HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Hillary Clinton’s State D...

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 10:02 AM

Hillary Clinton’s State Department Armed Saudi Arabia to the Teeth

While Saudi Arabia and Boeing poured cash into the Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton's State Department approved enormous sales of Boeing fighter jets to the kingdom.
by
Medea Benjamin, Rebecca Green
Common Dreams
3/8/16

As Hillary Clinton emerges as the front-runner for the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, she’s receiving increased scrutiny for her years as secretary of state — and in particular her hawkish foreign policy. Many critics are focusing especially on her long relationship with Saudi Arabia.


During her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton made weapons transfers to the Saudi government a “top priority.”

On Christmas Eve in 2011, Hillary Clinton and her closest aides celebrated a $29.4 billion sale of over 80 F-15 fighter jets, manufactured by U.S.-based Boeing Corporation, to Saudi Arabia. In a chain of enthusiastic emails, an aide exclaimed that it was “not a bad Christmas present.”

These are the very fighter jets the Saudis have been using to bomb Yemen since March 2015. A year later, at least 2,800 Yemeni civilians have been killed, mostly by airstrikes — and there’s no end in sight.

The indiscriminate Saudi strikes have killed journalists and ambulance drivers. They’ve hit the Chamber of Commerce, facilities supported by Médecins Sans Frontières (also known as Doctors Without Borders), a wedding hall, and a center for the blind. The attacks have also targeted ancient heritage sites in Yemen.

International human rights organizations are saying that the Saudi-led strikes on Yemen may amount to war crimes.

During her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton made weapons transfers to the Saudi government a “top priority,” according to a new report published in The Intercept. And even while Clinton’s State Department was deeply invested in getting weapons to Saudi Arabia, the Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the weapons manufacturer Boeing. Christmas presents were being gifted all around.

Despite the brutal attacks on Yemen and its egregious domestic human rights violations, Saudi Arabia remains the number one U.S. ally in the Arab world.

While the original U.S. interest was to secure Saudi’s vast oil reserves, today only 10 percent of oil used in the United States comes from the kingdom. Instead, U.S. dependence on Saudi oil has been superseded by U.S. dependence on weapons sales.

....snip.....

....While the U.S. government continues to provide massive amounts of weapons to Saudi Arabia, on February 25 the European Union took the extraordinary step of voting for an EU-wide arms embargo to Saudi Arabia. While non-binding, it’s a powerful statement that will put pressure on all European governments......

Read the rest~
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/03/08/hillary-clintons-state-department-armed-saudi-arabia-teeth




Also see - Emails Show Hillary Clinton Aides Celebrating F-15 Sales to Saudi Arabia: “Good News”
https://theintercept.com/2016/02/22/saudi-christmas-present/


Clinton is big business' biggest lobbyist. Military industrial complex, Communications monopolies, Fossil fuels, Wall Street, & BigAg. To the detriment of citizens, here & around the globe. Does she really represent the Democratic Party now? Really?

43 replies, 1950 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 43 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary Clinton’s State Department Armed Saudi Arabia to the Teeth (Original post)
RiverLover Mar 2016 OP
blm Mar 2016 #1
RiverLover Mar 2016 #5
blm Mar 2016 #12
RiverLover Mar 2016 #14
blm Mar 2016 #16
questionseverything Mar 2016 #28
blm Mar 2016 #36
questionseverything Mar 2016 #39
blm Mar 2016 #40
brush Mar 2016 #26
Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #8
Fast Walker 52 Mar 2016 #10
Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #20
blm Mar 2016 #13
Lizzie Poppet Mar 2016 #19
blm Mar 2016 #22
Mufaddal Mar 2016 #9
blm Mar 2016 #15
Mufaddal Mar 2016 #18
blm Mar 2016 #21
Mufaddal Mar 2016 #23
blm Mar 2016 #24
Mufaddal Mar 2016 #29
RiverLover Mar 2016 #38
Docreed2003 Mar 2016 #30
Scootaloo Mar 2016 #31
blm Mar 2016 #34
Scootaloo Mar 2016 #35
blm Mar 2016 #37
speaktruthtopower Mar 2016 #2
Jarqui Mar 2016 #3
RiverLover Mar 2016 #6
Jarqui Mar 2016 #17
RiverLover Mar 2016 #25
Scootaloo Mar 2016 #32
aspirant Mar 2016 #4
RiverLover Mar 2016 #7
Fast Walker 52 Mar 2016 #11
Scootaloo Mar 2016 #33
aspirant Mar 2016 #41
Scootaloo Mar 2016 #42
aspirant Mar 2016 #43
Faux pas Mar 2016 #27

Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 10:20 AM

1. Fellow Sanders supporter, here, but, isn't that what we WANT so US doesn't have to continue

to defend Saudi Arabia as our ally in the region?

