by Ghassan Kadi
A lot has been said and speculated on about the “real” objectives of Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia. Seasoned veteran British journalist/analyst and Middle East expert Robert Fisk sees it as an attempt to create a Sunni-style NATO to curb the Iranian expansion, and his speculation is on the money, but in realistic terms, what can this visit and its “aftermath” achieve?
Despite the slump on crude oil prices over the last 2-3 years, the Saudis are not short on cash, despite the huge and growing deficit they are running. Their reserve cash is estimated to be a whopping three quarters of a trillion American dollars, and the unit “trillion” has been chosen here because it is the millions of the 21st Century and billions have become too small to consider.
That said, the Saudis have recently pledged nearly a third of their stash on “investments” with the USA. The first allotment came in the form of an undertaking to invest over 100 billion dollars in the American housing sector less than a fortnight ago, and upon Trump’s historic Riyadh visit, the Saudis signed an excess of 100 billion dollar arms deal contract. This is a total of an excess of 200 billion American dollars to be injected into the American economy. But on the scale of trillions again, this huge figure amounts to only a mere 1% of America’s staggering official 20 trillion dollar debt.
A drop in the ocean perhaps if taken into the context of the American economy and debt, but there is little doubt that this Saudi money will create jobs in the USA, and if President Trump is still sticking by the promise of creating jobs, he’s on the money with this one too.
Thus far, and nearly four months after his inauguration, it can safely be said that the most predictable thing about President Trump thus far has been his unpredictability. But with all of his eccentricities and swings, what was it that made him swing in favour of Al-Saud? It may not be very difficult to solve this puzzle if we look at the chain of events.
Surely, the USA has a lot of strategic interests in the area, and these interests are multi-faceted. Among other things, the USA wants to protect the long-term wellbeing of Israel, curb the influence of Russia and Iran in the region, have a share in the decision making of the “War on Syria”, and last be not least, keep a tight control on Saudi oil and cash wealth.
One of Trump’s election promises was to get America’s allies to pay their way, and he was very vocal about the Saudis saying on a number of occasions that protecting Saudi Arabia was costing the USA more than it should be paying for. Those subtle “threats” sent a wave of shivers down the spines of Saudi royals, especially that they were already in deep trouble financially and also bogged down in a protracted and highly expensive war in Yemen that seems unwinnable.
Given that the Saudis believed that former President Obama has let them down and did not invade Syria after the alleged East Ghouta chemical attack of August 2013, the unknown and rather unstable Trump looked like a wild card and they braced for the worst.
Knowing that they are in deep trouble and need America more than ever, feeling extremely nervous about the Iran nuclear deal, the Saudis realized that the only option they have with Trump was to appease him; “but how?”, they wondered. But when they put two and two together, and listened to Trump’s statements about Saudi Arabia, the Saudis realized that they can and will appease him with money; a quarter of a trillion dollars and counting.
Taking the big fat cheque book out is not a modus operandi that is alien to the Saudi psyche, because the Saudis have learned to solve their problems with money. And now, they believe that they are forging a new era of military and strategic alliance with the United States, and paying for this privilege with hard cash.
What they do not know is that whilst they were dreaming big, thinking that they are on the verge of becoming a regional superpower to be reckoned with signing an alliance with America, Donald Trump was signing a business deal, a sales contract; nothing more and nothing less.
The way Trump sees this is a win-win situation. If the Saudis do manage to get the upper military hand and curb the Iranians, he would have reached this zenith not only without having to fight Iran, but also whilst being paid for it. On the other hand, if the Saudis take a gamble to go to war with Iran and lose, he would have received his quarter trillion in advance. So for Saudi Arabia to win or lose, the deal makes America a quarter of a trillion dollar richer; or rather a quarter of a trillion less in debt.
In reality however, what are the odds of Saudi Arabia winning an open war with Iran? Or will this war eventuate in the first place? Back to this question later on.
