Nope, they're not our only oil supplier, but they're a huge one. You can say that our dependence on oil doesn't weaken us, but think about what kind of crisis America would go into if suddenly Saudi Arabia just says, "Eh, screw you guys, we're never going to give you a single barrel of oil ever again."
They are a huge one, but not our biggest one. According to 2007 US imports, they are our second biggest one with 15.8% of US oil.
Anyway I think they would be in much worse trouble than we would. We could rely on increased oil output from our own coast line, as well as oil deposits inside of the US. As well as countries like Canada and Mexico. Which together already account for 32% of our imports of oil. Saudi Arabia on the other hand cannot survive with out oil exports. They would be thrown into chaos and be no better off than any other Middle Eastern country.
How do you know Chavez will do that? Talking to him isn't enough for him to say the US is behind him 100%, he'll start saying that when we start major trading and policy agreements, something American won't be doing anytime soon.
How do I know Chavez will do that? Because it is what any other dictator thug would do. Mind you it wasn't just a smile and brief talk, it was the book too. It looked like a friendly relationship and just enough propaganda to use against our anti Chavez allies in Venezuela.
Yes, he could have denied it, but then here in the US a lot of people in his party frown upon him and consider it rude and disrespectful. So it's lose lose.
Considering how much Chavez hates the United States, has called the previous President a Devil, has shut down nearly all freedoms in his country, was quoted in Iran saying "The United States empire is on its way down and it will be finished in the near future, inshallah (Arabic: God willing)". Not to mention was quoted TODAY saying: Capitalism "threatens life on this planet"
Obama would be getting cudos points for not wanting to have anything to do with a thug who has spent the last few years trashing this country and everything it stands for.
Saudi Arabia may not be undermining governments, but it sure is undermining their own people. They have extreme human and women's rights issues.
They do, and it is a horrible thing, but if we were to only have relationships with countries that have good human rights records we would have the European Union, and Japan and that is about it. Not to mention before Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia was our only real military base in the region. We lose that and we lose a major strategic position in the heart of the middle east.
Uhm, I would assume proof isn't needed. It's only...logical to assume that he's had discussion about Guantanamo behind the scenes, and that it's not something he's completely igorning. I mean, if he decided to detain some inside the US, then that means it's still an issue...
Seeing how he announced it's closure with absolutely no clue as to where to send them, and has gotten very little help from other nations in taking them. Not to mention he is dealing with several crisis right now. It is probably being punted down the road till the very last minute while they deal with more important things. Problem is that by doing this Obama will be just creating a whole new crisis when it comes time to shut it down.
Which is why we are already 1/3rd of the way to Obama's dead line, and we have not even surpassed the very first steps
Yes, and I think that is exactly the right point. It really doesn't matter who is in charge, the opposite party is going to slander and throw crap no matter what. That's something that is not change for quite some time.
Except part of the problem, especially the Rush Limbaugh thing and the "I won" thing has created these attacks. You get ****** that Republicans are attacking Obama on everything, but this mood of "You hate me, I hate you" was created by Obama's own staff.
Bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia, accepting a book, nominating Janet, inviting so and so to talk, lifting major bans and restrictions with Cuba to list a few.
Well lets break this down. Bowing to the king will probably be remembered down the road as a Foreign Policy gaff.
Accepting a book from Chavez could have horrible undermining effects to our allies in the region so that IS a issue.
Janet Napolitano is a absolute idiot, and the effects she is having on Foreign Policy will be felt while she is in office.
Inviting so and so to talk, especially with out pre condisions is a very dangerous gamble that has not always paid off for us in the past ( See Kennedy's first year ).
As for lifting restrictions on Cuba, seeing how it is a murderous regime who is even more of a strangle hold on its people than Venezuela, that really can back fire on him when Republicans start trudging out Cuban Exile after Cuban Exile talking about how hellish the country is. Not to mention is pisses off the Cuban Immigrant population.
Some of the major things Obama has left to do with Cuba is to allow you and me to travel to Cuba. Trading another main thing, but that is more with the government, while traveling is more of a personal thing.
No both of them are connected with the Government. As stated before Cuban is a communist country with a stranglehold on the population. Money spent there will end up in Castro's hands no matter what. I do love how ever that you have some kind of glamorous view of Cuba, who's murderous and dangerous Government has been a blight on that island and its people for so very long.
Obama has already said he isn't going to persecute anyone involved in the torture techniques. Again, anything with releasing CIA memos or pictures or anything shouldn't have been done in that fashion. And could you exactly explain to me the gun thing?
No Obama said he wouldn't procecute the people that carried it out, the lawyers who were asked by the President to do it is fair game. It doesn't matter anyway, Obama already flip flopped on one, it shouldn't be hard for him to do it again. Not to mention that once the partisan committee hearing comes back with its findings, it may be too late to decide who to and who not to go after.
As for the Gun thing it is part of the stupidity issued by Hillary and Obama that 90% of the Guns used in Mexico right now are from the United States.
The problem is that they are blatantly lying so that they can make the US look bad and push for further gun control. The truth is that only 17% of guns found in Mexico Crime Scenes are from the United States. When Mexican Authorities find the guns that have markings they can trace, they send them off to the United States. Problem is most guns found in Mexico have absolutely no markings.
So for example in 2007-2008, Mexico found 29,000 guns at crime scenes, of that they sent us 11,000 guns to trace, of that only 6,000 could be successfully traced. Of those 6,000, 90% of them could be successfully traced to being from the United States.
The rest of the guns found in Mexico, can come from a variety of sources from South Korea to Russia.
But the Obama Administration does not want to mention that, since it doesn't help them place higher gun restrictions on the US, and it doesn't make the US look bad.
"This war is being waged with guns purchased not here but in the United States . . . more than 90 percent of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States, many from gun shops that lay in our shared border. So we have responsibilities as well." - Obama April 16th.