Donald, like Hilary, has taken millsions from Saudi

[ReptilianPeon]

When Donald says Hilary should return the twenty-five or so million donated the Clinton Foundation to Saudi I agree with him. (Because it's a conflict of interest, and was used to speed up a stalled weapons deal whilst Hilary was Secretary of State, not to mention all of the paid speeches Bill has done for Arab dictators since leaving office) . But will Donald be consistent and return the millions given to him by Saudi? He was even bailed out twice by a certain Saudi prince.

He's just as crooked as Hilary. They are both as corrupt as they come. Neither of them are fit to be president. Now I know they will both lick al-Saud's butt whilst in the Oval Office.

Secular talk elaborates:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0IZIEaUTvI

[dyresand]

Pretty sure most of the country knows both Trump and Hillary are equally both pieces of shit i mean for fuck sake's
look at their approval rating you hate two people most of the country doesn't fuck like one just don't like and the other
believes as well as i do should be in jail. But will Hillary go to jail... more than likely since Trey Gowdy is questioning her.
I mean she lied to us about Benghazi then also today the media lied about the email leaks saying it was Russia when we know
they don't have anything to do with it.

But yeah.... she would still take their money...

[Drich]

When Donald says Hilary should return the twenty-five or so million donated the Clinton Foundation to Saudi I agree with him. (Because it's a conflict of interest, and was used to speed up a stalled weapons deal whilst Hilary was Secretary of State, not to mention all of the paid speeches Bill has done for Arab dictators since leaving office) . But will Donald be consistent and return the millions given to him by Saudi? He was even bailed out twice by a certain Saudi prince.

He's just as crooked as Hilary. They are both as corrupt as they come. Neither of them are fit to be president. Now I know they will both lick al-Saud's butt whilst in the Oval Office.

Secular talk elaborates:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0IZIEaUTvI

What kind of Racist propaganda is this? Are Americans business men bann from doing buisness with Saudi businessmen?

You do know that the net result from trumps dealings with the saudi prince was ultimatly more tangable assessts for the prince and trump right??? If your a sanders supporter I know this is immoral, but Normal people understand this to be called a business relationship. One man buys into another's business. This affords the second guy to make money for the both of them. Which again to normal people (who don't have anything against this country's middle eastern ally) don't have an issue with people making money.

So what is the difference between what Clintons did verse what Trump did? What did the Saudis buy? what asset was gained from Hillary? Oh, that's right The KINGS of Saudi Arabia Bought direct access, and influence to the American government's political structure. Verse a monetary gain from trump as is the nature of all business related dealings from a nonpolitical Saudi prince.

Or again are you lumping everyone in Saudi Arabia as being evil, and want to ban all dealings with them??

[Brian37]

Knock it off with Hillary.

I am so fucking sick of people thinking one politician constitutes an entire government. The planet is a globe and on this planet western leaders, have under both parties had to deal in global diplomacy. Now if people want to point out our dealings as America with Saudi Arabia, I can show you fucking pictures of every president back to and including Reagan dealing with the Arab world.

You cant be isolationists OR dominionists. China also isn't a bastion of western open speech and political pluralism either. I don't like that we have to deal with theocracies or closed societies either. But it still remains all 7 billion humans live on the same planet, so you deal with reality not fucking utopias.

[Brian37]

RationalPoet....... Trump's cheating contractors and failed businesses are why he should not be trusted with global diplomacy or the global market. He's a trust fund asshole with the same mentality baby Bush had with all his failed businesses daddy Bush had to bail him out on, and he and Cheney proved their bullshit with lying their way into Iraq. But it is utter bullshit to treat Trump and Hillary as being the same.

[ReptilianPeon]

So, Brian37, you think it's acceptable to sell military equipment to a country, and be chummy with them, known to give weapons to terrorists? Saudi what happens when DAESH gets statehood. In fact, if one compares Saudi to DAESH the Saudis get very angry. There was a story about that recently which I can't be bothered to find it now.

Saudi would fall without United States support because it is too tribal and needs strongmen to keep it together, kind of like Iraq under Saddam. Unlike, China the United States is, at least in part, responsible for the actions of Saudi because they are given political and military support by the United States. Western made bombs are being used to slaughter Yemini civilians, including schools for the blind and hospitals. Nowhere is safe in the Yemen.

The Clinton had a choice whether to show their support to human rights abuses by Saudi by giving all those speeches and they chose to give expensive speeches. It wouldn't be so much of a problem if the Clintons were consistent. Just listen to Hilary's rhetoric on Syria:

"Assad must go she says".

Yet at the same time Saudi is killing arguably more civilians than Assad, be it directly by dropping bombs, including US made cluster munitions banned under international law, or indirectly by giving weapons to groups like DAESH al-Qaeda.