In a part of the world that is highly volatile, supplying a huge arsenal of highly lethal weapons to a regime that is known for its atrocities, war crimes, inciting regional tension and creating conflict is pouring oil on an already raging fire. Trump’s arms deal with the Saudis probably marks one of the lowest points in America’s history. If anything, after the historic American-Iranian nuclear deal, America was in a position to play the role of an arbitrator and try to get the Saudis and the Iranians to reconcile; coerce them if needed. Instead, Trump turned his attack on Jihadi terrorism by supplying more support to the core and centre of terrorism (Saudi Arabia) and signed a huge arms deal that will only lead to further and much deadlier escalations.
With seemingly very powerful Sunni/Shiite animosities resurfacing after many centuries of dormancy, the pro-American axis happens to be predominantly Sunni and the pro-Russian resistance axis is seen to be Shiite; though it is not as such in reality. That said, the strongest Sunni army in the region is undoubtedly Turkey’s, and Turkey could potentially play a key role in bolstering Fisk’s Sunni-”NATO”. However, the Kurdish issue is a bigger threat to Turkey than Iran has ever been, and Turkey will walk away from its Sunni brothers and “NATO” allies if they were to support Kurdish separatists and arm them; and the irony is that they are.
Without Turkey, a Sunni-”NATO” will be a toothless tiger, unless perhaps it receives enough support from Israel; a support America will not be prepared to offer. But apart from some possible airstrikes and intelligence sharing, how much support will Israel give if any at all? And how much will Putin will be able to weigh in with his clout to keep Netanyahu’s nose out of it? Last but not least, how will the leaders of a so-called Sunni-”NATO” be able to “sell” the idea of getting into an alliance with Israel with its Sunni populace base?
There is little doubt that the Saudis now feel that Trump has given them a carte blanche to attack Iran, and if they swallow the bait fully, they may be foolish enough to take the gamble. But first, they have to finish off Yemen, and then look back and think how they miscalculated when they planned the so-called “Operation Decisive Storm”, and which was meant to be a swift and successful operation. More than two years later, victory seems further than ever predicted all the while the Yemenis have been improving their missile manufacturing capabilities and have been able to hit targets in the capital Riyadh.
Whilst the Saudis were begging the Americans to sell them more advanced weapons to win the war in Yemen, the Yemenis were developing their own. But given that Saudis believe that all problems can be solved provided one is prepared to spend as much as needed, the bottom line for them will always be, “how much?”
The Saudis will not only have to re-evaluate the short-sighted military gamble they took in Yemen, but also the financial one. No one knows for certain what has thus far been the dollar cost that the Saudis had to cough up, but it is in the tens of billions of dollars. With a country that is currently running a near 90 billion dollar budget deficit and diminishing returns, to gamble one third of the national savings on a new war aimed at Iran is tantamount to both, military and financial suicide.
If a war against Iran is at all winnable by the Saudis, what will be the dollar cost?
If the budget ceiling was broken, just like that of Operation Decisive Storm, and if the Saudis realize that the over 100 billion odd dollars they “invested” to buy state-of-the-art weaponry from the USA was not enough, by how much will they be prepared to lift the cost ceiling? They will only need to break the ceiling 3-4 fold before they actually run out of cash reserves. Such a budget overblow is not unusual in wars, and Yemen and Syria are living proof for the Saudis to learn from; if they are capable of learning.
A war against Iran will perhaps be Al-Saud’s final gamble option, but unless the Saudi royals change their rhetoric and seek reconciliation with their Shiite neighbours, this war could well be Al-Saud’s only gamble option.
But the bottom line to any military action is military pragmatism. How can the Saudis think that they can invade and subdue Iran when they haven’t been able to subdue a starved and besieged Yemen? In the unlikely event that they will be able to serve Iran with a swift “shock-and-awe” strike and achieve prompt victory, what will add to their woes is Iran’s ability to close the Strait of Hormuz and to also hit oil production areas and ports. In simple terms, the Saudi war on Yemen is expensive enough, but a war with Iran will be much more expensive, and one that will cut off Saudi life-line; its income.
