Why Obama administration does that ?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mohd_adam
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Obama administration's stance on a lawsuit by families of 9/11 victims against Saudi Arabian officials, exploring potential motivations behind this position, including legal, economic, and geopolitical factors.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act of 1976 may influence the administration's opposition to the lawsuit.
  • Others argue that economic interests, particularly related to oil, drive the Obama administration's actions, positing that the depletion of oil resources in the Middle East could lead to a more peaceful world.
  • One participant mentions the historical context of Saudi Arabia's population growth and its potential link to rising anger and terrorism, suggesting that economic disparity may contribute to unrest.
  • Another viewpoint expresses concern that allowing the lawsuit could expose the U.S. to legal repercussions for its foreign policy actions, particularly regarding support for controversial regimes.
  • Some participants critique the reliance on oil, questioning whether its scarcity would genuinely lead to peace or if it would exacerbate conflicts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the motivations behind the Obama administration's stance, with no consensus reached on the primary factors at play.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various external sources and historical contexts, but the discussion remains speculative regarding the implications of oil dependency and legal frameworks.

Physics news on Phys.org


Probably because of the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act of 1976.
 
In my opinion Obama administration do that because of the oil and the money. We hope the oil in Saudi Arabia , Kuwait and Emirates run out quickly , when this happen the world will become more peace without terrorism or torture. The truth that many know is that the religious education system in Saudi Arabia is one of the reasons terrorism , and the money of the oil of Saudi Arabia was used for financing terrorism.


this video for one of the princes ( dictators ) that America support.
( The video contains painful scenes )

http://www.uaetorture.com/index.php?page=the-video
 
mohd_adam said:
In my opinion Obama administration do that because of the oil and the money. We hope the oil in Saudi Arabia , Kuwait and Emirates run out quickly , when this happen the world will become more peace without terrorism or torture. The truth that many know is that the religious education system in Saudi Arabia is one of the reasons terrorism , and the money of the oil of Saudi Arabia was used for financing terrorism.


this video for one of the princes ( dictators ) that America support.
( The video contains painful scenes )

http://www.uaetorture.com/index.php?page=the-video

There is another element to the terrorism. Forty years ago Saudi Arabia only had a few million people and the oil money went a long way. Now they have about 30 million people with almost 40% of the population under 40 (see: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/SA.html) and the oil money doesn't go nearly as far. You take rich people and make them poor and they get angry. It is that anger that fuels the terrorism in my opinion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


mohd_adam said:
In my opinion Obama administration do that because of the oil and the money.
Oil is so convenient, isn't it? It means we never actually have to think -- we can just blame anything we don't like on oil.

We hope the oil in Saudi Arabia , Kuwait and Emirates run out quickly, when this happen the world will become more peace without terrorism or torture.
Really? You do realize scarcity of vital resources is historically one of the biggest motivating factors for war, right?

Though I suppose it won't initially be so bad -- after all, aren't there are some pretty major Western oil deposits that can be tapped if the Middle Eastern ones run dry. Of course, do you think the Islamist* radicals would let peace happen if it meant that the Middle East was dependent on the West for oil?

*: Islamist being the adjective describing someone who follows Islamism. (As opposed to Islamic, which refers to any follower of Islam)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
12K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
  • · Replies 133 ·
5
Replies
133
Views
28K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
11K