Support For the Royal Family of Saudi Arabia

[Pythagoras]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

 

[rightwinger]

I never understood why the US cowers to that evil, corrupt regime.
After 9-11, we ignored the Saudis role in the attacks and went out of our way to cower before them.
After the Khasgoggi atrocity, Trump played dumb and said he was not sure if the Royal Family was involved. Even if they were, Trump was willing to ignore it as long as they bought our expensive weapons
Now Biden is doing the same. While supposedly distancing himself from the Saudis, he refuses to condemn the Royal Family.

 

[surada]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Why should we interfere with Saudi. culture and religion? They have always been staunch allies and pro-American.

 

[skews13]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Why should we interfere with Saudi. culture and religion? They have always been staunch allies and pro-American.

Except for when they are supporting groups like ISIS, flying airplanes into buildings, and brutally murdering American Journalists, you have a point there.

 

[alang1216]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Why should we interfere with Saudi. culture and religion? They have always been staunch allies and pro-American.

The Saudi Royals are akin to the Mafia and I think they are not a stable country. 10% of the Saudis are Shiites and are likely considered 2nd class citizens. If things get bad there I can see Iran coming in as a 'liberator' of Shiites and gaining control of the country as they have in Iraq. We don't seem to choose our friends or enemies very well.

 

[surada]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Why should we interfere with Saudi. culture and religion? They have always been staunch allies and pro-American.

Except for when they are supporting groups like ISIS, flying airplanes into buildings, and brutally murdering American Journalists, you have a point there.

ISIS Is their enemy.. If a Saudi fights for ISIS, he goes to prison if he returns home. The Saudis didn't do 9-11. They revoked OBL's citizenship in 1994.. He wanted to hurt the US and have them blame the Saudis.

We don't really know what happened to Khashoggi. We do know he was Muslim Brotherhood and a friend to OBL.

 

[Gdjjr]

Ignoring the wise- trade with all, ally with none- has led us down a path of which there is no return- no matter what the US does it won't be the right thing- when you sell your soul, no matter who purchases it, you are in debt to the purchaser-

 

[surada]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Why should we interfere with Saudi. culture and religion? They have always been staunch allies and pro-American.

The Saudi Royals are akin to the Mafia and I think they are not a stable country. 10% of the Saudis are Shiites and are likely considered 2nd class citizens. If things get bad there I can see Iran coming in as a 'liberator' of Shiites and gaining control of the country as they have in Iraq. We don't seem to choose our friends or enemies very well.

How much time did you spend in Arabia? The Shia are successful in the oil business and among the merchant class. They aren't loyal to Iran. Do you know any of the Suderi Seven or their wives and daughters?

 

[alang1216]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Why should we interfere with Saudi. culture and religion? They have always been staunch allies and pro-American.

The Saudi Royals are akin to the Mafia and I think they are not a stable country. 10% of the Saudis are Shiites and are likely considered 2nd class citizens. If things get bad there I can see Iran coming in as a 'liberator' of Shiites and gaining control of the country as they have in Iraq. We don't seem to choose our friends or enemies very well.

How much time did you spend in Arabia? The Shia are successful in the oil business and among the merchant class. They aren't loyal to Iran. Do you know any of the Suderi Seven or their wives and daughters?

Never been there so no first hand experience. If everything is good and there are no religious tensions the would be great. Of course I have no idea who you are and can only take what you say with a grain of salt. I predict that since Saudi Arabia is fighting a proxy war with Iran in Yemen that tension has or will spill over into tests of Shia loyalties inside Saudi Arabia. If I doesn't, the Saudis are better people then most everyone else. We'll see I guess.

 

[surada]

should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Can you imagine if some country or asshole told the US we don't like your culture, traditions, religion or government and we're going to force you to change.?

Can you imagine???

 

[surada]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Why should we interfere with Saudi. culture and religion? They have always been staunch allies and pro-American.

The Saudi Royals are akin to the Mafia and I think they are not a stable country. 10% of the Saudis are Shiites and are likely considered 2nd class citizens. If things get bad there I can see Iran coming in as a 'liberator' of Shiites and gaining control of the country as they have in Iraq. We don't seem to choose our friends or enemies very well.

How much time did you spend in Arabia? The Shia are successful in the oil business and among the merchant class. They aren't loyal to Iran. Do you know any of the Suderi Seven or their wives and daughters?