Do the Saudis believe that expensive imported hardware is going to give the military edge they need? “Knowing” Trump, he will likely wait till the Saudis are down on their knees begging and then extort them by hiking the price of an elusive “super weapon”, perhaps even an A-Bomb, that will tip the war in Saudi favour. But “knowing” the Saudis and Iranians, if the Saudis attack and start an all-out war on Iran, then this may indeed earn the name of decisive storm, but not on Saudi terms. Will Iran virtually walk into Saudi Arabia? Such a scenario cannot be overruled. More than likely however, America will continue to feed the fire for as long as the Saudi cow (female camel in this instance) can be milked and for as long as there is money to be had. For as long as the infamous Al-Saud are on the throne, the kingdom will continue to be run by the same old rules of arrogance that will not stop until that evil legacy is down and vanquished.
The House of Saud has an evil legacy indeed. Whether it’s its encouragement of terrorists, or its floggings and executions or the corruption and greed of the (now) thousands of members of the royal house who extort property/businesses out of the ordinary people. Well written, Ghassan Kadi.
I’m not sure what the Saudi objectives are, but the objective for Trump is clear. There are only three nations in the world that love him right now: Saudi, Israel, and Japan (sadly for me as a Japan resident). Getting a warm reception in Saudi is exactly what he needs, now that the deep state, Democrats, news media are collaborating on intense Russophobic investigations that will take years to resolve, and have destroyed a lot of his GOP establishment support.
“The Milking” …yes, this is little more than a gangster shakedown.
Looking past the Saudi sham and face saving rituals, Trump and his Israeli household turned up to burn the petro-dollar bank for a few $100billion book-balancing transactions that will shift old MIC inventory and feather the pockets of the usual (Republican mostly) pockets.
Iran is a useful existential ‘agent’ in this game and serves a dual purpose of justifying the milking of the Arabian she-camel to feed the children of Israel with a (no doubt) similar quantum of free MIC ‘gifts’ — again rationalised and justified by ‘Iran’.
With Trump bumbling around the signing table, stumbling around the ‘war dance’ (Yeltsin comes to mind) and bowing his head to have a golden collar placed on his thick neck — only women and perhaps eunuchs traditionally wear gold in Islamic cultures — the real power behind the throne waltzed off the plane and into the centre of the Saudi regime holding his wife’s hand in public — a big no-no in Islamic cultures.
This mini-stop for usd$ refueling from a convenient Arab gas station met the basics for the metanarrative but fell way short for critical analysis.
Trump the casino guy; showgirl wife; and daughter-in-hand with the Israeli occupation apartheid state (note: not another female in a gender equity index domain of 0%) with a $100m petro-dollar donation to the Clinton (ooops, sorry) Trump Fashionista Fund — what’s not to see?
And the UN response is that the Saudi regime should stop stoning children to death. How many tanking usd$ donations to a UN programme will that take to disappear off the agenda?
And what a cacophony of evil this “55 islamic nations” that agree to support their Saudi funding overlords in fighting whatever it is of the day as long as it is on the Plains of Syria; helps greater Israel and trumps Iran.
Nothing seems as it should be — we are in a very sad state of affairs.
Here is a classic example of the idiocy @ the top in the current wave of criminality — (unfortunately the only link I have is a FB) — but not the “some mother’s do have them” body language quicks at around -2:50. This 21st century Glass-Steagall Act scenario says it all. God help us!
https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics/videos/1562281057136712/
What short memories we have.
Who could forget AG speedy Gonzales deny Habeas corpus in a congressional hearing
Thank you mr Gadi for sharing your analyses with us.
