Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Being that you're obviously an expert in Middle Eastern diplomacy, how would you handle the situation?
Seriously, no matter what any president does in the Middle East, he's going to make someone mad. You cannot simultaneously be friends with Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. Can't be done.
Quick answer...
I would not be courting Iran - that's for sure. We are not there to be friends with everybody. We should not be involved in trying to make them be friends among themselves.
I would be honor alliances that we have had with others in the past. Since we have no money - I would tell them they would have to handle their own defense and we will support them when circumstances warrant. Trade would continue as normal. There would be no turnover in Egypt and Libya. Those instances only occurred because Obama is in power and they knew they could get away with it.
That is what the U S deserves when they have a interventionist foreign policy and want to be the policemen of the world. Now the U S has demands from both the Saudi's and Israel for the U S to take action.
I can see that the Saudi's could get there way with a threat to trade oil in other currency then USD and get other nations to do the same. Too people that think our status is safe as the world reserve currency the reality is it is hanging by a thread. Russia, China, EU being joined with OPEC nations and it would be game over. What will the U S do? bomb the whole world?
US and Saudis have a deal about oil trade, and the other OPEN countries (most of them) trade in USD only because Saudis tell them to. The deal is that they deal in USD, and in return US guarantees military protection for Saudi Arabia. I do not think the Saudis will walk away from that agreement.
We are not "courting" Iran. We're looking for an opportunity to begin to diffuse a difficult and dangerous situation.
As for Syria, well, Saudi Arabia is now funding rebels. (Not THE rebels, but OTHER rebels.) Evidently they are giving absolutely no thought to what Syria would look like post-Assad. It would be just another chaotic country whose mess we would somehow be responsible for cleaning up.
I'd tell the Saudis to pound sand. Maybe they can just chill out and enjoy their palaces and Mercedes and outdoor air conditioning that Americans paid for with oil money.
Geez - Obama is screwing up all of our long time foreign alliances. Over 80 years being friends with Saudi Arabia, and it's going down the drain, because why?? ...he favors the Muslim Brotherhood?
ALL ?
Because you read it on the internet it must be true if it validates your perception of Obama?
On the other hand, follow the money. The second largest shareholder after Rupert Murdoch in News Corp Inc ( parent of Fox News) is a Saudi prince.
I would be honor alliances that we have had with others in the past. Since we have no money - I would tell them they would have to handle their own defense and we will support them when circumstances warrant. Trade would continue as normal. There would be no turnover in Egypt and Libya.
Honoring alliances and becoming their puppets are two very different things. Saudis do not have to be happy with everything we do. They can speak about their unhappiness, but we do not dance to their music. Saudis need us far. They need us far more then we need them, so there is no need for us to re-write our foreign policy just to appease one arab country.
How Obama has handled Syria and Iran seems to be the problem for Saudi Arabia.
That's too bad. They can attack Syria and Iran on their own if they want. They are trying to play US against other countries, and I am glad we are not dancing to their music.
Quote:
Don't know how they feel about the oil - who cares if they have a problem with
that...
Because you read it on the internet it must be true if it validates your perception of Obama?
On the other hand, follow the money. The second largest shareholder after Rupert Murdoch in News Corp Inc ( parent of Fox News) is a Saudi prince.
Nothing is ever 100% - so I understand your point on the "ALL". But old alliances are not happy at how Obama is handling some issues and as a result, are changing the way they interact with us.
Don't know what Fox/Murdoch has to do with anything here.
US and Saudis have a deal about oil trade, and the other OPEN countries (most of them) trade in USD only because Saudis tell them to. The deal is that they deal in USD, and in return US guarantees military protection for Saudi Arabia. I do not think the Saudis will walk away from that agreement.
The Saudi leader is using oil sells as leverage and he is right about grave consequences for the U S. But on the other hand where will the Saudi's go for protection and to buy fighter jets? It would not be Russia since they are allies with Iran and the Syria gvt. You are most likely right that they will not walk away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
