Corronchilejano
Member
When will Iraqis be able to sue the US goverment?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
US Senate approves Bill That Would Let Families of 9/11 Victims Sue Saudi Arabia
- Thread starter TheRealTalker
- Start date
- Status
TheRealTalker
Banned
Point them to me, and I'll point you to as many that counter you (from as reputable a publishing circle).
Perhaps only Pakistan is a worse 'ally' than Saudi Arabia.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Bill has setup to make Obama look bad in his last few months written all over it, and the Democrats in the Senate fell for it hook, line and sinker. It makes strategic sense to veto this bill, but it would be so misunderstood by the large majority of the country that it could effectively do significant damage to President Obama's legacy for people who don't understand the reasoning behind a veto. Not only that, how could Hillary, former United States Senator of New York, even remotely think to support President Obama's veto of such a bill?
This to me is a cleverly (or not so cleverly) disguised election year tactic.
This to me is a cleverly (or not so cleverly) disguised election year tactic.
TheRealTalker
Banned
I mean there are a bunch of Sunni places that would choose SA over Iran anyday
and seeing as these two are in a proxy war at the moment the US going at it on SA will push these nations even more away from US policy that currently sees them as useless in Syria, etc...
plus due to low oil prices the current SA administration scaled back on
plus they created a Islamic coalition of Muslim (and some non Muslim) nations which already did a drill early this year and are doing a smaller drill in Turkey next week
actually Iraq recently has even started easing up on SA while doing anti Iran rallies
I mean there are a bunch of shit happening and the US playing the blame game 2.0 would likely make a bunch of places flip over
I mean the worst possible scenario is for US to abandon SA and Russia who is has a frozen relationship with SA to go more pro SA and sweep in as a ally\
either Iran will then be a US Ally or both will be in Russia's backyard and let me just say other countries will follow suit after SA
Indeed but I doubt they were duped - after all Dem Senators have their own elections. I agree that this will become a 'Trump card' if you will, godspeed Clinton campaign
I said nothing on Iran. I wouldn't want an alliance with Iran either.
They are going to need our leverage on various things, whether we are active in Syria or not. Turkey without our presence has no love for Saudi Arabia. They are uncomfortable bedfellows with a history of hatred.
Making this the perfect time to pressure SA to take action on its Wahabi cancer
The coalition that so far has proven itself incapable of anything substantial. It was basically entirely Saudi Arabia in Yemen, and it proved itself incapable of taking on the Houthi rebels.
Iraq will have a Ayatollah Sadr in less than 3 years (for the Shia section of the country at least). The demographics tell the story.
I'm not even sure what this means.
So? Tell me why this even matters in the age of fracking. At worst, our European allies need an oil source. OPEC has collapsed, and there will be no embargo to raise prices.
Russia has nothing to provide long-term. The demographics point to a weak Russia. They would be wiser to align with Turkey. As much as I despise Erdogan, he has a bright future.
gutter_trash
Banned
TheRealTalker
Banned
The coalition in Yemen isn't the coalition of 40-60 countries that did Northern Thunder, Riyadh meeting, etc...
SA is the main backer with Turkey for the Syrian opposition if SA is tossed aside by the US I can see Turkey not scaling back on its alliance with SA but rather try and fill some voids for economic benefit
Diplomatic pressure to bear social reform is indeed a good idea especially since oil is low right now and SA is trying to reform their economy for 2030
fracking is not logical/competitive in a low oil market and SA, Russia and Iran are playing for the long term in keeping it that way
Russia and Turkey have a even bigger strife then SA and Russia
Similarly even if lets say the SA government attends the hearings the current people in power are not the same people in power a decade ago so to whom to sue is up for debate
Iraq had recent protest in the Baghdad green zone against corruption and meddling. The protest later began to shift from anti corruption to foreign meddling in their nations on to which Iraqi shias began to shout out anti Iran slogans as their influence reaches new tests and further strains. SA after many years brought in food/medical aid via planes which is unprecedented since the Iraqi government in the past wouldn't allow such things,
SA also brings in tons of aid for the Jordan refugee camp (coats, temp shelter, food, doctors etc...) which plays into their overall image for that region.
SA has the GCC and North African allies, they gave funding recently to Ukraine with the help of Turkey and even have closer relations to Shia Azerbaijan then Iran does.
SA has large business deals with world powers from high speed rail with Spain to nuclear reactors with South Korea. Large scale mega projects with nations will likely make other nations think twice then to ever sanction SA.
