US Senate passes bill allowing 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia

[Kal Muah]

Obama will Veto this for obvious reasons (why ruin the opportunity while they are milking Arabs?), but still, this has an important message, and it breaks a taboo in U.S politics, which is used to white wash the crimes of its allies and sugarcoat them, Israel and Saudis being the most prominent examples.

I want US and India to support Iran instead of SA, although Iran too have to shed their american hatred. I have met Iranians, and man they are so cool ppl

 

[salarsikander]

Oh i get it what you meant by that statement. Yes legally i guess you can sue president, but I don't think thats going to work. No country is going to allow to sue their own highest authority just because of foreigners.

Yeah that's why the question was posed !

 

[Kal Muah]

Which is ? Killing looting, pillaging? is that what every country must learn ? still living in stone age are we

Sorry but you are becoming too emotional. When you are dealing with geopolitics, you shed your emotional skin altogether. Think about it, Iraq threatened us, they destroyed it, don't go into right or wrong. Again think how cleverly us brought the war from home to so far in me and Afghanistan. Russia would have done the same had they got power like us, pakistan would have done the same, in fact it did its best to control bangladesh with all its might, and i dont blame it. Every country looks for their own self interest, nobody cares what happens to others.

 

[salarsikander]

Sorry but you are becoming too emotional. When you are dealing with geopolitics, you shed your emotional skin altogether. Think about it, Iraq threatened us, they destroyed it, don't go into right or wrong. Again think how cleverly us brought the war from home to so far in me and Afghanistan. Russia would have done the same had they got power like us, pakistan would have done the same, in fact it did its best to control bangladesh with all its might, and i dont blame it. Every country looks for their own self interest, nobody cares what happens to others.

See doing it practically and can do it are both different thing. You cant charge a robber unless he commits robbery. To control Bangladesh LOL. If we talk about Kashmir occupied by Indian that would fit the description more

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

This shit just got real.

But anyways, there's probably little change the bill will pass the House of Representatives. The Republicans rule that, and will cozy up to the Saudis real quick.

 

[Kal Muah]

See doing it practically and can do it are both different thing. You cant charge a robber unless he commits robbery. To control Bangladesh LOL. If we talk about Kashmir occupied by Indian that would fit the description more

I can charge a robber even if he didn't commit a crime. Remember how Cia captured 1200 ppl post 9/11 just on doubt. So it depends on how much power and influence you have. You can talk about kashmir, I gave example of bangladesh since once u controlled them and nw its an independent country.

 

[salarsikander]

I can charge a robber even if he didn't commit a crime. Remember how Cia captured 1200 ppl post 9/11 just on doubt. So it depends on how much power and influence you have. You can talk about kashmir, I gave example of bangladesh since once u controlled them and nw its an independent country.

Lol cia captured robbers. Plz a country that inavdes ankther country cuz apparently cia told they had non existent wmd. Im just awed at your logic we controlled bangla? Or it is you has placed half a million soldiefs in kashmir. The might does not make you right. So why cant the might kf US control takibans in afghanistan ?

 

[Kal Muah]

Lol cia captured robbers. Plz a country that inavdes ankther country cuz apparently cia told they had non existent wmd. Im just awed at your logic we controlled bangla? Or it is you has placed half a million soldiefs in kashmir. The might does not make you right. So why cant the might kf US control takibans in afghanistan ?

Half of the things i couldn't understand what you wrote. Anyways Yes, no matter how much you run, you did tried to control east pakistan/bangladesh with all your might, you couldn't defend, thats a different matter, and I am not saying what you did is bad. What is right and What is wrong? Its all about perspective, Kashmir is with India is wrong for you, but right for us. So right or wrong is a very perspective thing. The day you will learn, instead of cheering for others, have your countries priority comes first, nations will become mightier

 

[salarsikander]

Half of the things i couldn't understand what you wrote. Anyways Yes, no matter how much you run, you did tried to control east pakistan/bangladesh with all your might, you couldn't defend, thats a different matter, and I am not saying what you did is bad. What is right and What is wrong? Its all about perspective, Kashmir is with India is wrong for you, but right for us. So right or wrong is a very perspective thing. The day you will learn, instead of cheering for others, have your countries priority comes first, nations will become mightier

Your belief system is totally flawed. Killingnand inavding for the sake of progress at another countrys existence is plainly wrong, no matter how you paint it!

We didnt invadenbangla nor we have occupation there oike you have in kashmir

 

[Kal Muah]

Your belief system is totally flawed. Killingnand inavding for the sake of progress at another countrys existence is plainly wrong, no matter how you paint it!

We didnt invadenbangla nor we have occupation there oike you have in kashmir

Nop you got me wrong. I never said pakistan invaded Bangladesh, i said pakistan tried its best to hold on to bangladesh. Yes, India holds kashmir and will keep on doing so, just like how china hold tibet. No country will give up power to another country just like that, US projects power because it has the capacity to do so, Russia did in syria, China is doing in east, India is doing in South Asia.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Oh i get it what you meant by that statement. Yes legally i guess you can sue president, but I don't think thats going to work. No country is going to allow to sue their own highest authority just because of foreigners.


Sorry sir, i but i dont blame america. They are doing what's best for their country. Its a lesson every country must learn.

Invading a third world country on the spineless claims that they have WMDs then arrive to find nothing but by then hundreds of thousands are dead, irreversible damage of tens of billions, and a divided/destroyed Iraq.

That is considered war crimes my friend... and it isnt the first time the US has ever done that.

Iraq would've been the leading country in the region by now; it had a 56% growth rate under Sadam alone.

 

[Kal Muah]

Invading a third world country on the spineless claims that they have WMDs then arrive to find nothing but by then hundreds of thousands are dead, irreversible damage of tens of billions, and a divided/destroyed Iraq.

That is considered war crimes my friend... and it isnt the first time the US has ever done that.

Iraq would've been the leading country in the region by now; it had a 56% growth rate under Sadam alone.

We live in a dog eat dog world. While i do agree what US did with IRAQ is crime, the fact is it is nothing new, this is happening all the time in our history. Romans got into power, they started invading countries, Persians did the same, British, Germany, and now US. Whenever someone will get into power they will exploit others, its a fact whether we like it or not.

 

[salarsikander]

Nop you got me wrong. I never said pakistan invaded Bangladesh, i said pakistan tried its best to hold on to bangladesh. Yes, India holds kashmir and will keep on doing so, just like how china hold tibet. No country will give up power to another country just like that, US projects power because it has the capacity to do so, Russia did in syria, China is doing in east, India is doing in South Asia.

And according to you its alright because they have the power lol

This aint some jungle

 

[Zabaniyah]

Just because the hijackers consisted of Saudis doesn't mean that the Saudi government was involved. And why is this being brought up now? Strange times we live in.