# Why is it a bad thing if Saudis support Bin Ladin **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 13, 2004, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040 "2004-06-13T00:16:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/21 "2004-06-13T19:30:50Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > Do you really want to go there? I’m keeping my comments limited to what the OP is about. Morally, are out military operations better than Bin Ladin? Since he **is presently** targeting civilians, and since we **presently are not** , then, for the time being, our actions are morally superior to his. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/22 "2004-06-13T19:43:20Z")
We don’t target them - we just kill them by accident, arrest and torture them, and not let them bury the dead that we’ve killed. Anyway, I think it is fair to say that the US’s RoE are a good deal more “enlightened” than Al Qaeda’s. Can we drop that and get back on topic? ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/23 "2004-06-13T19:53:50Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > We don’t target them - we just kill them by accident, arrest and torture them, and not let them bury the dead that we’ve killed. > > Anyway, I think it is fair to say that the US’s RoE are a good deal more “enlightened” than Al Qaeda’s. Can we drop that and get back on topic? OK then, it’s bad that the Saudis support Bin Ladin because they are then, by extension, supporting targeting civilians. If they agree with what he stands for, then (as has been pointed out by others) that means that they can, and have, support him in other ways like monetarily. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/24 "2004-06-13T20:03:15Z")
> [@Master Control](#): > > OK then, it’s bad that the Saudis support Bin Ladin because they are then, by extension, supporting targeting civilians. If they agree with what he stands for, then (as has been pointed out by others) that means that they can, and have, support him in other ways like monetarily. Two questions. 1. When, if ever, is targetting civilians “justified”? 2. Does Al Qaeda have some justification? I realize that most Americans have a hard time wrapping their hard little heads around (2), but I guess we get to go into that debate. Again. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/25 "2004-06-13T20:12:46Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > Two questions. > > 1. When, if ever, is targetting civilians “justified”? > > 2. Does Al Qaeda have some justification? > > I realize that most Americans have a hard time wrapping their hard little heads around (2), but I guess we get to go into that debate. Again. 😕 When did I say that targeting civilians is justified? I’m saying that it’s not. I also don’t think that Al Queda is justified either. And what do you mean that most of us have a hard time wrapping our heads around that question? Please make yourself more clear. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/26 "2004-06-13T20:14:59Z")
> [@Master Control](#): > > 😕 When did I say that targeting civilians is justified? When did I say that you said that targeting civilians is justified? > [@](#): > > I’m saying that it’s not. I also don’t think that Al Queda is justified either. And what do you mean that most of us have a hard time wrapping our heads around that question? Because most Americans have absolutely no clue what AQ’s justifications are? ---
**Author:** ![Paladud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Paladud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paladud)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/27 "2004-06-13T20:25:07Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > Two questions. > > 1. When, if ever, is targetting civilians “justified”? > > 2. Does Al Qaeda have some justification? > > I realize that most Americans have a hard time wrapping their hard little heads around (2), but I guess we get to go into that debate. Again. 1. It is legitimate to target civilians involved in the production and transportation of military supplies amidst a war. 2. In its cause or with regard to its means? I’m not informed enough to determine the former. In the case of the latter, the Pentagon attack was morally acceptable but the Towers were not. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/28 "2004-06-13T20:36:31Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Hiroshima > Nagasaki > Dresden > American Indians > > That’s just the big examples. > > Targeting civilians is an American tradition Were the Americans involved in the main Dresden bombings? I thought it was the British. –Not to take away from your point-- we have plenty of civilian blood on our hands, no doubt. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/29 "2004-06-13T20:37:58Z")
> [@Paladud](#): > > 1. It is legitimate to target civilians involved in the production and transportation of military supplies amidst a war. One good example, yes. > [@](#): > > 1. In its cause or with regard to its means? I’m not informed enough to determine the former. In the case of the latter, the Pentagon attack was morally acceptable but the Towers were not. The cause. I agree with you on the latter, though I can see their (sick) reasoning. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/30 "2004-06-13T21:37:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Why is it a bad thing if Saudis support Bin Ladin? Because we need oil. And the Saudis have Lots O Oil. So much so, that if they decided to stop shipping it, they could, to paraphrase Yoko Ono, they _could_ “scratch our goodies out…they could blow our sillies off”. But the Saudi Royals don’t want to; they’d rather have the moolah than the mullahs. 😉 Bin Ladin— _he_ **wants to** scratch our goodies out…to blow our sillies off. :eek: So, it’s a bad thing, 'cause Bin Ladin could wind up in charge, & bring Western civilization to a halt, just by turnning off the oil taps. Of course, _then_ we have to use a nuke to _take_ the oil, which is a _worse_ thing. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/31 "2004-06-13T21:56:38Z")
