The very idea of a U.S. defense pact with Saudi Arabia should be a nonstarter.

From article:

First, the very idea of a U.S. defense pact with Saudi Arabia—a treaty-bound assurance that the United States will come to the royal family’s defense if their country is attacked, in the same way that we have pledged to defend any member of NATO that comes under attack—is, and should be, a non-starter.

  • circularfish@beehaw.orgM
    10·
    11 months ago

    Imagine sending your son or daughter, or signing up yourself to serve your country, only to die far from home in the service of … Saudi Arabia.

    • AngularAloe@beehaw.orgOP
      1·
      11 months ago

      Sadly some service people have already died for Saudi Arabia in the Khobar Towers bombing (1996). The presence of American soldiers in Saudi Arabia was also the impetus behind the 9/11 bombings.

      A foreign policy cynic could say that this deal changes little, because the U.S. already helps SA willingly, for example, we now help them bomb Yemen because we want to, rather than because we’re legally obligated to. But I find the idea that someone would want to codify this insane, and am surprised it isn’t bigger news.