The problem with all those new weapons, is that you also need people to fight with them. Saudis are not exactly ‘fighters’, far from it. Even for their shameless war in Yemen, where they have bombed hospitals, schools and medical storages, they have often used military from Pakistan to do the work for them (and in the contract was stated that just Sunni muslems were allowed). Iranians are quite different, they are no Arabs but Persians.
Attacking Iran would be suicidal. Iran has ballistic missiles with which it can hit about everything in the area, including oil fields, the main oil terminal in the Northeast and the brothels in Bahrein on a thursday evening.
My guess is that the oil prices would explode and it would have a devastating effect on the dollar itself, with the petrodollar system collapsing.
We may hope that Trump or his shady ‘advisor’ Kushner will hold them for gambling, but the rhetoric is becoming dangerous.
Interesting essay. Lots of yummy Petrodollars for the US elites to chomp upon. But if this article carries truth: And, I have found over the years that Mathias Chang is very reliable, then Russia and China may have already thrown a spanner in the works.
http://futurefastforward.com/2017/04/25/un-and-western-spy-chiefs-in-panic-after-russia-launches-first-strike-against-us-dollar/
Only one problem with this Russia/China destroy the dollar story; it’s author, Sorcha Faal. That name is a guarantee of real 100% fake news.
https://southfront.org/riyadh-pact-us-55-muslim-majority-states-pledging-34000-troops-to-fight-isis-in-iraq-syria/
this is beginning to sound very very very very very bad……..
34,000 very low level cannon fodder.
If anything happens, it will be used in Yemen.
Introducing more nations’ ground forces would mean covering them in the air without Russian permission in Syria. That would be called target practice for Russian Aerospace pilots.
The reality in the Arab world is always otherwise than the talk on the street.
Russia just lost a few more men earlier this month, reported today.
Blood into Syria soil by RF is sacred. And the geopolitical gains are not about to be given up to the financiers of two Chechen wars and the current Wahhabi terror still evident in and through the Caucuses.
Nothing more lame than a united Arab alliance. They have not won since the Crusades.
Yes,I’m worried about that too. While its true most of the “55” Muslim States are not able to field any army that would be more than cannon fodder. There are a few that can. And if they plan on invading Syria ,in violation,of whatever is left of international law and the UN Charter. Then that is a serious problem. And will require a military solution ,not another “deal” between “pardners”. In case there is any doubt at all. The perceived sarcasm of when I say “pardners”. Is real sarcasm,not just perceivable. I consider all of that as a horrible form of appeasement. A bit more clever than Chamberlain’s,but not much. And with the same ending for Russia and the World.
Syria may very well lose her sovereignty in the war. But she is beyond question going to lose her sovereignty if she allows those enemy states to invade her without fighting them. Syria should go to the UNSC (more to broadcast a point. Not really expecting to get aid),and declare that any state having forces in Syria, which was not invited in by Syria. Is ordered to get their forces out of Syria,or they will be considered as “rouge” invaders. And attacked whenever located on Syrian territory. And the same for any air force flying over Syria’s sovereign territory, which was not invited to fly there by the Syrian government. Declare those countries in violation of the UN Charter.But more importantly start backing those words with actions. Have their air defenses attack the violating aircraft. And have the SAA attack any foreign forces occupying Syrian territory. Russia and Iran might not help Syria with that. But seriously,were they ever going to really help Syria when “push came to shove” against the empire and NATO states. I strongly doubted it. And don’t see those doubts proved wrong “yet”.But for Syria,at least going “down” fighting for their country,would keep their honor. Something I can’t say about those pretending to be their allies.
