Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on October 18, 2018, 03:35:54 PM
-
And still we will sell them arms
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-45899285
-
Makes me sick.
I heard a caller on LBC argue that it is nothing to do with Britain and we should stay out of it. Another caller informed him that Britain supported Ibn Saud against the Ottomans, thereby helping create Saudi Arabia despite the evident extremism and violence in Wahhabi culture. And Britain has since supported Saudi human rights crimes by selling it weapons, stopping the Serious Fraud Office from pursuing its investigations into kick-backs for BAE arms deals, and doing back-room deals to get Saudi Arabia a seat on the UN Human Rights Council.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/sep/29/uk-and-saudi-arabia-in-secret-deal-over-human-rights-council-place
Any enemy of the house of Saud (including ISIS) may consider Britain its enemy too because of Britain's continuing support for Saudi repression and terror through arms sales. Especially now that some powerful countries, e.g. US, Russia, Saudi Arabia seem to feel they can get away with assassinating their enemies abroad as there is no international body that can stop them. This may translate to more terror acts on UK soil.
-
Just to note my applause for Gabriella's post there.
And membership of the Human Rights Council at the UN is almost a guarantee of hypocrisy.
-
Of course he does
http://uk.businessinsider.com/tony-blair-resists-keeps-multimillion-saudi-deal-following-khashoggi-murder-2018-10?fbclid=IwAR3dWOmTgtz-7SDBpDHoCnMzA0Uj9Rb7qG6kN8rFUpEgrwPIeGrxxyoMqys
-
Given the rulers that we and the USA have about corruption whilst conducting business transactions, I'm surprised that either country can legally sell them arms. In the early 90's I worked for a company that sold simulation systems for air combat to Saudi Arabia amongst other customers. Somebody told me that, just to get goods into the country you would have to pay a back hander to the customs agent or your goods would sit in a warehouse at the port forever waiting for clearance. All the bribes and corruption were documented at our end so they could be accounted for. Nowadays that sort of thing is surely illegal.
Saudi Arabia is corrupt from top to bottom. Its rulers do not care about its citizens because they make their money from oil rather than their people making stuff. It's a brutal regime and I do not understand how anybody could have the stomach to do business with them.
-
It's all about the money
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/10/28/khashoggi-bombshell-britain-knew-of-kidnap-plot-and-begged-saudi-arabia-to-abort-plans/
-
It's all about the money
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/10/28/khashoggi-bombshell-britain-knew-of-kidnap-plot-and-begged-saudi-arabia-to-abort-plans/
While I agree it is all about the money, your link doesn't really address that. In fact, it seems to claim that the USA has used a nuclear weapon in the Yemen, which makes me wonder about the quality of its journalism.
-
While I agree it is all about the money, your link doesn't really address that. In fact, it seems to claim that the USA has used a nuclear weapon in the Yemen, which makes me wonder about the quality of its journalism.
No, I didn't put the link there to show that it's all about the money. I think that's rather obvious. There are any number of statements from Trump stating that and the actions of the UK govt show that. The link was more an issue that if there is any chance of the UK having been aware of this, then we are complicit in murder.
-
No, I didn't put the link there to show that it's all about the money. I think that's rather obvious. There are any number of statements from Trump stating that and the actions of the UK govt show that. The link was more an issue that if there is any chance of the UK having been aware of this, then we are complicit in murder.
Well the link states that the British tried to stop it. If it is right (although see the comment about the use of nuclear weapons), then we are not complicit in the narrow sense of this one crime, but I agree we are complicit in the wider sense that we sell stuff to a murderous regime and probably buy their oil too.
-
Well the link states that the British tried to stop it. If it is right (although see the comment about the use of nuclear weapons), then we are not complicit in the narrow sense of this one crime, but I agree we are complicit in the wider sense that we sell stuff to a murderous regime and probably buy their oil too.
In the narrow sense, if we knew of the intention then we are complicit.
-
In the narrow sense, if we knew of the intention then we are complicit.
Not if we tried to stop it.
-
Not if we tried to stop it.
If we knew it was the intention and didn't call it out, then yes we are.
-
If we knew it was the intention and didn't call it out, then yes we are.
Define "call it out".They tried to stop it from happening. I'm not sure what more you'd want them to do.
-
Discovered today that his surname is pronounced "Hashodji", not "Kashoggi".