Rice unveils plan to send $billions in military aid to Middle East

[fatty]

http://voanews.com/english/2007-07-31-voa5.cfm

In a talk with reporters traveling with her, Rice defended the plan as a continuation of a long-standing American commitment to regional allies, while assuring supporters of Israel in the U.S. Congress that the military balance in the region will not change.

Under the plan, Israel would receive three billion dollars a year in U.S. aid - a 25 percent increase - with a commitment that funding would continue at that level for 10 years - for a $30 billion total.

Egypt would get $13 billion over the same 10-year period along with additional security-related economic aid to be announced later. Meanwhile Rice and Gates, in their unusual joint mission to the area, will begin talks this week with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf allies on arms sales to them that could exceed $20 billion.

Now, I am no expert in Middle East relations, but this is not a region exactly famous for its stability; good Arab guys have spontaneously turned into bad Arab guys on more than one occasion. Is this a good idea?

[SUBMAN1]

It is a great idea. The stability out there is a little off since there is a vacuum left by the demise of Iraq. So Iran is running aorund like no one can challenge them. This aid package will sort of bring the scales of power back in line.

-S

[Skybird]

Deliver HiTech weapons to your worst enemy - Saudi-Arabia - is a folly that cannot be topped. Not always the enemy of my enemy automatically is my friend - more often he remains to be my enemy as well. Over the half of Islamic terrorist going to Iraq - are coming from Saudi Arabia. SA is the exact oppposite of all and everything these American projects of democracy in the ME, and fighting the axis of evil, were about. Now a memeber of the axis of evil, a real rogue state, is getting armed up. This deal could be understood as the confession that all these ideas failed and have been given up. SA invests massively into international Islamic terrorism, and massively funds aggressive cultural expansion projects. The ME in general is not suffering from a lack of weaponry, but a lack of stability. The WH displays total helplessness in strategic imagination, has failed to create alternative options, and thus falls back to the block-thinking of the cold war. Reasonable strategy has nothing to do with this "aid package", it is the exact opposite of reasonable strategy. The real reason is pressure to do business from the Amerian arms industry, for Saudi Arabia is traditionally the best paying of all it's international customers. Mind you that the new Saudi king is openly hostile to the US, and the irritations between both sides, to put it this way, are mounting since a longer time now.

Greed wins over reason - that is what this deal is about. Strategy has nothing to do with it - it's better characterized by the the total absence of any reason.

Americans should ask themselves if the greed for profits by their defense industries really could be brought into conformity with the interests of the American people.

Arming up Saudi Arabia... typical stupid Bush&Gang logic. Who was it who said that capitalism does not know national loyalty and national pride?

[mbthegreat]

Keep the house of Sau sweet, lest they turn off the oil, can't figure out why you would want to give egypt money though, probably in an effort to help them clamp down on radicals.

Giving Israel even more money is just silly, perhaps they're hoping that they'll take the initiative and nuke Iran

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by mbthegreat

Keep the house of Sau sweet, lest they turn off the oil, can't figure out why you would want to give egypt money though, probably in an effort to help them clamp down on radicals.

Giving Israel even more money is just silly, perhaps they're hoping that they'll take the initiative and nuke Iran

You must make Isreal capable of standing up to other countries in the region who also have US weapons.

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Deliver HiTech weapons to your worst enemy - Saudi-Arabia - is a folly that cannot be topped. Not always the enemy of my enemy automatically is my friend - more often he remains to be my enemy as well. Over the half of Islamic terrorist going to Iraq - are coming from Saudi Arabia. SA is the exact oppposite of all and everything these American projects of democracy in the ME, and fighting the axis of evil, were about. Now a memeber of the axis of evil, a real rogue state, is getting armed up. This deal could be understood as the confession that all these ideas failed and have been given up. SA invests massively into international Islamic terrorism, and massively funds aggressive cultural expansion projects. The ME in general is not suffering from a lack of weaponry, but a lack of stability. The WH displays total helplessness in strategic imagination, has failed to create alternative options, and thus falls back to the block-thinking of the cold war. Reasonable strategy has nothing to do with this "aid package", it is the exact opposite of reasonable strategy. The real reason is pressure to do business from the Amerian arms industry, for Saudi Arabia is traditionally the best paying of all it's international customers. Mind you that the new Saudi king is openly hostile to the US, and the irritations between both sides, to put it this way, are mounting since a longer time now.