Let Syria not fear to be alone for long. The “Sunni NATO idea ” will soon ,after digesting Syria be directed at Iran. The US/NATO and Israel have decided to go back to their old playbook. In the 1980’s they galvanized the “Muslim World” against the Soviets in Afghanistan, and against Serbia. And it worked brilliantly for them. They used religion as a powerful weapon. Today the plan is a little different. They have decided to throw their support behind “Sunni Islam” to destroy Shia Iran. Using the Sunni-Shia split to use Sunni as their cannon fodder for that war.They realize around 80% of Muslims are Sunni. So Iran will find little support among Muslim states, if they can position this war as a Sunni-Shia war. Wahhabi Saudi Arabia and the other Wahhabi supporting Sunni, are easy targets for them to sign up for the war. And they will drag most other Sunni states along with them. They will use them to fight the war at first. And if they start to fail. The US/NATO and Israel will join to “save them”.
The article talked about Iran being able to defeat the Saudis,and yes they can.But who really believes the US would stand by and let that happen. They would never let an Iranian army invade Saudi Arabia. Or even Iranian missiles strike Saudi Arabia without jumping in the war. To “save the Saudis from Iranian aggression”. Its a perfect plan for the US. Let the Sunni states attack Iran. And claim Iranian aggression if they strike back. Its not as if they feared the UN would condemn them,that won’t happen. The US or/and other Western States would veto any condemnation. While at the same time calling for “peace” and the end to “Iranian aggression”.
I wouldn’t count on Russian or Chinese aid either if I were the Iranians. The Chinese see 20,000 jihadis training in Syria to attack China in the future. And yet the Chinese won’t commit to aiding Syria. Even though those terrorists will soon be attacking China herself when they get back into China. So the idea that they will come to Iran’s aid against the US isn’t very likely. As for Russia. Don’t hold your breathe there either.They stand by while the US and its allies attack Syria at will. Why would they change and help Iran when attacked.Certainly,they’ll moan in the UN. And accuse the US of violating international law (what,for the 100th time or so). But actually sending troops or planes to fight the US over Iran,is highly doubtful (sadly the US knows that too). They should of course,and China too. Because like cutting up a sausage,first Syria,then Iran,then Russia,then China.But when your allies policies are based on appeasement. You can’t really count on help from them.
I’m not nearly as positive on the situation as the article is. I see the “Sunni NATO” as the straw-man for an attack on Syria and more importantly Iran. I remember well how the US “weaponized religion” against the Soviets and Serbians. And see the start of that again with the Trump visit and speech. As history shows religion has been misused in countless wars of the past. And while the US is usually “history challenged”. They can at least remember how well the 1980’s and 1990’s worked for them in using religion for destroying countries.
It’s comical that Wahabbi-exporting Saudi Arabia is trying to masquerade as an opponent of terrorism, in particular ISIS terrorism, given that that this nation has been financing and backing ISIS against Syria.
The same could be said of Turkey, Qatar, Jordan, Israel, Britain, America and other members of the Coalition of the Willing, part deux.
These anti-terrorist nations are backing, financing, arming, and supporting the jihadist groups like ISIS or Al-Queda in Syria.
Just correcting this statement…
“Among other things, the USA wants to protect the long-term wellbeing of Israel,”
The USA has no say in the matter whatsoever because it is a Zionist Occupied Government. Bearing this in mind then we can more accurately state that among other things, blood and treasure of the USA is marshalled by the Zionists to protect the long-term wellbeing of Israel.
All the Saudis will do and have to do it is not let Iran export oil through the straight of Hormuz. Iran needs some oil pipelines to take its oil to terminals Iran needs to build on their coast far away from the straight of Hormuz where they and oil tankers can be reasonably defended.
Kushner’s visit to Saudi Arabia – yes, Trump was with him for the handshakes and for delivering stunningly stupid, warmongering speeches – is very, very bad news.
A 110 billion $ arms deal is utterly excessive. Not something the Saudis would need, unless their is a plan. Kushner’s plan at the behest of you know who.
I have been waiting 18 months by now for a US answer to Russia’s intervention in Syria. Here it is!
Realizing that their Al-Kaida-FSA-ISIS proxy army approach, that looked so good on paper, has failed miserably, some smart Zbigs and Henrys have decided to arm their compromised Saudi friends with some dangerous gadets.
