WOW! This is going to cause some friction...


PDA






JPL
July 15, 2004, 11:57 PM
From Reuters...

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Lawmakers cheered as the House of Representatives voted on Thursday to strip financial assistance for Saudi Arabia from a foreign aid bill because of criticism that the country has not been sufficiently cooperative in the U.S. war on terror.

The vote was a stinging defeat for the Bush Administration which had strongly opposed the measure saying it would "severely undermine" counterterrorism cooperation with Saudi Arabia and U.S. efforts for peace in the Middle East.

The House voted 217-191 to remove $25,000 in the $19.4 billion 2005 foreign aid bill earmarked for Saudi Arabia.

The funds were designated for military training but approval would have triggered millions of dollars in discounts on hardware and other military training, lawmakers said.

"I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to the Saudis and I don't want anyone else's to," said Nevada Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley.

If you enjoyed reading about "WOW! This is going to cause some friction..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Pilgrim
July 16, 2004, 12:11 AM
Don't we give the Saudis enough money in oil revenue?

Pilgrim

geekWithA.45
July 16, 2004, 12:14 AM
Are those numbers right? They voted to remove a whole $25k? As in the salary of a WHOLE congressional page?

Whoa. That's some statement. Yup. That'll learn em. :scrutiny: :scrutiny: :scrutiny:

Rebar
July 16, 2004, 12:26 AM
The House voted 217-191 to remove $25,000 in the $19.4 billion 2005 foreign aid bill earmarked for Saudi Arabia.
Why on Earth would we give them taxpayer money? Don't they have their own?

R.H. Lee
July 16, 2004, 12:43 AM
"Foreign aid" my azz. It's protection/extortion money. I had no idea this was happening. It really chaps my hide.:fire:

Zundfolge
July 16, 2004, 12:46 AM
The House voted 217-191 to remove $25,000 in the $19.4 billion 2005 foreign aid bill earmarked for Saudi Arabia.

.000025 billion of 19.4 billion? They shoulda cut the other $19.399975 billion while they where at it!

Destructo6
July 16, 2004, 04:04 AM
They can cheer all they want, but $25k isn't much of a victory or defeat.

Art Eatman
July 16, 2004, 08:15 AM
You guys need to go back and re-read the article. The key word is "trigger".

Art

HankB
July 16, 2004, 08:19 AM
I thought foreign aid was supposed to go to friendly, impoverished nations?

The Saudis are neither.



:cuss: :fire: :barf:

BeLikeTrey
July 16, 2004, 08:23 AM
These guys have no choice but to help in the War on Terror. They are being attacked too. Frack em!
Besides aren't these the OPEC members that were instumental in jacking our oil prices into the stratosphere? :fire:

Forget these idiots Saudi is not a friend of ours... Where's Bounty Hunter when you need him? He'd be all over this. I happen to agree with his assesment of the saudi's (SCUM BAGS).:banghead:

El Tejon
July 16, 2004, 08:44 AM
I WANT my tax dollars going to the kingdom (in the form of high explosives, troops, and bullets)!

Ransom
July 16, 2004, 08:47 AM
The funds were designated for military training but approval would have triggered millions of dollars in discounts on hardware and other military training, lawmakers said.

If this is the case then I 100% agree with it. Saudia Arabia has been far too much of a dick to us considering all the the crap we take from protecting them. I'm looking forward to pulling troops out of there asap.

wingman
July 16, 2004, 08:52 AM
In my old humble opinion most countries want to "bleed" us to death via
our pocketbook and then kick the hell out of us when we go down, I could
be wrong.;)

ravinraven
July 16, 2004, 08:52 AM
".000025 billion of 19.4 billion? They shoulda cut the other $19.399975 billion while they where at it!"

What an attitude! Don't you realize how much it costs to support two or three thousand wives each?? And just imagine the cost of appeasing an equal number of mothers-in-law. Not to mention fodder for everybody's camels.

