Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 ... snhp&pos=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Saudi Arabia's pledge to replace U.S. aid to Egypt that could be cut in the wake of the military's bloody crackdown makes clear the American ally's priority in the Middle East: to keep deposed President Mohammed Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood at bay and its own kingdom secure – even at the risk of stepping on American toes.

"I confirm to everyone, the Saudi Kingdom leaders, government and nation has stood and will forever stand with Egypt and the Arab community will not allow ever to have their fate manipulated or their security and stability tampered with," an official Saudi news agency quoted Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal as saying. "As for those who announced that they will stop their support to Egypt or threatened to stop it, for the Arab and Muslim world is rich with its people and capabilities and will not hesitate to offer a helping hand to Egypt."'



The US threatens to cut $1.5B in aid, and S.A. says, "F that!"

Now, will Saudi Arabia purchase US arms and give them to Egypt, or will they start buying from the Russians and Chinese?

Saudi Arabia: The gift that keeps on giving
They've been stabbing us in the back for 55 years now

what's new

Chizzang wrote:Saudi Arabia: The gift that keeps on giving
They've been stabbing us in the back for 55 years now

what's new

What exactly is your complaint with Saudi Arabia's aid? They realize that it is not in their interest to have the Muslim Brotherhood running the show in Egypt ( or anywhere else). Too bad our MB shill of a president doesn't realize it as well.

CitadelGrad wrote:

Chizzang wrote:Saudi Arabia: The gift that keeps on giving
They've been stabbing us in the back for 55 years now

what's new

What exactly is your complaint with Saudi Arabia's aid? They realize that it is not in their interest to have the Muslim Brotherhood running the show in Egypt ( or anywhere else). Too bad our MB shill of a president doesn't realize it as well.

I have a list of problems with Saudi Arabia so long I'd need 3 reams of paper to jot it down
Suffice to say: They double deal (always) and as the "face" of the modern middle east they routinely negotiate against us

We need to have a relationship with Saudi Arabia similar to the relationship we have with Venezuela

Sand naggers.

I think we can use that $1.5B better at home.

Chizzang wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:
What exactly is your complaint with Saudi Arabia's aid? They realize that it is not in their interest to have the Muslim Brotherhood running the show in Egypt ( or anywhere else). Too bad our MB shill of a president doesn't realize it as well.

I have a list of problems with Saudi Arabia so long I'd need 3 reams of paper to jot it down
Suffice to say: They double deal (always) and as the "face" of the modern middle east they routinely negotiate against us

We need to have a relationship with Saudi Arabia similar to the relationship we have with Venezuela

Sounds a lot like the US, they learned from the best.

Obama knew that the Saudi's would do this. Probably coordinated it in the first place.

dbackjon wrote:Obama knew that the Saudi's would do this. Probably coordinated it in the first place.

I wondered the same thing.

dbackjon wrote:Obama knew that the Saudi's would do this. Probably coordinated it in the first place.

Methinks you give the prez a bit too much credit.

DSUrocks07 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
I have a list of problems with Saudi Arabia so long I'd need 3 reams of paper to jot it down
Suffice to say: They double deal (always) and as the "face" of the modern middle east they routinely negotiate against us

We need to have a relationship with Saudi Arabia similar to the relationship we have with Venezuela

Sounds a lot like the US, they learned from the best.

We need to extract OURSELVES from that region
And worry a little less about extracting oil

We're too reliant on those who would lie to our faces
and God Bless 'em I don't blame them / It's a Shame on us situation

a) World Police
b) Effectively: Military working for Oil Companies
c) The tangled web

Someday hopefully we will be energy independent and we won't have to give a crap about the chaos in the Middle East and the only things we will send over there are water and contraceptives. A guy can dream, right?

Chizzang wrote:

DSUrocks07 wrote:
Sounds a lot like the US, they learned from the best.

We need to extract OURSELVES from that region
And worry a little less about extracting oil

We're too reliant on those who would lie to our faces
and God Bless 'em I don't blame them / It's a Shame on us situation

a) World Police
b) Effectively: Military working for Oil Companies
c) The tangled web

Agreed.

What's our ROI on foreign aid? It sure as hell isn't peace.

Ibanez wrote:I think we can use that $1.5B better at home.

