Islamic Theocracy given nukes!

[spronk]

Originally Posted by Jabberwhacky

Why would Saudi Arabia be "deeply threatened" by Iran? Honest question. Just this past December two important events happened: first, the GCC invited Ahmadinejad to their summit (the first Iranian leader to go) and second, the Saudi king invited Ahmadinejad on the haj. That doesn't strike me as a deeply threatening relationship.

For the past 50 years Iran, Iraq, and Saudia Arabia have vied for "leadership" of the middle east. Much of it has been a cold war, but it has many times come to outright wars (iraq vs iran, iraq vs kuwait). Iraq is more or less now an Iran ally, so its come down to Iran vs Saudia Arabia.

never, ever, ever fool yourself into thinking the two think of each other as anything other than their opponent in Islamic supremacy. Iran would love for the Saudi's to be destabilized by internal strife and for extremists to take over. Saudi Arabia would love for the west to overthrow the Iranian regime. They may work with each other in OPEC, religious issues, economics, whatever but the second they see an opportunity to hurt the other without hurting themselves they WILL take it.

This nuclear power transfer just is a way for Saudi to get a bigger dick (aka "look we got nukes too" to the arab street), for Bush & Co to position themselves for cushy jobs post presidency, and to stick a needle in Iran's eye.

Of course sending nuke tech to the country where 11 of the 19 9/11 hijackers came from is a pretty good idea in itself. We should help Pakistan some more too with advanced weapons, better to open up 3 fronts from which we can screw ourselves than just 2 (Saudis, Iraq).

[Eomer]

Regardless of the current Saudi regime's complicity or lack thereof in the planning of 9/11, they're just that, a "regime" that could well fall apart at some point in the future with all this lovely technology and weaponry in their hands that the US has given them hand over fist. Of course I'm sure the US would wage open warfare on any regime that tried to take over from the House of Saud.

This whole fucking thing stinks of the 70's and 80's proxy wars with Iran and Iraq, except now we're tossing nuclear weapons and Saudi Arabia in to the mix.

[Millie]

Originally Posted by Kobalt

I have not seen any proof that they were aware that bin laden planned on attacking america.

It's in the 9/11 Commission Report, which is publicly available information. Also:

9/11 hijackers tied to Saudi government, Graham says in book - The Boston Globe

From a book by the former Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. I know, he's a Democrat, so that makes him a complete liar. He's just making this all up, no doubt to defame the sparkling reputation of the Bush Administration.

Of course we are only friends because of economic reasons, you probably described most countries in the world.

Yes and no. Our relationship with Saudi Arabia is a lot more dysfunctional than our various other relationships around the world.

[Brutul Tarew Marr]

Correct me if I am wrong but haven't we also offered to help Iran build nuclear power plants? The issue is with Iran developing uranium enrichment facilities which they claim are for developing nuclear power plants but which are really for building weapons. If the US was allowed to build the power plants and had control of nuclear material coming in and out, then there's no risk. Of course Iran refused the offer because they really don't give a shit about having a nuclear power plant.

[Foozles]

Originally Posted by Millie

That's highly debatable. At the very least, we know they were aware that financing and recruiting for Bin Laden's various operations was passing through their country, and they did nothing to stop it. That doesn't necessarily make them responsible for 9/11, but it certainly makes them complicit to some degree.

If Saudi Arabia didn't have a giant supply of oil it was willing to sell us, do you think we'd be as friendly with them as we are now? The entire relationship is dysfunctional. Saudi Arabia hates our guts but knows we're addicted to their smack, so they sell us the smack and know we're not going to say a damned thing about it. And we fulfill our end of the bargain because we're too scared to break off the relationship. They know it, we know it, and pretty much everyone else in the world knows it.

Could provide a link to a credible article stating that the Saudis were aware financing to Osama bin Laden was passing through their country and they knew whatever money passing through was being used to finance his operations?

Im genuinely curious, because Ive never heard that before. And Im assuming by operations you mean terrorist operations.

I know that the bin Laden family and the royal family are extremely close having ties with each other that go back a couple of decades, but Osama bin Laden is more of an outcast. His brothers and sisters are much more moderate and some were even quite liberal.

[Khorum]

Originally Posted by Millie

That's highly debatable. At the very least, we know they were aware that financing and recruiting for Bin Laden's various operations was passing through their country, and they did nothing to stop it. That doesn't necessarily make them responsible for 9/11, but it certainly makes them complicit to some degree.

If Saudi Arabia didn't have a giant supply of oil it was willing to sell us, do you think we'd be as friendly with them as we are now? The entire relationship is dysfunctional. Saudi Arabia hates our guts but knows we're addicted to their smack, so they sell us the smack and know we're not going to say a damned thing about it. And we fulfill our end of the bargain because we're too scared to break off the relationship. They know it, we know it, and pretty much everyone else in the world knows it.

No that isn't highly debatable in the least.

The core objection Al Qaeda has against the United States was the presence of American Troops on "sacred" Saudi soil following Saddam's attempted invasion in 1991. THAT was reasoning behind the bombing of the USS Cole; THAT was the reasoning behind Al Qaeda's attack on on the Khobar Towers; THAT was the reasoning behind the attacks on 9/11.

Except the presence of American troops on Saudi Sovereign territory was, is and always will be under the invitation of the Saudi Government. It's under the WELCOME invitation of the Kuwaiti Royal Family that we have permanent bases in Kuwait, and it's under similar agreements that we have a permanent base in Qatar. We were invited there as far back as during the Iran-Iraq war and we've never expanded our presence except when regional allies asked for our assistance. The only reason American troops were in the Khobar Towers at all (including the hot army chicks sashaying in their daisy dukes) was because the Saudi Royal family ASKED them to be there.