Greed wins over reason - that is what this deal is about. Strategy has nothing to do with it - it's better characterized by the the total absence of any reason.

Americans should ask themselves if the greed for profits by their defense industries really could be brought into conformity with the interests of the American people.

Arming up Saudi Arabia... typical stupid Bush&Gang logic. Who was it who said that capitalism does not know national loyalty and national pride?

I have to agree with you hear Skybird....sending arms to any Muslim nation is just insane and makes me want to actually slap Bush but alas...the War Pigs have the power ...for now.

[caspofungin]

er, al qaeda is just as much a threat to the saudi royal family as it is to the us, and there's a long history of tension between the wahhabi sects and the royals.

in addition, the sunni gulf states (including saudi) are already twitchy about the prospect of a shiite iran with a military that's only second to israel's in the region.

giving the saudi's weapons/training seems a pragmatic move -- and it's been us policy since the 1930's. there's nothing new here.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by caspofungin

er, al qaeda is just as much a threat to the saudi royal family as it is to the us, and there's a long history of tension between the wahhabi sects and the royals.

in addition, the sunni gulf states (including saudi) are already twitchy about the prospect of a shiite iran with a military that's only second to israel's in the region.

giving the saudi's weapons/training seems a pragmatic move -- and it's been us policy since the 1930's. there's nothing new here.

The enemy of my enemy is not my friend. Iran is funding terrorism in the region. the Saudis are even more funding terrorism in the West and the whole world. that their motives make them different to al Quaeda does not change that BOTH are hostile to us. the top funder of international terrorism- is Saudi Arabia. Most 9/11 terrorists were Saudis. Saudi money is onvolved wherever you lokk at global Islamic terrorism. And such a regime now gets weapons from the US that claims to fight against terrorism - that is totally absurd. That is as silly as French nuclear reactors for Lybia. The raised potency of SA of course also needs to restore the "balance" - by giving according quatities of goods to Israel as well. If you arm Israel, you need to serve Egypt as well. Oh, military industries must love this way of circular thinking - plenty of profits from that "logic" of searching for the balance!

The West is not forced to behave that silly, and it will pay for follies like this - only a question of time. It's fate then will be well-deserved, and nobody will have the right to complain. Those who are responisble for these crimes against the interests of their own nations never will be held responsible for their unscrupelousness to help the enemy, of course.

It all stinks. "Homo Sapiens" - a contradiction in itself.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Greed wins over reason -

Indeed.

[Lurchi]

The secular government of Saudi Arabia is probably next to be overthrown by radical islamic elements. At least this will happen when there is no oil anymore and the resulting poverty of the masses will lead to a radicalization. Selling actual weapons to them looks like a great risk - especially regarding Israel.

Is this what Eisenhower warned of in his farewell address: America's politics in the iron gripe of the Military-Industrial complex? Maybe the whole Iraq war was also motivated by them? At least the MIC is probably the only one who profits from this disaster every single day, with rising stocks ...

Reminds me of Krupp - war is certainly a big business

[AntEater]

Secular government?
In Saudi Arabia?
This country is ruled by a medieval style monarchy! Every minister is a member of the ruling family, while the King styles himself protector of Mekka and Medina.
Women have practically no rights, Christian religion is publically banned and until recently, it was forbidden to take pictures of people (now you can if they consent).
Not to mention rather cruel punishments like beheading, stoning and chopping off hands. And of course they use their fellow muslims from poorer countries as quasi slave labour.
The Quran is the Saudi constitution, nothing else.
There is absolutely NOTHING secular about the current government of Saudi Arabia. The one thing why there won't be a fundamentalist turnover in Saudi Arabia is that the country is allready as islamic as it gets. Osama bin Laden can be regarded as a social revolutionary for his own country
The country may be friendly to the US, but that is foreign politics. Internally, Saudi is far worse than Iran, comparable to Taliban Afghanistan.
But sale of advanced weapons to SA perhaps won't do much harm, as the ineptitude of the SA military is legendary. Not so much the ineptitude but rather the lazyness of the genuine Arabs to do the more dirty aspects of soldiering like maintenance or digging. Without western maintenance specialists, the air force would be grounded within weeks, for example. Also recently I read a story about german NBC troops training Saudis. For the night, the Saudi unit was to dig in in the desert. The german instructors dug themselves in but the Saudis did not move: "Arabs don't dig"; they declared, pulled out their cellphones and after a few hours, some busloads of Filipinos, Indonesians and Pakistanis came and started digging....
:rotfl:

