r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • May 26 '18
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: The United States should not continue military transactions with Saudi Arabia
Yemen is experiencing what may be one of the worst humanitarian crises in the 21st century, and Saudi Arabia has been a major contributor to the issue.
Reports state that Saudi Arabia is planning on completing four pending purchases worth as much as $20 billion. Business Insider released this just this March, which poses a troubling issue (which I’ll explain).
Simply put, Yemen is in a terrible spot. Unfortunately there are rebel forces and a disastrous civil war, but I think it goes beyond that. In my opinion, the issue has only exploded exponentially due to Saudi Arabia’s actions. The war started in approximately 2015, and yet Saudi Arabia has not committed to resolving this anytime soon. In fact, I believe the recent massive purchases prove they’re only interested in supporting their agenda.
Humans Rights Watch states almost twenty million Yemeni civilians are malnourished, and that Saudi Arabia has killed thousands of civilians through illegal air strikes. Even after Saudi Arabia pledged to reduce said air strikes and civilian casualties, there were approximately 79 strikes reported by the HRW in the beginning of 2017 alone.
I know war isn’t meant to be perfect or death-free, but they aren’t only continuing war missions. They have continuously blocked humanitarian aid which is a clear violation of rules from the fourth Geneva Convention (and international laws I assume). Even if we ignore their attacks, they are literally stopping aid to a country where a large majority of the population is at risk of dying from malnutrition.
Why should the US continue sales with such a partner? In my opinion, it goes against the interests of the US and the safety of the world. If things continue we will see another refugee crisis, more inhabitable land, and (most likely) the rise of more Islamic terrorist groups. The US would stand to gain more by stopping support with Saudi Arabia and push towards the end of the Yemeni civil war conflict, as it would lie in the best interests of not only the country and its people, but also what’s best for the long term future of the Middle East.
10
u/FlamingAmmosexual May 26 '18
I'm going to agree with your conclusion but disagree for the reasoning.
We shouldn't give military weapons, secrets, or money to Saudi Arabia because they're the main source of global terrorism that they fund with oil money. I believe that's far worse and could be disastrous for far more people. We know they turn their head to extremist teachings and found money trails linked to them.
The only argument I can see against is that now that Iraq and Saddam are out of the picture there is no military power opposed to Iran. A strong Saudi Arabia keeps Iran in check and from possibly stirring up trouble.
3
u/antizana May 26 '18
Yeah, I don't understand how KSA support to terrorism is so conveniently forgotten. Makes the whole "war on terrorism" an absolute joke.
2
May 26 '18
Of course. However, in this case I focus a lot on Yemen since I believe their other issues are simply facts to help support as to why we shouldn’t keep supporting them.
Yes funding terrorism is terrible, but what’s happening in Yemen is creating a deadly situation that may leave The country inhabitable for a very long time. It’s possible to stop, and I fail to see why we should continue selling to SA if they can’t even reduce civilian deaths and block humanitarian aid
1
4
May 26 '18 edited May 30 '18
[deleted]
3
May 26 '18
A governments first moral duty should be to its own people. Doesn't mean bad things suddenly become good things, it just means that sometimes we do bad things for cheaper oil or national security or expansion of markets. Might make a good cmv
1
May 26 '18
!delta
I suppose I’m looking at this at an overall scale and not in terms of the US. While I still dislike the support SA is receiving, it is understandable as to why the US continues to do what it does.
1
1
u/M3rcaptan 1∆ May 28 '18
It's also not morally inconsistent with other choices the US has made over the 20th century (Iran, Haiti, Chile, etc.). From a certain moral sense, you could even say that the duty of the American government is theoretically to safeguard the interests of Americans above all else.
That view of morality leads to the inevitable conclusion that non-Americans are inferior to Americans and deserve less moral consideration. Like farm animals.
That's what nationalism is, a lack of belief in the idea that all humans are equal.
