This hit piece was already posted back in August so I'm just going to repost my response to the bullshit:
Husseini said:
But if your point is to build up the next stage of the U.S. government’s horrific role in the Mideast, it kind of makes sense. The U.S. government helped ensure the Saudis would dominate the Arabian Peninsula from the formation of the nation state of Saudi Arabia — a nation named after a family. In return, the Saudis had the U.S. take the lead in extracting oil there and favored investing funds from their oil wealth largely in the West over building up the region, what the activist scholar Eqbal Ahmed called separating the material wealth of the Mideast from the mass of the people of the region. Saudi Arabia buys U.S. weapons to further solidify the “relationship” and to ensure its military dominance.
...
Why is Sanders doing this? Is there a domestic constituency called “Americans for Saudi Domination of the Arab World”? Well, yes and no. It would obviously play well in the general public to say: “We’ve got to stop backing dictatorships like the Saudis. They behead people, they are tyrannical. They have a system of male guardianship. Why the hell are they an ally?”
But Sanders is unwilling to break with the U.S.-Saudi alliance that has done such damage to both the Arab people and the American people. Now, we have a full-fledged Israeli-Saudi alliance and it must be music to the ears of pro-Israeli journalists like Wolf Blitzer for Sanders to be calling for U.S. backing of further Saudi domination.
...
So Sanders and Saudi planners seem to be working toward the same ends, as though war by an autocratic state in a critical region can be expected to breed good outcomes. Sanders doesn’t seem to take money from Lockheed Martin — though he’s backed their F-35, slated to be based in Vermont — but his stance on Saudi Arabia must bring a smile to the faces of bigwigs there.
What a crock.
Bernie is not pro-Saudi, he has criticized them in the past and will continue to do so.
His comments are being taken out of context by the author, he was angry that they want the US to send troops to defeat ISIS:
Sanders blasts Saudi Arabia for suggesting US troops against ISIS
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) ripped Saudi Arabia Friday after the nation’s top diplomat suggested the U.S. would have to deploy ground troops to ultimately defeat the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
“I find it remarkable that Saudi Arabia, which borders Iraq and is controlled by a multi-billion dollar family, is demanding that U.S. combat troops have ‘boots on the ground’ against ISIS. Where are the Saudi troops?” Sanders, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, said in a statement.
“With the third largest military budget in the world and an army far larger than ISIS, the Saudi government must accept its full responsibility for stability in their own region of the world,” he added.
The sharp words come the day after Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, expressed concern that Iran’s military is increasing its support to Baghdad’s forces in the fight against the terror group, especially around the city of Tikrit.
...
Sanders flatly rejected the notion that America must lead the vanguard against ISIS.
“Ultimately, this is a profound struggle for the soul of Islam, and the anti-ISIS Muslim nations must lead that fight. While the United States and other western nations should be supportive, the Muslim nations must lead,” he said.
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/234907-sanders-blast-saudi-arabia-for-suggesting-us-troops-against-isis
Get some new material.
= new reply since forum marked as read
