BookTalk.org

What do you all think? Will we be regretting this in 20-30 years?

The sale is part of an overall $20 billion weapons package for Saudi Arabia, administration officials say.

A recent poll conducted for Terror Free Tomorrow, a bipartisan group whose goal is undermining world support for terrorism, found only 12 percent here view Bush positively — lower than Iran's president or even al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden — and more think warmly toward Iran than America. Top among the reasons are the chaos in Iraq that followed the 2003 U.S.-led invasion and the widespread Arab feeling that the United States is biased toward Israel and not serious in seeking Mideast peace.

All the Bush admin supporters...do you agree with this move? Will it buy Bush and the US popularity to offset the hatred most have for us over there?

Mr. P.

We're talking about a country with an inspiring human rights record, a well developed democracy where all are treated equally and an aristocracy that invests heavily in organisations devoted to the defeat of militant Islamic fundamentalism.

Providing military aid to countries of such stellar repute worked out very well in the past. What could possibly go wrong?

The sad thing is that whichever dreadful country the US would sell weapons to, they would be in good company.
When I read your two postings I realized that President Sarkozy was in Saudi Arabia today, so I checked: apparently he sold everything but weapons-- this time.

There has been a lot of protests in France about our recent contracts to sell weapons to Libya.

I think governments in countries with a weapon industry feel at ease about arms contracts because they know that even if there is an opposition at home it won't effect opinion polls and won't be much of an issue in the next election. Also if the country has a weapons industry all governments , left or right wing, have been selling arms in your country for decades.

Niall001 wrote:We're talking about a country with an inspiring human rights record, a well developed democracy where all are treated equally and an aristocracy that invests heavily in organisations devoted to the defeat of militant Islamic fundamentalism.

Providing military aid to countries of such stellar repute worked out very well in the past. What could possibly go wrong?

I'm so glad I wasn't drinking coffee when I read this. Otherwise, I would be mopping up my monitor right now.

Of course, Niall, you must remember that we Americans, generally, are abysmally ignorant of history

I don't know much about the specifics of this particular deal, and I know far less than I'd like about the current state of politics in Saudi Arabia, but it seems entirely likely to me that the rationale behind the deal is the same as that of most other instances. In the first place, once a country has bought any particular good from another country, they're almost obligated to return goods in order to keep local currency local. That is, they've put money into our economy, and to get that money back they're going to have sell us some goods in return -- probably to our fiscal advantage. So far as I know, Saudi Arabia doesn't produce a surplus of cereals or textiles, so I wonder (ahem) what substance we might try to buy from them in the future.

Secondly, that we're selling weapons to the Saudis would seem to indicate that, at the very least, we're not too worried about them firing a salvo or two at our allies. Arms deals are typically made to nations whose vested military interests coincide with those of the arms seller. So if we're selling arms to Saudi Arabia, it's likely because we think it will serve our own interests in the region by putting someone else (ahem) at disadvantage.

And thirdly, the sale makes liquid an investment that was, in all likelihood, getting dusty in a warehouse somewhere. We don't usually sell state of the art. We sell second or third generation arms, the stuff that's old enough to have been replaced by something better, but new enough that it still gives the buyer an advantage over whatever wolves are at their doors. Our military investments tend to run pretty high, so freeing up that investment by selling hardware to someone else is one way of returning assets to the economy.

Those are three rationale that I've seen employed to justify sales of this sort in the past. Do they make the deal make sense in the broader context? I'm not so sure. Ultimately, history will tell whether or not it's to U.S. advantage -- after all, the sale of arms to Afghani freedom fighters may have done the intended job of sticking it to the Soviets, but it also provided a solid base of training and arms to the Taliban and Afghan terrorist cells. The proliferation of weapons almost always means that someone gets shot, so you can bet that there are at least a few people who will definitely suffer from this deal. And as a citizen, I don't particularly like the idea that I belong to a country that prospers by selling the material for someone else's wars. But then, no one in my government asked me.

My first concern is that I don't easily include myself in the "we" of the original post. I've never sold anything to anyone in Saudi Arabia- especially not weapons of mass and not-so-mass destruction. The weapons industry in the USA and its legislative lackeys is, I assume, one of the least democratic structures in history: they neither seek my support nor invite my input...as I see it, the entire process is a mega-machine gone wild, with a life of its own that simply consumes everything it touches- turning it to ash or lifeless steel. Borg is more appropriate.

I think we, and I include me, should be terrified of the mess this machine has made and continues to make: and can rest assured that it will undoubtedly unleash mayhem, chaos and terror on the people of Saudi Arabia and its neighbors.

George recommended the documentary "Why We Fight", and I second that. It portrays an out of control industry that warps politics and local economies, and promises to increase instability and violence wherever it spreads its produce.

DH
Borg is more appropriate.

Man I hate those guys!