Point is, the Oval Office has been inhabited by hypocrites for decades and Hilary will be know different. She loves the Saudi terror state because it makes her buddies the defence contractors very rich. Why is she only outraged by Syria not Saudi?

[Brian37]

So, Brian37, you think it's acceptable to sell military equipment to a country, and be chummy with them, known to give weapons to terrorists? Saudi what happens when DAESH gets statehood. In fact, if one compares Saudi to DAESH the Saudis get very angry. There was a story about that recently which I can't be bothered to find it now.

Saudi would fall without United States support because it is too tribal and needs strongmen to keep it together, kind of like Iraq under Saddam. Unlike, China the United States is, at least in part, responsible for the actions of Saudi because they are given political and military support by the United States. Western made bombs are being used to slaughter Yemini civilians, including schools for the blind and hospitals. Nowhere is safe in the Yemen.

The Clinton had a choice whether to show their support to human rights abuses by Saudi by giving all those speeches and they chose to give expensive speeches. It wouldn't be so much of a problem if the Clintons were consistent. Just listen to Hilary's rhetoric on Syria:

"Assad must go she says".

Yet at the same time Saudi is killing arguably more civilians than Assad, be it directly by dropping bombs, including US made cluster munitions banned under international law, or indirectly by giving weapons to groups like DAESH al-Qaeda.

Point is, the Oval Office has been inhabited by hypocrites for decades and Hilary will be know different. She loves the Saudi terror state because it makes her buddies the defence contractors very rich. Why is she only outraged by Syria not Saudi?

What does "acceptable" have to do wit shit? Every fucking government friend and foe alike deals in the global market, that includes the weapons industry. Now it is part of the reality that without bases there the region would be far less stable, now if you want to blame anyone for the mess now, blame Bush for busting up Iraq. 

Yea, and we also sell weapons to Israel who in turn create massive poverty and open air prisons out of Palestine and Gaza. I hate that shit too. But that does not negate the theocracies and religious violence far too much of the east is held hostage by.

Don't cherry pick here. I hate that we have to deal with any enemy, but I also don't live in a utopia either. And that does not make everything they do moral by default. 

Again, if you insist on all or nothing propositions then we also should go to war with China and North Korea. We do business with China whom in turn does business with North Korea whom both do business with Iran. It sucks, but that is a result of living on one planet. But between the two parties in the states only one has made a mess of things and the other simply is now trying to contain it.

Now when you have 50 republican law agents telling you Trump is dangerous to global stability, I think you should worry less about Obama and Hillary and more about the damage he'd do to humanity if he were to win.

[JuliaL]

"“The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.” 
Douglas Adams- Restaurant at the End of the Universe

That's some catch, that catch 22. 
Joseph Heller- Catch 22

For 2200 years, China tested its bureaucrats.
We have some high school popularity contest judged by an ignorant student body of, at best, average intelligence.
It sucks but it's what we've got.

Sure she's a crook.
But he's a nut.

[Crossless2.0]

For 2200 years, China tested its bureaucrats.
We have some high school popularity contest judged by an ignorant student body of, at best, average intelligence.
It sucks but it's what we've got.

This! Fucking This!

[ReptilianPeon]

I hate the situation in Palestine too. But the topic isn't about Irsael. It's about Saudi.

First of all, China didn't train terrorists to fly airliners into buildings. Saudi did. And I think people have more freedom in China than they do in Saudi. And that's saying something. Just ask our resident Saudi, Altas. He lives in constant fear of the Saudi version of Gulags.

Second of all, the China doesn't go around the world claiming to be a "policeman". The United States sees itself as "leader of the free world" and a "policeman". I'm pointing out the double standards. They want "freedom" for the Syrians but not the Saudis. There is silence when it comes to the Saudis and their crimes. The thought is, US allies are by definition good because they are US allies. Saudi is a massive US ally, even more so than a lot of OECD countries.

This export of "democracy" isn't applied consistently because there is selective outrage by Western leaders. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy.

Support of numerous Arab dictators is just one reason there is a great hatred amoungst the Muhammadans for the United States. And decades later, Western leaders are only now just waking up to Saudi exporting terror around the world.

Now it is part of the reality that without bases there the region would be far less stable

I don't know where you got that idea from. People hate these bases (even in largely pro-US Japan the public want these bases gone, in particular in Okinawa where many women have been raped by soldiers). The invasion of sovereignty is what drives more people towards terrorism.

Bush can be blamed for a lot, but there are also things Obama can be blamed for. For example, supporting terrorists in Syria. Ronald Regan did the same thing in Afghanistan and we know how that turned out. And it was Hilary that pushed for bombing Libya and now that country is forgotten. Where is the reconstruction effort? The signals I'm getting are third world lives are worth far less than Western lives.