It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Senate...moves to withdraw US support for Saudi Arabia in Yemen in historic vote

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 06:51 AM
link   

The Senate on Thursday voted 56 to 41 in favor of a resolution to withdraw US support for Saudi Arabia in the Yemen conflict in a stunning rebuke of President Donald Trump's ongoing, controversial support for the kingdom following the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

The vote is largely symbolic, given the House on Wednesday moved to block virtually any deliberations on US involvement in Yemen for the rest of the congressional session. Accordingly, the measure will not end up on Trump's desk.

But the House is likely to take up the issue again when it reconvenes in the new year and Democrats take over.

Source

In an unprecedented move Senate has voted to withdraw US support for Saudi Arabia in Yemen. While the media seems to be strictly framing this as a response to the state sanctioned killing of Jamal Khashoggi, a large part of it stems from the fact that what is happening in Yemen is the worst humanitarian crisis currently occurring in the world.

While the vote itself is largely symbolic due to the House voting to block any deliberations on US involvement in Yemen until the new year, it still marks a historic first. This is the first time Congress has utilized the powers granted to them by the War Powers Resolution and voted to end an unsanctioned war.

Trump has stated that if any such bill crosses his desk that it will be vetoed. However, the message seems to be quite clear. Trump doesn't have the full support of his party and there are many on the Right that are concerned by continued support of Saudi Arabia.

It will be interesting to see how things play out in the new year. A Democrat majority House will almost definitely vote to end support. A more Trump friendly Senate will make it harder to get the resolution passed but I still don't think it's enough to block it. At which point we'll have to see if Trump stays true to his word and uses his power of veto.




posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254

Trump has stated that if any such bill crosses his desk that it will be vetoed. However, the message seems to be quite clear. Trump doesn't have the full support of his party and there are many on the Right that are concerned by continued support of Saudi Arabia.


Has he? Havent seen the threads detailing it.


Oh, yeah, you're against Saudi Arabia then you're a RACIST!




posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Not sure how anyone could support Trump vetoing this. I made a thread a bit ago about how 45 children were killed by Saudi Arabia's drone strike in Yemen.

Somehow, I'm sure trump supporters will find some reasoning to support him on this. This is good news though. Thanks for the post OP.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:09 AM
link   
We shouldn't be involved in the ME anyway.

We've been bombing Yemen for at least 10 years now. Well I haven't heard that we stopped, so I imagine that we still are.

So if the senate can work with congress to get this through then I'm cool with that.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254


Trump has stated that if any such bill crosses his desk that it will be vetoed. However, the message seems to be quite clear. Trump doesn't have the full support of his party and there are many on the Right that are concerned by continued support of Saudi Arabia.


This should have happened when this war broke out IMO. So I won't celebrate or congratulate the Senate for doing their jobs for once (they'll probably give themselves a raise and skip some votes to reward themselves).

We all know it's highly likely our money has made it to that war, but our weapons certainly have.

Yemen blood is on our hands and all for an archaic "ally".

As for Trump, should he veto it, he would look awfully swampy considering that is a move specifically for the MIC, and not the people. He ran on not being a warmonger, so lets see the proof in the pudding.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:10 AM
link   
so has the influence Saudi Arabia had on us for so long disappeared? If so, It's a wonderful thing, but somehow, I just doubt that is the case. If the world order changed, and Oil was no longer the preferred method of moving people, the folks in that region would need help quickly. You can't eat sand, and you can't grow anything except rocks over there, so without all that oil money, it would be empty plates and empty bellies.

But most of the worlds wealth revolves around oil, so I doubt it will change anytime soon. IMHO.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
We shouldn't be involved in the ME anyway.

We've been bombing Yemen for at least 10 years now. Well I haven't heard that we stopped, so I imagine that we still are.

So if the senate can work with congress to get this through then I'm cool with that.


It's going to be a strange scene if trump vetos any effort. Not sure if congress can move around that. Trump has a hard on for Saudi Arabia, no matter what they do. Which should be a wary sign to anyone on ATS. Obama gave support to the Muslim brotherhood and he was crucified for it. Trump gives full support to Saudi Arabia, and supporters are cool with it. O the hypocrisy!



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Well said; they are actually doing their jobs. Trump has proven himself to be of the swamp, just a side of the swamp we haven't quite seen yet. At least, in my opinion. We'll find out more as time goes on ..

Our country doesn't need billion dollar arms deals with countries who violate human-rights and desire war. We shouldn't require proxy wars and dirty deeds to be a great country. Maybe that's naive, but I think America can change.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: blueman12

Agreed. I don't think Trump realizes how strong the support is against SA right now. Either that or he's just so in SA's pocket that he doesn't care.

Both options are bad for America.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

I did a thread on Saudi Arabian lobbying efforts towards the US not long ago on this very issue.

I'm hoping this isn't just a trend (legislator pressure on SA), but my guess is that it is.

Trump is standing tough on Saudi Arabia, and this issue is a good way to make him double down. Truth is, until we address the Petrodollar, I'm hard pressed to see trends truly shift for the US foreign policy with SA (though it desperately needs to).

My guess is these senators are playing games right now, because lets be real... They haven't worked a single day in their career as senators other than for self interest, or those of their largest donors.
edit on 14-12-2018 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 09:10 AM
link   
so what is to stop OPEC from doing their usual games and withhold production to jack prices up to the lunacy levels of $5 a gallon here in the US?

I get that Trump is weak on SA, and I'm not a fan of them, nor is anyone I know, but they have us by the short and curleys and have for a while. When the dust settles from this, I'm sure whatever bad things will be blamed on Trump, but perhaps the veil will be pulled back just a bit.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

It's rather sad the vote was still mostly along party lines. There were only 7 Senate Republicans who voted yes to withdraw support. These officials should be ashamed of themselves. You have to wonder if these elected officials have any sense of integrity or moral values.

Saudi Arabia should never have been an ally considering their Islamic beliefs identify with terrorists who believe in radical Islam. Their human rights record is abominable. I still have questions why their diplomats received preferential treatment to fly back to their country during the height of 911 when there was a complete grounding of all flights. Anyone would come to the conclusion it was a huge red flag when 15 of the 19 hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia.

There should have been 100% of our elected officials condemning and withdrawing their support for Saudi Arabia's conflict in Yemen. The Saudi's have demonstrated their lack of concern for human life by killing innocent children. Now that there was enough evidence to connect the Saudi Prince to the killing of a journalist, we still have elected officials that side with party rather than basic moral values and the sanctity of life.

Economics should be taking a back seat to supporting a regime who are the driving force behind Islamist terrorism. Don't believe it? Speak with Islamic immigrants about Saudi Arabia. Many of them will tell you how strict and violent their religious beliefs really are.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 09:17 AM
link   
As long as Trump continues to keep his promise of no new wars, I'll continue to support him. Something none of the recent Presidents were able to do.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude


so what is to stop OPEC from doing their usual games and withhold production to jack prices up to the lunacy levels of $5 a gallon here in the US?


Eh, they do that and we will just bring them our number one export.... Freedom.


I get that Trump is weak on SA, and I'm not a fan of them, nor is anyone I know, but they have us by the short and curleys and have for a while. When the dust settles from this, I'm sure whatever bad things will be blamed on Trump, but perhaps the veil will be pulled back just a bit.


Saudi Arabia's royal family played hot and loose. Their time is running out due to their high production per day which floats around 12 million barrels a day~.





posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Same story, different decade. Right wingers clutching their pearls, oh my what are we to do? Suddenly propping up a socialist country in South America that isn’t full of religious whackadoos sounds like a sane and prudent move. a reply to: network dude



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Most here aren't worth a discussion only ridicule, due to their partisan blinders. Lucky you, one of the few who still possesses rational thought!

How is it that this event alone seems to be the end to SA's relationship with us? It's not like they have been perfect buddies up till they capped the journalist? They were just fine for Obama, Clinton, Bush, and all the rest, but now, this HAS TO STOP! LOL, it's a bit deeper than the shiny layer we are all amazed with currently. Or is this the first time a person was killed by a government?

This site used to have some wonderful thinkers, today, not so much.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude


Most here aren't worth a discussion only ridicule, due to their partisan blinders. Lucky you, one of the few who still possesses rational thought!


Thank ya now, I was born and semi-raised in Texas. Some of the core things taught to me were to be a straight shooter, try to be honest, and when I'm wrong, admit it.


How is it that this event alone seems to be the end to SA's relationship with us?


Unrealistic answer- the senate, and our legislators magically took mushrooms, had an epiphany, got morality, and want to do good by the people.

Realistic answer- They know Trump isn't going to budge, they pass this, he veto's, and we have a week of news cycles making 200 headlines for it.


They were just fine for Obama, Clinton, Bush, and all the rest, but now, this HAS TO STOP! LOL, it's a bit deeper than the shiny layer we are all amazed with currently. Or is this the first time a person was killed by a government?


Our nation is filled with goldfish, people with memory/attention spans of 5 seconds.

One day Saudi Arabia will dry up, Mecca will be for the taking and the ME will be a S### show. We either find alternative energy or go through a depression.

The bright side is we may find an alternative clean energy, if we don't though, Venezuela gets a regime change and then we can start the water wars.

If we do find clean energy (cheap), desalinization will mitigate water wars.

Thank you all in all though.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

that's rich coming from you...you're telling people about partisanship blunders or resorting o immediate ridicule un defense of trump?
(oh plenty to prove it...)
new definition to pot meet keytle...

this idea of everyone was mum under other presidencies and now suddenly vocal is simply another trump-defense camouflaged behind the guise of equal inquisition.

well there are plenty on record that outlined how most presidents differ on the ME:


I'll give you facts but I expect you to twist it .


Saudis loved the Obama administration.... which wasnt eschewed by the Iran nuke deal right...?



Obama, Riyadh press conference, April 2016: “Even as Iran is calling us ‘The Great Satan,’ we were able to get a deal done where they got rid of their nuclear stockpiles, and that makes us safer.  That's not a sign of weakness, that's a sign of strength.”
Trump, May 2017: “For decades, Iran has fuelled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror. It is a government that speaks openly of mass murder, vowing the destruction of Israel, death to America, and ruin for many leaders and nations in this room.




Human rights in Saudi Arabia

Obama, Riyadh speech, April 2016: “Even as these summits focus on security issues, it remains the case that true and lasting security also depends on governance and an economy that serves all its citizens and respects universal human rights.”


Trump, May 2017: “Our partnerships will advance security through stability, not through radical disruption. We will make decisions based on real-world outcomes – not inflexible ideology. We will be guided by the lessons of experience, not the confines of rigid thinking. And, wherever possible, we will seek gradual reforms – not sudden intervention.”




Obama, Washington address in May 2011: Arab societies “held together by fear and repression may offer the illusion of stability for a time, but they are built upon fault lines that will eventually tear asunder.”

Trump, May 2017: “We are not here to lecture - we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do, who to be, or how to worship. Instead, we are here to offer partnership – based on shared interests and values – to pursue a better future for us all.”



I'm going to take it, by me quoting directly each president, you'll say I'm twisting truth? or anti trump for that...?

no US president has been able to sever the strangle hold the Saudis have on us, but there are glaring differences between recent presidents postures at far back as bush41


and, a comparison of the two presidents meeting with the Saudis doesn't make the telegraph fake news: source... and yes Obama gave the Saudi government too much leeway. which is what started the Yemeni war initially. but they weren't in favor of Obama's Iranian policies and human rights issues including LGBT and women's rights
edit on 14-12-2018 by odzeandennz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 11:06 AM
link   
I am thinking that with the newly-controlled Dem. majority in the House and Rep. support in the Senate,Trump is probably hoping for a veto-proof majority.The he can say 'well,I tried'.Doubtful it will happen,but I think that's his play.
edit on 14-12-2018 by buckwhizzle because: spelling used to be my strong suit



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: network dude

that's rich coming from you...you're telling people about partisanship blunders or resorting o immediate ridicule un defense of trump?
(oh plenty to prove it...)
new definition to pot meet keytle...

this idea of everyone was mum under other presidencies and now suddenly vocal is simply another trump-defense camouflaged behind the guise of equal inquisition.

well there are plenty on record that outlined how most presidents differ on the ME:


I'll give you facts but I expect you to twist it .


Saudis loved the Obama administration.... which wasnt eschewed by the Iran nuke deal right...?



Obama, Riyadh press conference, April 2016: “Even as Iran is calling us ‘The Great Satan,’ we were able to get a deal done where they got rid of their nuclear stockpiles, and that makes us safer.  That's not a sign of weakness, that's a sign of strength.”
Trump, May 2017: “For decades, Iran has fuelled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror. It is a government that speaks openly of mass murder, vowing the destruction of Israel, death to America, and ruin for many leaders and nations in this room.




Human rights in Saudi Arabia

Obama, Riyadh speech, April 2016: “Even as these summits focus on security issues, it remains the case that true and lasting security also depends on governance and an economy that serves all its citizens and respects universal human rights.”


Trump, May 2017: “Our partnerships will advance security through stability, not through radical disruption. We will make decisions based on real-world outcomes – not inflexible ideology. We will be guided by the lessons of experience, not the confines of rigid thinking. And, wherever possible, we will seek gradual reforms – not sudden intervention.”




Obama, Washington address in May 2011: Arab societies “held together by fear and repression may offer the illusion of stability for a time, but they are built upon fault lines that will eventually tear asunder.”

Trump, May 2017: “We are not here to lecture - we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do, who to be, or how to worship. Instead, we are here to offer partnership – based on shared interests and values – to pursue a better future for us all.”



I'm going to take it, by me quoting directly each president, you'll say I'm twisting truth? or anti trump for that...?

no US president has been able to sever the strangle hold the Saudis have on us, but there are glaring differences between recent presidents postures at far back as bush41


and, a comparison of the two presidents meeting with the Saudis doesn't make the telegraph fake news: source... and yes Obama gave the Saudi government too much leeway. which is what started the Yemeni war initially. but they weren't in favor of Obama's Iranian policies and human rights issues including LGBT and women's rights


difference being, I'm fully aware of my bias, and I don't try to hide it behind some facade of social justice.



new topics




 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join