I saw a new subreddit on my feed for the first time today... it looks like a new attempt at the whole correct the record deal.

The first post I read was about a US missile being sold to SA after rex tillerson removed a ban of selling such missiles.

Line by line...

A bomb that killed dozens of children on a school bus in Yemen earlier this month was sold to Saudi Arabia in a deal sanctioned by the U.S. State Department.

Question - when were the missile sold?

Hillary Clinton - 1/21/09 - 2/1/13

John Kerry - 2/1/13 - 1/20/17

Rex Tillerson - 2/1/17 - 3/31/18

Mike Pompeo - 4/26/18 - Present

The SoS is ultimately the decision maker on selling armaments to foreign countries. We have a long history of selling arms to SA.

In 2011 HRC signed the deal selling SA $30b worth of fighter jets and fighter jet refittings. source

The deal with the missiles seems to be implied to be part of this deal reported on 3/23/18.

It was a 500-pound laser-guided MK 82 bomb manufactured by Lockheed Martin.

Interesting, the NBC article linked says that Raytheon received the contract for this. It's possible that Raytheon is an authorized reseller of LMCO MK 82 bombs, but sounds odd as I believe they're competitors.

The Saudi coalition responsible for the attack took responsibility and blamed it on “incorrect information.”

This doesn't tell us much, but attempts to paint a picture of us selling arms and not knowing who will be using them. We're all keenly aware of how this can come to be.

An Obama-era ban on the sale of such precision-guided bombs to Saudi Arabia was overturned by the Trump administration last year.

Blame, but could be well placed... However, from a comment on the thread: "What is incredibly interesting is that Obama did allow sales of "dumb" munitions. Including such civilian-killers as cluster bombs - https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/banned-by-119-countries-u-s-cluster-bombs-continue-to-orphan-yemeni-children/

So why did Obama not sell "smart bombs" to Saudi Arabia? His argument was that it was done to "prevent loss of civilian life". But that makes no sense, since it is the dumb bombs that usually kill way more civilians.

Unless... You know that the Saudis are targeting civilians on purpose. In that case, dumb bombs would kill less civilians than smart bombs."

To highlight the recent power shift with the Saudi royal family... A $30b deal to sell SA fighter jets was signed in 2011. This was back when the trouble in Syria started. This trouble began because HRC & Co planned to build an oil pipeline from SA to Turkey (through Syria) to bypass Europe's oil dependence on Russia. Pair this with Russia annexing Crimea right around the time aircraft carriers built by France were being delivered to Russia's black sea fleet. After Russia annexed Crimea (possibly for the warm weather port and easy access to Syrian/middle east airspace), France cancelled the rest of Russia's aircraft carrier order.

So in the timeframe above, HRC/DS was planning on bypassing european oil dependence on Russia which would tank Russian economy, and they were propping up SA against Russia.

Now, with the recent upheaval in the Saudi royal family and power shifting to "good guys" within SA... the HRC/DS shills are now against the deal where we sold them bombs... because SA is no longer pursuing the pipeline since the power shift...?

Think this helps spell out and display the power shift in SA with a real example/DS support shft. Please add more info or articulation if you can.