I see lots of state of the art long distance missiles systems, and here is the catch: possibly some nuclear warheads (or at least rumors thereof) too. The task given to the Saudis could be only one: Put some serious pressure on Iran and the Russians in Syria.
Pure speculation on my part, of course, but I don’t like this development at all.
Frankly, this is the worst news of the year so far.
Great article, but there is not a chance at all that KSA will actually attack Iran, for the very reasons the asuthor enumerates. The Saudi gamble is in the bribe they gave Trump. They are bribing him to attack Iran, or at least Syria. The riskbos that Trump will promise them everything, pocket the money and then go on his merry way without a thought given to the Saudis.
Then again, he might very well attack Iran or Syria or both. Time will tell. What is certain, however, is that KSA will not.
Dear Ghassan,
Re: “the national debt”
I think you find these interesting and illuminating:
Bibliography for understanding modern fiat currency and fiat currency regimes.
You may not like them, but you’d better understand them. They can be used very constructively or they can be terribly abused and create private debt and 1% elites. The West (US and Euro) is a textbook example of serious abuse. See Michael Hudson’s latest article:
Can Russia Learn From Brazil’s Fate? — Paul Craig Roberts and Michael Hudson
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/09/28/can-russia-learn-from-brazils-fate-paul-craig-roberts-and-michael-hudson/
———————–
Seven Deadly Innocent Fraud of Economic Policy
http://moslereconomics.com/wp-content/powerpoints/7DIF.pdf
Monopoly Money
http://demo.beccatron.website/mmn/sites/default/files/biblio/Pavlina_2007.pdf
Deficits are our Saving
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=10384
Barnaby, better to walk before we run
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=7864
Seven Deadly Frauds of Economic Policy
http://moslereconomics.com/wp-content/powerpoints/7DIF.pdf
DIAGRAMS & DOLLARS: Modern Money IllustratedJan 12, 2014
by J.D. ALT
Kindle Edition at Amazon
What is Money?
J. Mitchell Innes
https://www.community-exchange.org/docs/what%20is%20money.htm
The Credit Theory of Money/docs/The%20Credit%20Theoriy%20of%20Money.htm
https://www.community-exchange.org/docs/The%20Credit%20Theoriy%20of%20Money.htm
Thx for the information. Please could you stay on topic or go to the Movable Feast Cafe (MFC) to carry on this conversation. Mod
I have no intention to carry on a conversation on economics–they tend to generate at least as much heat as light. I just wanted to contribute a list of readings which express a corrective perspective on an economic idea as stated by Ghassan. Much of his argument is based on the “national debt”.
Correct URL to the Pavlina article:
http://www.modernmoneynetwork.org/sites/default/files/biblio/Pavlina_2007.pdf
the Saudis have recently pledged nearly a third of their stash on “investments” with the USA.
IMO it would be well to consider this “in the round.”
What they have accumulated is a massive credit. This, until it is converted into something tangible, is ultimately only a number on a ledger page. Should the system collapse, as it keeps threatening to, its intrinsic value would be the intrinsic value of any number : zero. This in itself gives them a strong motivation to keep the ponzi scheme going as long as possible (and their privileged position along with it).
They cannot convert it to gold — to do so would crash the entire system (there is not enough physical gold available to cover even 5% of the delivery contracts in play) (which are, by rule, settled in dollar value at the option of the exchange managers).
What could they buy or invest in with it that would either turn their digital 0’s and 1’s into tangible value or at least performing assets ? It makes for an interesting exercise to survey the options and assess each re. feasibility.
What I end up with is what they’re doing with it — buying military technology with some of it, and leaving the rest in the system. Which is to say, invested in everything, worldwide, that generates even more numbers even though these could revert to essentially zero in five minutes’ time. On this end, their situation looks analogous to being all-in in the US 1929 stock market with no option to sell before the margin calls begin and the bottom falls out.
