Silicon Valley's Saudi Arabia Problem (nytimes.com) 297
An anonymous reader shares a report: Somewhere in the United States, someone is getting into an Uber en route to a WeWork co-working space. Their dog is with a walker whom they hired through the app Wag. They will eat a lunch delivered by DoorDash, while participating in several chat conversations on Slack. And, for all of it, they have an unlikely benefactor to thank: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Long before the dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi vanished, the kingdom has sought influence in the West -- perhaps intended, in part, to make us forget what it is. A medieval theocracy that still beheads by sword, doubling as a modern nation with malls (including a planned mall offering indoor skiing), Saudi Arabia has been called "an ISIS that made it." Remarkably, the country has avoided pariah status in the United States thanks to our thirst for oil, Riyadh's carefully cultivated ties with Washington, its big arms purchases, and the two countries' shared interest in counterterrorism. But lately the Saudis have been growing their circle of American enablers, pouring billions into Silicon Valley technology companies.
While an earlier generation of Saudi leaders, like Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, invested billions of dollars in blue-chip companies in the United States, the kingdom's new crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, has shifted Saudi Arabia's investment attention from Wall Street to Silicon Valley. Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund has become one of Silicon Valley's biggest swinging checkbooks, working mostly through a $100 billion fund raised by SoftBank (a Japanese company), which has swashbuckled its way through the technology industry, often taking multibillion-dollar stakes in promising companies. The Public Investment Fund put $45 billion into SoftBank's first Vision Fund, and Bloomberg recently reported that the Saudi fund would invest another $45 billion into SoftBank's second Vision Fund. SoftBank, with the help of that Saudi money, is now said to be the largest shareholder in Uber. It has also put significant money into a long list of start-ups that includes Wag, DoorDash, WeWork, Plenty, Cruise, Katerra, Nvidia and Slack. As the world fills up car tanks with gas and climate change worsens, Saudi Arabia reaps enormous profits -- and some of that money shows up in the bank accounts of fast-growing companies that love to talk about "making the world a better place."
While an earlier generation of Saudi leaders, like Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, invested billions of dollars in blue-chip companies in the United States, the kingdom's new crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, has shifted Saudi Arabia's investment attention from Wall Street to Silicon Valley. Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund has become one of Silicon Valley's biggest swinging checkbooks, working mostly through a $100 billion fund raised by SoftBank (a Japanese company), which has swashbuckled its way through the technology industry, often taking multibillion-dollar stakes in promising companies. The Public Investment Fund put $45 billion into SoftBank's first Vision Fund, and Bloomberg recently reported that the Saudi fund would invest another $45 billion into SoftBank's second Vision Fund. SoftBank, with the help of that Saudi money, is now said to be the largest shareholder in Uber. It has also put significant money into a long list of start-ups that includes Wag, DoorDash, WeWork, Plenty, Cruise, Katerra, Nvidia and Slack. As the world fills up car tanks with gas and climate change worsens, Saudi Arabia reaps enormous profits -- and some of that money shows up in the bank accounts of fast-growing companies that love to talk about "making the world a better place."
Don't take money from assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Next problem?
Re:Don't take money from assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't take money from assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's no "problem" (Score:5, Informative)
If you've ever worked with Silicon Valley types you'd know most of them will sell their mom for a buck. Nobody gives a shit where their next round comes from as long as it does come.
Re:There's no "problem" (Score:4, Interesting)
And that is the actual problem: Greed and no sense of responsibility to the rest of the species.
Re:There's no "problem" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You nicely describe the problem and why you are part of it. If there are too many like you, the whole species fails.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if they're using any of those apps, they're spending those bucks foolishly anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My only concern is that you'll change your mind and take over the world.
Re: There's no "problem" (Score:2)
It's precisely the only reason for their wealth.
Re: There's no "problem" (Score:2)
The overwhelming majority of them are actually poorer than I am.
Prediction (Score:5, Insightful)
Lots of talk, followed by some back room dealing. A compromise will be reached whereas the US and Europe can take some token action that Saudi Arabia will make strident statements against and will make some token responding gesture - neither of which will substantively impact each other.
