UNPOPULAR TAKE: Trump Talks Terror In Saudi Arabia...And It's Meh

[EasyAce]

By Ben Shapiro
http://www.dailywire.com/news/16688/unpopular-take-trump-talks-terror-saudi-arabiaand-ben-shapiro

On Sunday, President Trump gave a well-received speech in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The speech was praised
by both the right and left: by the right for its focus on the problem of terrorism, by the left for its restraint.

Now, here is my admittedly unpopular take: the speech was a break from Obama’s nasty habit of ripping America
publicly and blaming America for the problems of the Muslim world. But other than that, it was empty and largely
pointless, and actually hinted more at American isolationism in the region than in involvement in helping to fight
terrorism . . .

. . . The speech, summarized, could have read: “Terrorism is bad. It has something to do with Islam, but I’m not
really allowed to say that, so Islamic extremism doesn’t actually have anything to do with Islam. Handle it yourselves,
but we’ll sell you some weapons, just like Obama did. Trump out.”

Trump did better than Obama did – he noted that the Islamic world has a problem, clearly and concisely. But he
offered no carrots and no sticks. His big “victories” amount to the foundation of an empty Global Center for Combating
Extremist Ideology – a notion that would have made conservatives guffaw had Obama bragged about it. Trump didn’t
undermine the image of the United States – which is a huge move away from Obama, who did so at every opportunity.
But he also didn’t offer much in the way of a plan, echoed some of the talking points of the Obama administration,
and covered it all in a gravy comprised alternatively of tough talk and “hey, it’s none of our business.”

So, far better than Obama. But more neutral than positive.

[ABX]

By Ben Shapiro
http://www.dailywire.com/news/16688/unpopular-take-trump-talks-terror-saudi-arabiaand-ben-shapiro

Here is the transcript:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/21/politics/trump-saudi-speech-transcript/index.html

I'm a bit surprised the Freeper fan types are cheering it as it continues the same language they have been complaining about 'Islam is really peace, terrorists are extremists and don't represent Islam, Israel and Palestine and hug it out, Saudi Arabia are good folk who can help us...'

I found it OK, kind of a "Meh" speech like Ben says. I'm far more concerned about $150 Billion Dollar arms deal to them. Republicans threw an absolute fit when Obama lifted the moratorium on selling or providing arms to Saudi Arabia and made a $1.5 Billion dollar deal. Now we are supposed to clap at a deal 100 times that?

..and to put that $150 Billion for arming the Saudi's in perspective. The 2017 US Department of Defense budget is a bit over $500 Billion.
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/652687/department-of-defense-dod-releases-fiscal-year-2017-presidents-budget-proposal/

[EasyAce]

Here is the transcript:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/21/politics/trump-saudi-speech-transcript/index.html

I'm a bit surprised the Freeper fan types are cheering it as it continues the same language they have been complaining about 'Islam is really peace, terrorists are extremists and don't represent Islam, Israel and Palestine and hug it out, Saudi Arabia are good folk who can help us...'

Uhhhh, because it's their demigod saying it and not the left's demigod saying it now? ;)

I found it OK, kind of a "Meh" speech like Ben says. I'm far more concerned about $150 Billion Dollar arms deal to them. Republicans threw an absolute fit when Obama lifted the moratorium on selling or providing arms to Saudi Arabia and made a $1.5 Billion dollar deal. Now we are supposed to clap at a deal 100 times that?

..and to put that $150 Billion for arming the Saudi's in perspective. The 2017 US Department of Defense budget is a bit over $500 Billion.
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/652687/department-of-defense-dod-releases-fiscal-year-2017-presidents-budget-proposal/

Because it's, "You can't sell the Saudis arms---only we can sell the Saudis arms!" ;)

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kg3rQR5EJ0


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kg3rQR5EJ0

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Here is the transcript:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/21/politics/trump-saudi-speech-transcript/index.html

I'm a bit surprised the Freeper fan types are cheering it as it continues the same language they have been complaining about 'Islam is really peace, terrorists are extremists and don't represent Islam, Israel and Palestine and hug it out, Saudi Arabia are good folk who can help us...'

I found it OK, kind of a "Meh" speech like Ben says. I'm far more concerned about $150 Billion Dollar arms deal to them. Republicans threw an absolute fit when Obama lifted the moratorium on selling or providing arms to Saudi Arabia and made a $1.5 Billion dollar deal. Now we are supposed to clap at a deal 100 times that?

..and to put that $150 Billion for arming the Saudi's in perspective. The 2017 US Department of Defense budget is a bit over $500 Billion.
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/652687/department-of-defense-dod-releases-fiscal-year-2017-presidents-budget-proposal/

I thought it was pretty good.  I think the tone will go over well with the moderate Muslims (they do exist, I've known some).  I like that he emphasized Iran as a shared enemy.  I don't know how it could have been made better.

