Why is the USA giving BILLIONS of dollars worth of ammunition to Saudi Arabia?

Question

I was stunned to watch CBS last night and learn that Condoleese Rice was in the Middle East yesterday meeting with Saudi Arabians.

Did you know the USA is arming the middle east because they said "Democracy" wasn't being embraced the way they had hoped for!

Duh!!! I can't imagine why!

They are not only giving tens of billions to them but also to Israel and they named a few other countries...it was on in the middle of the night so it didn't all quite sink in.

I just wonder what y'all feel about that???

I thought it was funny too that some guy states "We've been involved in the affairs of the middle east for 60 years...and we plan on being there for another 60 years..."

Ok here's the article...looks like they are SELLING them the goods...but still..wow...how many "good guys" do you think all that ammunition will stay with in the long run.

Now they will just have a REASON to turn on one another...(the ammunition)...and yeah, Iran will just sit ideally by until they come and get them.

Wow people ask about Armageddon...you're watching it live people.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/31/world/main3116506.shtml?source=search_story

.

Wait a minute...they ARE giving it away...read it and tell me your take?

Here's a quote...sure sounds like a give a way to me:

"Israel will receive a total of $30 billion in U.S. military assistance, up from about $24 billion, while Egypt, which along with Jordan has made peace with Israel, will get $13 billion as part of the broader package."

.

Answer 1

HERE'S A BIT OF HISTORY ON SAUDI ARMS SALES

THE US HAS BEEN DEALING ARMS TO THE SAUDIS FOR YEARS.

Saudi Arabia is America’s top customer. Since 1990, the U.S. government, through the Pentagon’s arms export program, has arranged for the delivery of more than $39.6 billion in foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia, and an additional $394 million worth of arms were delivered to the Saudi regime through the State Department’s direct commercial sales program during that same period. (Foreign Military and Construction Sales and Direct Commercial Sales are recorded and published by the Dept. of Defense in Foreign Military Sales, Foreign Military Construction Sales and Military Assistance Facts; the most current online edition includes information through FY 1999.)

Oil rich Saudi Arabia is a cash-paying customer. It receives no U.S. military assistance to finance these purchases, although it does demand that about 35 percent of all major contracts be "offset"-that is, economic benefits equaling 35 percent of the arms contract value must be steered back to the Saudi economy. (Check out the Offsets Monitoring Project for more information on this phenomenon.)

The United States has very close and long-running military ties to the Saudi regime dating back to 1945. Following the 1990-91 war against Iraq, more than 5,000 U.S. troops and thousands of U.S. military contractors have been continuously based in Saudi Arabia. However, several concerns have been raised about this close military cooperation and the related sales of sophisticated arms. These concerns are:

Sophisticated arms sales to Saudi Arabia spurring regional arms races

With billions of petro-dollars, Saudi Arabia has been buying very modern, deadly weapons from America.

Many of the systems on order, such as the M-1A2 Abrams main battle tank, M-2A2 Bradley armored vehicles, F-15E Strike Eagle attack aircraft and Patriot surface-to-air missile, are the top-of-the-line systems deployed with U.S. forces.

A flurry of expensive arms sales followed the 1990-91 Gulf War. However, long before Iraq invaded Kuwait, Saudi Arabia sought to obtain America’s most sophisticated weaponry in order to counterbalance its much more populous regional rivals-Iran and Iraq. From 1986-93, these three countries accounted for nearly 40 percent of all arms exports to developing world countries. Saudi Arabia imported $55.6 billion in arms, Iraq imported $22.7 billion, and Iran imported $13.9 billion. (Richard F. Grimmett, Congressional Research Service, Conventional Arms Transfers to the Third World, 1986-93," 29 July 1994)

Recent U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia have dramatically raised the level of military technology in the region, spurring arms races with other Persian Gulf states and with Israel. Having denied Egypt’s request for the sale of Apache helicopters equipped with Longbow radar, the U.S. government has approved the possible sale of this technology to Saudi Arabia. This move opens the way for a further shift in the balance of power and technology in this region.

