Guess I better not let on when I agree with your posts then… 
Except, they do have oil. A lot of it. So, we can enforce sanctions on Saudi Arabia, that will likely have massive repercussions on the global economy, and mostly harm the poorest and most vulnerable Saudis, while the House of Saud remains largely undisturbed, or we can send in the troops and try to effect a regime change, which has historically worked so well in the region.
Anyway, the while point of the Saudi Arabia things was the idea that there’s some particular Democratic hypocrisy involved in the relationship between American and Saudi Arabia, which is clearly bullshit. Nobody, liberal or conservative, particularly likes dealing with the Saudi government, but there’s not a lot of great alternatives out there. Not while the world economy runs on oil.
Yeah, it was *Max_S’*'s link, not yours. Not sure what’s screwy - it looks properly attributed to me?
Sure. Absolutely. And definitely get snarky. It’s merited, no question. And I’m not being sarcastic here.
But here’s a thing that’s real.
The “conservative” (for want of a better word) posters here tend to be much better writers (and thus more persuasive) than their opponents. And I appreciate that. And I admire that, having grown up in the Jesuit tradition of debate.
Take that for what it’s worth. But us liberals/progressives/leftists/what-have-you should really be open to learning a lessen or two from our oponents.
Got me. Came to me as a reply to me.
OK, no problem, glitches happen.
If 9/11 wasn’t that point, there isn’t going to be one.
Saudi Arabia has oil, and it’s an ally in the Middle East generally and against Iran in particular, and it spends lots of money on US weapons. Sadly I don’t expect any US government to care how the KSA treats its own citizens, or about dead children in Yemen. But one might have hoped several thousand dead Americans would be too much for them to swallow.
No shit.
I don’t believe we can’t do anything that would not negatively impact the House of Saud. We produce more oil than we burn. We can fuck them. Would it cost us a nickel more for a gallon of gas? Maybe. But the fact that we choose not to incur that cost speaks volumes about us.
Respectfully, disagree. The Democratic Party is only marginally less hypocritical than the Republican Party.
Oh, sorry, that was my fault - I think I opened a reply to your post, decided to respond to Max first, and used the same window, which was set up as a response to you.
Yep. Jesus, can we go back to DOS? One thing open at a time
Way safer.
Could not agree more.
The US government has no problem enforcing sanctions that mostly harm the poorest and most vulnerable on less useful countries. And had no objection to sending in the troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. If they refrain in future it’ll be because it was a colossal failure, not due to any moral objections.
Yes, and?
If it were that simple, I’m sure we would have extended the middle finger a long time ago. It’s probably not that simple, especially if the US isn’t doing all it should to invest in green energy.
It is that simple.
Get in bed with these people, form Aramaco, get cheap gas? Yep, bipartisan policy. Very simple.
Invest in green energy? Not so simple.
Pretty sure you and I have a lot of common ground here.
Can we hurt the House of Saud? Sure. Can we fuck them? Maybe. Can we do it without fucking every single other citizen of Saudi Arabia? That seems really doubtful. Can we do it for only an extra nickel a gallon? No chance in hell.
Respectfully, you just agreed with me. That was my precise point: the Democrats aren’t uniquely hypocritical in their treatment of Saudi Arabia. Both sides are hypocrites.
Fuck the citizens of Saudi Arabia. Look up exactly who gets to be a citizen of Saudi Arabia. Really, the “citizens” of SA are not the primary concern here. At least not mine.
Maybe I’m wrong about an extra nickel. Maybe it’s an extra dime. I’m fine with that.
It’s time for us to put Realpolitik behind us.
OK, on that, we’re in perfect agreement.
I mean, it’s not like the Saudis are Republicans!
Sorry, if the people who live in Saudi Arabia aren’t the primary concern here, what exactly is? You started off saying we shouldn’t deal with Saudi Arabia because of “bodies hanging from cranes.” If we don’t care about the average Saudi when it comes to putting sanctions on the state, why do we care about the ones that are hanging from cranes?
Or are you making a distinction between “Saudi citizen,” and “everyone else who lives and works in Saudi Arabia?” Because I wasn’t. Apologies for the imprecise language.
I am making that distinction. And the ratio is astounding. And I get that language in an internet message board can be imprecise, especially when responding fast. But in this particular case, it’s important.
There are plenty of Saudi citizens who oppose the House of Saud, just like there are plenty of Afghan citizens who oppose the Taliban. Do you think women enjoyed not being able to drive cars or being followed everywhere they go by male escorts? You don’t necessarily influence a society by cutting off all contact with it or telling it to go fuck itself. My point about Cuba and North Korea wasn’t to compare human rights, but rather to show that isolation isn’t always an effective strategy for bringing about change.