If this causes major shifts, I don't imagine they'll be apparent on day 1. Its not like Saudi Arabia was eagerly awaiting to burn some major bridges with the US. Check back on day 365, or day 3650.
"My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I drive a Mercedes, my son drives a Land Rover, his son will drive a Land Rover, but his son will ride a camel."
Whether or not anyone actually said it, it seems to be more and more likely as oil verrrry slowly becomes less and less relevant.
Having primed myself so, I had to reread the camel quote a few times before I understood it!
And Iran finds itself emboldened by renewed ties to Russia.
Bridges aren't typically their target.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_Saudi_role_in_the_Sept...
1. One guy who worked for Saudi intelligence knew about the attacks (disputed).
2. 15 of 19 attackers were Saudi nationals (dubious relevance, generally we don’t blame a whole country for crimes committed by individuals from that country).
3. Bin Laden family has close ties to the Saudi royal family, and Al Queda got funded by the Bin Laden family.
My surface-level takeaway is that Saudi royals deserve criticism for associating with the supporters of terrorism. However, I don’t see evidence the Saudi state conspired to commit the 9/11 attacks.
Not disputed. You didn't go far enough. Saudi intelligence agent met a set of the attackers in L.A. at the airport. He drove them, and had their first apartment setup. They started using computers in that apartment using Flight Sim software, for them to start training flying. He gave them cash. They scheduled enrolling in their classes in the Florida flight school from that apartment at that time.
https://www.propublica.org/article/sept-11-family-lawsuit-sa...
9/11 is a turning point in world history. Even today, much of what's going on in the digital world around cybersecurity, digital rights and software design is reverberating from what happened two decades ago. I have people close to me still living with the PTSD.
I think for some of the current generation who cannot directly remember it but live in the shadow, it's what WW2 was to mine.
For them it's important to keep clarity, and not give in to myths, convenient narratives and conspiracy theories. And that takes constant courage.
Looking back at it, it's beyond insane. We waged two theatres of war against completely the wrong countries, killed millions and wrecked our own culture, waged disinformation psyops on our own people to maintain a lie, for what?
And despite shooting Bin Laden - which was never a trial or any kind of real justice by our standards of civilisation, I can't help thinking the bad guys just got away with it all.
And there they are, still talking about "petrodollars" while the climate fails and the planet burns.
By pretty much every measure, Biden appears to be the establishment candidate. Who is out to get him?
Certainly the fossil fuel establishment, one of the strongest forces on the planet, would always prefer a GOP candidate over a Dem.
Other parties out to get Biden are likely corporate lobbying groups as the Dems have been showing some backbone with regard to regulations in recent times.
Yes, since Dems always worked just fine for them too.
> You all are wealthy enough, he (Trump) said, that you should raise $1 billion to return me to the White House. At the dinner, he vowed to immediately reverse dozens of President Biden’s environmental rules and policies and stop new ones from being enacted
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/09/trump-oil...
And the same deals Dems have been making for decades too.
The source is a paper run by an ex-News Corp employee.
> And the same deals Dems have been making for decades too.
This is extremely hand-wavy. To get down to specifics, look at the history of the opening of drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge. GOP opens it, Dems close it.
Look at EPA fuel efficiency regulations, which party increases them?
I understand being frustrated by how corporate-friendly both parties in the USA are, but to just throw your hands up in the air while stating "both sides" is ignoring reality and surrendering your agency.
So someone who's used to being owned by a billionaire and pushing their agenda, and good at it, and presumably doing the same thing now under another billionaire? What point were you trying to make?
Then Riyadh would prefer Biden. American fossil fuel producers are their competition.
(Not claiming knowledge about MBS’s preferences. Just underlining this isn’t as simple as implied.)
Riyadh and Houston have always been on great terms as they have common goals and common enemies.
The Dems propose moving to a green economy, this is terrible for all fossil fuel extractors.
Both candidates are ancient.
Some want different candidates. On both sides.
In the current election system of primaries (in place since 1972), an incumbent has never lost. They haven't even lost a state in 44 years. So basically the incumbent has a defacto first right of refusal when it comes to their party's nomination.
The other party has been shaped by a political movement with a lot of power and momentum, and the founder of that movement more or less has the same defacto first right of refusal.
Prompt: list of us presidents and their year of birth and age when elected
Let's say there are two main political ideologies, kittens and puppies. There are two kitten candidates and one puppy candidate.
With a preferential voting system, if more people like kittens than puppies, a kitten will almost certainly win.
With an FPP system, the puppy will almost certainly win regardless of people's preference.
There are only two candidates in US elections because having a third candidate will almost certainly mean the least popular old codger will win.
The two-candidate presidential system is a consequence of a broken voting system.
Maybe someone can explain what I'm saying that incorrect.
An election is fundamentally binary: it has one winner and everyone else is equally a loser. There are other structures that don't fall prey to that, such as multi member districts or party lists. As long as the election has a unique outcome, everyone else is equivalently irrelevant.
The fact that they're both elderly is kind of a coincidence. It is true that older candidates are the ones with the longest track record of accomplishments and the most extensive alliances.
But the GOP candidate had little government experience and somewhat dubious business experience. He is nonetheless popular for his style and positions.
Both parties are very diverse and it's difficult to find someone tolerable to all. Many actively despise their party's candidate but the alternative to the consensus risks losing entirely. It is generally thought to be better to vote for a suboptimal candidate than a pessimal one, though some vocally disagree.
A young, charismatic candidate could come up next time around, but to be honest neither party seems to have one getting ready.
So here we stand, with our leaders entering the high positions of power well after they should have retired. In the president's case, his first run for the presidency was 32 years before he eventually won it in 2020. That spacing is the bulk of most people's working life.
In 2028 both parties will really have to figure something out. At least (hopefully) neither Trump nor Biden will be eligible to run.
Not accounting for death from old age making them physically ineligible, since that's also a very real concern at this point for both.
Which is why your comparison doesn't make sense to me--Haley is obviously the spicy one in the comparison.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34FsIJFT6N8 (For context see this excellent Jezebel article https://www.jezebel.com/the-rise-and-fall-of-an-all-american... [2] and accompanying video https://youtu.be/TxAlJq94-b8)
[2] which even cites Brother Malcolm himself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsuaFmN2O98&t=3m35s
But now that you made me think about it, Indian Malcolm X is probably Kshama Sawant or someone like that
[1] Although India loves socialism, it's like cricket and biscuits--stuff we inherited from white people.