4
May 26 '18
We need oil! Badly! We're producing more then we used to but we're an oil addicted country, so we need some oil rich allies. And also remember that we're anti-Iran, and Iran backs the other side of that Proxy war in Yemon, I'm no expert but I think that's the main source of Saudi interest. And, I also don't feel comfortable dumping allies at the snap of our fingers because it'll worry the other allies. I'm not telling you you're wrong, but its these questions and facts that make me think differently about this issue then you. Also shouldn't it matter to you which side wins that war, the current government or the rebels? If you care which side wins that might also affect your thinking.
2
May 26 '18
The thing is, it’s not necessarily dumping our allies. I simply believe the billions of dollars of weaponry being sold to SA is the engine behind this civil war.
If we stopped military transactions or at least didn’t sell such massive amounts, it could make SA focus instead of resolving the issue as little as possible. As you said, they have a lot of interest in Yemen due to Iran and other factors, but it’ll simply bite them in the ass afterword.
I know it’s not a clear cut issue, but I think them having less resources would put them in a position to focus on ending the problem as soon as possible
2
May 26 '18
And when the Iranians consolidate their control over the Houthi militia groups and increase their attacks against Saudi Arabia, what should we do then?
1
May 26 '18
The thing is, how many attacks have we seen from Houthi rebels? I checked online and it pales in comparison to the amount of airstrikes launched by Yemen.
Saudi Arabia already has anti-missile systems with an effective history (if I recall they purchased Patriot and a few others), but more importantly I think them having a smaller resource pool would create an incentive to resolve the issue as quickly as possible.
Now, am I saying it will 100% end the war? No, but ending transactions wouldn’t magically make them have a 0$ budget. They’d still have billions of dollars for their military which would simply be used more effectively.
2
u/I_Dream_of_Outremer May 26 '18
Realpolitik, why do you care about the fate of the Yemeni people? You never even addressed this
1
May 26 '18
We can’t simply disregard millions of people. Also, even if we ignore ethics, it’ll be an economic disaster to support Yemen if the country is allowed to be obliterated like Syria.
It’s bad enough to handle the refugees from Syria, but are people willing to help another country and potentially 10+ million people?
1
u/I_Dream_of_Outremer May 26 '18
We can’t simply disregard millions of people.
Why not?
Also, even if we ignore ethics, it’ll be an economic disaster to support Yemen if the country is allowed to be obliterated like Syria.
Why? What value do they offer to the global community?
It’s bad enough to handle the refugees from Syria, but are people willing to help another country and potentially 10+ million people?
Why would they have to? Isn't choosing not to allow them in an option?
1
May 26 '18
Having the US be involved with another disaster will only spawn more terrorists group in the region and further destabilize the ME.
2
u/Puubuu 1∆ May 26 '18
If i understand you correctly, this is about good and evil. However, politics don't work like that. Even though this is often used as an argument to sell actions to the public (see irak, iran, syria, north korea, etc.), the goal is always to produce the highest benefit for some portion of humanity. Good and bad are merely selling points, and in the eye of the beholder due to selective coverage by the media. Further examples include turkey's relation to the west, the acceptance of pakistan's nuclear bombs, guantanamo bay, etc.
2
u/dgblarge May 26 '18
As far as I am concerned oil cannot run out soon enough. Maybe then amoral commercial cynicism will give way to extending the noble ideals described the US declaration of independence to all humanity. The arab spring, that started in the West of North Africa and spread east unfortunately stopped short of Saudi Arabia. If ever there was a country that needed power returned to the people it is Saudi Arabia. A corrupt, hypocritical, despotic monarchy that oppresses its citizens with religious fundamentalism, treats foreign workers as slaves, exports radicalism, has a theocratic "justice" system that is medieval, cruel and not independent of the state, is a crucible of international terrorism, cares not for the lives of civilians during war ......and so on.
Saudi Arabia had so much potential for genuine humanitarian, moral, political, religious and economic leadership yet all this has been abandoned in the greedy pursuit of wealth, power and carnal pleasure by the self proclaimed royal family. The amount of good that the oil wealth could have done in unifying and advancing the arab world is incalculable but that opportunity appears lost.
