[HN Gopher] Retired U.S. generals, admirals take top jobs with S...
___________________________________________________________________
Retired U.S. generals, admirals take top jobs with Saudi crown
prince
Author : room505
Score : 226 points
Date : 2022-10-18 17:05 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.washingtonpost.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.washingtonpost.com)
| gigatexal wrote:
| I know they're ostensibly an ally of the US but I find this hella
| suspect and not at all cool on their part. Sure they're likely
| doing it for the money. But MBS is a bad dude, he killed an
| American journalist, and the Saudis would sell us out to the
| highest bidder if they could.
| 1-6 wrote:
| More reason why veterans need more protection in the USA.
| room505 wrote:
| https://archive.ph/JrvlQ
| bell-cot wrote:
| Bad optics, certainly. Both for the U.S. and for the DoD retirees
| working for not-so-savory governments.
|
| OTOH - certain foreign governments paying top dollar to employ a
| bunch of military big shots from the U.S. does not say good
| things about their local talent pools. And the situation may look
| less-than-inspired to what talented young locals there are.
| hnfong wrote:
| > paying top dollar to employ a bunch of military big shots
| from the U.S. does not say good things about their local talent
| pools
|
| It depends. If it's just "talent" they're after, then sure. If
| they're after things that can only come from a US military big
| shot, then it's a different issue.
| markvdb wrote:
| Working for the butcher prince. We don't need that kind of people
| near any NATO army. Let's hope they stay in Saudi Arabia.
|
| In other news, this is just another symptom of a shrinking US
| empire. Pax americana is starting to crumble.
| jeanluc_discard wrote:
| Generals who oversaw Abu Ghraib are no different.
|
| Pax Americana is definitely crumbling before our eyes.
| jdminhbg wrote:
| It's ok for two different things to both be bad, we don't
| have to pretend they're the same.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| I don't see much of a difference between the two. They're
| both institutional murder and torture.
| hey2022 wrote:
| There is action and there is the reaction. You could
| argue that the action is identical. But the reaction--
| internal, institutional, political--was and is not
| participating similar.
|
| People in power will abuse power. That's inevitable in
| any regime. What makes the difference is how they are
| held accountable, especially by their own regime.
| googlryas wrote:
| They're similar in that they're both beyond the pale.
|
| For example, Manadel al-Jamadi was murdered in detention,
| while being tortured by the US military. The people who
| murdered him then took "thumbs up" photos with his corpse.
|
| No one was punished for his murder.
|
| NSFW, his corpse is pictured on this page:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Manadel_al-Jamadi
| mbostleman wrote:
| Crumbling for sure. But incredible turn arounds have happened
| before. Consider the US posture at the end of the 1970s vs only
| a decade later.
| whywhywhydude wrote:
| Don't know who is downvoting you. I wonder if the butcher is
| also employing people to monitor social media to influence
| discussions.
| justapassenger wrote:
| I didn't downvote the op. I downvoted you.
|
| Having someone to disagree with your stance doesn't mean
| there's a conspiracy.
| jm4 wrote:
| It's probably because of the second paragraph. The first is a
| sentiment many people can agree with. The second paragraph,
| asserting not only that the U.S. is crumbling but that
| somehow retired generals working in SA is proof is utterly
| ridiculous.
| dendrite9 wrote:
| Like this?
| https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/09/technology/twitter-
| saudi-...
|
| A former Twitter employee was convicted on Tuesday by a jury
| in federal court of six charges related to accusations that
| he spied on the company's users for Saudi Arabia.
|
| While at Twitter, Ahmad Abouammo, 44, managed media
| partnerships in the Middle East and North Africa. He
| developed relationships with prominent individuals in the
| region, receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars and a
| luxury watch from a top adviser to Saudi Arabia's crown
| prince, Mohammed bin Salman. In return, prosecutors said, he
| shared the personal user information of dissidents with Saudi
| officials.
|
| The jury convicted Mr. Abouammo of two counts of wire fraud
| or conspiracy to commit wire fraud, two counts of money
| laundering, one count of falsifying records and one count of
| acting as an agent of a foreign government without properly
| disclosing that work. It found Mr. Abouammo not guilty on
| five counts of wire fraud or conspiracy to commit wire fraud.
| whywhywhydude wrote:
| That is really scary. They probably have insiders in their
| payroll in every major tech company.
| lesuorac wrote:
| Why wouldn't they?
|
| If you had a budget of ~1T for several decades how would
| you (acting as MBS) spend it all?
| jmyeet wrote:
| While I'm in general agreement that we should stop treating
| Saudi Arabia like it's the ally we want it to be given their
| actions in Yemen, with OPEC and their direct ties to 9/11.
|
| But your comment is particularly funny because you brought up
| NATO [1]:
|
| > One typical example is General Adolf Heusinger, a career
| military officer who, with the outbreak of the Second World
| War, became part of the German headquarters field staff and
| helped plan the Nazi invasions of Poland, Denmark, Norway,
| France and the Low Countries. The Nazis perpetrated against
| Poland one of the worst crimes history has ever known. Poland
| suffered the largest number of casualties per capita of any
| European country, with a total of about six million people
| killed. Heusinger rose quickly through the Wehrmacht's
| administrative ranks and in 1944 was appointed Adolf Hitler's
| Chief of the General Staff of the Army.
