Senate clears way for $1 billion arms sale to Saudi, Obama vetoes Sept. 11 Saudi bill

[dunksby]

SMH @ people believing in this Rep vs Dem shit.

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.

"If you're serious about stopping the flow of extremist recruiting across this globe, then you have to be serious that the ... brand of Islam that is spread by Saudi Arabia all over the world, is part of the problem," Murphy said.

"This motion comes at a singularly unfortunate time and would serve to convince Saudi Arabia and all other observers that the United States does not live up to its commitments," Senator Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN11R2LU

President Barack Obama on Friday vetoed legislation allowing families of victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia, which could prompt Congress to overturn his decision with a rare veto override, the first of his presidency.

Obama said the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act would hurt U.S. national security and harm important alliances, while shifting crucial terrorism-related issues from policy officials into the hands of the courts.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKCN11T237

[ItsMillerTime]

SMH @ people believing in this Rep vs Dem shit.

yep. as long as we're fighting each other, shit at the top will never change

[knickballer]

The only difference between democrats and republicans is one party is more openly supportive of gays/abortion while the other party is a bit more supportive of some individual freedoms(guns).

But other than that their economic, foreign and domestic policy is all the same. They all sell out to the highest bidder. Both have a duty to give their financial donors(mainly corporations, NGO's, bankers, etc) a return on their investment.

We live in an age of distraction with the media, government and society trying to distract us from the truth.

[fiddy]

And people get offended when i say the US is a joke.

[Hawker]

If Obama is so concerned about refugees and xenophobia then why does he support selling arms to Saudi Arabia that creates more yemeni refugees?

[TheGreatDeraj]

Obama communicates with a pseudonym on crooked Hillary's illegal private server while lying to the public about it's existence, then they delete all of the emails and get the head of the DoJ,Loretta Lynch, and the head of the FBI, James Comey(both linked to Obama, Clinton, HSBC bank and the Clinton Foundation), to cover up their treasonous crimes destroying any faith and credibility that the public had in our justice institions.

These communications helped unleashed ISIS and arm radical islamic jihadist throughout the Middle East in order to overthrow regimes they don't like while accepting and laundering bribes from countries that benefited(Saudi Arabia) through that facade of a charity the Clinton Foundation.

Now radical Islam threatens the entire world world not only through direct jihad attacks, but also through passive jihad with the mass refugee migrations. All of this they call for gun control and open borders as they live in there private gated residence with armed bodyguards surrounding them while they slander hard working American citizens who want a safe, secure family, city and country.

Absolutely criminal and treasonous.

There is only one choice to restore America's respect and dignity across the World.

LOCK 'EM UP!

MAGA TRUMP 2016

[nightprowler10]

If Obama is so concerned about refugees and xenophobia then why does he support selling arms to Saudi Arabia that creates more yemeni refugees?

And here it is again. What did the Republicans, that hold the senate, do to stop this? It's everybody that's implicit. Yet for people like you mentioning Obama's name is like a ****ing dog whistle.

[Hawker]

And here it is again. What did the Republicans, that hold the senate, do to stop this? It's everybody that's implicit. Yet for people like you mentioning Obama's name is like a ****ing dog whistle.

I'm specifically talking about Obama here. There was also bipartisan support against this bill which is why I didn't specify a party.

I don't play the rep vs. dem game but he's in no position to criticize those that are anti-refugee based on this action.

[Dresta]

Country is run by corrupt scumbags, and that is a bipartisan thing. Then, somehow, many are surprised when people say **** it, we'll take any alternative to this shite. Mitch McConnell is a piece of human trash.

And Obama has continued the legacy of Bush, just with much more effective PR, and a tan.

edit: Obama constantly race baiting in the US and lecturing Americans on their intolerance, while giving a helping hand to one of the biggest exploiters of black people in the world:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XzT...ature=youtu.be


#priorities

[Terahite]

edit: Obama constantly race baiting in the US and lecturing Americans on their intolerance, while giving a helping hand to one of the biggest exploiters of black people in the world:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XzT...ature=youtu.be

Damn, great video. Definitely subscribing to that channel.