Uhhh...that $1.5 billion never leaves home. It goes from the Fed, to a trust at the Treasury, to the pockets of our defense contractors.

That transaction is one of the many laws our Congress has written for the benefit of...?

Seriously...the law is written that our aid to Egypt goes directly to our defense contractors...the money does not pass through Egypt in any way, shape, or form.

We have a law written that gives $1.5 billion directly to our defense contractors.

Think about that.

And, while Obama has suspended delivery of the F-16s to Egypt, those planes were bought and paid for already, so it is business as usual for our defense contractors. Cha-ching.

dbackjon wrote:Obama knew that the Saudi's would do this. Probably coordinated it in the first place.

Exactly.

Saudi Arabia has promised Egypt $12B in aid, including military aid.

Anyone know Saudi Arabia's capacity for building F-16s, armored vehicles, or any other military equipment?

Obama said we would not directly send military aid to Syrian rebels. Yet we knew Saudi Arabia was supplying weapons to the rebels.

Can anyone guess where Saudi Arabia was getting those weapons to supply to Syria? All the while, Obama says, with a straight face, that we were not involved with arming the rebels.

This is why I love Assange and Snowden. Put all of that BS out there for the world to see.

Nothing much will happen with those revelations, really. People won't want their sitcoms interrupted with the truth.

However, the Libs will finally have to just admit that they are a bunch of Conks who are willing to sacrifice some camel jockeys in order to enjoy the American dream.

OBushma. Change my azz!



Don't worry, Jon, I am sure your tummy is rumbling and you are drawing up a poster that says, "Impeach Obama - the lying sack-of-sh!t warmonger!".

Cluck U wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Obama knew that the Saudi's would do this. Probably coordinated it in the first place.

Exactly.

Saudi Arabia has promised Egypt $12B in aid, including military aid.

Anyone know Saudi Arabia's capacity for building F-16s, armored vehicles, or any other military equipment?

Obama said we would not directly send military aid to Syrian rebels. Yet we knew Saudi Arabia was supplying weapons to the rebels.

Can anyone guess where Saudi Arabia was getting those weapons to supply to Syria? All the while, Obama says, with a straight face, that we were not involved with arming the rebels.

This is why I love Assange and Snowden. Put all of that BS out there for the world to see.

Nothing much will happen with those revelations, really. People won't want their sitcoms interrupted with the truth.

However, the Libs will finally have to just admit that they are a bunch of Conks who are willing to sacrifice some camel jockeys in order to enjoy the American dream.

OBushma. Change my azz!



Don't worry, Jon, I am sure your tummy is rumbling and you are drawing up a poster that says, "Impeach Obama - the lying sack-of-sh!t warmonger!".

You know, you'd be a lot easier to like if you weren't such an ass-hole
But it is true (painfully true) that this administrations middle east policy is not different than the previous administrations

Lets put that in perspective:
The previous Administration had DICK CHENEY on it...

Cluck U wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Obama knew that the Saudi's would do this. Probably coordinated it in the first place.

Exactly.

Saudi Arabia has promised Egypt $12B in aid, including military aid.

Anyone know Saudi Arabia's capacity for building F-16s, armored vehicles, or any other military equipment?

Obama said we would not directly send military aid to Syrian rebels. Yet we knew Saudi Arabia was supplying weapons to the rebels.

Can anyone guess where Saudi Arabia was getting those weapons to supply to Syria? All the while, Obama says, with a straight face, that we were not involved with arming the rebels.

This is why I love Assange and Snowden. Put all of that BS out there for the world to see.

Nothing much will happen with those revelations, really. People won't want their sitcoms interrupted with the truth.

However, the Libs will finally have to just admit that they are a bunch of Conks who are willing to sacrifice some camel jockeys in order to enjoy the American dream.

OBushma. Change my azz!



Don't worry, Jon, I am sure your tummy is rumbling and you are drawing up a poster that says, "Impeach Obama - the lying sack-of-sh!t warmonger!".

Someone buy his azz some PUSSY

Chizzang wrote: You know, you'd be a lot easier to like if you weren't such an ass-hole
But it is true (painfully true) that this administrations middle east policy is not different than the previous administrations

Lets put that in perspective:
The previous Administration had DICK CHENEY on it...

Excellent perspective!