> [@Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor](#): > > Because we need oil. This is where I lose sympathy for the American cause. SA has oil. A corrupt monarchy rules SA. US makes deals with corrupt monarchy to take their oil off their hands. SA people get a tad ticked off when they realize that not only is their oil being taken, but it is being done by foreign companies by foreign workers. Dissent begins. US decides it needs to protect “its” oil reserves, builds military bases. Dissent rises. The rest is (modern) history. ---
**Author:** ![asrivkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9d8465/32.png) [@asrivkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asrivkin)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/32 "2004-06-13T22:26:56Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > This is where I lose sympathy for the American cause. Well, but the “we” in **Bosda’s** post isn’t just America. It’s all of Western civilization +/- non-Western civilization. And whether or not we should have done a better job preparing for a day of reckoning, this is where we are. It’s seen as vital for the oil to keep going not just for the USA but for Europe, Japan, China, Africa… > [@](#): > > US decides it needs to protect “its” oil reserves, builds military bases. > > Dissent rises. The US in this case is the proxy for the Western world (again, with adjunct countries you may or may not include as “the West”). If the oil stops, _everybody_ is screwed. The US is the only country that plausibly has the military ability to keep things going, and I’m not so sure even at that. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/33 "2004-06-13T22:33:30Z")
> [@asrivkin](#): > > The US in this case is the proxy for the Western world (again, with adjunct countries you may or may not include as “the West”). If the oil stops, _everybody_ is screwed. The US is the only country that plausibly has the military ability to keep things going, and I’m not so sure even at that. Yea, that whole calling yourself the “leader of the free world” can really come back to bite ya in the ass when someone is pissed at the “free world.” Need for something is not an excuse to take it, and neither is it a good defense when someone catches you doing so. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/34 "2004-06-13T22:46:00Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I don’t buy this rationalization for a second. If we commit an act which we _know_ will kill civilians, then we _are_ killing civilians on purpose. We’re killing them on purpose, but we’re not targeting them. Killing them isn’t the goal of the mission, it’s the unfortunate consequence of it. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/35 "2004-06-13T22:54:07Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > We’re killing them on purpose, but we’re not targeting them. Killing them isn’t the goal of the mission, it’s the unfortunate consequence of it. … actually, there were many first hand reports from foreign reporters in Falujah, when it was very intense, that women and children were coming in with sniper wounds, and aerial bombardmant was hitting housing complexes well away from the front… much like it has been suggested that we killed more civilians bombing Yugoslavia than Milosevic did. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/36 "2004-06-13T23:36:02Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > SA people get a tad ticked off when they realize that not only is their oil being taken, but it is being done by foreign companies by foreign workers. I don’t follow this bit. Their oil isn’t being stolen, it’s being bought. I doubt they care about that. Maybe they’re pissed that the corrupt monarchy is getting rich and the rest of them are getting squat, on the other hand… Anyway, let’s not overcomplicate this, folks. Bin Laden is a mass murderer, and we’re the people he wants to murder. That’s why it’s bad. Actually, he wants to murder thousands or millions of innocent people and repress the hell out of the people he doesn’t want to kill. It’s not good for anybody if people are supporting him. That said, I don’t think that poll is that big of a deal. [Here’s the CNN story about it, just to get the numbers out there.](http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/08/poll.binladen/index.html) As the headline indicates, it says there are wide support for his _views_ - not necessarily for him. Not my idea of good news, but not as bad as it could be. A few relevant bits: The pollster says _“They like what he said about what’s going on in Iraq and Afghanistan. Or about America and the Zionist conspiracy. But what he does, that’s where you see the huge drop”_ […] Forty-one percent said they favored strong and close relations with America, while only 39 percent said they had a favorable opinion of the Saudi armed forces, both results that Obaid also termed “surprising.” […] less than a third of Saudis polled had a positive opinion of militant clerics, although government-appointed religious figures did better. The poll showed strong support for political reforms and allowing women to play a greater role in society. Almost two-thirds said they favored allowing women to drive, something they are currently banned from doing. While support for political reforms, particularly elections, was high, few Saudis viewed liberal reformers with much favor.\* ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/37 "2004-06-13T23:43:31Z")