I'd rather Saudi Arabia step forward in the region and our military forces step back……way back.

Did you want Russian firms to get the sale?

Did you want Obama administration to deny weapon sales to other nations so they would rely on our forces?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:14 AM

5. Why do we need to get involved at all? We need to get out of the ME. And 9/11? hello?

We were horrifically attacked by Saudi Arabians. And don't even try to say the leaders in Saudi Arabia didn't know what they were up to. And now, because SA gave $25 mill to the Clintons & our MIC makes millions, we help them commit war crimes.

WTH??????????

We allow the media to lead the conversation, and they never fail to ignore this fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:26 AM

12. So you prefer the alternative for US troops to lead the coalitions in that region?

I sure don't. I have been pleased that Sec Kerry has been getting other countries in that region to step up to the plate to take some of the burden off of US troops.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #12)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:32 AM

14. I support US getting the hell out of there. Why do we support Saudi Arabia?

They attacked us on 9/11 and are now committing war crimes.

If we only get 10% of our oil from them now, I think its very doable to just get out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:38 AM

16. This is one step taken down that road, whether you acknowledge that fact or not.

You cannot UNWIRE in a short amount of time, a mideast policy that was HARDWIRED over the last 5 decades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #16)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:17 PM

28. if it is such a great idea why the bribe money to the foundation?

During her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton made weapons transfers to the Saudi government a “top priority,” according to a new report published in The Intercept. And even while Clinton’s State Department was deeply invested in getting weapons to Saudi Arabia, the Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the weapons manufacturer Boeing.

//////////////////////

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to questionseverything (Reply #28)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:00 PM

36. The world's actors have made large show of donating to charities since forever.

It's not like Clinton Foundation has been found to be an illicit charity. Their reputation as a charitable foundation hasn't been dented even as some have tried mightily to do so. All anyone does is IMPLY it, and usually based on charges thrown at the foundation by Larry Klayman and RW propagandists. THIS Sanders voter won't be led by RW propagandists or repeat their propaganda at Dem sites.

As a longtime celebrity event fundraiser in the 80s and 90s, I was always on the lookout for bad organizations ripping people off and making the rest of us look bad. The one I worked with had a 5% overhead, which was stellar. The Clinton Foundation has been accused of self-enrichment through the CGI and Clinton foundation that just doesn't hold up when scrutinized by experts in philanthropy.

https://philanthropy.com/article/Opinion-How-to-Understand-the/230745

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #36)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:18 PM

39. saudis giving millions out of the goodness of their hearts...ok

common sense tells me when millions of dollars change hands...someone expects something

<shrugs>


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to questionseverything (Reply #39)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:29 PM

40. A Saudi prince gifted my brother a very expensive MercedesBenz after the 1st Gulf War.

My brother was running one of the operations dealing with communications between the tanks dispatched on the ground in Iraq. The young prince was involved through joint training.

After the end of that military op, my brother returned to Texas to find the car in his driveway.

It IS a cultural thing, too, to make these gestures that are overthetop grand to people like us, while being more commonplace to those of that world.

Sorry that doesn't fit the narrative that RW propagandists prefer, but, it's more common than you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:15 PM

26. Come on. There's nothing new about this. W Bush was best buddies with the Saudis . . .

and we've been arming them through several administrations, just as we do Israel.

Let's have some perspective here.

If you critique the Saudi arming you have to talk about Israel too.

Neither of these two countries have blood-free hands, and Israel has used it's US-supplied arms much more readily (on Palestinians and others) than the Saudis, who until recently, have rarely deployed them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:19 AM

8. For me, the issue is arming and otherwise supporting a truly loathsome regime.

 

We've been guilty of supporting vile governments for geopolitical reasons far too often. It's practically a tradition, a consistent blind spot in US foreign policy. I understand the reasoning behind getting nations like SA to pull their weight in regional defense...but I just can't support these deals with murderous, repressive, terrorist-bankrolling regimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:22 AM

10. indeed-- Saudi Arabia is a horribly sick regime and they spread death and desctruction

 

They secretly fund ISIS, and secretly funded 9/11. They are committing genocide in Yemen.