And I don't need to be liked. All I need is...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VbI5zcB8Ac[/youtube]

mrklean wrote:
Someone buy his azz some PUSSY

I'd think that with your view of history, you wouldn't want to be bought and sold.

Chizzang wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
Exactly.

Saudi Arabia has promised Egypt $12B in aid, including military aid.

Anyone know Saudi Arabia's capacity for building F-16s, armored vehicles, or any other military equipment?

Obama said we would not directly send military aid to Syrian rebels. Yet we knew Saudi Arabia was supplying weapons to the rebels.

Can anyone guess where Saudi Arabia was getting those weapons to supply to Syria? All the while, Obama says, with a straight face, that we were not involved with arming the rebels.

This is why I love Assange and Snowden. Put all of that BS out there for the world to see.

Nothing much will happen with those revelations, really. People won't want their sitcoms interrupted with the truth.

However, the Libs will finally have to just admit that they are a bunch of Conks who are willing to sacrifice some camel jockeys in order to enjoy the American dream.

OBushma. Change my azz!



Don't worry, Jon, I am sure your tummy is rumbling and you are drawing up a poster that says, "Impeach Obama - the lying sack-of-sh!t warmonger!".

You know, you'd be a lot easier to like if you weren't such an ass-hole
But it is true (painfully true) that this administrations middle east policy is not different than the previous administrations

Lets put that in perspective:
The previous Administration had DICK CHENEY on it...

The policy is very different. It is born of the liberal idea that supporting tyrants is unconscionable under any circumstance, even when it is in America's best interests to do so.

Remember the good ole days when we used to hear (ad nauseum) that we'd have a lot more peace and stability if we wouldn't support people like Mubarak? How's that working out now?

This is what happens when ideology meets reality.

CID1990 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
But it is true (painfully true) that this administrations middle east policy is not different than the previous administrations

Lets put that in perspective:
The previous Administration had DICK CHENEY on it...

The policy is very different. It is born of the liberal idea that supporting tyrants is unconscionable under any circumstance, even when it is in America's best interests to do so.

Remember the good ole days when we used to hear (ad nauseum) that we'd have a lot more peace and stability if we wouldn't support people like Mubarak? How's that working out now?

This is what happens when ideology meets reality.

CID, nothing has really changed.

We are still supporting Bahrain's oppressive government, Saudi Arabia's oppressive government (love how they treat their women and minority sects), Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan, and many other crappy governments. We just prefer to not speak about those governments in terms of individual tyrants and, instead, talk about monarchies and democracies (those based, of course, on tons of our money flowing to warlords and rigged elections).

We just helped kick out Egypt's first-ever democratically elected leader (yes, he was an azzhole and becoming a tyrant) and we are supporting a "rebel" uprising in Syria in order to throw sand in Russia's face while kowtowing to Saudi Arabia and the other so-called "moderate" (are you kidding me?) Muslims, including Gul.

Why do we do such things? To support our "national interest." As always. Same ol' same ol'.





It is a joke, and it is our foreign policy.

It sure smells the same...

Cluck U wrote:

mrklean wrote:
Someone buy his azz some PUSSY

I'd think that with your view of history, you wouldn't want to be bought and sold.

Cluck U wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
The policy is very different. It is born of the liberal idea that supporting tyrants is unconscionable under any circumstance, even when it is in America's best interests to do so.

Remember the good ole days when we used to hear (ad nauseum) that we'd have a lot more peace and stability if we wouldn't support people like Mubarak? How's that working out now?

This is what happens when ideology meets reality.

CID, nothing has really changed.

We are still supporting Bahrain's oppressive government, Saudi Arabia's oppressive government (love how they treat their women and minority sects), Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan, and many other crappy governments. We just prefer to not speak about those governments in terms of individual tyrants and, instead, talk about monarchies and democracies (those based, of course, on tons of our money flowing to warlords and rigged elections).

We just helped kick out Egypt's first-ever democratically elected leader (yes, he was an azzhole and becoming a tyrant) and we are supporting a "rebel" uprising in Syria in order to throw sand in Russia's face while kowtowing to Saudi Arabia and the other so-called "moderate" (are you kidding me?) Muslims, including Gul.

Why do we do such things? To support our "national interest." As always. Same ol' same ol'.





It is a joke, and it is our foreign policy.

Yep...same program just different speeches.

Pat Buchannon is CID for his comments. thread.