|
Post by Amadan on Oct 20, 2018 9:40:30 GMT -5
Gee, Trump is having a positive effect on politics afterall. It's nice to see so many who ignored the crimes of Saudi Arabia under the last several administrations finally waking up.
It's not like people haven't been talking about how atrocious the Saudi regime is since even before 9/11. I think what's captured the public's feelings in this case is the very personal nature of the atrocity - anonymous brown people being bombed en masse in a shithole country no one can locate on a map doesn't really elicit more than a "gosh, how tragic - war, ya know?" But a journalist who's kinda sorta an American (US residents are not citizens, but they are generally extended most US civil rights and we expect the US government to take an interest in their well-being) who gets tortured and cut up just before he was to be married... and the Saudis doing it in such a blatant in-your-face fashion. That gives people the heebie-jeebies. That makes people wonder if the Saudi embassy here in the US might pull the same kind of shit.
I mean, you're not wrong that it's ironic that this is what pushes people over the edge of tolerance for the Saudis, but it doesn't require some Trumpian explanation. It's human nature. You're going to react more strongly to your next-door neighbor dying in a car crash than to fifty people dying in a car crash on a foggy road in China.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 20, 2018 10:04:23 GMT -5
In my opinion, Daniel Pearl's execution was fully sanctioned by people high up in Pakistan. I think such a conclusion is close to a no-brainer, actually. Yet, we played nice with Pakistan under Bush because it was a "valuable ally" in the war on terror. And this continued under Obama. Similarly, I think it's also a no-brainer that Kim Jong Un had his half-brother assassinated, yet we've still dealt diplomatically with North Korea. Then there are all those unexplained deaths of various Russians...
The point is, many people remain selective in their outrage. I think what's going on now with the Saudis is awful. I think the proper response is immediate sanctions and the freezing of assets IF AND ONLY IF Turkey ponies up all of the evidence it has. Because let's be clear here: Erdogan--who is hardly as pure as the driven snow--is milking this for all it's worth, for his own advantage. But this is the sort of response that the Daniel Pearl situation--and others--should have generated, as well.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Oct 20, 2018 10:20:44 GMT -5
Because let's be clear here: Erdogan--who is hardly as pure as the driven snow--is milking this for all it's worth, for his own advantage. Erdogan abhors the murder of journalists. Just ask Serena Shim.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2018 12:52:06 GMT -5
As I recall, people were in fact pretty fucking upset by Daniel Pearl's killing. Unlike President Trump, President Bush promptly denounced the killers: More to the point, Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and assassinated by terrorists. Khashoggi was killed in the fucking Saudi Consulate, and we can be pretty confident the Saudi government was in on it. But no, the situations are identical, both sides, etc.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 20, 2018 13:29:59 GMT -5
As I recall, people were in fact pretty fucking upset by Daniel Pearl's killing. Unlike President Trump, President Bush promptly denounced the killers: More to the point, Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and assassinated by terrorists. Khashoggi was killed in the fucking Saudi Consulate, and we can be pretty confident the Saudi government was in on it. But no, the situations are identical, both sides, etc. Oh, please. I didn't say the situations were identical, and given that I'm criticizing the BUSH regime, I don't know how this turns into "both sides." See, this is the problem I have with rabid anti-Trumpism in a nutshell: these kinds of auto-responses to any opinion that isn't full-bore anti-Trump. AGAIN, I think Trump and his admin's response to this has been awful, and I think the US should respond with sanctions and the like (at the very least). Re Daniel Pearl: no shit people were pretty fucking upset. But what you are *conveniently* ignoring--in order to sustain your Trump hatred--is what I actually said: You want to argue that I'm wrong, that it was "terrorists" who were apparently acting alone, knock yourself out. I think that's a pretty naive opinion, myself. You know, I was one of the people who was--and still is--upset by Pearl's execution. And I held that against the Bush admin for a long time. I still do, actually. As far as I was concerned back then, Pakistan should have been target #2--right after Afghanistan--in the response to 9/11 (and for point of info, Saudi Arabia should have been next in line). The US government fails repeatedly when it comes to these sorts of situations. It's nice to see people waking up to it now, even though they're only doing so because Trump is a loud-mouthed ass and waaaay out of his league, when it comes to diplomacy and IR. The following is unprovable but I'd bet dollars to donuts that if this sort of killing had occurred under the previous two admins--or under Hillary Clinton--there would have been a ton of serious talk about how it wasn't acceptable, many veiled threats would have been made through diplomatic channels, and "red lines" would have been drawn. This would have persisted for some time, at least through the election cycle. But pretty much nothing would have actually been done about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2018 14:31:32 GMT -5
Bush's reaction to Pearl's death is absolutely nothing like Trump's reaction to Khashoggi's death, and when you condemn them in the same breath, the effect is to equate them and normalize Trump's.
Trump's reaction is, as usual, off the fucking map. It doesn't belong on the same chart. He's swallowing the absolutely ridiculous and ever-changing explanations of the Saudi government (who first asserted that Khashoggi left the consulate alive, and now says he went there and got in a "fistfight", FFS, with 15 people). In the immediate aftermath of the horror, Trump was all "well, he's not even a citizen" (essentially, "hey, so who cares,") and, at a rally, he fucking re-dredged up the assault of a reporter by Gianforte, cheering it and saying that anyone who assaults a reporter is his kinda guy. RIGHT AFTER THE BRUTAL MURDER OF A JOURNALIST. Come on, did Bush, Obama, etc. EVER do anything close to that? Trump is essentially telling all the brutal regimes in the world "Hey, go right fucking ahead and kill and torture people. We'll fucking cheer you on, bros."
I can see arguing that Bush didn't do enough to investigate whether Pakistani intelligence had a connection to Pearl's death. But COME ON, it's clear on the damn face of it, from minute one, that the Saudi government is behind Khashoggi's death. It took place in the damn consulate. There's apparently a tape. The Saudi government's statements are ridiculous and contradictory.
Sure, past presidents did plenty of stuff we can criticize, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But Trump is here now outraging norms every minute, miles past his predecessors. Constantly equating his actions with Bush, Obama, etc., when they really aren't comparable is giving unneeded fuel to those who want to make Trump out to be just another president, no worse than any other, so everything is fine, fine, fine.
And that, IMO, is not even close to true.
ETA:
To note, I was also really upset about Pearl. I have plenty of criticisms of Bush. But I don't think his reaction and Trump's belong in the same breath -- not even close.
And Don's "well, NOW the liberals are all upset -- where have they been in the past, hmmmm?" steps right past all of the liberals who were in fact upset, and again, equates Trump's insanity with Bush and Obama.
And yes, plenty of us think, and have long thought, that our government is way too chummy with the Saudis. I have that criticism of pretty much all of our recent presidents, to one degree or another. But Trump made Saudi Arabia his first foreign visit. Trump and his family have business tie upon tie with the Saudis, bringing his motivations into serious question. And Trump's reaction to the Khashoggi thing is, as I said, off the map, and just doesn't come close to passing the Pinocchio test. He doesn't believe the Saudis any more than I do. He just doesn't care.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Oct 20, 2018 14:50:02 GMT -5
The following is unprovable but I'd bet dollars to donuts that if this sort of killing had occurred under the previous two admins--or under Hillary Clinton--there would have been a ton of serious talk about how it wasn't acceptable, many veiled threats would have been made through diplomatic channels, and "red lines" would have been drawn. This would have persisted for some time, at least through the election cycle. But pretty much nothing would have actually been done about it.
I think if this had happened under Obama's presidency and Obama had given the same sort of mealy-mouthed equivocations, refused to strongly condemn the killings except in very general "killing people is bad" terms, and seemed to be willing to take the Saudis' denials at face value with the same credulity Trump has, you'd have gotten some "wtf?" reactions even from his most die-hard supporters.
What would Obama (or Clinton) have actually done about it? You're probably right that there wouldn't have been any abrupt alterations in our relationship with Saudi Arabia, but I think either of them would have put enough pressure on them, possibly backed up with the threat of actually pulling arms deals or withdrawing some of our forces from the Gulf, that the Saudis would eventually have at least spit out a kinda-sorta admission of maybe having had something to do with Kashoggi's killing, a couple of individuals would have been thrown under the bus (maybe literally....) and there'd have been a notable chill in relations.
