The Senate has voted on the resolution introduced by Sens. Rand Paul (R – KY) and Chris Murphy (D – CT) aiming to block portions of President Trump’s $110 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia. The vote was as expected far closer than previous ones on previous arms deals, failing with just a 47-53 margin.
Sen. Paul spoke extensively on the need to limit arms sales to Saudi Arabia, citing the humanitarian calamity of the Saudi invasion of neighboring Yemen, warning it has linked Saudi Arabia’s tactics to the United States’ support in the minds of Yemenis.
Paul cited the “very troubled record” of Saudi Arabia on human rights, and cautioned that the record arms deal with them would serve to fuel hostility toward the United States abroad, citing specific incidents of Saudi warplanes bombing hospitals and funerals.
Sens. Lindsey Graham (R – SC) and John McCain (R – AZ) meanwhile argued that the arms might conceivably help the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, because the US makes “smarter” weapons that are more accurate. This argument was made in spite of the Saudi government already using US bombs throughout the war. The two also argued that arming Saudi Arabia was an excellent way for the US to move against Iran.
It’s unlikely that the arguments were seriously impactful on the vote, however. Rather, support for the arms deal is primarily bolstered by lobbying from major US arms makers who stand to make tens of billions of dollars exporting weapons to the Saudis to keep the Yemen war going. But for five Senate Democrats who voted against the resolution, it could’ve easily blocked aspects of the sales, and those Democrats almost certainly weren’t swayed by Lindsey Graham’s say-so.
McNasty and Lindsey have their usual smart suggestions.
Since the Senate votes almost unanimously for Israel and to “punish” Iran which is doing little harm, of course it will support democratic/human rights icon KSA.
Why aren’t McCain and Graham on trial right now for collusion with known terrorists? Send those motherf**kers to Gitmo.
McCain/Graham for Retirement 2017!
Defense contractor donations $$$ best Senate money can buy.
And there are only 100 of them, easy to manage.
This all argues much strongly for devolving many functions back to states, and all these manufacturers that are scattered across all 50 states could not care less about what states think — they have 100 people on federal level to please/influence.
All 47 Senators who voted to reduce the income of our war materials industry by a gigantic $110 billion, they knew the bill would not pass and all 100 Senators will get a $2 million donation from said industry for a job will done.
In another shocking development, the sun rose and set yesterday.
I was very impressed with Rand Paul’s presentation on the Senate floor yesterday. And while he did not tell the entire truth about goings on, he did a good job explaining why this arms deal is wrong.
Footnote: vote details:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2017/s143
I’m a Republican but Cory Booker is getting my vote in the next senate race in NJ. He voted for the Iranian nuclear agreement (or at least to sustain it) and the right way on this deal. I don’t care about the other stuff where we disagree. It will be my first Democrat vote for senate in NJ.
Shocker! As Virginia State Senator Rich Black said in one of Trump rallies, our military, our sons and daughters are rented to KSA to advance the goal of building a medieval Middle East. Quite to the liking of Israel as well. Both do not like idea of strong, SECULAR states in their neighborhoods.
Permanent war for permanent profits and permanent power.
Besides Paul & Lee, who were the other two GOPers who stood against this foulness?
Are you mainstream brainwashed?
Yes___ No___ Our 51% most wealthy owning all the land and wealth, this does not give them a superiority complex toward an economically enslaved lower-half of society,
Yes___ No___ The laboring-class, the impoverished lower-half of society, they are not the 50% of voters who refuse to vote.
Yes___ No___ Wealth is not the property we own above what is needed to have a comfortable life.
Yes___ No___ Owning excessive wealth does not require the owner to be violent against people or nations that are harming their wealth.
Yes___ No___ Nationalizing excessive wealth, putting a cap on income, that would take all the joy out of life.
If your answer to all of the above is Yes, then you would be most miserable in an equal and just society.