These are our ALLIES?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fast Walker 52 (Reply #10)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:45 AM

20. Yep...our "allies."

 

"You are known by the company you keep."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #8)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:28 AM

13. It's hardwired into that region at this point. This was a good step, imo, to pull back OUR

responsibilities there as more is done by those who should have been doing more to stabilize the region all along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #13)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:44 AM

19. Oh, I understand the argument and it's pragmatism.

 

It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. They are not our allies in any real way, just useful(ish) allies-of-convenience. Oh, and extremely useful to the oil companies...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #19)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:48 AM

22. Heh - Understood. Too bad there is no sweep of a wand to undo all that wiring

within a 3 second wave. We'd be damn fortunate to see a great portion of it undone within this decade.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:20 AM

9. No

The Saudis are a nightmare regime and pervasive human rights violator, who are committing war crimes with those weapons in Yemen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mufaddal (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:34 AM

15. Yes, as they all are in that region. You may prefer US troops bear the greatest military burden

for that region as 5 decades of BushInc policies has been HARDWIRED to do, but, I do not. I prefer the steps being taken by Obama administration, and, especially by Sec Kerry, to limit US involvement and to force countries who truly have a stake in the outcome to accept responsibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #15)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:40 AM

18. That's a nice false dichotomy

But continuing a policy of "hey, they may be tyrants, but they're our tyrants--so let's give them even more military aid" is a foreign policy disaster that has contributed massively to sectarian tensions and destabilization across the Middle East.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mufaddal (Reply #18)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:45 AM

21. No, it's continuing to find ways to get OUT of the policies that cast US military as lead players

in that region.

Develop a plan that you are certain will work better than Obama's current efforts to diminish our presence in that region and send it to the State Dept. Or post it here. Easy enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #21)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:55 AM

23. People living in the ME aren't stupid

I know that may come as a shock. The US doesn't need to be directly involved for them to notice what American client states are doing, and that they are, in fact, American client states. Every Iraqi and Iranian understands that Saudi is a US client state and proxy. Hell, even ISIS understands that Saudi is a US client state. Every Bahraini knows that their repressive monarchy is being propped up by the US. Ask virtually any Middle Easterner who they believe is responsible for ISIS, you will get two names 95% of the time: "The US and Saudi Arabia," although technically it is more true that it is actually "The US and Qatar" (no better). Every Yemeni knows they are being shelled with US-made weapons by the Saudis (using jets sold by Hillary, no less):

Human Rights Watch viewed photographs taken on January 6 in Sanaa that showed unmistakable remnants of cluster munitions, including unexploded submunitions, spherical fragmentation liners from submunitions that broke apart on impact, and parts of the bomb that carried the payload.

Human Rights Watch identified the munitions as from US-made BLU-63 antipersonnel/anti-materiel submunitions and components of a CBU-58 cluster bomb. Markings on the bomb remnants indicate that it was manufactured in 1978 at the Milan Army Ammunition Plant in the state of Tennessee in the United States.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/07/yemen-coalition-drops-cluster-bombs-capital-0

So here's my plan: GTFO of the Middle East. Period. That includes cutting military aid to pervasive human rights abusers and war criminals, and that includes US troops, and that includes propping up dictatorships. If you ever want to see an ounce of peace or goodwill towards the US from the ME in the future, that is the only way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mufaddal (Reply #23)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:01 PM

24. Obama-Kerry's efforts are best chance for longterm success than 'leave immediately, don't look back'

in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #24)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:21 PM

29. I understand why you have that opinion

It's a totally sensible opinion, in fact--if you're looking at the situation from the US. On the surface, it seems totally logical.

What I'm trying to convey is that this opinion, though it is part of the prevailing wisdom here, is totally dissonant with the reality on the ground in the region, particularly the popular mentality there. (I say this having lived in Iraq--which of course doesn't mean I can't be wrong on the subject.)

I can't tell you how much goodwill would be generated by exactly that: "leave immediately, don't look back"--assuming, of course, that this also meant an end to propping up bad actors and fueling their militaries (who do much of the bad acting). Iraqis, for instance, hate the US so much right now that we could basically offer the government an aircraft carrier full of no-strings-attached money, and they'd spit at it. That's how much of a disaster our foreign policy has been. And that's not just because of the Iraq war and sanctions, either. It's not a stretch to say that at this point the same goes for Yemen. Bahrain's majority Shīʿa population has been incensed for years over the US propping up a brutal minority Sunnī regime there, and they understand exactly why the US does it: we have a massive naval base there. Saudi minorities, as well as everyone else who suffers as a result of Saudi actions in the region, understands precisely why the US props up the Saudis: oil (although as of late, it's gone beyond that, and is now turning into: "because the US wants to undermine the entire region". Our government's "special relationship" with Israel doesn't help either, but it's not even the biggest issue anymore. Most funding for ISIS in the region comes from Qatar (I believe Saudi is still in second place for that dubious honor), and of course they are yet another US ally. And let's not even talk about our history in Egypt and Libya.

What we are seeing in the ME is the fruits of a foreign policy built on imperialism by hook or by crook. When that ends, progress can start.