Currently the Obama administration is easing tensions with Iran... A tactic of hammering SA while the rest of the region sees the US as 'betraying them' will likely make most countries there recall their ambassadors
SA has also been hit by ISIS and AQ lately and have been fighting AQ particularly in Yemen in the last few weeks, while getting attacked in military bases and police stations by ISIS sympathizers
A US labeling of SA as a enemy would have large implications at first with tons of nations following suit but in the long term a media game for all sides would likely split nations from supporting different sides
Media war is deadly with fabrications and twists happening from all sides and such a thing with SA will likely make even more confusing media biases
There is basically a ton of shit but these are the top of my head.... I mean every week we get like 8-12 new things and months have passed with ever changing info
Also the US is full of crap, a bunch of atrocities that SA is doing in Yemen is with US weapons and US help.... basically some countries will just see this as the US putting the blame card on someone but themselves again and many nations will try and sue the US as well.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
I wonder the same thing.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Do you really think suing Saudi Arabia will work? Even if it's "morally" right, in practical terms do you really honestly think it will work?
That you think this will allow Saudi Arabia to be "held responsible", while sounded nice, is laughably naive.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
I really want this bill to go through. Just to see the can of worms this opens.
If the Saudi government can be sued for 9/11, what happens when other governments start looking at things they can sue the US for?
If the Saudi government can be sued for 9/11, what happens when other governments start looking at things they can sue the US for?
TheRealTalker
Banned
Obama should just sign it and peace out on a early retirement in Cuba
m_shortpants
Member
Fuck he Saudis as far as I'm concerned, they can get sued.
But is there are a process for Yemenis/Pakistanis to seek recompense from the US for drone bombings?
I agree with the sentiment, but doesn't the Senate recognize that it's like opening the pandora's box?
I mean these guys have way more legitimate reasons to sue the US for billions:
I mean these guys have way more legitimate reasons to sue the US for billions:
If they really love their country they won't ask anything of it.
TheRedSnifit
Member
It's not about suing Saudi Arabia, it's about our government formally acknowledging that certain states that we consider "allies" (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia) are prime enablers of radicalism.
Probably toss the USA and some of the other world powers on that list too; they've all enabled the proliferation of radicalism due to their support of entities like the KSA and various other dictators.
rrvv
Member
To be frank. The end result will just be everyone suing everyone
We will pay whatever the award is in missiles. Special delivery.
The bill was created so that he'd veto it.
SolicitorPirate
Member
How would US courts even have jurisdiction over SA?
With respect to simple negligence and a failure to respond adequately, perhaps. I do wonder though if this move opens the potential for other governments to sue America as well, for things like Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, support of rebels in Syria, support of Israel complicit to it's colonisation of Palestine, the CIA drug trafficking ties, the drone bombings in Pakistan and Yemen etc.
br0ken_shad0w
Member
Removed
For what?
I hope you understand that the US doesn't just drop those bombs unilaterally over foreign nations. The governments in charge are usually the one's asking for the strikes to happen in the first place.
you know i was just wondering (and bear with me, i'm an insomniac that has been awake approximately 48 hours so my logic may be totally unsound) if Bush could be charged with aiding and abetting or whatever it's called when you help criminals escape justice.
edit: i mean, there were only one type of folks allowed to fly out of the us once the no fly order was issued. saudi royalty if i'm not mistaken.
rrvv
Member
Won't that it actually make it more valid reason for a family to sue the US government since they have direct involvement. As opposed to 9/11
Woody Invincible
Banned
Is this what our politicians do with their time?? This is the shit they legislate on??
9/11 was an illegal act, drone strikes--especially one's authorized by the host nation like Pakistan and Yemen--are not.
Yeah.... I think you greatly over-exaggerate the bonds that tie SA with other countries in the neighbourhood. The Saudis buy their friendships, their "allies" know full well the shit disturbing nature of the Saudi Monarchy, their attempts to spread their shitty version of Islam and their support for terrorists, and none would hesitate to drop them if that same money was replaced from a more grounded source.
Also, it's a ridiculous assertion that any nation in the world would choose to downgrade their ties with the US over Saudi Arabia, no matter how chummy they are with the Saudis. I mean look at Saudi Arabia's silly attempts to turn the world against Iran after Nimr Al-Nimr's execution, the only countries they managed to convince to sever ties with Iran were some no-name backwater countries that included none of their GCC buddies(outside of Bahrain).
Frankly, with the hard economic times that Saudi Arabia has fallen in recently, and considering their frosty relationship with most of the EU and Russia, the Saudis need the US more than the US needs the Saudis.
The US already opened the door to getting sued by allowing US citizens to sue Iran, allowing them to sue Saudi monarchs will not result in anything more from the rest of the world.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
How would a civil court even try to compel SA to show up for this farce, nevermind footing the bill. SA would probably get a kick out of it though.
bigmit3737
Member
If they want to cut ties with SA why don't they just levy import tariffs on their oil.
Bruce Springsteen
Member
Who would make Saudi Arabia pay?
They have assets in US banks and own property in the US.