The West is just too dependent on Saudi oil... plus they’re considered friendly to western interests. No one will have the will to really punish them.
Re:Prediction (Score:5, Insightful)
The reality is that they buy a lot from us to support their military and they hate Iran with a passion, which suits our interests fine. They're a shitty ally, but no one wants to rock the boat too much as the Middle East is unstable enough as is without countries collapsing and another ISIS-like entity trying to seize power.
Re: (Score:3)
What you fail to realise is that oil is a global commodity. Sure, you import more of it from Canada, but the price you pay is the price Saudi Arabia sets.
Re: (Score:2)
The US has enough oil to avoid buying from nasty petrostates. But Europe and Asia don't.
If you really want to see who has a Saudi problem (Score:2, Insightful)
take a look at how much influence the Saudis have bought in mainstream media outlets and academia. There's a reason the former will lie through their teeth about Israel even as Hamas claims armed combatants and live video shows armed terrorists with guns and high explosives, and latter is increasingly full of people who will openly violently attack jewish students just for existing while heaping praise on arab colonialism.
Re: (Score:2)
So it's Saudi Arabia's turn now? (Score:4, Insightful)
To get the Saddam treatment.
SA always had the same laws as the IS. Yet they were America's best friend in the region.
Because their leaders obeyed the USA.
Who here remembers when Saddam was America's best friend aka henchman in the region?
Suddenly he became "the new Hitler" literally over night. Only beause he stopped obeying, and attacked Quwait instead of Iran as he was told to, because he was tired of losing. That is literally all that changed. He already was an asshole before.
And why did he keep losing? Because Iran had the third or fourth largest military in the world.
And why was that?
Because Iran got the same treament before!
Does anyone remember, when *Iran* was the USA's best friend in the region? "As a stronghold against communism." (As if the Russian dictatorship wasn't a big enough enemy of communism themselves. Stretching out the "transition phase" ad infinitum.)
Then, the Iranians suffered so much under their US puppet dictator, that they fell for religion, and in their desperation, chose a religious nutjob. Which would be like the USA having a literal revolution, to install the WBC, just to get rid of Trump.
Bam, they were the new Hitlers.
Why do you think with recently taking Russia out lf the convenieg enemy figure closet again, suddenly they try to get along with Iran again, just when a new US-friendly leader jumps out of nowhere.
So now it's Saudi Arabia's turn. To be turned back into a desert wasteland.
Did they get too cocky? Or is it simply that China bough the oil instead and became their new oil best buddies, and now that the USA got more oil-independent, the old SA shit does not fly anymore?
Oh well... at least it will be the the USA's very first actual blow against terrorism. ;)
Which will come back to bite them, once the Russia scarecrow is all used up again, and they realize, that idiot TrumpObamaBush emptied the closet.
Re: (Score:2)
Which will come back to bite them, once the Russia scarecrow is all used up again, and they realize, that idiot TrumpObamaBush emptied the closet. ;)
Comrade, you've outdone yourself. Extra vodka serving tonight.
Re: (Score:3)
I actually grew up in the Eastern Block and this is simply something you were taught to think. The dictatorship of the communist party had nothing, except for lip service, to do with communism or even socialism. It was the bullshit they used to justify their dictatorship, just like Wahabism is the bullshit Saudi Kings use to justify their dictatorship and just like democracy is what the United States use to justify their fascism. But sure... go ahead think whatever you like. The Chinese will soon take over
Isis == Saudi Arabia without oil (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't really news for those who pay attention.
Re: (Score:2)
"Isis == Saudi Arabia without oil"
Not really. ISIS funded most of their operations by _selling oil_ from the lands they've controlled. Iran was buying some of it.
Re: (Score:2)
ISIS is also heavily funded by Saudi Arabia in both cash and transfer of weapons, of which I fully expect a large percentage of the latest 100b deal to funneled to ISIS.
PIF is dangerous (Score:3)
They way jerked the rag under Elon Musk shows they are not to be trusted. Tell him, "I am the final authority, I approve, let us do the deal at 419$", Elon, "what about 420?". "OK deal". The idiot tweeting prematurely was probably not part of the plan, just an additional unexpected bonus.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Still own 5%. And just granted Tesla the right to run wholly foreign owned stores and service centres in the country. And there's supposed to be a huge cleantech announcement on the 18th that many (not including me) are speculating has to do with Tesla.
Needless to say, this is now - not to put too fine a point on it - an uncomfortable situation for Tesla, and the numerous other Silicon Valley companies that find themselves in similar situations. It was always awkward to work with Saudi Arabia, but nobody
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I sure hope you are joking.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, what? How, exactly, did they jerk the rug out from under Elon Musk?
Re: (Score:2)
Right now I don't care about Elon.
Some low level concern about Tesla. But on the long run, Elon will for ever be remembered for unleashing the genie out of the bottle. He may or may not benefit from the windfall that is going to generate. Heck, even Tesla might not get a significant chunk of that gold strike. But, the fact remains, the genie is out and the ICEV is a dead thing walking. Chicken that had its head c
Re: (Score:2)
It does not need rack and pinion steering. Differential rotation can steer the car at any speed and extremely tight turn radius. Even zero turn radius!
It does not need disk brakes. The motors can brake the car all the way to stand still, and can even hold it there, even on inclines with an active battery. It would need just a parking brake to hold it when the main computer is shut down.
No steering, no brakes. So no hydraulics! No engine oil. No transmissio
Re: (Score:2)
I have read some people doing exactly that - using the motors as brakes in a four electric motor dump truck. They said that it is very difficult to do right and can often lead to situations where the truck goes back and forth just a little instead of standing perfectly still, making drivers nauseous.
Re: (Score:2)
My BMW X3 (ICEV) also has automatic parking brakes. It quite easy to implement.
Re: (Score:2)
There is an enthusiast, Tesla fan who is putting 1000 hp motors in each wheel, built into the hub. ICE is dead.
Tesla and the Saudis (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I keep asking this on these kind of threads (Score:4, Interesting)
This keeps happening too. Paul Ryan has repeatedly called to privatize Medicare for anyone under 55 (being careful not to risk votes of current seniors). Net Neutrality is dead. There's a serious challenge to the Affordable Care Acts protection of pre-existing conditions which I know many
So is anyone going to drastically change who their vote for, or start voting consistently when they didn't bother in the past? Is this or anything else above enough to change voting behavior?
Re: (Score:3)
People wont' change much. They will vote against their own interests as long as they think their candidate is on their side. If their top concern is getting rid of abortion then they won't care if their candidate strips away other freedoms at the same time, and if their top concern is protecting their domestic job then they won't care if the economy suffers. The average voter doesn't like complexity and isn't thinking about complex trade-offs, so instead thinks in very simple terms such as "my guy versus
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting question ... it there any reason to believe that HRC or anyone else in that seat would *do* any different? We know HRC was tight with Saudi and knew Saudi was sending the weapons the were buying (under here okay as US Sec Of State) to support ISIS in Syria. We know Obama was tight with Saudi, we know the Bushes were all best fiends with the Saudi and investment partners with the 'bin Laden' family.
So what new crazy outsider do you image sitting the the hot seat will do it differently?
IMO there i
extremely obvious things for 500, Alex (Score:2)
Ignoring all the purple prose (what's the agenda there?), a thinking person really ought to come up short at the phrase "unlikely benefactor". Hard short.
Perhaps I have a superior education, but I would have filed this under: I'll take extremely obvious things for 500, Alex. Consider: one of the largest nest eggs in human history recently celebrated their golden gooses 65th birthday party. Certainly not dead yet, but unmistakably slowing down. Early-bird dinner discounts. That kind of thing.
Optimistically
Magic money tree (Score:2)
Poor Submission (Score:3)
The article selection is rather poor and simplistic. The relationship between Western Governments and the Saudi's goes back now some 100 years to the founding of Saudi Arabia and is much, much more complex than described involving two world wars and the later discovery of oil.