And the bill for the secret police going around and stoning women who let anyone see the color of their eyes is damn high too. Come on, guys. Have a heart!

rr

JPL
July 16, 2004, 09:43 AM
READ THE ARTICLE.

As it states yes, it was only 25K, but it will cost the Saudis millions in discounts on US manufactured hardware.

You're also missing the concept that this is not a hardship for the Saudis.

Far from it.

What it is, however, is a very obvious crack in the "friendship" that has existed between our two nations for many years.

The money is nothing.

The MESSAGE, on the other hand, is everything.

316SS
July 16, 2004, 01:16 PM
wingman wrote:
In my old humble opinion most countries want to "bleed" us to death via our pocketbook and then kick the hell out of us when we go down, I could
be wrong.

You said it, brother. Don't forget about the UN, though.

Where is Ragnar Danneskjold when we really need him?

316SS

HankB
July 16, 2004, 01:24 PM
Upon re-reading the first post, it doesn't seem entirely clear - is the foreign aid bill designating $19.4 billion for Saudi Arabia, or is the entire foreign aid bill $19.4 billion, with the Saudis only getting a part? :confused:

If it's the former, with the Saudis getting all the money, then costing the Saudis "millions" of dollars in discounts doesn't seem like much if they're still getting $19.4 billion . . . figure it out: a 19.4 million dollar cost increase would only be one tenth of one percent of the total.

themic
July 16, 2004, 02:46 PM
The Saudi's get 25k. Or, not anymore. That sentence was very poorly written.

My take on this:

The 25k is important because to get any money means they automatically qualify for certain discounts on other things from the US, and possibly it also makes the further acquisition process a bit more streamlined.

don't quote me on this, but I think maybe they will now need some high level of approval to buy anything export-restricted, such as software, computers, automobiles, firearms, helicopters, etc.

which, if they decide they'd rather buy all their stuff somewhere else, will hurt the country much more than 25k worth.

alan
July 16, 2004, 02:54 PM
This action MIGHT serve as a wake-up call to our Saudi Friends, however don't bet all that muich on it remaining as it seems to be, is, or might be at the moment, for there are many paths yet to be tread re this legislation.

Correction please, should I be in error.

Of course, the foregoing is NOT to say that the Saudi's are without problems of their own. The question that ythen arises is as follows. Neither is anyone else, but what is the source Saudi "problems"

braindead0
July 16, 2004, 03:14 PM
First they use our money to blackmail the states into 'getting in line'... and now they are using OUR money to blackmail other countries (well, that's nothing new).

Perhaps it's time to take OUR money back so we can do what WE want with it, instead of letting some money grubbing pols spread it around their special interests.. pork projects..etc....

JPL
July 16, 2004, 03:24 PM
Does anyone NOT see what other friction this may cause?

Saudi Arabia is our largest oil supplier, and they're also the ones who have typically responded to our requests to either increase production or veto actions by OPEC to tighten supplies and increase prices.

alan
July 16, 2004, 03:57 PM
JPL wrote:
Does anyone NOT see what other friction this may cause?

Saudi Arabia is our largest oil supplier, and they're also the ones who have typically responded to our requests to either increase production or veto actions by OPEC to tighten supplies and increase prices.
There is some truth in this, however there is also that proverbial BUT, which might be described as follows.

How much does Saudi support, increased production, from time to time, and or it's moderation of OPEC pricing practices end up costing us, the cost being reckoned in increased dependence on Middle East oil, instead of conservation here, and or a realistic and energetic search for sources elsewhere, like here maybe.

Scottmkiv
July 16, 2004, 04:33 PM
Saudi Arabis is not our largest oil supplier, far from it. I am pretty sure that the entire mideast accounts for less than 10% of our oil. Most of it comes from Canada, and Latin America.

JPL
July 16, 2004, 04:43 PM
Scott,

Saudi Arabia supplies roughly 17 to 18 percent of our oil.

Canada supplies roughly 15 to 16 percent.