It's not just "hatred of Trump" making people say that Trump's reaction has been unacceptable bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 20, 2018 15:26:18 GMT -5
Bush's reaction to Pearl's death is absolutely nothing like Trump's reaction to Khashoggi's death, and when you condemn them in the same breath, the effect is to equate them and normalize Trump's. I'm condemning the US response--in total--to these sorts of incidents. I haven't defended anything Trump has said or done in response to Khashoggi's murder, and I won't. But again, the Bush regime ultimately accepted what I think it's a completely bogus story from Pakistan on Pearl's execution (and fyi, do you know where the guy Pakistan claimed was responsible for that execution is today? Still cooling his heels in jail), and they did so for "diplomacy." You seem to think me interjecting my opinion in this regard is somehow excusing Trump. I think that's a bunch of happy horseshit. Sure, the Saudis are almost certainly full of shit, here. But if there's a tape, again that's something Erdogan should immediately make available to the intelligence services of the US and other countries, don't you think? He's hardly the most trustworthy guy on the planet. AGAIN, I was comparing the US government's response to these things, not just the first reactions of whomever is in office. Yet you misrepresented what I said, tried to dismiss it with the bullshit of implying that I said "but no, the situations are identical, both sides, etc." You're doing it again with the snotty "so everything is fine, fine, fine." Really, what I said in that first post is not at odds with any of the criticisms leveled at Trump in this thread (and again, I made no attempt to defend Trump or his admin in any way here, because their response has been awful). Because even if I agree--and I do--that Trump's response to this has been (horribly?) awful, it doesn't mean that's the only thing I can see here, the only aspect of this story that deserves attention.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Oct 20, 2018 15:41:58 GMT -5
What would Obama (or Clinton) have actually done about it? You're probably right that there wouldn't have been any abrupt alterations in our relationship with Saudi Arabia, but I think either of them would have put enough pressure on them, possibly backed up with the threat of actually pulling arms deals or withdrawing some of our forces from the Gulf, that the Saudis would eventually have at least spit out a kinda-sorta admission of maybe having had something to do with Kashoggi's killing, a couple of individuals would have been thrown under the bus (maybe literally....) and there'd have been a notable chill in relations. Well, let's leave Bush in that equation as well, okay? Because his family's relationship with the Saudis is well-documented and goes beyond Trump's by a country mile, I think. But regardless, the point of my post was that we don't really do anything at the end of the day when these types of things happen. The US government is willing to officially accept bullshit stories in the name of diplomacy. That, or there's some finger-wagging that's promptly forgotten in short order. The fact that Trump handled this horribly is it's own thing. Why can't both points stand?
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Oct 20, 2018 16:26:33 GMT -5
Well, let's leave Bush in that equation as well, okay? Because his family's relationship with the Saudis is well-documented and goes beyond Trump's by a country mile, I think. But regardless, the point of my post was that we don't really do anything at the end of the day when these types of things happen. The US government is willing to officially accept bullshit stories in the name of diplomacy. That, or there's some finger-wagging that's promptly forgotten in short order. The fact that Trump handled this horribly is it's own thing. Why can't both points stand?
Because your point is that this is just business as usual, and I don't agree.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Oct 20, 2018 17:07:49 GMT -5
Gee, Trump is having a positive effect on politics afterall. It's nice to see so many who ignored the crimes of Saudi Arabia under the last several administrations finally waking up. Now why do these snarky and useless one-liners sound so familiar? Almost as if it came from somewhere and someone else and ended up being regurgitated here? Oh. That's why. Consider the source. As well as the stank of the b.s. In my opinion, Daniel Pearl's execution was fully sanctioned by people high up in Pakistan. I think such a conclusion is close to a no-brainer, actually. Yet, we played nice with Pakistan under Bush because it was a "valuable ally" in the war on terror. And this continued under Obama. Similarly, I think it's also a no-brainer that Kim Jong Un had his half-brother assassinated, yet we've still dealt diplomatically with North Korea. Then there are all those unexplained deaths of various Russians... The point is, many people remain selective in their outrage. I think what's going on now with the Saudis is awful. I think the proper response is immediate sanctions and the freezing of assets IF AND ONLY IF Turkey ponies up all of the evidence it has. Because let's be clear here: Erdogan--who is hardly as pure as the driven snow--is milking this for all it's worth, for his own advantage. But this is the sort of response that the Daniel Pearl situation--and others--should have generated, as well. "Many people remain selective in their outrage?" Maybe that's because what outrages me may not phase you in the slightest because I know a lot of things that outrage you doesn't phase me in the slightest.