Saudi money, both from government and private sources, has been poured into Western Economies and businesses for decades. When I worked there in the early 90's, the owner of the business I worked for, a long-established import company, had his personal financial assets invested in the UK and the US and his children educated overseas. He understood that he only operated in business while he was on the right side of the ruling family and ensured that if it all went pear-shaped he would be financially secure in London for example. And he was just one of many, many businessmen who did the same thing.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:2)
Typically there is a jury involved if death by volts in the USA
Re: (Score:2)
the beheaded had a trial too
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:5, Informative)
the beheaded had a trial too
Wasn't the case for Princess Mishaal bint Fahd
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:2)
That's speculation, with little evidence other than - ironically - her confession.
maybe if jury duty payed more it whould not suck (Score:3)
maybe if jury duty payed more it would not suck.
Try full min wage + free meal + full IRS mileage + parking (or full travel costed covered)
The last time I had it the pay just really only coved the public transport costs to get there.
Re: maybe if jury duty payed more it whould not su (Score:2)
Maybe you should talk to your employer about their civic duty. My employer - like many - pays me my full salary during jury duty.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:4, Insightful)
Comparing the US judicial system to the SA Sharia system is like comparing apples to nuclear warheads. Your false equivalency is a prime example of the type of bullshit that has empowered the mob rule. And the mob seems incapable of understanding that their mindless sloganeering, over the top hyperbole, and general idiocy will draw a response just as mindless by those on the other side. If you are incapable of being honest in your criticisms then you would be better off shutting the hell up.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:5, Interesting)
Juries are easily swayed by expensive lawyers.
Perhaps even more frequently by crooked prosecutors?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Let's not pretend. (Score:2)
While I agree beheading isn't necessarily more barbaric than hanging when done right, any execution can be botched, and a botched beheading is way worse than a botched hanging. We (USA) almost never use firing squad outside the military (it's available by choice in some states, but no state forces execution by firing squad). One reason is that it relies on humans doing human things, like making mistakes. The electric chair, lethal injection, and the gas chamber (which we also don't use much anymore) all tak
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Saudi Arabia uses Sharia Law, and the "jury" consists of educated clerics who are far less likely to be sway by appeals to emotion.
Wow you managed to find something worse than a jury. "appeal to emotion" is pretty much the definition of religion.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:5, Insightful)
Can you even imagine America executing a Trump or Clinton?
Prior to 10 to 15 years ago, no. But at the rate things have been going, I can see it happening in the next 5 to 10 years. The wing nuts have been getting ever crazier and have gotten very efficient at stirring up more people than I would have ever thought possible. The media has also gotten very good at giving the masses just enough information to scare the shit out of them, but not enough to make an informed decision. Even the weather channel hypes anything they can.
Re: (Score:2)
If they always return a guilty verdict that would be 100% compatible with not being "sway[sic] by appeals to emotion".
It doesn't exactly sound just and fair, though.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:4, Insightful)
Saudi Arabia uses Sharia Law, and the "jury" consists of educated clerics who are far less likely to be sway by appeals to emotion. Several members of the royal family have been beheaded.
As long as you don't mind issues of religion/honor/etc having a much higher priority than whether the accused is in fact guilty of the charge, yeah it's great.
Why do so many people think that if something is bad, anything different must be inherently better? It's like we've collectively forgotten that something bad can always be made even worse.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the clerics apply the laws rationally and fairly. The problem is what the laws are in the first place.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:2)
I imagine they are about as fair as a typical United States judge. There are probably bad apples, but the big concern is without juries-of-peers, the law is intrinsically skewed towards the powerful class, because only the powerful judge the law.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:2)
Foolish people, being born into corrupt societies.
Re:Who murders more of its own? (Score:5, Informative)
The US gives the death penalty for murder and worse.
Saudi Arabia gives the death penalty (or tries to) for speaking out:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/saudi-arabia-seeks-unprecedented-death-penalty-woman-activist-n902771
They also apply the death penalty for things that aren't even crimes in civilized countries, like sodomy, blashpemy and witchcraft:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Saudi_Arabia#Other_offences
Also, the US is a Democracy, not a theocracy.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Also, the US is a Democracy, not a theocracy.
Yet. The U.S. is not yet a theocracy. However, based on their actions, Republicans, and their Evangelical Judases, are working very had to change that.
Re:Who murders more of its own? (Score:5, Insightful)
*sigh* And this in a time when one doesn't even have to go outside to get information and learn things.