|
| > With the 1955 establishment of the Bundeswehr, the
| reconstituted West German Armed Forces, Heusinger returned to
| military service, and was appointed Lieutenant-General in 1955.
| In 1957, he was promoted to full general and named the first
| Inspector-General of the Bundeswehr. He served in that capacity
| until 1961. In 1961, Heusinger was appointed Chairman of the
| NATO Military Committee, making him the senior military
| spokesperson for NATO and in 1963 he also became NATO's chief
| of staff, serving in that capacity until 1964.
|
| There were a number of other ex-Nazis in NATO's ranks and
| leadership.
|
| [1]: https://cpcml.ca/itn220328-tmld-art4/
| g8oz wrote:
| Under both Obama and Trump the US provided *direct* logistical
| and targeting support for the Saudi bombing of Yemeni targets.
| Biden finally stopped it in 2021. The humanitarian catastrophe
| in Yemen would not have happened without U.S acquiescence.
|
| Saudi Arabia is not a U.S adversary, it is an ungrateful client
| state and has been since Roosevelt.
| [deleted]
| mise_en_place wrote:
| > Pax americana is starting to crumble.
|
| You mean Pax Israel is starting to crumble. Is it a coincidence
| that Yair Lapid is now advocating for a two state solution?
| They see the writing on the wall.
| Maursault wrote:
| Chances are good these US ex-military are not loyal to Saudi
| Arabia. They're only doing it for the money, not fanatical
| idealisms. We have the Logan Act and Espionage Act to protect us,
| and we benefit from these activities through income taxes.
| olliej wrote:
| Those only work for people in the US or countries that will
| extradite which I would guess SA would be unlikely to do in
| this case.
|
| I'm not saying that there's going to be a bunch of treasoning
| or anything, just that the laws you're citing wouldn't be
| particularly useful if said treasoning did happen.
| vsareto wrote:
| Doing anything remotely perceived as treasonous seems dumb.
| More than likely they are acting closer to spies for the US
| (against SA) in these positions.
| kelnos wrote:
| > _Those only work for people in the US or countries that
| will extradite which I would guess SA would be unlikely to do
| in this case._
|
| I wouldn't be so sure. SA depends on the US for a significant
| amount of military equipment and training. They might turn
| over a US traitor if they got even a whiff of that help being
| threatened.
| mytailorisrich wrote:
| It's not uncommon for ex-military to take such jobs as a way to
| insulate the Pentagon (or your favourite government) even
| though they in fact still 'work'for them.
|
| This was (still is?) a classic of French influence in Africa,
| for instance.
|
| Here my interpretation is that the US keep a close watch on the
| Saudis...
| pyuser583 wrote:
| The US Army let soldiers take leave to fight in Afghanistan's
| during the 1980s. This is small potatoes compared to that.
| lnwlebjel wrote:
| This would be my first assumption - if not the pentagon then
| the CIA.
| atlasunshrugged wrote:
| That's an interesting interpretation and I hope you're right.
| I read it and just assumed it was people finally cashing out
| after public service and going to the highest bidder.
| mytailorisrich wrote:
| Oh they do get a great payday, but that does not
| necessarily mean that they cut informal ties with the
| Pentagon or do things against the wishes of the Pentagon.
|
| In this case, the US and the Saudis have been 'tight' for
| 70 years so one can imagine it is all very friendly...
| wahern wrote:
| And Michael Flynn?
|
| > do things against the wishes of the Pentagon
|
| I'm betting that the Pentagon _prefers_ their retired
| senior staff don 't whore themselves out to potential
| adversaries. But unless and until they cross a formal
| line, what are you gonna do? If the Pentagon comes across
| as punitive, e.g. by revoking any latent security
| clearances, there'll be a huge backlash. This form of
| consulting and liaising with international groups by
| retired military is nothing new, and there are legions of
| retired staff leveraging their status one way or another.
| It's a perk of the job. It's also not new that it can
| sometimes be rather unseemly, to say the least. What
| might be new is the amount of money being thrown around.
|
| These relationships are quite valuable because while it
| may not seem that way in our social media bubbles and
| among our international cosmopolitan peers, the day-to-
| day cultures and administrative machinations of various
| governments and militaries can be extremely opaque simply
| because of the huge differences in presumptions and
| expectations. And this is true even among allies with
| seemingly similar cultures, which is why even a country
| like the U.S. with veritable armies of intelligence
| analysts do ridiculous *hit like bug Angela Merkel's
| cellphone. Retired personnel don't need to divulge
| secrets to provide extremely valuable and timely
| insights, especially as between countries like the U.S.
| and Saudi Arabia.
| GartzenDeHaes wrote:
| > does not necessarily mean that they cut informal ties
| with the Pentagon
|
| Just the opposite, it's those ties and connections that
| the Saudi's are buying.
| Philorandroid wrote:
| Law is only a paper veneer to keep honest people honest. Legal
| acts do about as much to deter desertion and security leaks as
| speed limit signs keep people from speeding.