[Ass Dan]

And people get offended when i say the US is a joke.

most Americans recognize this. I do. Our government is a corporation and it doesn't matter if it is Hillary, Trump, or even Bernie, if the shareholders want the CEO gone, the CEO gets gone.

Obama is a pawn, doing whatever a pawn does to separate from the rest of the pawns.

[BoutPractice]

Can I just say, as someone who hates the Saudi regime perhaps more than any other on Earth, and would love to see them all go provided this didn't lead to an even more dangerous power vacuum...if you were in those guys' position, and understood what's at stake, most of you would probably make similar decisions.

It's easy to lecture on the sidelines. But when you know the rules of the game, you quickly understand that there's no workable foreign policy that isn't, in some way, a deal with the devil.

And that's just at the decision making level, where the fun stuff happens. Those you are blaming aren't the decision makers, they're the politicians. They too need to abide by their own rules.

It's not that politicians are particularly stupid or evil. They're not exceptionally clever or courageous either. They're just playing a game with a complex set of rules that dictates what their next logical move should be.

They need to simultaneously achieve a competing set of objectives, including popularity with constituents, access to big donors, and party aignment.... and they have a whole machinery to advise them on how to balance them out, essentially telling them how to vote.

Naturally there are those politicians who don't want to play the game (or play it poorly, and find themselves with nothing to lose, something that could happen to a Ted Cruz for instance). The Pauls (Ron not Rand), the Sanders... But they're destined to remain a curiosity, because the game exists, so it's only natural that most of the participants will want to play it... And the public, in their collective wisdom, would rather allow the game to proceed than let politics be a purely anarchic affair. (Although they seem increasingly tempted by the anarchic option, but anarchy is one of those ideas which only look good in theory, never in practice) So next time you want to, say, punch Marco Rubio in the face, remind yourself that he's just playing his part the way he's supposed to.

By the way, none of this should make us cynical and complacent. We all have real tools to influence the system. Whether it's a Sanders-style insurgency, grieving families' lawsuits that ultimately can lead to things like a Saudi bill, thereby forcing politicians to reveal their hypocrisy, or something more mundane like protests against some local construction project... It does make a difference, it does change the incentives of politicians. It's not as if we're completely powerless.

[falc39]

Naturally there are those politicians who don't want to play the game (or play it poorly, and find themselves with nothing to lose, something that could happen to a Ted Cruz for instance). The Pauls (Ron not Rand), the Sanders... But they're destined to remain a curiosity, because the game exists, so it's only natural that most of the participants will want to play it... And the public, in their collective wisdom, would rather allow the game to proceed than let politics be a purely anarchic affair. (Although they seem increasingly tempted by the anarchic option, but anarchy is one of those ideas which only look good in theory, never in practice) So next time you want to, say, punch Marco Rubio in the face, remind yourself that he's just playing his part the way he's supposed to.

By the way, none of this should make us cynical and complacent. We all have real tools to influence the system. Whether it's a Sanders-style insurgency, grieving families' lawsuits that ultimately can lead to things like a Saudi bill, thereby forcing politicians to reveal their hypocrisy, or something more mundane like protests against some local construction project... It does make a difference, it does change the incentives of politicians. It's not as if we're completely powerless.

When you say the Pauls (but not Rand), what other Paul would you be referring to if you are going to use the plural? I would not put Rand in with the neocons, if that was what you are implying. He has shown many times that he is willing to go against them, including this example from OP.

One of the most effective tools today have been the hacks/leaks. Snowden and all the other people releasing info to the public has completely changed the landscape. I love it, it is like forced transparency on a government that advertised transparency but never delivered. Even if the election doesn't go the way I want it to, I've learned the most from this election cycle alone because of the hacks and leaks. What were only once suspicions have been confirmed and opinions have been solidified for the long future, saving me time to do my own activities instead of trying to decipher lies from these politicians.

[bladefd]

yep. as long as we're fighting each other, shit at the top will never change

And it all comes back to money. Always.