USA have a variant of representative democracy where people elect leaders which in term can elect others (current example: supreme court judges). And that is one type of democracy. You may be thinking of direct democracy where people directly vote for different alternatives, or more likely of some variant of an anarchy (the political use of the word).
But really spend some hours, search and learn. It's interesting.
Re:Who murders more of its own? (Score:4, Insightful)
The latter is mob rule and tyranny of the majority.
Meanwhile here we are suffering tyranny of the minority, ala Trump.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It is not just Trump and his merry band of tax cheats. The tyranny is supported hook, line, and sold soul by the Evangelicals. They are the U.S.'s Taliban. They are just as mindlessly religious in their intolerance and given half a chance, they'd be happy to lock up anyone who doesn't parrot their beliefs. The U.S. gets all funky over the Chinese treatment of the Uighurs, but where is the outrage from the Evangelicals over the U.S.'s tent camp for children of illegal aliens? Where is the outrage over separa
Re: (Score:2)
Saudis dont ignore climate change. They support it enthusiastically.
Their current climate sucks. Any change would be an improvement.
All the models show that a warming planet will cause more rains in Saudi and green the desert.
It would be stupid for Saudis to be against climate change.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:2)
Saudis dont ignore climate change.
Right, it's their exports that ignore it.
Bad Arabian crude!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:2)
Re:Who murders more of its own? (Score:5, Informative)
Also, not all U.S. states have a death penalty, and of those that do, many don't use the electric chair. Wikipedia indicates that some states allow convicted criminals to choose it [wikipedia.org] if they so want, but that there aren't a lot of states actually using it. Most of it is by lethal injection, and I'd say that there are probably more humane ways than that to kill a person if you're going to do it. Nitrous oxide asphyxiation seems like a pretty painless way to me, and probably a hell of a lot less expensive.
Re:Who murders more of its own? (Score:5, Insightful)
A medieval theocracy that still beheads by sword
So the US is a medieval theocracy that murders with volts?
I believe that there are three different claims being made in the statement:
Saudi Arabia is a theocracy
Saudi Arabia is medieval
Saudi Arabia uses "beheading by sword" as a method of capital punishment
I don't see a claim that "beheading by sword" makes Saudi Arabia a medieval theocracy, so it does not logically follow that the United States would be a medieval theocracy that "murders with volts".
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Saudi_Arabia [wikipedia.org] Saudi Arabia is a theocracy. Depending upon one's point of view, there are aspects of Saudi Arabian society that appear to not have progressed beyond what Europe practiced in the European medieval period. Saudi Arabia does use beheading as a method of capital punishment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Saudi_Arabia [wikipedia.org].
So the claim that "Saudi Arabia is a medieval theocracy that still beheads by sword" seems to me to be based on a set of independent facts. I don't see evidence of a claim that the manner of execution determines whether a nation-state is a medieval theocracy.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Go there and attempt to set up a Church. See how far that gets you.
Pardon? I don't think you would get too far if you were setting up a Christian church. Setting up a mosque, on the other hand, would probably work (as long as it was the right sort of mosque).
Re:Who murders more of its own? (Score:4, Informative)
Whataboutism is a propaganda technique first used by the Soviet Union, in its dealings with the Western world.[1] When Cold War criticisms were levelled at the Soviet Union, the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world.[2][3] It represents a case of tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy),[4] a logical fallacy that attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:4, Insightful)
that the accusation of whataboutism is itself a form of tu quoque fallacy, as it dismisses criticisms of one's own behavior to focus instead on the actions of another, thus creating a double standard. Those who use whataboutism are not necessarily engaging in an empty or cynical deflection of responsibility: whataboutism can be a useful tool to expose contradictions, double standards, and hypocrisy.[126][127]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Re: (Score:2)
This. Can't upvote.
We're through the looking glass people (Score:2)
Anonymous Coward, am your father’s brother’s nephew’s cousin’s former roommate!
But I'll make it simpler. A straw man is a straw man. Anything used to distract from the central point. The central point here is that Saudi Arabia is a brutal regime that cannot survive on it's own merits and as such uses violence and murder to retain power. Rather than
Re: (Score:2)
A double standard might be unfair or immoral, but it's not a logical fallacy.
