Originally posted by Surtur
It seems the only difference is ISIS has nothing we want.
It's pretty disgusting.
We're currently helping the Saudis with their war in Yemen. How many Americans know were involved in a war in Yemen? How many Americans know what the Saudis have been doing in Yemen, with our help?
And we have the gall to whine about Assad?
Originally posted by Sin I AM
Yea i get all that. Im just not seeing the victims side. I dont understand the NEED to sue SA for anything oher than personal gain and a symbolic win seems petty.
Yes the symbolic win is a big part of it. For some people they just want those responsible to somehowface some kind of consequence.
Plus all our clandestine activities could be brought to light. The trade off isn't worth it
You see this is what disturbs me though. I acknowledge that I'm sure some people would try to maybe do this just to get money. However, we can't say all of them will be like that. So I just find it wrong to say these people can't even attempt to get any type of closure on this because our country is shady and we don't want our shadiness being exposed.
If we're going to say this is wrong because they were already paid, I understand. But I just can't get behind the idea that it's somehow noble or good to ignore anything terrible we have done. If it's wrong it's wrong, but it shouldn't be wrong merely because something shady about us might come out.
We're too powerful to not be held responsible for the shit we do.
Here is a weird question: is the average citizen in Saudi Arabia happy? Like okay I understand the place does horrible things, like the witchcraft stuff. But in general..do the people accept that kind of thing? Or are they against it?
I'm not saying they could necessarily do anything to stop it, I'm just wondering if they actually like living in their country.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
How about you do some research on Solyndra before you just make up wild accusations.
You mean because one company failed, the entire concept of generating power through ways independent of fossil fuel is broken?
How brilliant; are you going to backtrack again and say this is just an "opinion" now?
Originally posted by Surtur
Here is a weird question: is the average citizen in Saudi Arabia happy? Like okay I understand the place does horrible things, like the witchcraft stuff. But in general..do the people accept that kind of thing? Or are they against it?I'm not saying they could necessarily do anything to stop it, I'm just wondering if they actually like living in their country.
I have no idea. I know there is a vocal segment of the female population that has been trying to get more freedom for women, but as for everyone else? No idea.
I had several classes in college with a guy from Saudi Arabia. Like most rich Saudis, he was going to school in the States. I avoided bringing up anything cultural or political with him, but he didn't seem to find anything strange about a western college campus with coed dorms. It could be his background; rich Saudis are much more cosmopolitan than your average Saudi citizen.
Originally posted by Surtur
Yes the symbolic win is a big part of it. For some people they just want those responsible to somehowface some kind of consequence.You see this is what disturbs me though. I acknowledge that I'm sure some people would try to maybe do this just to get money. However, we can't say all of them will be like that. So I just find it wrong to say these people can't even attempt to get any type of closure on this because our country is shady and we don't want our shadiness being exposed.
If we're going to say this is wrong because they were already paid, I understand. But I just can't get behind the idea that it's somehow noble or good to ignore anything terrible we have done. If it's wrong it's wrong, but it shouldn't be wrong merely because something shady about us might come out.
We're too powerful to not be held responsible for the shit we do.
Good post. Its a slippery slope. Doing time in the military i know 1sthand there are things that we did that shouldn't come to light. Its just is what it is. But you are correct everyone should be policed and held to a certain standard. Its just hard because to most America is the standard.
Im almost certain that the victims at this point are only in it for monetary gain. I cant see how even a symbolic win would appease those who died. Its so arbitrary its pathetic.
Originally posted by Surtur
Here is a weird question: is the average citizen in Saudi Arabia happy? Like okay I understand the place does horrible things, like the witchcraft stuff. But in general..do the people accept that kind of thing? Or are they against it?I'm not saying they could necessarily do anything to stop it, I'm just wondering if they actually like living in their country.
On average the same as anyone
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
There is no provision in the bill for what you are talking about. If you really want to end wars, stop voting for government and supporting it. Thats why I am voting for Trump, I want him to destroy it.
Seems after congress overrode the bill, they're having second thoughts whether it was a good idea and not surprisingly the Republicans are blaming Obama for it.
-Congress Weighs Rewrite of Saudi 9/11 Law After Veto Override-
[I]The two top Republicans in Congress said they’re prepared to rewrite legislation allowing victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia -- less than 24 hours after Congress took the extraordinary step of overriding President Barack Obama’s veto of the measure to make it law.