> [@Paladud](#): > > The value one puts on the life of “someone else’s child” (a description that inevitably holds true for the target as well, unless there’s been an immaculate conception or two in recent years…) varies with whose child it is. > > The military is under the control of a nation’s government. It is the government’s **duty** to prioritize the lives of the people it serves above those it does not. That doesn’t give it free license to shit upon outsiders for its own gain, but in a justified war (which is again debatable for most) it has to make decisions: if we attack this headquarters/ammo dump/train junction with our infantry, many of them will perish; if we do nothing, the intact enemy facility or people will endanger those of our troops or our civilians; if we drop a bomb there, we will kill several of their civilians in addition to the mark. > > It depends on the circumstances, but a rational person (one capable of value judgment) will usually opt for the third choice while developing more precise bombs. None of this really counters my essential claim that we kill civilains on purpose. I don’t care about the labored justifications. We kill civilians on purpose just like al Qaeda. As a matter of fact, we have killed something like 3-4 times as many civilians already as were killed on 9/11. But it’s ok when we do it because we’re special. > [@](#): > > I value people differently depending on how I am connected to them. Without specifics, it’s something roughly like: my mom \> me \> other immediate family and closest friends \> other friends \> distant family \> ethnic group \> most people in the US \> most people in my home country \> people outside those borders who bear little relevance in my life \> people who’d like to see me or those I value most dead but do not act on such desires \> people who put forth active effort toward bringing harm to me or those whom I value most. If you are going to claim that one should invoke Kant’s categorical imperative with respect to a choice between the lives of those one values greatly and those one does to a much lesser extent, it is you who are not entirely sane. So you’re saying that you, **Pladud** , are the moral center of the universe and the value of other human beings can only be measured by their emotional proximity to you personally. A completely irrational, amoral and self-centered value system, IMO, and one that forces you to surrender any moral highgound in condemning strikes against your own civilians by an enemy because they can use the same rationalizations that you can, and with equal moral authority. > [@Captain Amazing](#): > > We’re killing them on purpose, but we’re not targeting them. Killing them isn’t the goal of the mission, it’s the unfortunate consequence of it. A distinction utterly without a difference. If launch a strike which you know will kill innocent people then you are making a conscious decision to kill innocent people. When the target includes civilians, then you are targeting civilians. Deal with it. And let me ask another question. If it’s ok for us to kill civilians to get a military target is it also ok for the enemy to kill _our_ civilians to take out a military target. Would you say that it was morally acceptable for an enemy to blow up an American military base, killing every civilian on it, because it’s a legitimate military target? Would you say that Americans would have no right to be outraged? Would you just shrug it off as part of war or do you think Americans should be subject to different rules than everybody else? ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/38 "2004-06-13T23:48:11Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t follow this bit. Their oil isn’t being stolen, it’s being bought. I doubt they care about that. Maybe they’re pissed that the corrupt monarchy is getting rich and the rest of them are getting squat, on the other hand… Depends. Is a corrupt government selling the rights to all of the country’s national resources to foreign interests counted as “stealing?” Technically, no, maybe not, but then, we’re the ones profiting from this theft. I highly doubt Americans (especially Alaskans) would be pleased if the gov’t started selling the Alaskan oil reserves to France. The difference is, we have representative government, not a corrupt monarchy, so we can do something about it. The Saudis can only get pissed off and blow sh\*t up until someone listens to them. As “defenders of freedom,” we aren’t entirely blameless here, now are we? ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/39 "2004-06-13T23:51:11Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > None of this really counters my essential claim that we kill civilains on purpose. I don’t care about the labored justifications. We kill civilians on purpose just like al Qaeda. As a matter of fact, we have killed something like 3-4 times as many civilians already as were killed on 9/11. But it’s ok when we do it because we’re special. I believe that they are saying it is OK because we are doing it while shooting at bad guys. Interesting divide between Americans and Foreigners here. If the police killed 20 people to arrest 5 people, it would be a huge scandal. Army blows up 10,000 people to arrest a few thousand, and we wave flags and call them heroes. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2004, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040/40 "2004-06-13T23:56:27Z")
> [@kung fu lola](#): > > They already have. Where do you think OBL got his moolah? Playing craps? I thought he got his money from his wealthy family before they supposedly disowned him? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-a-bad-thing-if-saudis-support-bin-ladin/250040.md?page=3)