Why Would America Sell Saudi Arabia 15,699 Dangerous Missiles?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/12/07/why-would-america-sell-saudi-arabia-15699-dangerou.aspx By Rich Smith | More Articles
December 7, 2013 | Comments (9)


In what has to be hands-down the biggest development in defense news this week, Saudi Arabia just asked America to sell it 15,000 rockets.
More precisely, 15,699 rockets.

Or even more precisely:
•9,650 of Raytheon's (NYSE: RTN ) BGM-71 2A Tube-launched, Optically tracked Wire-guided (TOW) Radio-Frequency (RF) missiles
•4,145 BGM-71 2B TOW Aero RF missiles
•1,000 BGM-71 2A TOW missiles
•750 BGM-71 2B TOW missiles
•and an assortment of 154 "fly to-buy" TOW2B and TOW2A missiles.

The U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) notified Congress of the planned arms sale on Thursday and, by law, Congress now has 15 days to either reject or approve the sale. If Congress does nothing, the sale is deemed approved and may proceed. At which point we're going to have to ask... at whom, exactly does the Royal Saudi Land Force plan to point these missiles?

Are there 15,000 tanks lumbering around somewhere in the Middle East, that Saudi Arabia wants to blow up? Or is there just one tank out there that's bugging them... and the Saudis are just really bad shots?

Opinions on the question probably differ. According to Middle East news organization Al-Jazeera, for example, the entire nation of Israel owns fewer than 4,000 tanks. Iran has less than 2,000. Most of the tanks in Iraq, the Saudis' usual sparring partner, have already been blown up... although Iraq has embarked upon a multibillion-dollar spending spree to rebuild its armed forces with dozens of M1 Abrams tanks and Stryker APCs from General Dynamics (NYSE: GD ) .

This still all adds up to fewer than 6,000 tanks for the Saudis to shoot at, however. So while according to DSCA, the express purpose of this sale is to "support the Ministry of the National Guard's defense and counter-terrorism missions," you have to wonder if a few (or more than a few) of these missiles might not somehow find their way into the hands of the combatants fighting to overthrow the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria A good guess is some are (illegally)destined for use against Assad and the majority will be ready for use against Israel. If the deal is not stopped you can bet some of that is in place. Either way its not in our nation's best interests to arm the Saudis that way since they truly are this nation's enemies as well. Let them purchase inferior munitions from China or Russia instead. --Tyr

[jimnyc]

No way in hell I would support this deal. I simply don't trust them. Unless you trust someone 300% and they are a solid ally, you would be dumb to put weapons in their hands that can possibly end up in the wrong hands. Even if that chance is less than 2%, IMO. (just made that up). Hopefully Congress will reject it, but given their record on other similar issues, I doubt they will.

[red states rule]

Perhaps Obama is having a Clearance Sale of overstocked items from the Pentagon Christmas catalog

I am sure Israel is beefing up its defenses and perhaps may take out the shipment before it is delivered

[revelarts]

the Saudis , Israel and the U.S. believe they have a common enemy, the horrible monster from Hades Iran, that will soon gobble up the world, as it's already done in ... well... no where really.
Also the Saudis are mixed up with us in the cold war we have with Russia.
Seems they control/support some of the terror groups in the Caucuses that the Russians have been dealing with there.

The fact that they also have ties with other terror groups round the world should but them on the sanctions list instead of the arms customer list.

it's a game, and we aren't getting the whole story by a far piece.

[aboutime]

Tyr. If Obama, and Congress won't spend all of those DEFENSE department bucks on OUR OWN missiles, and rockets. American Defense companies need to stay in business, and help the economy somehow. So...they sell their rockets, and missiles to the HIGHEST BIDDERS...while keeping Americans at work.
NOT SOMETHING OBAMA and the DEMOCRATS have been able, or willing to do.

[revelarts]

Billions of Taxpayer Dollars Funding Insurgents in Afghanistan
Quote:

<tbody>
Data reveal that billions of American taxpayer dollars continue to fund questionable or openly corrupt contractors in Afghanistan. The findings underscore the inability of the American military to filter suspicious contractors from the thousands who work with the United States on a regular basis to build bases and transport supplies.

The New York Times reported that American investigators uncovered data surrounding the Zurmat Material Testing Laboratory, affiliated with the Zurmat Group, an Afghan company that “investigators say was paid to do work at an American-controlled facility in November 2012, despite having been blacklisted two months before by one part of the military for providing bomb-making materials to insurgents.”

This was brought to the attention of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel by the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction in a letter last week.

The New York Times wrote:

According to other documents and a review of internal Pentagon communications obtained by The Times, the United States Central Command, which oversees the war in Afghanistan, requested in 2012 that Zurmat and its subsidiaries, along with more than 40 other companies and individuals believed to have ties to insurgents, be “debarred” by the Army. This would formally ban them from doing work for any part of the United States government.

At the time, officials estimated that those contractors had collectively been awarded more than $150 million in work for the American-led coalition over a 10-year period.

Pentagon officials have reportedly refused to issue the bans, however, because they assert that they cannot present evidence against the companies and individuals since much of it qualifies as “classified intelligence.” Without being able to show the accused the necessary documents, debarment allegedly violates their right to due process.

