Posted on 01/23/2016 12:25:00 PM PST by Theoria
When President Obama secretly authorized the Central Intelligence Agency to begin arming Syria's embattled rebels in 2013, the spy agency knew it would have a willing partner to help pay for the covert operation. It was the same partner the C.I.A. has relied on for decades for money and discretion in far-off conflicts: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Since then, the C.I.A. and its Saudi counterpart have maintained an unusual arrangement for the rebel-training mission, which the Americans have code-named Timber Sycamore. Under the deal, current and former administration officials said, the Saudis contribute both weapons and large sums of money, and the C.I.A takes the lead in training the rebels on AK-47 assault rifles and tank-destroying missiles.
The support for the Syrian rebels is only the latest chapter in the decadeslong relationship between the spy services of Saudi Arabia and the United States, an alliance that has endured through the Iran-contra scandal, support for the mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan and proxy fights in Africa. Sometimes, as in Syria, the two countries have worked in concert. In others, Saudi Arabia has simply written checks underwriting American covert activities.
The joint arming and training program, which other Middle East nations contribute money to, continues as America's relations with Saudi Arabia -- and the kingdom's place in the region -- are in flux. The old ties of cheap oil and geopolitics that have long bound the countries together have loosened as America's dependence on foreign oil declines and the Obama administration tiptoes toward a diplomatic rapprochement with Iran.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Allowing the stupid half of any population to have a say in intelligent decisions will allow such stupidity to happen.
Yes, you may quote me on that.
Now there’s a shock./sarcasm
Decades of financial support for US covert and overt military operations (including Operation Desert Storm, for which the Saudis footed over half the bill) are why administrations on both sides to the aisle have referred to the Saudi royals as allies. They are arguably stronger allies than most NATO countries, which are military dependents rather than useful allies. Our problem with Saudi Arabia is the same as our problem with the Muslim world - the Muslim man on the street hates our guts and those of their leaders who are our allies are villified by internal rivals as American lapdogs.
As a price for their contributions we are allowing them to spread their radical form of Wahabism. As they said they are in it for the long run and long run they are commited to jihad.
and look how wonderfully that secret military invasion has worked out
Should have drilled our own damned oil.
Totally agree. And there is an epidemic of stupid people nowadays.
The cia is an enemy of traditional American life. As every convert operation they do becomes public, we learn again of a new evil. Now it is training al qeida who attacked us on 9/11.
The Saudi government is the most repressive on earth except for north Korea. They are literally worse than iran.
When they pay for things, they aren’t being an loyal ally. They are hiring us.
Saudis keep their friends close, and their enemies even closer.
As free societies, we don't "allow" them to spread anything, any more than we "allow" Indian gurus or Mayan mystics to spread their messages. The nature of free societies is openness to foreign ideas, even hostile ones like Islam, Nation of Islam, socialism, fascism, Putinism and so on. The reason the Saudis fund missionary work (dawah) so lavishly is because it (1) is part and parcel of Islam, and lack of devotion is this area (as with other spheres) would be noticed by the always angry Saudi masses and (2) is a form of exile for nutty radicals who think the royals are (a) too liberal and (b) slaves of the US.
To change the man on the street view in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries to a pro-US stance would require a root-and-branch extermination of their populations and their replacement by US settlers or mandatory apostasy from Islam at gunpoint and the slaughter of those who refused. Since neither of these is a realistic possibility, our best bet is sticking with our current dance partners.
Yep. And we think they are an ally, we act like a hooker falling in love with a John. And the worst embarrassment of all is seeing repubs fall all over themselves to kiss Saudi ass.
That depends on what your gauge of repressiveness is. As to hiring us, it's good to be paid by the Saudis for services that we would have provided anyway - namely keeping the Soviets out of Africa and South America, and preventing any one Muslim leader from unifying the oil resources of the Middle East under a single ruler.
Whereas we are obligated to provide free protection for "allies" in Europe and East Asia. There's a word for people who provide free services. Slave. We are slaves to military dependents like the NATO countries, South Korea, Japan and the Philippines. Better to be an employee than a slave, any day of the week.
Once again you are wrong. Everyone there hates us because we are best friends with the oppressive government. We are chummy with the worst evil leaders on earth, and then astounded when their beaten and crushed down people don’t seem to like us very much and call us hypocrites. It isn’t rocket science. Well. .. even rocket science isn’t really “rocket science”. But you get my point.
And of course, you and the CIA quickly see that we need a weed and branch campaign against the population who is under the heel. That’s or foreign policy in a nutshell for several decades now.
The government is just fine, anyone who resists them is the problem!
The Saudis fund wahabbism. They aren’t victims of it.
Where do people get this neocon BS from? Inside every Muslim isn't an American struggling to get out. That is why we don't want them in this country. The Saudi masses hate our guts because we are infidels, not because we don't invade and topple their government. We don't support the Saudis - they keep themselves in power just fine. What we do is prevent external powers from adding Saudi Arabia to their territory.
Saddam could have taken Saudi Arabia for all I care. At least he was a secular leader, who only paid lip-service to Islam when it benefitted him.
Well, you skip over defining repression and hop right to how cool it is to have them pay us. The ethos of the whore. What’s that about what the meaning of “is” is thing again?
My definition of oppression is cities I cannot visit, women who cannot travel or go on a date and have no right to vote except -barely- this year. Public beatings nearly to death if you blog that maybe people should have some say in their lives. Massive Internet censorship. Death for witchcraft still. Slavery. Not a synagogue or church or bible allowed in, and a feudal monarchy, and a pervasive internal spy network.... for starters.
China is more free than Saudi Arabia.
They are not an ally, they pursue their goals by using us.
The Saudi royals are not victims of Islam because they haven't repudiated it. The Shah became a victim of Islam because he repudiated it. Are we better off now that the mullahs rule Iran? I'd argue not. Similarly, a Saudi repudiation of Islam that resulted in the creation of an imamate (Iran-style rule by clerics) in place of Saudi Arabia would not be in the American interest. The Carterite policy of getting our Muslim allies (i.e. national leaders) to secularize is a fool's errand. The people they rule are Muslim savages who will remove or kill any leaders who deviate from Islam. Americans obey their rulers. Muslims obey only the Koran and in that view, any Muslim leader who deviates from the Koran is asking for Koranic tortures and death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.