Both House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the measure could have unintended consequences -- including the fact that it could leave U.S. soldiers open to retaliation by foreign governments.- snip
Before the vote, senior administration officials warned lawmakers of this exact problem -- that weakening the concept of sovereign immunity could backfire if foreign countries tried to do the same for the U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter sent House Armed Services Chairman Mac Thornberry of Texas a letter saying that could potentially expose Americans to lawsuits and “an intrusive discovery process” even if the U.S. is ultimately found not to be responsible for a particular event. - snip
McConnell blamed the White House for an inadequate effort to explain its concerns, saying there was "a failure to communicate early." -snip
Obama on Wednesday night called the override “a mistake” at a town hall event at Fort Lee, Virginia hosted by CNN. Other countries, he said, may respond by allowing their citizens to sue the U.S. for actions by American soldiers, diplomats or corporate executives, who are usually protected from litigation by the concept of sovereign immunity.
"It’s a dangerous precedent," he said. "It’s an example of why sometimes you have to do what’s hard. I wish Congress here had done what’s hard." -snip
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
There is no provision in the bill for what you are talking about. If you really want to end wars, stop voting for government and supporting it. Thats why I am voting for Trump, I want him to destroy it.
Seems after congress overrode the bill, they're having second thoughts whether it was a good idea and not surprisingly the Republicans are blaming Obama for it.
-Congress Weighs Rewrite of Saudi 9/11 Law After Veto Override-
The two top Republicans in Congress said they’re prepared to rewrite legislation allowing victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia -- less than 24 hours after Congress took the extraordinary step of overriding President Barack Obama’s veto of the measure to make it law.
Both House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the measure could have unintended consequences -- including the fact that it could leave U.S. soldiers open to retaliation by foreign governments.- snip
Before the vote, senior administration officials warned lawmakers of this exact problem -- that weakening the concept of sovereign immunity could backfire if foreign countries tried to do the same for the U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter sent House Armed Services Chairman Mac Thornberry of Texas a letter saying that could potentially expose Americans to lawsuits and “an intrusive discovery process” even if the U.S. is ultimately found not to be responsible for a particular event. - snip
McConnell blamed the White House for an inadequate effort to explain its concerns, saying there was "a failure to communicate early." -snip
Obama on Wednesday night called the override “a mistake” at a town hall event at Fort Lee, Virginia hosted by CNN. Other countries, he said, may respond by allowing their citizens to sue the U.S. for actions by American soldiers, diplomats or corporate executives, who are usually protected from litigation by the concept of sovereign immunity.
"It’s a dangerous precedent," he said. "It’s an example of why sometimes you have to do what’s hard. I wish Congress here had done what’s hard." -snip
Originally posted by Robtard
Seems after congress overrode the bill, they're having second thoughts whether it was a good idea and not surprisingly the Republicans are blaming Obama for it.-Congress Weighs Rewrite of Saudi 9/11 Law After Veto Override-
[I]The two top Republicans in Congress said they’re prepared to rewrite legislation allowing victims of the Sept. 11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia -- less than 24 hours after Congress took the extraordinary step of overriding President Barack Obama’s veto of the measure to make it law.
Both House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the measure could have unintended consequences -- including the fact that it could leave U.S. soldiers open to retaliation by foreign governments.- snip
Before the vote, senior administration officials warned lawmakers of this exact problem -- that weakening the concept of sovereign immunity could backfire if foreign countries tried to do the same for the U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter sent House Armed Services Chairman Mac Thornberry of Texas a letter saying that could potentially expose Americans to lawsuits and “an intrusive discovery process” even if the U.S. is ultimately found not to be responsible for a particular event. - snip
McConnell blamed the White House for an inadequate effort to explain its concerns, saying there was "a failure to communicate early." -snip
Obama on Wednesday night called the override “a mistake” at a town hall event at Fort Lee, Virginia hosted by CNN. Other countries, he said, may respond by allowing their citizens to sue the U.S. for actions by American soldiers, diplomats or corporate executives, who are usually protected from litigation by the concept of sovereign immunity.
"It’s a dangerous precedent," he said. "It’s an example of why sometimes you have to do what’s hard. I wish Congress here had done what’s hard." -snip
Its great talking points for politica purposes, does not mean is in the bill Rob.
TI, the very people who pushed for the bill against Obama's wishes are now the one's saying it's a concern for the same reasons Obama wanted it to not go through and then blaming Obama.
"Both House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the measure could have unintended consequences -- including the fact that it could leave U.S. soldiers open to retaliation by foreign governments"
Dude, read my OP, I am really not in favor of this.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Another failure of Obama, another example of his executive penmanship destroyed. It looks so bad to be overridden, especially since it has never been done before during his terms.It shows how weak and ineffective he is.
[b]I do not agree with the veto override, and I think this is one of the times Obama did the right thing.
But instead of working with Congress to pass a bill that worked for all, he chose this path, which led to this, and for that I am disappointed in him.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-sept11-veto-override-20160928-snap-story.html [/B]