To be fair, during their reign they've put millions of United fans to sleep.
Saudi sports minister gives update on buying club from Glazers
- Thread starter Zlatattack
- Start date
Yeah with the slight difference that if an American is buying us, it's not the American government buying us but with the Saudi Government it would literally people who don't have a problem ordering journalists to be killed or tortured being the owners of our club.
You miss the point.
FOURTEEN officers indicted on assault and cover-up charges shows that the police are accountable for their actions in a democracy. The difference is that in a police state the police would not be indicted and the press would not even be allowed to report it ever happened.
You are an intelligent person so I am don’t know why you are pretending that you are not.
Saudis kill their own people. They get their heads chopped off infront of a bunch of people cause a neighbor who do not like them, said they spoke bad about Allah or the royal family.
Fecking weak discussion. Lets forget about no human rights etc cause America goes to war for oil.
This is somehow morally inferior to death by drone strike?
When did the Glazers order a fecking drone strike?
Those human rights only really count within their own country.
They don’t practice what they preach when bombing villages and innocent people and children are killed throughout their war to secure oil. I include my own country the UK in that as well.
Truth is, half of what the Saudi’s are guilty of, though disgraceful, shouldn’t make us even raise our eyebrows in comparison to what our countries have done time and again previously.
I wouldn’t study British history if I were one of the many on here fixating on Saudi atrocities.
Maybe it was the glazers who funded that plane banner those few years ago
Famous whataboutisms. The main point is that the UK government isn't trying to buy a football club. The comparisons are between individuals (who happen to be American but could be from anywhere) and an actual state. Unfortunately people keep talking about America, UK and every other country under the sun, when the only relevant country is Saudi Arabia because they are the only ones supposedly interested in buying United.
Has there been any noises about this in the past few months? I've seen this post bumped quite a bit, but it's usually just moral debate - anything else, even rumours on Twitter?
Ah I see so we’ve narrowed it down to the Glazers who I never mentioned. So murder is negotiable as long as it’s not whoever owns United committing it.
why does this post get so much traffic? It's not like there's been any concrete evidence they want to buy us, There was more press media about them buying Newcastle than there ever was about us?
Why are people continually in this thread discussing the evils of America’s foreign policy?
Surely everyone with a working brain understands the difference between a brutal dictator who rules a country rumoured to be interested in buying United and Businessmen who just happen to come from another country who haven’t even been remotely linked to buying United or any other football club. Surely?
This thread needs closing, there hasn’t been news on this for months.
Surely everyone with a working brain understands the difference between a brutal dictator who rules a country rumoured to be interested in buying United and Businessmen who just happen to come from another country who haven’t even been remotely linked to buying United or any other football club. Surely?
This thread needs closing, there hasn’t been news on this for months.
Last edited:
+1
well, many seem not to or just don't want to understand that. Just look at any of the pages in this thread.
I get the sentiment Ole but when you discuss a countries misgivings it’s only right to then compare those to the countries that the people judging come from.
People loath the Saudi’s because of atrocities, news flash, the UK and US commit far worse when it’s convenient for them, both of them are some of the biggest arms dealers in the world for a start.
Surely you can see the comparison to be drawn when weighing up the argument against the Saudi’s and therefore people’s stance on it.
The people from any particular country cannot be held responsible for the actions of their governments, governments most of them won't have even voted for. Nor does simply being born in a certain country who have been involved in wars and other immoral acts invalidate someones opinion to rightly criticise a brutal regime like the Saudi Royals and express their aversion to the idea of those people owning the football club they support. Its a flimsy argument thats been regurgitated in these threads over and over again and again for over a year now.
What is the relevance? Are the regular people of Sauid Arabia also complicit with the brutal actions of their government? No of course they aren't.
If we wake up tomorrow and theres a rumour that the US or UK government are interested in buying United then yeah sure it would be entirely relevant to discuss and compare the horrible atrocities both of those governments (past and present) have committed to the Saudis record in regards to their suitability as owners of Manchester United. But until such time discussing anything of the sort in this thread is about as relevant as having an in depth discussion about japanese tentacle porn in a thread about morris dancing.
Why is this on a football forum? Take all this sh!te to other forums. Wackos from both sides make this topic impossible.
Please mods.
Well you see, Manchester United are a football team and the Saudi royal family, who are draped in controversy, are rumored to be interested in purchasing them. Have we earned your permission to talk about it now mr nobody?
This one takes the cake, calling someone mr nobody on an internet football forum.
Go do you pal, keep fighting the fight.
I was discussing the topic at hand with someone else without saying a single word to you. You decided to quote my post, interject yourself in a condescending manner and call everyone wackos. Nobody asked you how you think this topic should be discussed.
The UK/US governments also helped found the Saudi kingdom as we know it today.
I did not call everyone wackos.
Should rename this thread Saudi politics.
Oh is it? Damn, my fault. I forgot we the British haven’t been in a war for centuries...
Tagging along with the US to Iraq was just an excursion to buy some duty free fuel I suppose.
It's really not though... It's more like test driving a car with poor emissions and refusing to buy the car for that very reason because your a good guy and have a strong moral compass. Then immediately jumping back into you're petrol, turbo charged, 4x4 and burning fuel all the way home.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
How can you say that you are able to form an opinion on something if the very thing you are judging isn't compared to it's peers/counterparts/rivals etc?