The sale of F-15E bombers provides a good case study of how others respond to sales of high-tech U.S. arms. Saudi Arabia had sought to buy the jet in the mid-1980s, but Congress opposed the sale on the grounds that it would threaten Israel. (While relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia improved following the Gulf War, the two are technically still in a state of war.) In September 1992, the Bush Administration and Congress approved the export of 48 of the aircraft to Saudi Arabia, largely on the basis of an aggressive "jobs now" campaign waged by McDonnell Douglas (MD), the manufacturer of the aircraft. The Air Force was finished procuring the jet, and so MD devised a national campaign to promote the controversial sale explicitly on the number of jobs that it would sustain (see Arms Sales Monitor No. 16 and No. 17). The sale got caught up in presidential politics, with then-candidate Bill Clinton endorsing the deal while on a campaign stop in St. Louis, where the jet is manufactured. Shortly thereafter President Bush announced his support for the sale while at a campaign-style rally at the McDonnell Douglas factory.

This was the first time the jet--which can deliver twelve tons of bombs 1,000 miles--had been exported to any nation. Only two years previously, the plane was rushed into service with the U.S.Air Force for the Gulf War, where it was used on hundreds of deep-strike bombing raids. The Saudi planes will be less capable than U.S. F-15E jets: they will carry less ordnance and are not currently slated to carry AMRAAM or HARM missiles, and the radar will have a lower resolution. Nevertheless, this was the most sophisticated combat aircraft the United States had ever exported...until a year and a half later, when the Clinton Administration and Congress agreed to give Israel 21 F-15E bombers with greater capabilities, in order to maintain Israel's qualitative military edge over Saudi Arabia.

Having gained U.S. government approval for two sales of its most advanced fighter-bomber, MD is eagerly anticipating more: It recently competed (unsuccessfully) for a sale of 20 to 80 long-range attack planes to the United Arab Emirates. The winner of that $8 billion-plus competition is Lockheed Martin, which will develop an "enhanced strategic" version of its popular F-16 fighter for the U.A.E. The F-16"ES" would have several improved features over the F-16s flown by the U.S. Air Force: a reduced radar signature, conformal fuel tanks, internal navigation and targeting gear and a un-refueled combat range of 1,000 miles. In addition, as a condition of the sale, the U.A.E. has demanded that the jets be equipped with the Air Force's most advanced medium-range air-to-air missile (AMRAAM)-- and the Clinton Administration agreed. Previously the U.S. had declined to export this missile to countries in the region. Now Israel, Egypt, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia have all lined up to get AMRAAMs.

Since the U.A.E. jet sale, Saudi Arabia has been making noises about buying more F-15s, which Israel opposes. Saudi Arabia has threatened the United States not to base decisions future export decisions on regional security and avoiding arms races: “Officials in the Saudi capital have hinted that the kingdom may look elsewhere for a replacement for the F-5 if the USA continues to link future military sales to Israeli security concerns.” (“Country Briefing: Saudi Arabia,” Jane's Defense Weekly, 18 August 1999, p. 30).

Through these sales, the U.S. government has dramatically raised the standard of combat aircraft and munitions of U.S. allies in the region, many of whom are engaged in a "cold peace" with each other. Large-scale sales of advanced conventional weapons to our Middle Eastern allies play into the threat perceptions of "unfriendly" governments as well, in this case Iran and Iraq, spurring them to seek countervailing weapons. Such sales by the United States also give the green light to other arms exporters to introduce new levels of military technology into this and other tense regions. A 1995 report by the CIA's non-proliferation center noted that "as countries' reliance on exports to maintain their defense industrial base grows, pressures will increase to export advanced conventional weapons and technologies to remain competitive with the United States in the world arms market" (emphasis added). By making multi-billion dollar sales of extremely advanced weaponry to the Middle East, the United States government has diminished credibility in pressing other governments to refrain from making sales that it views as dangerous. [See U.S. Nonproliferation Policy, hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee (Washington: U.S. GPO, 1994), pp. 27-29 on the difficulty the United States faces in persuading Russia to forgo arms exports to Iran, given high level U.S. arms transfers to Persian Gulf countries.]

At the same time, defense and intelligence officials now routinely cite the spread of advanced and, on occasion, low end conventional weapons as a threat to U.S. security. And, completing the circle, the military services and industry justify development and production of next-generation weapons on the basis of arms being acquired by Third World nations, including previously-exported U.S. systems. In lobbying Congress for production funds for its F-22 fighter, Lockheed cites the widespread proliferation of very capable combat aircraft, like the Russian MiG-29 and the American-made F-15 and F-16.