The 4 largest sources for the US, Saudia Arabia, Canada, Mexico, and Venezuala, are all within a few percentage points, and often change from month to month depending on shifts in the economy.

As a weighted average, though, Saudi Arabia supplies our largest percentage of oil.

Bravo11
July 16, 2004, 04:48 PM
I doubt there is country in this world that doesn't get some of the U.S. free money(foriegn aid).

Hawkmoon
July 16, 2004, 06:14 PM
This action MIGHT serve as a wake-up call to our Saudi Friends, however don't bet all that muich on it remaining as it seems to be, is, or might be at the moment, for there are many paths yet to be tread re this legislation.
Correction ... we don't have any Saudi friends. Only Saudi leeches and back stabbers.

We, maybe an exception for one guy who posts on an automotive forum I visit occasionally, but (a) he's not a Saudi, he only works there, and (b) I'm not even sure he's all that friendly to the U.S.

WonderNine
July 16, 2004, 06:22 PM
I would venture to guess that most members of the Saudi Arabian oil cartel dictatorship have toilets worth more than $25,000.

DRZinn
July 16, 2004, 08:44 PM
Where is Ragnar Danneskjold when we really need him?

Damn right!

Standing Wolf
July 16, 2004, 08:54 PM
The House voted 217-191 to remove $25,000 in the $19.4 billion 2005 foreign aid bill earmarked for Saudi Arabia.

Wow. What courage.

Did I key that in with a straight enough face?

Art Eatman
July 16, 2004, 09:44 PM
JPL, within the last couple of months I ran across a breakdown of the sources of our imported oil

Saudi Arabia, 8% of imports, or 4% of our total usage. (This is not a fixed number, of course. It will vary with demand and inventory.)

Art

JPL
July 16, 2004, 09:57 PM
Art/Steve,

OK, here's where the problem is, and I should have been more specific:

Saudi Arabia supplies us with the most crude oil which is refined here.

Canada is the top supplier of all petroleum products combined.

That's everything from crude oil to heating fuel to naptha to gasoline, etc.

In part I believe that's because Canada refines foreign crude oil which is then exported to the United States, but also refines crude pumped in that nation.

This information is from the Department of Energy. It is 2002 data, but that's the last solid year for which figures have been prepared.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html

But here's the real kicker, folks.

The Saudis can, if they want to, have an impact on American markets.

How?

Oil futures.

Say the Saudis, in retaliation, say they're slashing exports to America by 25% for 6 months.

The price will immediately rise market wide as investors trade oil on the commodities market, bidding the price per barrel through the roof.

Sure, it's only 18% of the total crude oil that the United States imports every day, but if crude, and other petroleum products, are suddenly in hotter demand, capitalism does its dirty work and the price goes through the roof.

A perfect example of this effect was the Exxon Valdez when it grounded in Prince William Sound back in 1989.

The effect on the oil suply to the United States was absolutely ZERO. The supply in that tanker was but a drop in the bucket.

Yet gasoline, heating oil, and other petroleum products traded as commodities skyrocketed as futures traders bid up contract prices.

Welcome to a commodities driven market.

Art Eatman
July 16, 2004, 10:29 PM
Hokay, I follow your point. However, don't be too "America-centric". Japan's oil is 100% imported. China's import rate is growing at 7% per year; she's not far behind us as to total quantity of imported oil.

Mess too much with the spot price of oil and the US is not the only one to put on the political pressure...

Art

JPL
July 17, 2004, 10:16 AM
Art,

What happens in the American commodities market doesn't necessarily have to flow over to foreign commodities markets.

It's not an American-centric thing.

It's a purchase-price trade agreement thing.

Again, the Exxon Valdez is a perfect example.

American oil prices rose like an SOB, foreign oil prices barely budged.

And, if the Saudis said that they were cutting exports to America by 25%, it's likely that prices paid by other nations would drop, because that would free up nearly 300,000 barrels of oil a day -- a positive glut in their markets.

If you enjoyed reading about "WOW! This is going to cause some friction..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!