| Maursault wrote:
| > Law is only a paper veneer to keep honest people honest.
|
| Not all laws.[1]
|
| > Legal acts do about as much to deter desertion and security
| leaks as speed limit signs keep people from speeding.
|
| Seems to be working well so far.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal
| _gr...
| hnfong wrote:
| But I hear that black holes are *notoriously* dishonest...
| thisiscorrect wrote:
| Because you can't get any accurate information out of
| them?
| hnfong wrote:
| I was thinking that they don't obey Newton's laws...
| Maursault wrote:
| They obey his Law of Gravity and his Laws of Motion.
| Newton was not incorrect and Einstein did not invalidate
| Newton's laws. It's only that Newton could not explain
| the source of the "force" of gravity, and he was honest
| about this.
| nonameiguess wrote:
| That's an awfully bold statement. It'd be nice if you showed
| some evidence that classified information leakage and
| military desertion rates are anywhere near the rate of speed
| limit violations, which at a first approximation I would
| guess is pretty near 100% of licensed drivers doing it at
| least once. As a person who served in the military and still
| holds a clearance, I don't know the true rates, but in 15
| years I have so far witnessed 0 desertions and 0 classified
| spills (caveat that I did witness one accidental copy of a
| classified course catalog onto an unclassified e-mail that
| was self-reported and immediately resulted in every
| unclassified workstation and hard drive in the 1st CAV
| headquarters being quarantined and wiped until it was
| determined the spill went no further, and we had no network
| access for a week while that was happening).
| formerkrogemp wrote:
| The former president routinely leaked classified
| information and took whole boxes worth or documents to his
| house after the presidency. Edwards Snowden and Julian
| Assange exist. There have been many "leaks" of classified
| information. Just because you and your associated coworkers
| didn't leak doesn't mean that leaks don't happen,
| unfortunately.
| kelnos wrote:
| Sure, but can you generalize the behavior of Trump,
| Snowden, and Assange to that of a bunch of retired
| military officers?
|
| Incidence matters. If intentional classified information
| leaks were commonplace and unsurprising, then sure, we
| could say we expect retired military officers to
| routinely follow the example of Trump, Snowden, and
| Assange when it comes to classified information. But I
| don't think any of us can make that claim.
|
| Intentional classified information leakage is relatively
| uncommon, and, for the most part, is punished when it
| happens and a perpetrator can be identified and caught.
| Obviously in the case of Trump, that potential punishment
| is politically fraught, as was/is the case with Assange.
| The US government would love to punish Snowden if they
| could get their grubby hands on him. I guess look to
| Chelsea Manning if you want an example of when the
| government has successfully brought down the hammer on
| someone doing things with classified material that they
| didn't like.
|
| To bring it back to the topic at hand, I expect that the
| retired military officers now taking employment with the
| Saudi Arabian military will most likely protect any
| secrets they're legally bound to protect. Why? Because
| that's what seems to happen most of the time, and
| punishments for failure to do so can get pretty severe.
| And someone who wanted to sell secrets might have a
| difficult time if their chosen country of exile is SA. If
| found out, they'd have to contend with the strong
| possibility that the SA government would extradite them
| to the US, depending on what kind of pressure the US
| might bring to bear.
| [deleted]
| Maursault wrote:
| >> Law is only a paper veneer to keep honest people honest.
|
| > That's an awfully bold statement.
|
| Worse, it is entirely false on its face because it not only
| completely ignores enforcement as well as social contract,
| the purpose of law _is not_ "to keep honest people honest,"
| nor is law "paper veneer." Laws are rules to regulate
| behavior, and as such fundamentally they are _ideas_ ,
| therefore they are intangible and only recorded to medium
| like paper, digital storage, stone tablets, what have you.
| panny wrote:
| This is spam. It doesn't matter that there is a news article
| behind that pay wall.
| rlewkov wrote:
| Follow the money.
| stormbrew wrote:
| a lot of people in this comment section seem kind of confused
| about the relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia?
|
| This isn't at all surprising, why wouldn't you hire American
| military to go with your American military hardware?
| warner25 wrote:
| Not only that, we have _active duty_ American service members
| stationed in Saudi Arabia working as instructors and advisors
| on how to maintain and employ that hardware.
|
| Saudi pilots are routinely trained at American military flight
| schools like Fort Rucker and NAS Pensacola. The performance of
| these Saudi student pilots is usually terrible[1], by the way,
| to the point that it's a running joke in the American military
| aviation community. This is probably because their officers are
| selected based on having royal blood, not based on merit,
| whereas getting into flight school is highly competitive for
| Americans. I'm told that Saudi Arabia pays a lot of money to
| send these guys for training, so instructors aren't allowed to
| fail them. Basically, the instructors pencil-whip their
| progress and let them graduate, but then Saudi Arabia seems to
| really need some experienced Americans on-hand to keep things
| from going off the rails.
|
| [1] I was paired with a Saudi during flight school. For
| example, all students had to score 100% on a written test on
| aircraft limits and emergency procedures before ever getting
| into the cockpit. American students would get a second chance
| if they got one or two questions wrong, but that was rare and
| embarrassing, and there would be no third chance. My Saudi
| partner, on the other hand, scored something like 16% on his
| first attempt and then received five or six more chances. When
| we actually got into the air, he wasn't much better. During the
| first week, I approached my commander and told him that I was
| uncomfortable flying with this guy, but he assured me that our
| instructors dealt with this situation all the time and knew how
| to manage it safely. Later in my career, I saw a bit of what
| happens behind the scenes and learned that cheating among Saudi
| students was also rampant and effectively allowed to continue.
| yucky wrote:
| It's not confusion, it's disgust. Everybody understands that
| Saudi's are the leading exporters of terrorism and the US helps
| enable that terrorism with our money and intel. Then we condemn
| Putin and expect the entire world to take it seriously.
| sschueller wrote:
| Because the United States should not be involved in invoking
| terror on the Yemenese population.
| BrandoElFollito wrote:
| Why selling them weapons then? Except if they were intended
| for gardening and what we have here - an obvious breach of
| TOS.
| stormbrew wrote:
| I mean, I agree! But it is, and this specific thing is only
| part of that.
| josefresco wrote:
| > invoking terror on the Yemenese population
|
| To clarify the US is invoking terror on the Yemeni Iranian
| proxy forces and therefore the population.
| sammyteee wrote:
| https://archive.ph/vGVcP
| TechBro8615 wrote:
| How else will they retire? It's not like CNN and MSNBC can hire
| all of them!
| atlasunshrugged wrote:
| Yeah, and Ollie North ruined it for military people at Fox /s
| pjc50 wrote:
| He was pardoned for his crimes!
| JasonFruit wrote:
| I don't know, they seem pretty determined to. I'm surprised at
| the complete breakdown of journalistic independence, right when
| news outlets are in a financial position where they should be
| trumpeting that sort of justification for their existence.
| imgabe wrote:
| If they're an ally, it's to our benefit that their military is
| strong.
|
| If they become an enemy, it doesn't hurt that we built their
| military and know everything about it inside out.
|
| If the US could make every other country's military a subsidiary
| of the US military, they would.
| adolph wrote:
| Even awesomer is heading up Washington "institutions" like
| Brookings while taking a foreign paycheck.
|
| https://www.vox.com/23166516/scandal-john-allen-brookings-th...
|
| _The court filing alleges that Allen had been tapped by two
| unregistered representatives of Qatar -- a business executive
| named Imaad Zuberi and a former US ambassador to the UAE, Richard
| Olson -- to advocate on Qatar's behalf. (That Olson used the
| email address rickscafedxb@yahoo.com, a reference to the seedy
| Rick's Cafe in the film Casablanca and the airport code for
| Dubai, might have been a tip-off that no one should be shocked
| that something was awry.)_
| atlasunshrugged wrote:
| Agh, and he probably thought he was just so clever with that
| email too. Ex-military officials should stick to joining the
| boards of defense conglomerates that their former friends and
| colleagues are going to spend billions of dollars with.
| adolph wrote:
| My guess is that the military is only the tip of the State
| iceberg.
|
| _Shortly after Olson left the State Department, several Gulf
| countries, including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, launched a
| blockade against Qatar that sparked a massive spending spree
| in Washington on lobbying and other efforts to influence the
| US policy._
|
| _Olson, Zuberi and retired Marine four-star Gen John Allen
| traveled to Doha early in the diplomatic crisis to meet with
| top Qatari officials and discuss ways of resolving the issue,
| according to court records and a statement Allen's spokesman
| provided to the wire service last year._
|
| https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/954208-ex-us-ambassador-
| to-...
| credit_guy wrote:
| Well, they are free people, not slaves. If they want to take a
| job in the private sector, they should have the freedom to do it,
| including working for a sovereign state that is not an enemy. Of
| course, they have knowledge of classified stuff, but I'm sure
| there are protocols around that, and they are aware of it.
|
| It would be more scandalous if they were to take jobs with
| Russia, or Iran. But Saudi Arable is a US ally, so what's the
| problem?
| europeanguy wrote:
| Saudi Arabia hasn't _really_ been a us ally since about 2016
| when Saudi Arabia tried dumping oil price to ruin the us shale
| industry. Ever since the USA has been preparing to strike back.
| Look up the NOPEC bill. It looks like the USA plan is to charge
| Saudi Arabia with manipulating oil prices (being a cartel is
| literally the stated goal of OPEC). SA knows this and they 're
| aligning themselves with Russia and China (with whom they're
| ideologically closer anyway).
|
| Also just a comment, the dichotomy "they are free not slaves"
| is entirely useless to this discussion. There are countless
| examples from elsewhere in society of where a person isn't a
| slave but still has constraints on how they can earn money.
| exhilaration wrote:
| Aren't there literally American military bases in Saudi
| Arabia? https://militarybases.com/overseas/saudi-arabia/ How
| much more allied can you get?
| europeanguy wrote:
| Like I said, this is a story in development now.
|
| Yes, there are bases in SA, and the US has threatened to
| pull them out.
|
| [1] https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/10/06/oil-
| dispute-p...
|
| [2] https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-democrats-slam-
| opec-cu...
| Guy2020 wrote:
| basementcat wrote:
| This sort of thing isn't all that unusual. John Paul Jones,
| whom many regard as the "father" of the United States Navy,
| served as a rear admiral for the Imperial Russian Navy after he
| retired from the US Navy.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Paul_Jones
| edgefield wrote:
| Perhaps not unusual, but ethical? That's a different matter.
| A former US general working for a theocratic, monarchy with a
| deeply concerning history on human rights raises some serious
| red flags in my mind.
| raydiatian wrote:
| The fuck is ethical about anything the US military has done
| since 1945?
| melling wrote:
| I often wonder how people can not understand the world in
| which we live?
|
| Didn't President of the United States just go to Saudi
| Arabia and ask them to produce more oil.
|
| Have we not supplied them weapons for decades?
|
| Does the world use 100 million barrels of oil a day?
|
| Let's go throw something on a famous painting and maybe
| that'll stop.
|
| Still waiting for the batteries and all the renewable
| energy to solve the problem.
|
| In the meantime, it's great that people can take the moral
| high ground for decades on end.
|
| We've been trying to get off oil since the 1970's. How's
| that working out?
| pjc50 wrote:
| > We've been trying to get off oil since the 1970's
|
| _Some_ have, but for most people and most countries it
| 's simply far too cheap and convenient to not do that.
| Until there's an oil shock or a war. The oil money also
| pays for a lot of anti-renewables lobbying.
| edgefield wrote:
| I sleep well at night. How about you?
| saiya-jin wrote:
| You would be surprised how many sociopaths occupy higher
| echelons of any power structures, be it government,
| military, banking, or well anything. As per J. Peterson
| there is around 1:20 ratio of sociopaths:normal folks in
| general population. Sociopathy like all other similar
| things are a spectrum, but with certain age you will
| start noticing them everywhere where power is.
|
| If its a trait mixed with above average intelligence,
| these people often climb careers like ladders, and
| getting to the general/admiral level involves tons of
| political games and quid pro quo played right for
| decade(s).
|
| What I want to say with all this - you bet those folks
| sleep well at night. They've sent 18-year old to (almost)
| certain death from time to time. Don't expect everybody
| in the world to share your morals, however sad it may be.
| kelnos wrote:
| I mean, consider that, right now, the US has a military
| presence in Saudi Arabia, and _active_ US military members
| are under orders to help train Saudi Arabian military
| members.
|
| These former US officers in question may have _already_
| been working "for" this theocratic monarchy before they
| retired from the US military. So I don't think it'd be much
| of a moral leap for them to continue to do so, at least in
| their own minds.
|
| But sure, I certainly wouldn't work for SA in any capacity;
| the whole idea would feel gross to me. But I don't have the
| career baggage of a US military officer who may have been
| stationed in SA for years.
| padraic7a wrote:
| It could be worse. He could be a US general working for a
| country with a deeply concerning history of human rights, a
| lingering racial apartheid problem, and a history of
| violating the independence and sovereignty of many other
| countries : the United States.
| publicola1990 wrote:
| Wasn't the Russian Empire also as such.
| hef19898 wrote:
| Back the day Napoleon, from Corsica, actually whantedbto join
| the British Army before he settled to become an Artillery
| Officer in the French Army. The rest is, quite literally,
| history.
|
| We don't live in the 19th century anymore so.
| neaden wrote:
| Do you have a citation for that? My understanding is he
| went to boarding school in France at the age of 9 and then
| directly entered the French military academy. The hero of
| his youth, Pasquale Paoli, was in exile in England for much
| of that time and so maybe he wanted to join him until the
| revolution happened and Napoleon no longer supported
| Corsican independence.
| basementcat wrote:
| Fidel Castro wanted to play for the Washington Senators
| baseball team but wasn't signed due to an underwhelming
| tryout.
|
| https://sabr.org/bioproj/topic/fidel-castro-and-baseball/
| lern_too_spel wrote:
| TLDR; he didn't try out for the Senators. The story is a
| myth.
| Dawnyhf5 wrote:
| [deleted]
| idontpost wrote:
| yucky wrote:
| Russia and Iran weren't behind 9/11, Saudi Arabia (or at least
| key parts of the current ruling royal family) was.
| marshray wrote:
| My dim understanding is that once you are enrolled in General-
| and Admiral-level security clearances, you are not quite free
| free to freelance your experience globally without significant
| limitations.
|
| The key questions raised would seem to be: did they in fact
| obtain the required signoffs, and are the current requirements
| sufficient or do they need some adjustment?
| google234123 wrote:
| The saudis are allies and we sell them many of our top weapon
| systems.
| marshray wrote:
| Yes, and there are a lot of signoffs involved.
| dsfyu404ed wrote:
| >did they in fact obtain the required signoffs,
|
| You don't get official "signoff" when you're at that level.
| You get plausibly deniable permission with the understanding
| that the powers that be reserve the right to pull the rug out
| from under you should doing so be politically expedient.
| bigbacaloa wrote:
| Sure, no one has any responsibility for what his employer does
| or where the cash comes from. Mafia mentality has taken over
| the tech world apparently.
| sschueller wrote:
| I would not count of SA being an ally for ever. I find this
| highly inappropriate especially for someone with sich high
| rank. Very very dangerous territory that could end up with a
| treason charge.
| mjevans wrote:
| Non-competes should include compensation commensurate for the
| non-compete period. In the case of these individuals is the
| retirement package not sufficient to guard national secrets?
| aerostable_slug wrote:
| The security agreements they signed are sufficient to guard
| national secrets. It has nothing to do with whether they go
| to work for Raytheon, the Saudi Defense Ministry, or
| Goodwill in their retirement, their compensation packages,
| etc.
| dsfyu404ed wrote:
| Working for Raytheon vs working for KSA is like the
| difference between buying an index that has a bunch of
| AAPL and buying AAPL. You're "fractionally" working for
| KSA (and whoever else).
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| I'm not seeing how 'security agreements' can guard
| against them deciding to just stay in Saudi Arabia with
| the patronage of the princes.
| thrill wrote:
| Expatriates would still be subject to not disclosing
| national secrets. It's not like they're former second-
| rate steak salesmen.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Subject by whom? The Saudi Arabian government has their
| own agenda. And obviously the U.S. government cannot
| enforce laws or policies in Riyadh.
| aerostable_slug wrote:
| You honestly think an American flag officer would defect
| to Saudi Arabia? Really?
|
| Russia, China, or Iran would be a far "better" choice for
| a number of reasons, chiefly the fact that the Saudis
| might turn the turncoat back over to the US for any
| number of reasons -- like pulling American maintenance
| contractors out of KSA, which would ground their air
| force in a matter of days and leave them very vulnerable
| to Iranian aggression. Hell, without contractor
| representatives giving them cues I wonder if they can
| really run some of the gear we've sold them.
|
| Besides, if I'm going to be stuck in one dictatorship for
| the rest of my life (because you could never safely
| travel again), I'd pick somewhere like Iran over KSA in a
| second.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| I was originally responding to your comment that: 'The
| security agreements they signed are sufficient to guard
| national secrets.'
|
| High ranking officers can just as much buy plane tickets
| as anyone else. Yes, including to countries that may not
| have entirely harmless intentions.
|
| Signatures on a piece of paper are not the final arbiter
| of disputes between countries, as demonstrated by the
| previous administration. Even if they were, not everyone
| can be trusted 100% just because they made promises to
| that effect, actions speak louder than words after all.
| mek6800d2 wrote:
| Your comment reminds me of a scene in the Rolling Stones'
| Altamont Concert film: Keith Richards is hanging out of his
| dressing room door and he answers a queston, "Yeah, we sold
| out, but it was for the money so that's okay! (laughter)"
| From Keith Richards, it was funny. A retired general
| claiming the military did not provide enough incentive to
| guard national secrets would also be laughable, but in a
| different sense.
|
| Unrelated to the topic of this discussion and elsewhere in
| the film, Mick Jagger answers another question, "Am I
| satisfied? Sexually, yes. Philosophically, no." (Working
| from hazy memories here -- I last saw the movie in the
| 1970s, I think.)
| maxbond wrote:
| In the United States, the charge of treason only has meaning
| within the context of a declared war (due to it's specific
| definition within the constitution). Given that wars are no
| longer declared, I don't foresee even literal traitors being
| charged with treason until either a law is passed creating a
| different charge with different criteria, or Congress decides
| to check the Executive regarding the declaration of war. No
| reason to believe either are on the horizon; it's entirely
| possible no one will ever be charged with treason in the
| United States ever again.
| boomskats wrote:
| How is this different to the Saudi crown prince hiring MPRI,
| DynCorp, or any other US private military company that largely
| employs retired US army personnel?
| hunglee2 wrote:
| this is an example of something which was entirely
| uncontroversial becoming a scandal only after changes in the
| relationship. Two weeks ago, a non story.
| thermalsauce wrote:
| This is not as bad as it reads. Understand that the top brass in
| the DoD are extremely loyal to the country, loyalty and trust is
| crucial in the officer corps (in the US at least).
|
| Once you get that star (or whatever the equivalent is for the
| navy) you are basically a US officer for life. Retired Generals
| and Admirals can and do get called upon by the government when
| they are needed. They are considered highly experienced
| professionals that the government can trust. They are not "in"
| the system, they are the system.
|
| I would expect that the DoD keeps tabs on these officers. While
| the oil money may be nice, make no mistake, the US government is
| the wealthiest organization on the planet. These officers
| understand who the real provider is.
| ncmncm wrote:
| yucky wrote:
| They're so loyal that they're working for the guys who planned
| 9/11, and not just working for them, but giving them expertise.
| nosianu wrote:
| Also just today:
|
| BBC headline "Ex-UK pilots lured to help Chinese military, MoD
| says"
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-63293582
|
| With more background info: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-
| zone/is-china-really-using-...
|
| Some highlights from the BBC article:
|
| > Former British military pilots are being lured to China with
| large sums of money to pass on their expertise to the Chinese
| military, it is claimed.
|
| > Up to 30 former UK military pilots are thought to have gone to
| train members of China's People's Liberation Army.
|
| > The retired British pilots are being used to help understand
| the way in which Western planes and pilots operate, information
| which could be vital in the event of any conflict, such as over
| Taiwan.
|
| > "They are a very attractive body of people to then pass on that
| knowledge," a Western official said. "It's taking Western pilots
| of great experience to help develop Chinese military air force
| tactics and capabilities."
|
| The disclaimer sentence
|
| > There is no evidence that any pilots have broken the Official
| Secrets Act or that they have committed any crime.
|
| is funny - how would they gather that evidence without
| confessions from the pilots involved or from the Chinese? Even if
| they don't tell them any secrets, there remains the fact that
| they train them at all. With the next big conflict where this
| might be used being Taiwan, where the West has already taken the
| opposite side.
|
| From the second link:
|
| > The MOD also said that the United Kingdom is only one of
| several Western countries whose aircrew (and likely other sources
| of military expertise) are currently being targeted in this way.
| No details were provided of other nations involved.
|
| Personally, reading this, I think the news is getting more
| ridiculous by the day. I think this is much worse, I don't think
| Saudi Arabia is likely to end up as a direct adversary, and even
| if it did it would not matter much. But China...
| yakak wrote:
| The US leaking capability to SA is like China leaking
| capability to NK. When SA runs fully amok the US will be worse
| off than if it were just in conflict with a single opponent
| because alliances with garbage bring you into a 2 against 200
| position that is almost entirely outside your control.
| kelnos wrote:
| It's weird to me that it's legal for former military members of
| one country to be employed by another for any military purpose
| at all, without the express approval of the home country.
| alexfromapex wrote:
| Saudi Arabia is not as worthy of an adversary as China but they
| still are a dangerous country to underestimate. They were
| possibly behind 9/11, after all:
| https://theintercept.com/2021/09/11/september-11-saudi-arabi...
| .
| stytchwhy wrote:
| dirtyid wrote:
| >The disclaimer sentence
|
| It's a manufacturing consent piece to setup this:
|
| >Anyone working in the UK for "hostile" states like Russia and
| China who fails to register their role will face up to five
| years in jail, Suella Braverman will announce on Tuesday.
|
| [0] https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/hostile-state-
| workers-...
|
| With respect to Saudi's, a lot of Saudi of military is
| serviced/supported by Pakistanis who feeds info directly back
| to PRC. And TBH it wouldn't surprise me if PRC "lured" ex
| Japanese / Korean pilots for info as well.
| ClumsyPilot wrote:
| > Anyone working in the UK for "hostile" states like Russia
| and China who fails to register their role will face up to
| five years in jail, Suella Braverman will announce on
| Tuesday.
|
| This is exactly like Russian 'Foreign Agent' law introduced
| about 10 years ago. Should we be following in the footsteps
| of despotic regimes? If we have just declared that these
| regimes are morrally bankrupt, we should be doing the
| opposite?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_foreign_agent_law
| rawling wrote:
| I'm sure there are a lot of things Russia does that we
| shouldn't do the opposite of.
| dirtyid wrote:
| IMO this was introduced so UK security architecture is more
| in line with US/AU when it come to PRC as pre-req for
| getting piece of multibillion AUKUS nuclear sub deal.
| H8crilA wrote:
| Here's a guess: it has been known to various counter-
| intelligence agencies around the world for a while, but only
| now someone decided to escalate just a tiny bit and clean up
| some of the mess. Can't say I don't like it, though I dislike
| the seemingly ongoing worldwide escalation in international
| relations.
| groffee wrote:
| Your link makes more sense with this missing context
| https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62582156
|
| In August, the RAF stopped recruiting 'white men', now they're
| all joining China.
| kelnos wrote:
| That doesn't make sense. Even if what you're saying is true,
| these people who were not recruited in the first place would
| not have any military training or expertise that is of
| interest to the Chinese government.
| rafale wrote:
| Diversity is incompatible with meritocracy. RAF is gonna pay
| the price for letting the politics du jour impact their
| performance based criterias.
| frereubu wrote:
| The meaningful point of diversity intiatives is that they
| find people who are better than others but who would
| traditionally be overlooked because of their background.
| Some initiatives are better executed than others, but this
| comment comes across as a knee-jerk reaction.
| TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
| Demonstrate the RAF is a perfectly spherical merticocracy
| operating in a vacuum.
| miles wrote:
| > In August, the RAF stopped recruiting 'white men'
|
| Pause on hiring white males pushes head of British air force
| recruitment to resign, report says
| https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/pause-on-hiring-white-
| mal...
|
| > Multiple British defense sources reportedly told
| Australia's Sky News that the head of the Royal Air Force's
| (RAF) recruitment office resigned over concerns an effective
| pause on hiring white males, in favor of people of color and
| women, will undermine the RAF's readiness.
|
| > Defense sources allegedly insisted the RAF placed a pause
| on hiring white males in pursuit of diversity and inclusion
| goals.
|
| > "You look at the head of the RAF and he's prepared to break
| the operational requirement of the air force just to meet
| diversity [targets]," one of the sources reportedly told Sky
| News. "I think he needs to be hauled up by the Ministry of
| Defence and told: This is the defense agenda, get on it."
|
| > However, an RAF spokesperson disputed the allegations.
|
| > There is no pause in Royal Air Force recruitment and no new
| policy with regards to meeting in-year recruitment
| requirements," the spokesperson said, according to Sky News.
| ...
| Redoubts wrote:
| > the RAF has gone the furthest, setting ambitious targets to
| more than double its recruitment of women to hit 40% by 2030,
| as well as to ensure ethnic minorities make up 20% of new
| recruits.
|
| "Stopped recruiting white men" eh?
| faeriechangling wrote:
| Yeah that's literally how race quotas work. You hire some
| white men, go "woah too many" and stop hiring them.
|
| To make things easier, you do this by avoiding hiring poor
| whites in particular, while continuing to hire privileged
| whites who will celebrate your efforts as brave and
| courageous.
| ClumsyPilot wrote:
| Alternatively, use google, search RAF budger and realise that
| RAF has fired a bunch of people due to budget cuts. They are
| looking for another Job. China gave them a job and 10x the
| salary.
|
| > RAF has smallest combat force in history with fewest
| fighter jets after shrinking by nearly half in just 12 years
|
| This is typical conservative government, demand loyalty from
| military personel, but show them no loyalty and respect
| inreturn. Espouse belief in the market, then complain when
| the market does exactly what it's suppose to do. You can't
| have it both ways
| adamsmith143 wrote:
| So you think what, that these white men who didn't even get
| recruited are now training China with their non-existant RAF
| expertise that they didn't get because they weren't
| recruited?
| adamsmith143 wrote:
| >is funny - how would they gather that evidence without
| confessions from the pilots involved or from the Chinese?
|
| MI6 is a thing. What do you think they do all day. You really
| think these people with classified info in their heads are just
| walking around blabbing secrets in China or Saudi or wherever?
| nosianu wrote:
| That would be evidence they won't be able to use in court? It
| would be giving up on their sources at the least, even if
| they are not disclosed directly. I have my doubts in them
| being able to find out exactly which pilot gave the Chinese
| some specific piece of information. They would need a source
| that is part of the direct training, which I find a bit
| optimistic.
| ectopod wrote:
| We have secret trials in the UK where the accused doesn't
| get to hear the evidence.
|
| So classified evidence can be used and there is no danger
| of it leaking.
|
| Of course, there is a danger of innocent people being
| convicted but that doesn't seem to bother MPs or the
| government or even the public.
| [deleted]
| tksiden wrote:
| Apparently British officers are taking positions with the Chinese
| too.
| hnfong wrote:
| Just in case you need another data point.
|
| https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hong-kong-protesters-turn...
|
| Having lived through this, it's a bit funny to me that most
| people aren't aware the Chinese crackdown on Hong Kong protests
| was led by British officers on the field. Inconvenient truths I
| guess.
| stainablesteel wrote:
| it might sound weird, but if they're allowing it they're
| probably using it to gain intel while not giving away any
| valuable info
| miles wrote:
| On a related note:
|
| Ex-UK pilots lured to help Chinese military, MoD says
| https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-63293582
| [deleted]
| bigbacaloa wrote:
| Traitors united.
| edmcnulty101 wrote:
| US tax dollars spent training these mercenaries!
| photochemsyn wrote:
| This has been going on for years, but now it's news? Here's a
| blurb from some random 2009 blog post on how this works (more
| about Iraq, but Vinnell has been training Saudi forces for years,
| and probably is involved with Yemen as well):
|
| > "The Pentagon has awarded a 48-million-dollar contract to train
| the nucleus of a new Iraqi army to Vinnell Corporation, a US firm
| which also trains the Saudi National Guard. The Fairfax, VA-based
| company, a subsidiary of the US aerospace firm Northrup Grumman,
| said on its website it was hiring former US army and marine
| officers to train infantry battalions and combat support units
| for the new Iraqi army. The Vinnell Corp. of Alexandria, Va.,
| owned by politically connected Northrop-Grumman."
|
| More on that:
|
| https://www.corpwatch.org/article/iraq-vinnells-army-defensi...
|
| It's just so painfully obvious that these kind of articles
| wouldn't be getting published right now if the US government
| wasn't angry with Saudi Arabia about crude oil production.
| ClumsyPilot wrote:
| > The Pentagon has awarded a 48-million-dollar contract to
| train the nucleus of a new Iraqi army to Vinnell Corporation, a
| US firm which also trains the Saudi National Guard.
|
| Were similar contracts in place for training Afghani Army?
| Maybe we should get a refund?
|
| I found shocking how western media just declared Afghani army
| as incapable and closed the chapter. Someone was in charge of
| this program for 20 years. Someone had oversight of billions
| spend. Were western contractor facilitating corruption? Was
| this a shocking failure of western management?
|
| The results are worse than Russian army procurement where
| millions of uniforms just go missing!
| bombcar wrote:
| Nobody wants to talk about training the Afghans for 20 years
| and having them decide to be citizens or Taliban the moment
| we left.
|
| Training went well, but why would they bother once we're
| gone?
| whywhywhydude wrote:
| Money wins. The admirals probably couldn't resist the million
| dollar paychecks. I bet they would happily divulge all they know
| - mo matter how top secret-for the right price.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-18 23:01 UTC)