Never been there so no first hand experience. If everything is good and there are no religious tensions the would be great. Of course I have no idea who you are and can only take what you say with a grain of salt. I predict that since Saudi Arabia is fighting a proxy war with Iran in Yemen that tension has or will spill over into tests of Shia loyalties inside Saudi Arabia. If I doesn't, the Saudis are better people then most everyone else. We'll see I guess.

I lived in Arabia for 20 years, Yemen is your worst nightmare.. Every terrorist group has settled there since 1998.

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

One thing about that family. When they don't like you they really let you and everyone know they don't.

 

[sealybobo]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Trump sold the saudis nuclear technology. We don’t want murderers getting nukes.

 

[surada]

One thing about that family. When they don't like you they really let you and everyone know they don't.

And you know this how?

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Trump sold the saudis nuclear technology. We don’t want murderers getting nukes.

Did he? I know the Saudis have been planning for nuclear desalination for years because it provides clean water AND cheap electricity.

When did Trump sell it to them?

 

[Hang on Sloopy]

One thing about that family. When they don't like you they really let you and everyone know they don't.

And you know this how?

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Trump sold the saudis nuclear technology. We don’t want murderers getting nukes.

Did he? I know the Saudis have been planning for nuclear desalination for years because it provides clean water AND cheap electricity.

When did Trump sell it to them?

Well the last Saudi who visited here they did not like left in about 20 pieces headed home

 

[surada]

One thing about that family. When they don't like you they really let you and everyone know they don't.

And you know this how?

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Trump sold the saudis nuclear technology. We don’t want murderers getting nukes.

Did he? I know the Saudis have been planning for nuclear desalination for years because it provides clean water AND cheap electricity.

When did Trump sell it to them?

Well the last Saudi who visited here they did not like left in about 20 pieces headed home

Left where? You mean Turkey?

 

[surada]

U.S. approved secret nuclear power work for Saudi Arabia ...

U.S. approved secret nuclear power work for Saudi Arabia

U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry has approved six secret authorizations by companies to sell nuclear power technology and assistance to Saudi Arabia, according to a copy of a document seen by Reuters on Wednesday.

www.reuters.com

Mar 28, 2019 · The Trump administration has quietly pursued a wider deal on sharing U.S. nuclear power technology with Saudi Arabia, which aims to build at least two nuclear power plants.

 

[sealybobo]

One thing about that family. When they don't like you they really let you and everyone know they don't.

And you know this how?

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Trump sold the saudis nuclear technology. We don’t want murderers getting nukes.

Did he? I know the Saudis have been planning for nuclear desalination for years because it provides clean water AND cheap electricity.

When did Trump sell it to them?

Google it. It wasn’t nuclear weapons but I wouldn’t sell them anything nuclear.

 

[sealybobo]

U.S. approved secret nuclear power work for Saudi Arabia ...

U.S. approved secret nuclear power work for Saudi Arabia

U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry has approved six secret authorizations by companies to sell nuclear power technology and assistance to Saudi Arabia, according to a copy of a document seen by Reuters on Wednesday.

www.reuters.com

Mar 28, 2019 · The Trump administration has quietly pursued a wider deal on sharing U.S. nuclear power technology with Saudi Arabia, which aims to build at least two nuclear power plants.

What does Sunni Man say about this?

 

[sealybobo]

I could've put this in the political forum however I believe this has several ethical points to which validate this being its location.

The Kirkpatrick Thesis has brought to my attention the several interesting support transitions the United States has been repeating. The US pulled support from the dictator of Cuba and so Fidel Castro took over. The same things have happened in Nicaragua with the Sandinista. The idea is that the US may like they did before, pull support from Saudi Arabia's current dictatorship allowing for those seeking a regime change to take over.

This could have several conflicting factors. One of which being that an Islamic theocratic state will be born potentially ruining ties with the United States and creating a coalition of very strong Islamic states most of which do not support the US. Other possibilities form too, a worse regime taking over which could potentially eliminate the human rights of all citizens with a corrupt and terrible religious police. ( I am aware some of these things exist but they can be worse)

My ethical Inquiries are involving what should we do? Does the United States have a right to get involved in the transition? Should the US pull support? How would we deal with the repercussions of a worse regime? Do we need to fear the next Islamic surge? Does US interest matter here; should we remove that from the decisions for ethical purposes?

Why should we interfere with Saudi. culture and religion? They have always been staunch allies and pro-American.

They are the lesser of two evils.