Whataboutism seeks to prevent discussion of X, by interrupting with accusations of Y any time X is mentioned.
There should be plenty of time to discuss both X and Y. What's incompatible with logical argumentation is seeking to prevent discussion of X altogether.
Re: Who murders more of its own? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
whataboutism can be a useful tool to expose contradictions, double standards, and hypocrisy.
Whataboutism is nothing more than a universal tool rationalize bad behavior.
If I've done something wrong, address that issue with me. If you've done something wrong, I'll address it with you. Those two actions are orthogonal. One doesn't affect the other. One doesn't justify the other. Hypocrisy doesn't make bad behavior good. Correct yourself, and SEPARATELY, pursue correcting the action of others.
The favorite Whataboutism today in the US is "what about the Clintons" or "what about Obama". You know what? R
Re: (Score:2)
You really have to be ignorant if you think that is some recent invention. ... Oh, it's DNS-and-BIND. Yeah, as I wrote: really ignorant.
Re: (Score:2)
Whataboutism is a propaganda technique first used by the Soviet Union, in its dealings with the Western world.
I really, really doubt that Whataboutism was first used by Soviet Union.
Re: (Score:2)
No but that's still whataboutism (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, we've got our share of problems, but that doesn't make anything the Saudis do any better. If you want to find a fault in us it's that we continue to sell them weapons and help them bomb schools in Yemen...
Re: (Score:2)
>A medieval theocracy that still beheads by sword
So the US is a medieval theocracy that murders with volts?
Does the manner of execution determine whether or not you are a medieval theocracy?
The subject of your message is "Who murders more of its own?". Yet you have completely neglected to address the issue instead choosing to focus entirely on loaded language used by the author.
Per capita US performs about 1.4% percent of the executions conducted by KSA.
Re: (Score:2)
Does the manner of execution determine whether or not you are a medieval theocracy?
No. Saudi Arabia is a medieval theocracy. Saudi Arabia uses beheading in capital punishment.
Correlation is not causation.
Re: (Score:2)
The things you can be executed for is a good indication of the theocracy part.
The method determines whether it's medieval or not. Modern theocracies use electricity or chemicals to do the job.
Re:Who murders more of its own? (Score:4, Insightful)
We are neither medieval or a theocracy.
If you aren't, it's not for a lack of desire by certain influential portions of the population.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Give Trump another term and we will be.
Mac
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I never understood why so many people support, visit, and defend that country
The food's quite good.
Re: (Score:2)
I never understood why so many people support, visit, and defend that country
Really? Do you understand how car engines work?
Hint: They aren't powered by the battery.
Re: Can't wait... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.
And 100% of the perpetrators of the OKC bombing were Americans. So were 100% of successful US President assassins. Are we supposed to hate all Serbians because 1 Serbian started WW1?
Re: (Score:2)
Given the British only entered the war to protect the sovereignty of Belgium from an unwarranted German attack I think you're talking nonsense.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.
The hijackers were people that opposed the Saudi ruling family, and especially opposed America's alliance with KSA, and the presence of infidel American troops in the Arabian Peninsula.
Re:Oil (Score:5, Funny)
The US gets very little oil from the ME. We protect shipping routes mostly. Lefties still working from 1970s data.
We don't get much oil from Saudi Arabia, but they are an important counterweight to Iran. Iran is our enemy because ... umm, we need an enemy because ... well, we spend $610B a year on weapons and we need to justify that somehow.
Iran wants WAR [twimg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
They kidnapped US diplomats [wikipedia.org] the last time they had a chance, they blew up hundreds of US soldiers [wikipedia.org] last time they had a chance, they still make "Death to America [wikipedia.org] a common slogan. I think the burden is on them to show they are no longer the US's enemy.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same as 'pre-Snowden' and 'pre-wikileaks' dump of diplomatic cables.
Everyone who is dealing with Saudi knows they are an open enemy of the US, but until Turkey called foul and claimed to have evidence the world could play pretend.
Before wikileaks dumped the diplomatic cables *everyone* know about CryptoAG and that the US was listening in.... but embassy's could pretend and hope that it wasn't as bad ... or perhaps the the leaks were overblown, or ... but the cable dump removed all doubt and nobody