What purpose would the Libra Scale be if it were not used to compare with weight on both sides.
You are looking at this from the wrong angle, people who make the argument that I'm making are simply pointing out that it's rich for anybody to form that opinion and judge the Saudi's when they simultaneously turn a blind eye to the many many atrocities their own governments make, or happily purchase Apple products, designer clothes, petrol ffs.
Another thing, yes we don't get to select our governments but neither do we get to select the owners of this club either.
Like I say, it's obtuse to say you can form a strong opinion on anything without comparing that thing/person/country to it's peers. Unless of course it doesn't conveniently fit the narrative.
A Syrian guy in my office at work says exactly the same thing about the Saudi regime.
Bezos, Gates?
Apologies I didn’t realise that you were so far behind on the news and current affairs. Whatever it was (stuck on a desert island, stuck in a comma, stuck in a Saudi prison for demonstrating for more human rights). I hope everything is good with you now.
Just to get you up to speed, it is on a football forum because the Saudi regime have shown an interest in purchasing Man Utd which is a football club.
Thats ridiculous. How can you compare countries at all? Its a cruel royal family, not Saudi Arabia, versus a family of billionaires, not USA. You might as well say Chelsea are owned by Russia then.
God bless America, look at Iran back in the day was becoming quite more westernised until us and the yanks put our foot in it.
Oh my days. It’s really not that hard to grasp.
I’m not the one judging any country. I’m not talking about potential owners I’m talking about people’s perception of Saudi Arabia.
All I’m pointing out is that before you form a strong opinion on a country you first need to compare it with others (the same as you would for anything in life.)
Without a comparison you can’t fairly form an opinion when judging something. Surely you can see that as fact?
The whole basis of any judgement is based on comparison to the accepted/acceptable.
In the context of this thread this is whataboutery at its finest. You can't have an opinion on these potential owners unless you also compare Saudi Arabia to every other country in the world?
No other government are rumoured to be taking over so it doesn't come into it.
If any other potential owner had ordered the execution of a journalist like that it would have been enough for me, before we get into the rest of it.
If you wish to discuss the good and bad things various countries do and rank them against each by all means go start a thread on that but it's not relevant to this one.
Ok so let me get this straight. The very thing causing a problem in this potential move is people’s perception of Saudi Arabia but we cannot discuss how people came to that opinion?
Might as well close the thread then.
I’ve said it so many times, I’m not arguing that it’s fine for them to be owners because other countries have done worse.
What I’m questioning is how people have come to this opinion of them without first balancing that against what other countries have done.
I.e. is it fair to hate Saudi Arabia when you compare what their royal family have done compared to say our own governments. Fact is that they pale in comparison.
I don’t think it is a fair and honest opinion if you ignore the far worse things that go on within our own countries.
It then becomes a false opinion based on nothing but some sort of internet based morality.
You can’t switch morals on and off when it suits and that’s what people are doing here, I don’t get what is so hard for you to understand about that.
Why does it matter what other countries have done. If American govt was trying to buy United there'd be a discussion of whether or not that was a good thing.
When anyone is supposedly buying United then United fans will discuss whether or not they want their club associated with them, specifically.
As I said, this whole bit that you cant have an opinion on the Saudis without first ranking them against all the other countries is whataboutery and irrelevant to the specifics of the situation.
If a private person was buying the club and was suspected of some of the types of things these lads have done would you be sitting there telling me about Jeffrey Dahlmer and Wayne Gacey and how comparitively they're not that bad?
EDIT: in relation to your first point as I said earlier what was done to that journalist was enough for me to decide they're not fit to be the owners of Man Utd.
Again, I’m simply asking the question, why do we despair at the idea of the Saudi’s owning us and how did we form that opinion if we haven’t compared them to others?
If your not willing to compare them and they pass the fit and proper ownership requirements then everything else they have done is irrelevant then.
There is context to factor in to every argument, it’s when people start removing context and any contrasting opinion that it becomes a nonsense.
I’m not excusing them, what they have done is terrible, but how do we define terrible in our day to day lives.
Compare it to a lot of things closer to home and I’d argue your strong opinion of SA would wane, and if it did, then their ownership becomes more morally viable.
That’s the crux of my point.
Because it's true. Most educated Arabs/Middle-Easterners think the same way. It's a wretched regime and unfortunately the majority of it's population is just fine with it. Which is quite understandable considering how financially well off a large portion of them are. They will be in deep shit when the oil runs out. Considering the lack of workforce and work ethics they got. Everything is imported from simple foodplates to even their army because they dont even trust their own.
Again you are completely missing the point to the extent that I'm suspecting it's willful.
I'm not interested in debating whether or not they are worse or better than other countries. I don't really agree with clubs being bank-rolled by the wealth of a sovereign state in general.
This is about if this specific country should be in charge of Manchester United. I am not going to change my mind and think it's not a terrible idea just because xyz governments are also up to no good.
As I said you are engaging in whataboutery and claiming that no one can have an opinion on this particular issue unless they also consider all these other irrelevant factors.
I also consider murdering and disappearing journalists to be objectively wrong. I don't really need to compare it to anything. Do you disagree?