High level military expenditures undermining stability

From 1987-97 Saudi Arabia is estimated to have spent $262 billion (constant 1997 dollars) on its military, with its annual military expenditure consuming on average 18 percent of GNP. (By comparison, the United States spent about 4.6 percent of its GNP on the military during this same time.) During just 1995-97, over $31 billion was spent on arms imports from the United States and Europe. (U.S. State Department, World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers 1998)

Low oil prices, a $60 billion tab for the 1991 Gulf War, and tens of billions of dollars worth of new weapons have led to large budget deficits for the past several years. These budgetary problems have led the Saudi Kingdom to revise payments on $25-$30 billion of U.S. arms contracts. A January 1994 deal between the United States and Saudi Arabia extends payment and delivery schedules for outstanding weapons orders; less important orders may be postponed. Saudi financial problems will grow when the embargo on Iraqi oil sales--in place since 1991--is lifted.

According to William Quandt, a middle east scholar at the Brookings Institution, "This is not a popular regime. It's a huge patronage system that has spread the wealth around. If you take that away, you could contribute to a political crisis" (New York Times, 23 August 1993).

In May 1995 the State Department acknowledged that the economic downturn in Saudi Arabia is undermining political stability in the sheikdom, as the Saudi government is cutting popular public subsidies for gas, electricity and water in an effort to redress the deficit. In a letter to Rep. Lee Hamilton (D-IN), the State Department reported that "Tighter government budgets have reduced employment opportunities for young Saudis, frozen wages and slowed the private sector.... The short term economic downturn has colored popular perceptions of the government’s financial management and sharpened the distinctions among the social groups. These economic strains have added to the resentment over the advantages enjoyed by the very large Saudi royal family."

Hamilton asked the State Department whether U.S. efforts to boost sales of advanced weaponry and aircraft have contributed to the Saudis’ financial woes and whether the burden of these payments contributes to anti-American sentiment. "We are aware that the high profile of some U.S. commercial successes has generated criticism of the U.S. in sectors of Saudi society which believe incorrectly that the U.S. has pressed the Saudi government to make unwanted or unneeded purchases," said the State Department. "It is the Saudis alone who have defined their import priorities. Thus, it is misleading to suggest that U.S. companies are responsible for Saudi economic problems." (For a copy of Rep. Hamilton’s inquiry and the State Department’s response, see Congressional Record, 2 May 1995, pp. E908-10)

Actually, the United States has been helping Saudi Arabia define its military needs for over fifty years. In 1991, Lt. Gen. Dennis Malcor completed the most recent DOD assessment of Saudi Arabia’s security needs, which presumably laid the ground work for recent U.S. sales of Patriot anti-aircraft missiles, F-15E bombers and M-1A2 tanks. And, according to a report in the Washington Times in May 1995, the Pentagon recommended that the Saudis buy several Aegis-class destroyers and cruisers at $1 billion each.

Answer 2

The US is not giving billions in ammunition to the Saudis. The US is planning to sell billions of dollars worth of arms and munitions to the Saudis. Israel is also buying arms, as well as qatar and several other middle eastern states friendly to the US.
We have been in the middle East well over sixty years, trying to help establish a Jewish state in Israel and pumping and shipping oil.
The US hope is that a better armed middle east will somehow bring about more peace. It hasn't worked before, but it is being tried again anyway.

Answer 3

Why doesn't the Bush Administration offer Saudi citizens jobs in American airports and a lifetime supply of box-cutters?

Makes as much sense.

Doesn't the US government have an understanding of the teachings of the Saudi state religion (Wahhabism)?

Answer 4

I'm p.o.'d about it. We have so many people on here and around the U.S. that slam the Government for spending money on the needy in the U.S., but yet you hear little when they take our hard earned tax money and give it away to RICH countries like Saudi Arabia to buy weapons. It is a disgrace.

Answer 5

It's been going on for decades. These sort of arms deals are typical of our policy in the middle east:
Arm them and train them. Call it 'stabilizing the region' and come back in 10 or 20 years to take fire from American made weapons. Sad but true.

Answer 6

OIL... the war on terror is a lie. It has always been a lie. It was a lie in the 19th century and it was again a lie in the 1970's.
Terrorist is what the rich call those who fight back.

"The Government says law, but they mean wealth
the corporations say law, but they mean wealth."
Ralph Waldo Emerson

Answer 7

They've been doing it for years, sure they armed Iraq to fight Iran!!!! Whole thing is a sick joke!

Answer 8

To me it just means they see some sort of threat of war, with whom ...of course they will never tell us.

Answer 9

and you and i have no say in the matter. democracy? what democracy?