money making war on their enemies.

Looks like a win, win, win, win, win for all the right-wingers out there. You ain't no kinda right-winger if you ain't got enemies.

And left-wingers have no enemies?

 

[Derec]

You forgot that SA, the government behind funding 9/11,

It was Saudi individuals who were involved in 9/11, not the government.

buys American guns (and a lot of them),

Yes. We make bank. Would you rather they bought weapons from Russia? Putin would be very happy to sell to them.

and sells America oil (and a lot of it),

Not really that much. Maybe 1 mbbl/d.
KSA does, however, have huge reserves, export a lot of oil in total, and is the swing producer, i.e. they have (at least when they are not attacked by Iran) significant swing capacity. That makes them important geopolitically.

therefore they can do no wrong.

They can do, and actually do, plenty wrong. But you don't have to be friends with all your allies.

Instead, look at Iran, Iraq Palestine. Pay no attention to the Saudi Prince behind the curtain.

You think the attack was a Sender Gleiwitz type of thing? Really?

 

[Derec]

Sorry, "internationally recognized government" ran away and as "Yanukovich vs. protesters" precedent shows they are no longer recognized.

And that makes it ok that a foreign power (and one openly hostile to US and our allies) establish a sort of Vichy government?

 

[Derec]

Never thought I'd see Derec defending the bastion of everything that is wrong with Islam. Personally, I think "both sides" are equally fucked in this particular dispute.

They are the lesser of two evils for reasons I have expounded in other replies.

 

[Derec]

I think if I was in the military, I'd rather face a courts martial than fight for KSA.

You would not be "fighting for KSA", you'd be fighting for national interests of the US, which in this case means defending KSA from Iranian aggression.

 

[bilby]

I think if I was in the military, I'd rather face a courts martial than fight for KSA.

You would not be "fighting for KSA", you'd be fighting for national interests of the US, which in this case means defending KSA from Iranian aggression.

There's no Iranian aggression. There's just retaliation by Yemenis, against Saudis, using weapons purchased from the Yemenis' ally, Iran.

As a wise man once asked:

And selling weapons to our allies is wrong because?

 

[Derec]

There's no Iranian aggression. There's just retaliation by Yemenis, against Saudis, using weapons purchased from the Yemenis' ally, Iran.

1. It seems that the attack did not originate in Yemen, but in Iran.
Saudi oil field attack originated from Iran, used combination of cruise missiles and drones, officials say
U.S. Satellites Detected Iran Readying Weapons Ahead Of Saudi Strike, Officials Say
2. Even if it had originated in Yemen, Houthis are Iranian proxies who overran the Yemeni government with the aim of installing a puppet government. The Houthis are like Hezbollah, a wholly owned foreign subsidiary of the IRGC. Thus, Iran would still be responsible.

 

[bilby]

There's no Iranian aggression. There's just retaliation by Yemenis, against Saudis, using weapons purchased from the Yemenis' ally, Iran.

1. It seems that the attack did not originate in Yemen, but in Iran.
Saudi oil field attack originated from Iran, used combination of cruise missiles and drones, officials say
U.S. Satellites Detected Iran Readying Weapons Ahead Of Saudi Strike, Officials Say
2. Even if it had originated in Yemen, Houthis are Iranian proxies who overran the Yemeni government with the aim of installing a puppet government. The Houthis are like Hezbollah, a wholly owned foreign subsidiary of the IRGC. Thus, Iran would still be responsible.

I don't believe what the "officials say", now that they've had plenty of time to think up a spin that supports their objective of going to war with Iran.

And there's never been a revolutionary/terrorist/freedom fighter organisation in history that has been a wholly owned subsidiary of their sponsors. Much to the dismay of many such sponsors (including the USA) on many occasions.

So I don't believe your spin, either. It would be just as reasonable, and just as wrong, to say that the Saudis are a wholly owned subsidiary of the Pentagon.