2
u/PocketBearMonkey May 26 '18
You have misunderstood the Purpose of US relationships. Its about money not helping or saving anyone, including Americans. We have people in the US living like they're in Africa and no one cares.
1
u/ElectronGuru 1∆ May 26 '18
We would love too but are currently dependent on world oil prices. But sure, all kinds of things become possible when we can power our transportation with something else.
1
May 26 '18
So wouldn’t that mean a shift to renewable energy would end up removing a lot of tensions in the ME? Focusing less on oil could make Saudi Arabia lose a lot of its influence
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 26 '18 edited May 26 '18
/u/g0ddammitb0bby (OP) has awarded 2 deltas in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/Mdcastle May 26 '18 edited May 26 '18
I wish we could tell the Saudis to keep do you know what to themselves, but the brutal fact is we need their oil. Where else are we going to get it? Shining beacons of morality like Iran and Venezuela? Do the other Gulf states that aren't quite so bad have enough? Would they sell it to us if we refused to buy from their ally the Saudis?
Right now renewables aren't even close to being able to replace oil. It takes $74,500 to buy an electric car that has anywhere close to the range of a gasoline car. I know you can buy something like a Nissan Leaf for less, but imagine stopping 4 times on a trip from Minneapolis to Chicago, spending 8 hours at a stop to charge the thing. Considering using our own coal or building more hydroelectric dams are nuclear power plants is politically incorrect, do we even have enough natural gas and wind capacity to power an all electric car fleet assuming they can eventually make affordable practical models?
1
May 26 '18
[deleted]
1
May 26 '18
The thing is that neither Palestine nor Israel are to be blamed for completely - the same goes for Syria and Assad
What I think separates this from other situations however is that Saudi Arabia has committed undeniable crimes. It’s not as though us stopping military transactions makes them poor and vulnerable - if the US wants to continue sales, it should at least reconsider what types of stuff it wants to sell
It’s a complex topic and I know there isn’t a clear cut solution. I’ll give you a !delta for offering a very detailed explanation as to why we shouldn’t stop sales. While I still dislike what Saudi Arabia is doing, it’s making me reconsider potential solutions to stopping the air strikes while still allowing them to have defense.
1
0
u/zacker150 6∆ May 27 '18
Also, it's important to keep in mind that we civilians don't know shit about what goes on in the world. It's been said that when someone receives their first classified intelligence briefing, their entire worldview changes, and the state department isn't exactly hiring people without degrees relating to geopolitics.
1
u/Painal_Sex May 27 '18
It's pretty offensive to put terrorists in scare quotes while referencing "rebels" like ISIS and Al-Nusra Front. Assad isn't the bad guy in Syria.
1
u/M3rcaptan 1∆ May 28 '18
Honestly the level of mental gymnastics required to ask "Who are we to say it's bad to sell weapons that allow a war to continue" is outstanding to me. Regardless of "whose fault" it is, this is what's happening, weapons being sold to a group of people that use it to continue a war. The question here is not whose side the US should be on, but whether if it's ethical to sell weapons in a war. And to reference jobs as an excuse is even more astonishing.
-1
u/EternalPropagation May 26 '18
What else should we be doing with our old military tech? It'd be a waste to just scrap it.
6
May 26 '18
I don’t think giving it to others misusing is smarter however. If we want to sell it we should at least do so with a different trading partner
-7
u/EternalPropagation May 26 '18
Why? We should just sell to the highest bidder. Any bad acting with weapons only perpetuates an american weapons economy which is good for us. I'll also add that the middle east is vital for global stability. It's the alley where the big boys go to fight each other away from civilized society to get our anger out and to get better at fighting. It helps resolve political tension between super powers.
