Is suing Saudi Arabia a good idea? (Details )

Suing the government sets a bad precedent for loons to go off on personal foreign policy crusades. Think of all the ridiculous domestic litigation stories we hear, and now imagine those jerks vying for even more money and attention.

Equally important is the distraction. Private Saudi money has been vital to al Qaeda and ISIS, including money from the vast royal family. THAT is who should be held accountable. People trying to prove some government connection should be following that money trail instead.

Does anyone know how this would even work? In whose court would these trials be held?

@johnpowell Foreign assets in the US can be seized to satisfy a judgment in US courts.

For example, Iranian government assets were frozen in the US after the 1979 revolution, and they will be used to satisfy this judgment:

The Guardian – Wednesday 20 April 2016 - Supreme court rules families of terror victims can collect $2bn from Iran. Court rejects efforts by Iran’s central bank to stave off orders to pay relatives of 1983 Beirut bombing and other terrorist attacks

No it is not, and the fact that such a measure carried is a direct reflection on the shortage of mental acuity in people we find fit to govern us. This is an example of a law where the negative consequences for the country down the road are blindingly evident. All the sucking up in the world to 9/11 victims aside, any fool with the cognitive capacity of a bedbug should appreciate that a nation routinely blowing people away with drones cannot possibly grant its citizens leeway to sue foreign governments for “wrongful acts”. The levels of stupidity achieved in Washington these days are breathtaking, and it is only appropriate that the Congress itself is the drum major in the parade of America dumbing down.

Dumb idea to pass the law, and dumb idea to sue Saudi Arabia.

But since when does common sense get in the way of politics?

“Your thoughts?’

Same as yours. How can you sue a country? And why now, years after 9/11? Ridiculous.

Some law firm is going to get a huge commission.

I agree – bad idea. Opens a Pandora’s box.

@MrGrimm888 it isn’t“trying to pass”; Congrees overrode the President’s veto. And then they realized that wasn’t’ very smart to do, and Mitch McConnell blamed the President for not telling them to not override the veto.

It is now law. Republicans think they can “fix” it advter the election. But I wouldn’t hold my breath.

^However you articulate it. The thread is about the position the US government is wrestling over. I’m aware Obama vetoed it, and aware of McConnell’s hypocritical ravings on the issue. Although I don’t understand why anyone would support the idea. McConnell and his party are dragging their feet on everything, in hopes a republican wins the presidency. At which point they will complete many of their agendas, and destroy the world.

@MrGrimm888 The thread is about the position the US government is wrestling over.

This is an instance where thinking of the “U.S. Government” as some monolithic organization obscures the issue. The Executive branch has no dog in this fight other than dealing with the diplomatic fall out and what to do when the Armed Forces start getting sued by citizens in other countries.

The ones that are wrestling are the legislators that took a vote on a blatant election move to curry favor with the voters, but now have to figure out what to do.

They sort of are monolithic. All branches seem equally incompetent, and unable to do their job.

The structure of the government is meant to keep at least two parties (two mindsets ) in the mix, so one frame of mind cannot rule. But it assumes mutual respect, funds, oversight, and cooperation. That’s not happening now.

The veto itself ,by Obama, is a sign of a functioning democracy. But this issue, really, is like all others in that the US government as a whole is at odds politically, and while they get rich while sedentary, the real losers are the public. The world suffers from the mistakes from these idiots. Now they’re going on vacation. WTF?

The current system is singular in that it doesn’t work anymore.

The world is a in a fragile time right now. Things are on the brink of going bad everywhere.

This is a back burner issue. And it doesn’t deserve a second thought, until more pressing needs are addressed.

It’s mere debate on Washington’s floors is an insult to Saudi Arabia( and especially countries the US has been in conflicts in), and is inflammatory at best.

This issue is confusing to me in that it ever got traction to begin with.