FWIW (assuming anything)
How enthusiastic will the cannon fodder of those many Arab countries be about fighting with or on the side of the USA against another country?
If the world would divert from oil and gas to other forms of energy before the big financial reset, the only thing Saudi Arabia could export would be sand.
Not good at all. At best, it means more war in the ME with no end of it in sight…
Seems plausible enough. But I wonder about unintended secondary delayed after-effects of the process – so I’ll speculate.
Persia’s been there a long time, Iran has been there superimposed on that foundation. They are as a people obviously able and resolved to prevail against Saud, and to cause what to happen in Saud? Obviously revolution. Trump will indeed have them begging. Then they’ll bug out. The money that’s left to them will be milked out in exchange for their condition in life. Possibly though the Presidente may not be Trump by the time this eventuality comes to bear fruit. Then conditions may not be as they are now. Our neoliberal comrades behind this criminal enterprise always assume that they alone can cause change – that matters of Fortune, will, and especially human reactions simply do not matter, or even exist. They are delusional, not to put too fine a point on this. Anyway they assume a static field of action in which they alone may cause change and secondary effects always are assumed to be as desired, even when they are undesirable…it simply means to them that they didn’t “use enough dynamite”, so to speak – they always double the bet… So what?
So, by the time Saud is facing the choice to bug out, Trump may not be in the picture – but another fellow, the illustrious and masterful nut-job we see grinning in the light of heaven right behind the t-man…and in the US? Great an’ slumbering populace? Not in the universe we live in, only in the dreams of optimists and fools. The matter looks, in the large frame, more like the opening round in a global suicide-murder.
Yup… Check out the guy’s bio…
Pax
slobs all those Saudis – except the activists that are in jail or beheaded –
Thanks Ghassan, interesting read –
Lets try to understand what’s going on here. “America” was not made “richer” from this, or even less in debt.
The Pentagon is not the entity that is selling these arms. Its not like they are selling weapons out of the back of a Hummer direct to the Sauds.
The way the scam works is this. The American taxpayer pays enomous amounts of money to develop and research these weapons. Then the American taxpayer pays even more to buy the first runs off the assembly lines. Then the American taxpayer pays more to put the weapons to use and thus to showcase them to the world.
Then, the CEO’s of these companies, the modern Merchants of Death, travel with the President on a trip like this and its these companies that sell the weapons. Its not the Pentagon or the USAF selling planes for instance, its Boeing or Lockheed-Martin.
The CEO’s will get salary bumps to their already inflated compensation, plus some big bonus checks. The portion of the 1% that invests their money into these “defense stocks” will do well. But the American taxpayer won’t see a penny of any of this. The American taxpayer paid the costs of the trip, and is already being told that people need to starve and go without medical care so that they can pay exorbitant costs and costs overruns to pay for the development of new weapons that some future President will help sell.
I think your post contains a lot of painful truth.
But my guess is, that it’s even worse. See for instance here: https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/866477632573104128/photo/1
So, we have an Arab-islamic-American summit, but Iran is excluded (read: isolated).
My guess is, that the idea is to divide Syria, and to install a Sunni controlled buffer in the East. Their advantage would be to cut off the supply lines of Hezbollah and block the planned Iranian gas pipe line (and to install the pipe line from Qatar).
And after that they may want to go after Iran. A strange geopolitical fact is, that roughly 80% of the oil in the Middle East is located in areas where mainly Shia muslims live. Also in the North East of Saudi-Arabia itself, where their main large oil field iis situated.
It is embarassing to watch the idiotic texts, that they want to fight ISIS. They don’t. Saudi-Arabia finances them, and covertly deliveres weapons to them. I have seen pictures of large boxes of ammunition, found at ISIS miltaries, with the name of Saudi-Arabia stamped on it.
So, Donald Trump has at least for a part indirectly sold weapons to ISIS.