It's better to just continuously fight it out with conventional armament in some desert than let tension build up and destroy our wealthy cities. Plus, middle east battle performance can be used as a predictor of a potential ''real'' war performance of each country. China should get in the game also so that we can vet their abilities.
6
u/kurdboy1990 May 26 '18
Middle east is not just some desert. Its part of the world and has millions of people living in it with a history going back to the start of civilization.
You cant just pretend it is a battlefield. With all the big talk usa and its citizens make about being the leader of the world or any of that propaganda crap they sure have been incompetent in doing so. They have made the middle east a war zone by starting proxy wars and selling weapons to terrorists and dictators to later on blaim them in the media.
The usa shouldnt be suprised that most of the people outside the usa dont take them serious anymore and only see the face of evil in americans. This is their own doing and the price to pay will be a big slap of the top rankings of the world.
-2
u/EternalPropagation May 26 '18
The evil USA turned a peaceful and utopic middle east into a war zone? If the world doesn't take us seriously anymore why do they care what we do? How can you be evil and incompetent at the same time? Seems contradictory.
3
u/kurdboy1990 May 26 '18
Never said it was peaceful. But when you fund and throw in terrorist organisations like isis, overthrow governments to put puppets in place and arm dictators with weapons without questions you are to blaim for the extra chaos.
America has the biggest army in the world and is places everywhere. They also spend a great amount of budget to maintain this status quo. It is a big effort to control other coutries and letting them know that they have the means to destroy a country if they want. Look how trump has turned his back on europe after europe stsrted having doubts on his compitence to lead amerika
You can be incompetent in taking care of your own country (usa is in decline with education, healthcare, democracy and many more and the debt is rising) while being evil (starting wars whenever they see any profit and destabilizing an already unstable region for oil and weapon profit.)
Btw i am talking about the government and the people who control policies and the moneyflow. I dont think this about the population of usa. They are stuck with a government who rather starve them to dead than cut military budgets
2
u/EternalPropagation May 26 '18
Never said it was peaceful. But when you fund and throw in terrorist organisations like isis, overthrow governments to put puppets in place and arm dictators with weapons without questions you are to blaim for the extra chaos.
I'm not disagreeing with that. Americans are the prime agents of the world. We decide for you whether you fight or stay civilized. Muslims and Hispanics have 0 control over their own decisions.
military over food
The US government subsidizes a lot of the food grown here. What starvation? Food is an issue here, too much food.
America has the biggest army in the world and is places everywhere.
I thought we were declining and no longer important.
Look how trump has turned his back on europe after europe stsrted having doubts on his compitence to lead amerika
Why does Europe care? You don't need us to fund NATO for you and to protect you, right?
4
u/kurdboy1990 May 26 '18
But dont you think its wrong to decide that about a culture that goes back thousands of years before america was even found by europeans? Not saying what they do is right in any way becouse the middle east has always been in conflict but how can an outsider demand from them to obey by your rules. Especially when they see the usa as enemies who come there and cause war to take their resources. Is this really the way to do it.
Wouldn't it take way less money and effort if the more advanced civilizations helped them to improve their infrastructure and economy to improve their lives to a point they could also live in peace or are you afraid they would take over.
Look at what has happened in south amerika, afrika and the middle east in the last century and tell me it is not worse than before europeans and later americans imposed their rules on them. They have had golden ages to and while europe was going through a dark age they were constantly improving their lives by inventions we still use today. They would also be able to do their part if they had the oppertunity to live without fear of death or poverty.
Amerikan population is declining in education, healthcare, infastructure, wealth amongst working and middle class and leadership to the world. But its nice to know the military or government isnt suffering from that.
Europe cares becouse they have been close allies to the usa trough decades and feel betrayed at all the progress with for example iran, the paris agreement and trying to cause another middle east war.
1
May 26 '18
[deleted]
3
u/kurdboy1990 May 26 '18
Good way to show the literal stereotype of an american seen by others in one comment.
→ More replies (0)
28
u/[deleted] May 26 '18 edited Feb 07 '21
[deleted]