And now we're expected to believe that the Saudi Royal family (who had members visitting the Bushes during 9/11) was in cahoots with Al Qaeda? Even when one of the foremost Saudi scholars on Islamic Jurisprudence have condemned Bin Laden and Al Qaeda from Mecca's minarets. Note that Sheikh Salman al Oudoh isn't just one of the foremost Saudi scholars of Islamic law, but he was also Osama Bin Laden's mentor. But that's nothing next to when the highest religious authority in Saudi Arabia (and thus Sunni Islam) the Grand Mufti Abdul Aziz al Sheikh, has issued a fatwa against unauthorized foreign Jihads including but not limited to Al Qaeda after lecturing the Saudi elites for "supporting causes that have cause catastrophic harm" to muslim youths.

[x1hundredregrets]

Oh god, Khorum vs. Millie showdown.

TBH save us.

[Kolle]

i think we should let several dozen countries have military bases on us soil

[Khorum]

Originally Posted by Kolle

i think we should let several dozen countries have military bases on us soil

Would it surprise you that we already HAVE foreign troops on US soil? Would it surprise you that NORAD---the legendary command center for nuclear security---is actually commanded by a Canadian?

[Kolle]

military bases. very large military bases with hundreds, if not thousands of troops from a multitude of countries. they need to aslo have a variety of weaponry at their disposal. this includes tanks, planes, and bazookas.

[Etoille]

Originally Posted by Millie

That's highly debatable. At the very least, we know they were aware that financing and recruiting for Bin Laden's various operations was passing through their country, and they did nothing to stop it. That doesn't necessarily make them responsible for 9/11, but it certainly makes them complicit to some degree.

If Saudi Arabia didn't have a giant supply of oil it was willing to sell us, do you think we'd be as friendly with them as we are now? The entire relationship is dysfunctional. Saudi Arabia hates our guts but knows we're addicted to their smack, so they sell us the smack and know we're not going to say a damned thing about it. And we fulfill our end of the bargain because we're too scared to break off the relationship. They know it, we know it, and pretty much everyone else in the world knows it.

To be fair, everythings debatable.

One could argue for example, that one of the largest reasons Al Qaeda is pissed off at the US is the unconditional support we had for Israel when Israel engaged in aggression (yes aggression, not a response to aggression) against Palestinians and its neighbors.

If the US treated Israel like any other country on the planet, especially a country in that region, do you think Al Qaeda would have been as pissed off with us?

[Etoille]

in before khorum calls me an anti semite again.

[Khorum]

Originally Posted by Kolle

military bases. very large military bases with hundreds, if not thousands of troops from a multitude of countries. they need to aslo have a variety of weaponry at their disposal. this includes tanks, planes, and bazookas.

Why the hell do we need them? With the exception of occupied adversaries and treaty obligations all of our foreign bases are there under the invitation and requests of foreign hosts.

And when they asked us to leave, we left. Like we left in Subic Bay and Clark Field, then the largest US Bases on foreign soil. You think we'd bat an eye if the Japanese asked us to leave?!? We've had hegemonic voices on both sides of the Pacific CLAMORING for Japanese re-mobilization because the post-war Japanese were able to re-ignite their economy largely with the defense cost savings that neighboring Asian countries never enjoyed.

Wait... wait... are you clinging to the delusion that American military presence and security has EVER proven to be a corrosive and harmful thing for the OVERALL health and economy of our allies? Do you REALLY genuinely believe that American Exceptionalism hasn't yielded the greatest level of human prosperity in the history of world?

Why don't you look at what happened to Philippine economic and political stability after the Subic and Clark bases were closed. Why don't you look at what happened to Indochina after Nixon decided that it was OK to outsmart the soviets by LOSING Vietnam in exchange for WINNING China. Why don't you compare the relative prosperity of the PRC and Taiwan before post-detente free market reforms transformed China from yet another doomed socialist experiment.

In contrast, let's look at the consequences of American defense assistance in the long term versus the comparative influence of global socialism. Here's an ACTUAL satellite image of the Korean Peninsula from a couple years ago:

Hmmm... Care to guess which side "suffered" from American "oppression"? You don't even need that line to know where Prosperity and Opportunity ends and Mediocrity and Servitude begins at the 38th parallel. Maybe YOU can explain how America's vicious imperial boot has soooo drained the Japanese and German people of their liberties and aspirations that they're now the second and third most vibrant economies in the world despite the presence of PERMANENT American garrisons in both countries huh?

[Millie]

Originally Posted by x1hundredregrets

Oh god, Khorum vs. Millie showdown.

Nah. There will never be a "Khorum vs. Millie showdown" because it's pointless arguing with Khorum's chosen personality. He just spews crap to try to get a rise out of people. Arguing with him is basically taking bait from a wannabe Stephen Colbert.

[Lumie]

Israel didn't have a hand in 9/11, for starters.

Lol, actually Israel is directly responsible for 9/11 and the entire thing was a false flag operation in order to support the Zionist agenda.

There is so much evidence to support this that it's mind boggling only you'll never hear about it unless you go out of your way because the majority of the media is controlled by Israel and therefor can get you to believe whatever they want you to believe.

The Truth Seeker - Rumors of Israeli Involvement in 9/11

"Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about the evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information."
-- US official quoted in Carl Cameron's Fox News report on the Israeli spy ring and its connections to 9/11.