We don't live in the 19th century anymore so.
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?
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.
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.
And even if you would percieve ignorance instead, it doesn't mean that they need snark targeted at them. Please respect the community guidelines of this comment section.
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.
Working for dictatorship is not worse than bombing innocent children in name of working for oldest democracy
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.
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.
Even if a cleared military member gets nothing after their separation (perhaps do to a court martial or the like), there's still no justification in spying, especially not after the agreements and acknowledgements cleared individuals sign throughout their careers. Those documents are what put convicted spies in places like ADX Florence, and no degree of whining about one's pension changes that.
>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?
"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."
Which seems to be aimed at addressing a different topic.
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.)
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?
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.
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.
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...
But then who has "really" been an ally since whenever? All sovereign nations have national interests, and they are not 100% allied with the US interests.
Still, in the case of Saudi Arabia, their most important security concern is Iran. And there, they are aligned with the US. Also, the US is the most important security partner of Israel, and, according to wikipedia [1], Saudi Arabia has quite a good working relationship with Israel
However, reports have surfaced in recent years indicating extensive behind-the-scenes diplomatic, intelligence, and security cooperation between the two as part of a larger Arab-Israeli alliance against Iran (see Iran–Israel proxy conflict and Iran–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict) and, more recently, Turkey under Erdoğan. At the same time, the Saudi relationship with the Palestinian National Authority is deteriorating.
Yes, I know about Kashogi. But those guys are not going there to tell MBS to kill more disidents. They are going there to give security advice. And that security advice will benefit the US, not hinder it, because it will result in a stronger ally, not a stronger enemy.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Saudi_Arabia_re...
All I'm pointing out is that the relationship between US and SA is souring. Simple stuff. Who has "really" bla bla bla I don't know dude, I can't be bothered to fight over semantics.
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?