What evidence would you be good enough for you, robeiae? An audio tape of Jamal Khashoggi's screams or a video tape of Jamal Khashoggi's dismemberment? Or both? I doubt either would be evidence enough to satisfy the conservatives trying to cover for the Saudis executing Khashoggi or Trump trying to blow it off with, "The Saudis have investigated the Saudis and they found no proof they did anything, so let's move along and sell them another billion or so worth of weapons.
Let's cut the crap and just say it because Trump won't publicly. There is no way a slaughtered journalist is going to be allowed to screw up a deal between the world's biggest arms dealer and a customer with deep pockets and control of1.1 millions barrels of oil per day going into American homes and Escalades. It's not going to happen and it wouldn't be much different if President Obama or Hillary Clinton were in the Oval Office making the call. They probably wouldn't show as much deference to the kingdom as Trump is doing, but then Obama and Clinton don't have the same sort of direct personal interest Trump has in keeping on the good side of the House of Saud.
It bears pointing out that while Daniel Pearl was taken and murdered by killers affiliated with Al Qaieda, Jamal Khashoggi was taken and murdered by killers with the Saudi royal family. Bit of a difference in what kind of outage that should merit.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Oct 21, 2018 12:10:55 GMT -5
Khashoggi wasn't killed on U.S. soil. He wasn't killed in an official U.S. location. He was not a U.S. citizen. He was not killed while performing U.S. work. Everyone involved in this has an ulterior motive. EVERYONE. The story has changed frequently and in major ways. Even Pompeo has not seen or heard any evidence about this, though Turkey swears they have evidence. Why not? He went there. There's a scope of actions on the world stage that the response to this could change, that could affect well more than one life.
Yet the outrage and the coverage and the condemning of Trump and his administration about not going in with guns blazing is on a pretty big level. What are the reasons for this level of outrage?
1)he was a journalist, so we are seeing more press about this than if he had another occupation. 2)it's right before midterms, so it can be used to hit Trump hard 3)genuine moral dismay (taken in context of everything the Saudis have done over the years)
I'll let you all decide what order of importance to put those reasons in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 13:26:50 GMT -5
Jesus, c.e.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2018 5:48:07 GMT -5
It's moral dismay, c.e. It's profound horror. It's disgust and rage.
But perhaps you've been watching Tucker Carlson...
"He's not an American citizen."
No. No, he's just a greencard holder who resided in the U.S. with his American family and worked for an American newspaper.
I mean, pfft. He gets tortured and hacked apart with a bone saw in the Saudi Consulate, and people act like it's a big deal, all because they're so mean and unfair to Trump!
And then when the Saudi government, after initially denying anything happened, says this 59 year old guy got into a fistfight with 15 people in the consulate and accidentally fell on a bonesaw they act like it's not reasonable for Trump to accept that perfectly plausible story!
Oh, and to top it off, when Trump, at his rally immediately afterward, talks about how people who assault journalists are his kind of people, those awful, mean, unfair Trump haters act like there's something wrong about that!
I mean, OBVIOUSLY, this is all about the Dems capitalizing on a trivial incident for the midterms.
Nancy Pelosi is just AWFUL!
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Oct 22, 2018 7:54:49 GMT -5
Khashoggi wasn't killed on U.S. soil. He wasn't killed in an official U.S. location. He was not a U.S. citizen. He was not killed while performing U.S. work. Everyone involved in this has an ulterior motive. EVERYONE. The story has changed frequently and in major ways. Even Pompeo has not seen or heard any evidence about this, though Turkey swears they have evidence. Why not? He went there. There's a scope of actions on the world stage that the response to this could change, that could affect well more than one life. Yet the outrage and the coverage and the condemning of Trump and his administration about not going in with guns blazing is on a pretty big level. What are the reasons for this level of outrage? 1)he was a journalist, so we are seeing more press about this than if he had another occupation. 2)it's right before midterms, so it can be used to hit Trump hard 3)genuine moral dismay (taken in context of everything the Saudis have done over the years) I'll let you all decide what order of importance to put those reasons in. Oh well, he was just a foreign journalist then. Who cares if one of our allies and trading partners tortures and dismembers one of those? Obviously this is all fake outrage because the Liberal Fake Media is out to get Trump. Frankly, celaw, I'm disgusted. I am 100% convinced that even if Kashoggi had been a US citizen, the right wing would be casting shade about his foreign origins and family connections, and you'd be echoing the exact same defenses.
|
|