9
9
0
This is all about diplomacy and trying to relieve tensions in U.S. - Saudi relations and it is on the heels of the Senate approving a $1 Billion weapons sale to Saudi Arabia.
Earlier this year the administration was accused by Saudi Arabia of failing to show support after POTUS gave a series of interviews in which he explained why it is not in the "US’s interests to continue the tradition of the US foreign policy establishment, whose views he privately disdains, by giving automatic support to the Saudis and their allies". POTUS is quoted as having said the reason for this is, “The Saudis and other Gulf Arabs have funnelled money, and large numbers of imams and teachers, into the country. In the 1990s, the Saudis heavily funded Wahhabist madrassas, seminaries that teach the fundamentalist version of Islam favoured by the Saudi ruling family.” There was a great amount of discourse over this in the middle east.
The issue was of such diplomatic importance that POTUS made a swift trip to Riyadh to reassure them of American support for their efforts in the region while encouraging them to try to get along with Iran..
This bill that he vetoed would have removed the sovereign immunity, protecting governments, against lawsuits if it was found that the countries were involved in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.
Saudi Foreign Minister Adel bin Ahmed al-Jubeir has said his country's objection to the bill is based on principles of international relations. "What (Congress is) doing is stripping the principle of sovereign immunities which would turn the world for international law into the law of the jungle,"
Earlier this year the administration was accused by Saudi Arabia of failing to show support after POTUS gave a series of interviews in which he explained why it is not in the "US’s interests to continue the tradition of the US foreign policy establishment, whose views he privately disdains, by giving automatic support to the Saudis and their allies". POTUS is quoted as having said the reason for this is, “The Saudis and other Gulf Arabs have funnelled money, and large numbers of imams and teachers, into the country. In the 1990s, the Saudis heavily funded Wahhabist madrassas, seminaries that teach the fundamentalist version of Islam favoured by the Saudi ruling family.” There was a great amount of discourse over this in the middle east.
The issue was of such diplomatic importance that POTUS made a swift trip to Riyadh to reassure them of American support for their efforts in the region while encouraging them to try to get along with Iran..
This bill that he vetoed would have removed the sovereign immunity, protecting governments, against lawsuits if it was found that the countries were involved in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.
Saudi Foreign Minister Adel bin Ahmed al-Jubeir has said his country's objection to the bill is based on principles of international relations. "What (Congress is) doing is stripping the principle of sovereign immunities which would turn the world for international law into the law of the jungle,"
Obama vetoes 9/11 lawsuit bill
Posted from cnn.com
Law
Saudi Arabia
9/11
War on Terror
Edited 8 y ago
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 10
3
3
0
Diplomacy, as anyone who knows me can tell you, is not my long suit. However, even to me, the Senate Bill allowing American citizens to sue a foreign government appears to be a really bad idea. Fundamentally, diplomacy is a game of tit-for-tat. Once you take an action against another country you can well expect a reaction against yours. I do believe that the families of the victims of 9/11 were compensated by the generosity of their fellow citizens. Of course, that meant that those who supported the terrorists weren't required to pony up and I suspect that most of us would like to see that happen. Well it ain't gonna. The Senate was responding to popular demand, the President (I can't believe I'm going to say this) was responding to diplomatic reality. (Excuse me now while I go retch for ever placing any reference to President Obama in the same sentence with "reality")
(3)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
CPT Jack Durish You are absolutely right on that.I was thinking the same thing and along the lines of; What will this open our country up to? Given the tit for tat international play that is always going on.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Going to be interesting, Pelosi is for this and may join Rs to over ride his veto. Where is the popcorn.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand I agree with the President in vetoing the bill since it came out that there really were no government involvement by Saudi Arabia. It never came to light if there really were anyone in the government that supported the 19 Saudi nationals that attacked us on 9/11. That is going by the 9/11 investigation.
On the flip side, even if there was someone from the Saudi Government involved. It would have to have been a low level person, which does make the government culpable in what happened on 9/11. So the President vetoing the bill which pretty much has 100% support from both parties in congress was a mistake. If his veto is overridden by Congress, which it will, he has to get the US Supreme Court to agree with him which I think will be very difficult.
On the flip side, even if there was someone from the Saudi Government involved. It would have to have been a low level person, which does make the government culpable in what happened on 9/11. So the President vetoing the bill which pretty much has 100% support from both parties in congress was a mistake. If his veto is overridden by Congress, which it will, he has to get the US Supreme Court to agree with him which I think will be very difficult.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google