In theory, the US government could also refuse to pay the US bonds Saudi Arabia currently holds.
hobblygobbly
Member
The U.S has signature drone strikes/targeted killing which means they can kill anyone who exhibits "terrorist behaviour", they don't need to prove anything nor does is it requested, a group of people unloading a truck can be "terrorist behaviour", that's why wedding and funeral convoys have been bombed by drones due to this. The other poster wasn't referring to the general drone strikes, but the signature drone strike program by the U.S. Innocents have been directly killed or indirectly such as family members and a lot of it without any verified proof that they're terrorists.
Some articles:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/25/us-drone-program-secrecy-scrutiny-signature-strikes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/signature-strikes-and-the_b_3575351.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targeted_killing#North_America
SliceSabre
Banned
We need to stop cuddling SA. I have no issues with this bill and Obama ought to be ashamed.
Mr. Giggles
Member
Its a technical loop hole in which the strikes are carried out, sure, but don't act like drone strikes don't inflict massive civilian collateral damage.
Also, getting authorization from countries that treat their own civilians like shit shouldn't be a good sign
You probably had no issue with invading Iraq becasue of all the "WMDs" too then..... I'm all for stopping the special relationship with douchebag countires like SA and Israel, but use a little forethought now instead of having to rely on hindsight later - EDIT: this bill is just a waste of time
And just as incapable. SA's greatest success comes from funding and supplying questionable rebel groups in Syria that all tie back to Al-Nusra.
The three power players in the region are going to eventually all be actively undermining each other. Currently the only reason Turkey and SA are not undermining each other significantly is because of the US relationship. Frankly, we need someone undermining Saudi Arabian Wahabiism, and letting Turkey and Iran do it will help.
Good, we agree.
This is the point I am making about the fracking era. The mechanisms that allowed for higher prices (OPEC) broke because of the proxy wars between Iran and SA and because supply surged from fracking. Even the threat of fracking is enough to give us the foundation to crush SA economically. Either oil stays cheap or it goes up enough that fracking becomes viable again. Either way, its a world where we no longer need SA.
Great, that's good for us. Regardless, Turkey is clearly looking to become more of a dominant player in the region's politics. Turkey will be a more important global player than Russia in 15 years (another demographics story).
Its not about the lawsuits themselves. Its about terminating the relationship. Its about raising public anger at this 'ally' to the point that it is politically toxic to work with SA.
You're citing anecdotal evidence, but the people who broke in were basically all Sadr supporters (who want to end the rule around representation in parliament based on Shia/Sunni/Kurd split). There will more likely than not be a Shia nation and a Kurd nation that come out of this due to the tensions that Sadr is now pushing. The US opponent that we made a deal with more than a decade ago is now starting to make moves to take over.
Even so, the tea leaves indicate the Shia portion of the country will break towards Iran. See: the 'militias' now active in the country that are IRGC, the voting bodies in their parliament that are basically plants from Iran, etc.
So? That doesn't require our relationship with them. It is more important to break the Salafist Wahabi ideology that is destroying Islam.
None of these countries are going to break towards SA over the US. Ever. It is the nation with aircraft carriers able to be deployed around the world vs. a small regional player who no longer has sway because of the dynamics of oil in the fracking age.
Most of the rest of the small countries will choose to align with either Turkey or SA. None of them will pull ambassadors from the US; it is too important a relationship. Most will lean towards Turkey if we make clear Turkey is our ally in the region (NATO).
Instability in Yemen created by SA because they have proven incapable of taking military action. Great job SA, you fought the Houthis and created yet another vacuum for extremism.
SA in a post-OPEC era has no friends.
What we can say with certainty is the fuel for Wahabiism is coming from one country and has for more than 40 years - Saudi Arabia.
Who to blame, the people who decided to invade despite US pressure behind the scenes not to, or the people who sold the weapons and gave the intelligence?
The Middle East could be full of democratic and secular countries by now, if not for the disgusting behaviour of the CIA in the 1950s. They sow the wind and reap the whirlwind.
That's a sexy line, I'm gonna use it from now on
Other than that, you're on point.
I eagerly await lawsuits against the US, should this whole suing thing become a trend.
Generalpsyduck
Banned
The US actually declared war. 9/11 was a random attack by terrorists. very different circumstances
He should veto it. All this would do is stir up shit. It's a monumentally bad idea.
Mr. Giggles
Member
A war based on false pretenses - faked arial photos of supposedly WMD storage facilities.
Besides, the terrorists (Al-Qaeda) have actively declared on the U.S in the past ..see, goes both ways
Indeed. Instead of denying Iraqi citizens the right to sue for the war, US citizens should be joining them. Oh, and maybe prosecuting and jailing a lot of these assholes responsible.
+1
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked