President Trump has his work cut out for him. He needs an administration that would contain a thoughtful Conservative secretary of state. Hillary, Madeline, 'Colon' Powell and the current asshat Kerry are tragic examples of anti-Conservative adminstrations.
Three women and an affirmative action hire.
splains a lot.
I’d love to blame this on Obama, but this sh!t has been going on for decades.
That is BS, pure drivel
There is a common enemy of the GCC nations and Turkey is Iran
You are quite foolish to equate Arab and Jihadist
while it is true that most all Jihadist are Arab, it is not true that most all Arabs are Jihadist
Council on Foreign Relations. Neocons and CFR stooges drive this crap. They are pure evil. They make billions off wars and the suffering of millions.
Welcome to the wrong side of WWIII.
This link http://books.sipri.org/product_info?c_product_id=495# says the largest buyers 2010-2014 are
1. South Korea
2. UAE
3. Australia
That will probably change a lot once F-35 deliveries start.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_procurement#Planned_purchases
A few points to consider -
While the US might have a bigger defense budget than the next 7 countries - COMBINED - the disparity won’t seem as much if you consider what the US spends as a percentage of GDP. The US spends about 4% of GDP on military. Lots of socialized countries or countries in NATO might spend 1 to 1.5% of their GDP on the military. And the US spending in the 1950’s to early 1990’s tended to be around 6% of GDP - and we have lowered it significantly. (Pre-WWII - we were around 3% of GDP.)
When we sell arms to other countries - we have several goals including making the country more of an ally, helping our own vendors (why not let Boeing make money instead of a French or Swedish country?) - and with the sale of high tech equipment, we can withhold parts support if the country turns way from the US. (The Iranian F-14’s aren’t worth much since they can’t get spare parts...) Face it - some of the countries mentioned will still buy weaponry - the question is whether or not it might be beneficial to be involved in the sales, or sitting on the sidelines, with no possibility of being able to exercise influence. (Of course - influence goes both ways, and we might have to do things that we shouldn’t to ‘make the sale’.)
The Saudi Arabian leaders have been ‘riding the tiger’ and now they don’t know how to get off without the tiger eating them. For many decades, the rich leaders allowed the Wahhabi ‘cult’ to dominate - and the Wahhabi cult is very ‘fundamental’ - more “Islamist” vs. modern Islam. This led to a populace that is more ready to ‘revolt’ than ever before. The leaders are trying to figure out how to back down from Wahhabism...for a more main-stream and less aggressive form of Islam (if one can ever exist.) Are we better off trying to work with leaders and hope that things can be fixed - or would it be better if the nation went the way of Iran?