Robert Fisk has no credibility. In 2006, when Israel turned southern Beirut into an approximation of 1945 Berlin, Fisk never left his comfortable abode in northern Beirut to see the southern half. He wrote an almost poetic line saying that you could see the smoke drifting out to sea for 20 miles, but he didn’t describe the destruction in any detail, and he sure as hell did NOT explain anything of what was going on. Another year, Fisk was in Iraq for a few weeks, and in his column for The Independent, he wrote that when he got back to [the safety of] Lebanon, he would write about who was really behind all the bombings in Iraq. He never wrote any such thing. Without getting into too many details such as his schmoozing with the elite of Lebanon, you have to ask yourself one basic question< which is "If you paid attention to Fisk for very long, did you ever learn anything important from Fisk?" I never did, so I'm done with him.
Fisk is another Brit making a living scribbling self-glorifying repetitive stuff that gets young lefties excited.
Fisk is the best you will get from the mainstream media. he goes as far as is allowed. But not far enough to be truly insightful. I have no idea whether what he writes is at the center of what he knows/believes.What he writes is not fake news but conditioned by the circles he lives in. He does live in the Middle East. One can read him to get an idea of what the more realistic ones in the foreign affairs establishments think which includes their blindness’s.
In case of war with Iran, Russia will not sit idle… perhaps, as the author says, this is a golden opportunity to kill once and for all the islamic terrorist snake in the Middle East.
Good article. One thing that wasn’t mentioned is Saudis manpower problem. Their army has limited resources to draw on and already Saudi kids are being shuttled out of the country to the west for long term degrees as in Ukraine as well. So would they get Phillipinos to fight a protracted war? Just a thought.
Aaron J:
and already Saudi kids are being shuttled out of the country to the west for long term degrees as in Ukraine as well.
I’ve never read anything like this, but it sounds plausible. Can you provide me/us with one or several links to credible sources where to read relevant articles?
Sending Saudi Arabians abroad reminds me of reports of their officers being trained by the German military (some of many sources: http://www.dw.com/en/saudi-arabia-wants-no-more-german-weapons-report/a-38647662, http://www.dw.com/en/saudi-arabia-wants-no-more-german-weapons-report/a-38647662 and https://sputniknews.com/military/201705011053170085-bundeswehr-saudi-military/).
The United States encouraged and militarily aided Iraq to invade Iran in 1980. It was thought that striking Iran sooner than later, after 1979 Iranian Shia revolution, was the best option, as the country would still be in disarray and the Iranian military in turmoil. It didn’t work out that way – the Iranian’s rallied to the cause and a great cost of life used mass wave human attacks of enthusiastic if poorly trained young men against the Iraqi’s and stabilized the fronts. After that it was stalemate war of attrition that dragged on throughout most of the 1980s until 1988.
The US supplied the Hussein era military with weaponry, but whilst it gave a tactical advantage, it was never enough for a strategic breakthrough. Saudi Arabia has a large and expensive inventory of US sourced military hardware, and presumably some capable and US trained staff officers. But equally like all Arab armies its ranks are stuffed with nepotism, corruption, and tribalism. It is not a meritocracy based institution by any standards.
The dominant al-Saud clan reserve the upper military echelons for themselves and cronies from loyal tribes. The rank and file are not part of that equation. They are largely poor and face rampant corruption amongst junior officers – and the backbone of the squad level military, the NCO is a meaningless role in Arab armies as the junior officers do not share information with those below them in the hierarchy. The actual loyalty of the average Saudi soldier with no tribal allegiance to the al-Saud clan other than a paycheck is a moot point, and certainly in Yemen the Saud’s are ever increasingly employing US, Colombian and South Sudanese mercenaries for ground work – as the cheapest the South Sudanese are currently contracted to 5000 in number.
What does that all mean? Simply that Saudi Arabia would not win a war with Iran – they have too many structural weaknesses in their military that has never fought a serious peer to peer campaign.