Anyway, thanks for being open to a dialogue on the subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mufaddal (Reply #29)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:11 PM

38. This is such an interesting post. Thanks for taking the time!

Informative & concisely comprehensive. Its appreciated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:24 PM

30. The problem arises...

The problem arises when Saudi Arabia uses that military strength to support factions like Isis in a proxy war against Iran. That's a big freakin problem, and no one is openly addressing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:25 PM

31. Nope.

 

Saudi Arabia's agenda is genocidal. They are out to wipe the Shia off the map. That's what they're doing in Yemen. it's why they're funding and arming Daesh. it's what their beef with Iran is. It's why they support Bahrain's dictator. It's why they send money to Sunni rebels in Iraq.

Saudi Arabia isn't our ally. it's not even a frienemy. It's a staight-up foe, who we have invested too much into to walk away from. But I think the Obama administration is trying to end that, or at least set a trajectory to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #31)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:43 PM

34. Then the answer is Yes. Obama-Kerry ARE on track to do that and this step

is one step taken to back us out of a policy that had been hardwired over decades.

We are taking difficult steps that will help us transition out of that lead role in the region, including those that transfer greater military responsibility onto Saudi Arabia.

Emphasis on the difficult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blm (Reply #34)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:53 PM

35. We're not going to divest from the Middle east.

 

Obama's maneuvers point towards a re-focusing rather than a withdrawal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #35)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:06 PM

37. Re-focusing in order to diminish our footstep is a great shift in policy, imo.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 10:25 AM

2. It's how we pay for the oil without the dollar disintegating....

they buy stuff back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 10:27 AM

3. I think I saw Saudi Arabia has donated between $10 and $25 mil to

the Clinton Foundation and Boeing was over $5 mil.

Those were not the only ones who got some sort of blessing or assistance from the State Department under Hillary's watch and then donated to the Clinton Foundation.

I saw the subpoena of the Clinton Foundation from the Inspector General on this but yesterday, I read in an article the FBI is looking at it (don't recall which article - should have saved the link - I'll look and keep an eye out for it - and no, it was not a right wing shoot-the-messenger paper).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jarqui (Reply #3)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:16 AM

6. I hope so. More than anything else, her Saudi connection bothers me most about her.

And the TPP.

For Bill, its China PNTR WTO & NAFTA. And deregulating Wall Street.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:39 AM

17. The figure that blew me away was $4 billion

That is how much money these wealthy countries, businesses and wealthy execs have given the Clintons since they left the White House. And for what? What did the Clintons do for this panhandling? They spoke for a quarter million per hour for $150 million of it. But the rest, why did they get that money? What's in it for these people? Yes, it built the Clinton library and it funded Hillary's campaigns and the good work the Clinton Foundation claims it does. But that is a hell of a lot of money for being the top squeegee/figurative windshield washer in Washington.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jarqui (Reply #17)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:01 PM

25. It seems have bought a lot of endorsements, that's for sure.

Money is power & power is money & corruption is the final result.

Screw Democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:28 PM

32. The Saudi connection and her apparently native hate for Iran combine into something frightening

 

especially since it looks like Obama is trying to go in the opposite direction on both nations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 10:40 AM

4. Isn't this wonderful,

sell the Arabs WMD's (fighter jets capable of leveling cities) and then send Kerry over there to negotiate peace.

Starve the beasts, it's time to return to the days of the French Foreign Legions fighting on camels with swords.

Energy independence NOW and let the ME rot with their oil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:17 AM

7. Let them rot with their oil! I love it.

Yes, lets!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 11:23 AM

11. Indeed-- I can't wait for the day when we don't need their evil oil

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:29 PM

33. You do know that there's a lot more Middle East than Saudi Arabia, right?

 

And that the Saudi regime isn't representative of "the Arabs"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #33)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:44 PM

41. Arab...ia doesn't represent Arabs, right

You do know that this thread is about selling WMD's to Saudi Arabia, right?

You do know we have no business in an Islamic civil war, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aspirant (Reply #41)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 01:45 PM

42. Correct. It doesn't. It's a single nation.

 

You do know that your post had you talking like Saudi Arabia is the entire Middle east, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #42)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 02:07 PM

43. Wrong: "arabs" (plural), " ME oil" (arab nationS), thread focus=Saudi Arabia

You do know the French Foreign Legion existed in more spots than Arabia, right?

You do know we sold the arabs in Iraq WMDs, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RiverLover (Original post)

Wed Mar 9, 2016, 12:17 PM

27. Kickin' with disgust

tired of arming the world so they can use those weapons against any living thing. Slimy squared.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread