Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
42. It is almost funny how badly you missed the point...but instructive.
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 09:37 PM
Jul 2012

Last edited Tue Jul 31, 2012, 01:05 AM - Edit history (1)

I am not advocating for the overthrow of the Saudi Regime. It simply is not the point of the OP.

The point of the OP is to shed light on the dark relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia.

The point of the OP is to help people to look at issues that are NOT discussed -to focus on what is not said by the MM and not always respond by what is thrown in front of them. In other words, to actively think and question.

When watching CNN, Fox, NBC et al. it is important to ask "Why are we being shown something? Who's purpose does it serve?" and then to ask "What are they NOT discussing and why?"

In your case, you quickly jumped to a conclusion and entirely missed the point.

Furthermore, the fact that you said you would support any military action as long as you view "the people rising up" is laughable. Do you really think that any rebel activity is always "'The People (capital P) rising up"? How could you possibly have the confidence that you could accurately judge when a true people's movement is happening when it is difficult to do so even in retrospect?

In addition, do you mean to day that as long as people are NOT taking military action, it exonerates the government of being an authoritarian swamp that should be overthrown?

oil struggle4progress Jul 2012 #1
sure is weird. and you're correct "never". also the emirates, kuwait, etc. "never". because HiPointDem Jul 2012 #2
Not to mention Politicalboi Jul 2012 #3
In Rachel Maddow's book, Drift, she states something to the effect JDPriestly Jul 2012 #56
Weird how watching FOX News OnyxCollie Jul 2012 #4
The Saudis own Fox-Republican "news"? Berlum Jul 2012 #6
They *don't* think about that. OnyxCollie Jul 2012 #16
But, but, but...it's traitorous to deliberately remain IGNORANT Berlum Jul 2012 #17
That would mean learning new things. OnyxCollie Jul 2012 #18
You mean learning & dealing with the fact that virtually all the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis (R)? Berlum Jul 2012 #19
Bill O'Reilly (R) thinks his party & company being OWNED by the Saudis is "funny" Berlum Jul 2012 #20
Funny thing is, OnyxCollie Jul 2012 #21
This kind of factual discussion about who is pulling Republican strings could get us Dungeonized Berlum Jul 2012 #28
Or the brutal Bahrain regime or the brutal Dictator of Uzbekistan. We were very selective sabrina 1 Jul 2012 #5
..., Bronze Age, Iron Age, Oil Age harun Jul 2012 #7
Am I the only one to have a copy? Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2012 #8
+1 nt Bonobo Jul 2012 #9
Exactly. The Bush family is all kissy, kissy with the Saudis. tclambert Jul 2012 #13
They got all kinds of special treatment. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2012 #15
Imagine that. woo me with science Jul 2012 #10
If you knew anything about a US company called The Vinnell Corporation you would understand NNN0LHI Jul 2012 #11
The people protested but the Saudi's upped their monthly stipend. joshcryer Jul 2012 #12
No Josh, I'm not the one that supports wars. Bonobo Jul 2012 #14
Then why are you concerned about "getting rid of the Saudi regime"? joshcryer Jul 2012 #30
KSA wasn't on the list for regime change. See "A Clean Break" (Perle, Feith, Wurmser, PNAC 1997) leveymg Jul 2012 #32
The OP appears concerned about Saudi regime change. joshcryer Jul 2012 #34
Why does the OP have to clarify his own position? He's asking why the subject isn't raised. leveymg Jul 2012 #36
Right, so basically, it's all about not taking a stance somewhere. joshcryer Jul 2012 #37
The "Arab Spring" isn't a template that fits all cases. Not every revolution means change leveymg Jul 2012 #38
Nor would I. But I would be behind them. joshcryer Jul 2012 #41
It is almost funny how badly you missed the point...but instructive. Bonobo Jul 2012 #42
I know that. Basically you want to caricature people who support the downtrodden... joshcryer Jul 2012 #45
Man, Josh, you really put the "My" in Myopic. nt Bonobo Jul 2012 #47
nintended consequences result when you advocate for war. Look. Bonobo Jul 2012 #48
LOL. joshcryer Jul 2012 #49
Libya did the same thing Dokkie Jul 2012 #43
Libya did it after the uprising not before. joshcryer Jul 2012 #44
and what difference does it make? Dokkie Jul 2012 #46
Half the country was under opposition control? joshcryer Jul 2012 #50
+1. They pre-empted the whole protest movement by bribing it in its infancy. nt Selatius Jul 2012 #57
Why haven't protests arisen as in the other countries? treestar Jul 2012 #22
Not that weird. The US has always favored stability over Democracy in foreign affairs FSogol Jul 2012 #23
Sunni Muslims considers the Saudis to be the protectors of Mecca. Odin2005 Jul 2012 #24
The Saudis are already engaged in a holy war, against the Shi'ia. leveymg Jul 2012 #33
Some of the biggest money in Wall St. raouldukelives Jul 2012 #25
Stop! Don't they own Fox News? Rosa Luxemburg Jul 2012 #26
Hey, what's this have to do with Romney/Palin/Paul...? whatchamacallit Jul 2012 #27
Heavens no. Everyone has seen how the Saudi rulers are our kissy-face buds indepat Jul 2012 #29
Saudi Arabia’s $36 Billion Insurance Policy Against Regime Change Protests Coyotl Jul 2012 #31
Mittens said Iran was the most destabilizing nation in the world. I think Saudi is at least as bad. MNBrewer Jul 2012 #35
but isn't the 'soviet union' the gravest danger? spanone Jul 2012 #40
I remember when China was the "gravest danger." KansDem Jul 2012 #61
True, the Romney camp is very concerned about the Soviet threat. MNBrewer Jul 2012 #62
i have a sudden gas attack spanone Jul 2012 #39
Osama Bin Laden did jberryhill Jul 2012 #51
Osama focused a lot of his energy on taking down the House of Saud then, I suppose? nt Bonobo Jul 2012 #53
Yes, and several attacks there jberryhill Jul 2012 #54
Thank you for the link. NT Bonobo Jul 2012 #55
the current king is as liberal JCMach1 Jul 2012 #52
The problem with getting rid of the saudis crimson77 Jul 2012 #58
Tell B) to the idiots here who say "No uprising = No problems". nt Bonobo Jul 2012 #60
If ever there was a capital in need of carpet bombing. Arctic Dave Jul 2012 #59
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»No one talks about gettin...»Reply #42