The weapons deal?  If we could sell them weapons, at a profit, and let their people use them to stamp out terrorism, while our guys stay over here (which is what both sides really want), that would be one of the greatest political accomplishments in memory.

But, as I said, "If we could".  Seems like every time our own weapons end up pointing back at us.

[ABX]

I thought it was pretty good.  I think the tone will go over well with the moderate Muslims (they do exist, I've known some).  I like that he emphasized Iran as a shared enemy.  I don't know how it could have been made better.

The weapons deal?  If we could sell them weapons, at a profit, and let their people use them to stamp out terrorism, while our guys stay over here (which is what both sides really want), that would be one of the greatest political accomplishments in memory.

But, as I said, "If we could".  Seems like every time our own weapons end up pointing back at us.

The weapon's deal part I mentioned in a thread the other day. We really don't know the details at this point. More often than not, when we make these deals, we are either subsidizing the  cost to the receiving party or subsidizing the manufacturer in order to cut the receiving party a break. In other words, at the end of the day, taxpayers are footing the bill for it, it isn't 'at a profit'. Even in this speech, Trump said he was basically cutting them a deal- political speech that taxpayers are subsidizing it (especially as he doesn't own these companies so he can't dictate what they sell the arms for and can't speak on their behalf).

This landmark agreement includes the announcement of a $110 billion Saudi-funded defense purchase -- and we will be sure to help our Saudi friends to get a good deal from our great American defense companies....

That kind of 'deal' is something we threw a fit about just a year ago with Obama. Rand Paul even tried to block it.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/14/saudi-arabia-us-arms-deal-senators-rand-paul-chris-murphy

[truth_seeker]

... We really don't know the details at this point. ...

What did Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II do in similar cases?

Republican Presidents, post WWII. And there are the military and the defense industry to consider.

In just 4 months, are you suggesting something sinister, different and negative about Trump?

Or is it "we really don't know the details," but it probably follows patterns dating back decades?

[ABX]

What did Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II do in similar cases?

Republican Presidents, post WWII. And there are the military and the defense industry to consider.

In just 4 months, are you suggesting something sinister, different and negative about Trump?

Or is it "we really don't know the details," but it probably follows patterns dating back decades?

Well it certainly isn't a pattern regarding the amount we are supplying them. $150 Billion is 100 times the amount Obama gave them last year when the freeze on arms sales to Saudi Arabia was lifted and is 1/5th our entire Department of Defense 2017 budget. https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/652687/department-of-defense-dod-releases-fiscal-year-2017-presidents-budget-proposal/

Because 'they' did it in the past, Trump can do it exponentially more is not only not an excuse, it is exactly opposite of what everyone was sold Trump is all about. As a point of reference, especially after 9/11, Conservatives were the ones speaking out the loudest against this constant arming of states like Saudi Arabia who sponsor and support Terrorism. It was the 'establishment' (or I guess you call them 'deep state' now) that were the ones always playing the military industrial complex game.

IE, Trump is acting like any other establishment, deep-state 'neocons' that we were sold he wasn't. Only he is doing it grander.

[Cripplecreek]

Well it certainly isn't a pattern regarding the amount we are supplying them. $150 Billion is 100 times the amount Obama gave them last year when the freeze on arms sales to Saudi Arabia was lifted and is 1/5th our entire Department of Defense 2017 budget. https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Releases/News-Release-View/Article/652687/department-of-defense-dod-releases-fiscal-year-2017-presidents-budget-proposal/

Because 'they' did it in the past, Trump can do it exponentially more is not only not an excuse, it is exactly opposite of what everyone was sold Trump is all about. As a point of reference, especially after 9/11, Conservatives were the ones speaking out the loudest against this constant arming of states like Saudi Arabia who sponsor and support Terrorism. It was the 'establishment' (or I guess you call them 'deep state' now) that were the ones always playing the military industrial complex game.

IE, Trump is acting like any other establishment, deep-state 'neocons' that we were sold he wasn't. Only he is doing it grander.

I know of at least one GOP candidate who spoke about being choosier about what wars we meddle in, which allies we choose to work with and how we choose to aide them. Unfortunately he was a "Goldman Sachs shill" who would load his administration with rich donors. 

[ABX]

I know of at least one GOP candidate who spoke about being choosier about what wars we meddle in, which allies we choose to work with and how we choose to aide them. Unfortunately he was a "Goldman Sachs shill" who would load his administration with rich donors. 

Rand Paul attempted to block Obama when he made the 1.5 Billion dollar arms deal with SA and tried to reinstate the ban. It was the RINOs like McCain and Boehner who stopped him and supported allowing arms sales to SA again.

[Cripplecreek]

Rand Paul attempted to block Obama when he made the 1.5 Billion dollar arms deal with SA and tried to reinstate the ban. It was the RINOs like McCain and Boehner who stopped him and supported allowing arms sales to SA again.

True enough, Rand Paul also deserves props for that.