Zurmat had been blacklisted in April 2012 by the Commerce Department following accusations that the company aided the Haqqani insurgent faction in Afghanistan. Following that, the military’s Central Command banned Zurmat from working on contracts within its area of operations in September.

As noted by the New York Times, however, that order did not immediately translate into warnings to other companies that may have been subcontracting work to Zurmat or its subsidiaries. Those warnings would be issued only if Zurmat were to be formally debarred by the Defense Department.

Since Zurmat has not been formally debarred, its employees were permitted access to the main American-run prison in Afghanistan, the letter indicates. In fact, Zurmat was hired to perform safety tests on the construction work done by CLC Construction, a contractor that had not been informed of Central Command’s decision to bar the Zurmat Group.

“This lapse in security highlights the immediate need for a simple process to ensure that individuals and companies identified as supporters of the insurgency are prevented from accessing U.S.- and coalition-controlled facilities,” the inspector general wrote to Hagel.

Lawmakers are understandably angry at the Pentagon’s refusal to ban such contractors. “It’s like we’re subsidizing the people who are shooting at our soldiers,” declared Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)....


</tbody>

more...
Billions of Taxpayer Dollars Funding Insurgents in Afghanistan (http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/16962-billions-of-taxpayer-dollars-funding-insurgents-in-afghanistan)

[Gaffer]

Our current regime only wants the war in afghan to be fair. After all we have all the high tech weaponry and training and the insurgents don't have much of anything. :rolleyes:

On the other hand, what's the big deal if the insurgents get this bomb making material. What countries have they invaded? We should only act if they attack. Nothing there to lose sleep over. :rolleyes:

I had a sudden attack of sarcasm. I'm better now.

[aboutime]

Our current regime only wants the war in afghan to be fair. After all we have all the high tech weaponry and training and the insurgents don't have much of anything. :rolleyes:

On the other hand, what's the big deal if the insurgents get this bomb making material. What countries have they invaded? We should only act if they attack. Nothing there to lose sleep over. :rolleyes:

I had a sudden attack of sarcasm. I'm better now.


Thanks Gaffer. I have those attacks almost every time I come here. It never gets any better as long as some of our members desire to remain uninformed.

[revelarts]

Our current regime only wants the war in afghan to be fair. After all we have all the high tech weaponry and training and the insurgents don't have much of anything. :rolleyes:

On the other hand, what's the big deal if the insurgents get this bomb making material. What countries have they invaded? We should only act if they attack. Nothing there to lose sleep over. :rolleyes:

I had a sudden attack of sarcasm. I'm better now.

oohh ho hoo. almost most got there .

But aren't the insurgent attacking our troops.
that's a little different.
aren't we at war with them officially.
that's a lil different

and anyway I'm not in favor of GIVING our enemies arms or making it EASY for them to get arms.
I just don't want to shoot 1st and ask questions later because they, said mean things and they, LOOK LIKE they MIGHT buy weapon ONE DAY.:poke:


and BTW Afghanistan insurgents haven't invaded any other countries, and they didn't do 9/11 either,
Here's an idea Maybe we should just leave.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

oohh ho hoo. almost most got there .

But aren't the insurgent attacking our troops.
that's a little different.
aren't we at war with them officially.
that's a lil different

and anyway I'm not in favor of GIVING our enemies arms or making it EASY for them to get arms.
I just don't want to shoot 1st and ask questions later because they, said mean things and they, LOOK LIKE they MIGHT buy weapon ONE DAY.:poke:


and BTW Afghanistan insurgents haven't invaded any other countries, and they didn't do 9/11 either,
Here's an idea Maybe we should just leave. Germans hadn't invaded Poland until they did. A little to late Rev, to worry after the horse leaves the barn. That's why they have gates on the stalls. ;) Preventative medicine should get the same treatment some try to give to war . No need to ever try to stop an epidemic ,lets just wait until after one starts then fight it. Not much of a winning idea if you ask me. Iran wants a nuke and it's not to toast their damn bread with. Think about that. Even if they don't use it on Israel but instead use it to blackmail other nations they should never be allowed to have one. --Tyr

[fj1200]

Maybe this is why:

Saudi ready to act alone on Iran, Syria: ambassador (http://news.yahoo.com/saudi-ready-act-iran-syria-39-without-39-051516382.html)



Washington (AFP) - The West's policies on Iran and Syria are a "dangerous gamble" and Saudi Arabia is prepared to act on its own to safeguard security in the region, a top Saudi diplomat said.

"We believe that many of the West’s policies on both Iran and Syria risk the stability and security of the Middle East," the Saudi ambassador to Britain, Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz, wrote in a commentary in the New York Times."

This is a dangerous gamble, about which we cannot remain silent, and will not stand idly by," he wrote.

The bluntly-worded warning was the latest in a series of public statements by senior Saudi figures expressing displeasure with US and Western diplomatic initiatives towards Syria and Iran.

Until recently, Saudi leaders rarely voiced public criticism of their Western allies in a decades-long partnership.