[peterloo]

Mmm... Arms support ... What I can imagine is the military balance being broken and the radical Islams retribute - by terrorist attacks (of course)

Futhermore, oil is a key factor for prosperity in America in long term. If America provides the arms to her allies, she must be demanding something in return. "There's no free lunch", right?

Motives (just some wild guesses, but reason-based)
(1) Secure oil bases in Middle-East
(2) Use them as the main force in combating those terrorists and cut American casualities (thus leaving less troubles for Bush, who is "almost" abondoned by his people)
(3) use up the bulk of out-dated arms (remember, the F-14 are now scapped like a paper in a shredder, for the fear of Iran acquiration of these arms. Should they be sent to allies, Iran will not be able to get access to them)
(4) Making friends and remaining a good relation don't hurt / backfire, do it?

[SUBMAN1]

Most ideas present in this thread are crack smoking ideas with little thought or basis behind them.

Arming a friendly nation has nothing to do with terrorism. To do so is to say that giving or buying American product is to fund Islamic radicals. Yes - there are some sympathizers in this country as well as any other country and buying their product might ultimately end up in the hands of fundamentalists. We give these very same people the oppurtunity to buy weapons, which may end up in fundamantalists hands. And the point is?

Not sure what you guys are thinking here but the Suadies have criminal elements in their society like ours - that is not a debate. To say that the government funds those ideologies is very much another thing. It is similar to putting blinders on a horse. The country has money flowing out of it that is and can be used by people who may do us harm - but this is by the civilian population. However, the weapons the US is supplying cannot 'ever' be used by these same terrorists organizations. The type of weapons? And example is JDAM bombs. Hello people? When does a terrorists steal a state owned Saudi aircraft and use it to bomb some mosque and incite civil war? The answer is a clear 100% 0 chance this can happen unless the state of Saudi Arabia turns against the western world. I gues you forget that the US can simply disable these bombs given a moments notice? Guess no one here thought of that.

I'm having a hard time buying any argument presented here on the state of this weapons transfer.

-S

[P_Funk]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Most ideas present in this thread are crack smoking ideas with little thought or basis behind them.

Arming a friendly nation has nothing to do with terrorism.

Well if that nation uses forms of terrorism to prosecute their policies then yea it is, and we all know how insanely corrupt and fickle middle eastern governments are whether that involves clandestine anti-West activity or just opportunistic ideologues in their midst diverting support to other causes. A terrorist is still a terrorist if its fighting for "our" side. The US has routinely supported terrorist organizations over the decades as well and often times they become our new enemies. American military hardware always shows up in the oddest places and its no wonder why.

We keep talking about changing the middle east and yet we keep feeding the status quo.

[caspofungin]

That the Saudi kind of Islamism (Wahabitism) is of a slightly different colour does not mean that they are less extreme and dangerous than al quaeda

the wahabis and the saudi royal family are not one and the same -- the wahabis command the support of a significant section of the population, and the government has to perform the juggling act of keeping them happy so as not to foment a revolution, but at the same time trying to limit their influence.

i'm afraid you're wrong trying to equate wahabism with the saudi royal family - the 2 are not 1 and the same.

the country is already as islamic as it gets

yeah, well there's different degrees of how islamic a country can get -- believe me, if the saudi royal family falls, sa will turn into a country so fundamentalist the u.s. will be courting iran to stop the saudi influence. the king isn't anti-west, he's anti -us foreign policy. he's much more of a realist and pragmatist than the former king, and he realizes that his country needs to be intimately involved with the west, from an economic as well as a security point of view. and he's actively taking steps against al qaeda.

The answer is a clear 100% 0 chance this can happen unless the state of Saudi Arabia turns against the western world

and that's exactly the point -- the arms sale is to help prop up a friendly government, and try and shift the balance of power in the region as a whole.