posted on January 29, 2002 08:36:52 AM new
The results of a survey were released yesterday stating that 74% of Saudis in their 20's-30's support bin Laden.
posted on January 29, 2002 09:28:17 AM new
It should come as no surprise since the radical fundementalist clerics are in charge of education in Saudi Arabia and have their own sanctioned police force.
The Washtabi (sp?) branch of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia in the most radical. They have exported it by building and staffing religious schools in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Phillipines, Indonesia, etc., all done with the petro-dollars that pour in to Saudi Arabia from the West. The first thing the children learn is death to America and death to Israel.
posted on January 29, 2002 10:34:54 AM new
I read this am that the majority of detainees in Cuba and the majority of the 9/11 terrorists are Saudi. Now they want 100 saudi detainees returned, so they can question them.
posted on January 29, 2002 11:04:34 AM new
Bush will probably allow them to return to Saudi Arabia. They will have their heads cut off there. Why ? Not for their crimes, but for embarassing the country. Their decapitation will also silence those who think we are treating the prisoners inhumanely.
posted on January 30, 2002 02:44:15 PM new
It is now being reported that the Saudi royal family has direct ties to the Al Qaeda. My opening statement was incorrect, it is 95%!!!!!
[ edited by stusi on Jan 30, 2002 03:19 PM ]
posted on January 30, 2002 04:42:27 PM new"It is now being reported that the Saudi royal family has direct ties to the Al Qaeda."
As soon after the 911 attacks that the government went about cutting off funds for Al-Queda, the very first place that they went to stop the most massive flow of funds was Saudi Arabia. Even the densest ones of us caught on early that it was our Good Ole' Friend & Ally, Saudi Arabia that was in fact supporting us openly on the one hand and on the other, quietly seeking our downfall by founding and funneling money, arms, troops, and support to its political head - Al-Queda. That we have NOT bombed Saudi Arabia for their part in all of this shows just how stupid it was to have betrayed Sadam Heusein, who was America's stanch ally, who would have taken over Saudi Arabia and been more of a friend to us than these current snakes in the grass. Not that I like Sadam one bit. Nope, not at all. But it would have been OK with the rest of the Arab World if HE had gone and kicked their ass instead of us getting ours kicked all the time.
Borillar
"Friends don't let friends vote republican"
posted on January 30, 2002 09:39:32 PM new
I was happy that Bush mentioned Hamas and Hezbolleh by name in his state of the union speech. Acknowlegement of the real source of terrorism is long overdue.
posted on January 30, 2002 09:40:12 PM new
Hussein was our best ally when he was gassing and killing Iranians. He was also the only secular leader in the Gulf.
This is decades of oil politics being played out.
First we all have to face the reality that our economy is based on oil, and second, foreign countries control the majority of that oil.
If we "hit" Saudi Arabia, 20% of world oil production is disrupted - perhaps more as Saudi Arabia's neighbors react. Saudi Arabia could wreck the Western economies overnight just by shuting the oil taps. It would take years to wring 20% of our oil consumption out of the economy or try to replace it with new sources, in the meantime oil prices could hit $60 or more a barrel- which would be $5-$6 a gallon at the pump, and grind the West's economies to a near halt. However, we left Hussein in power as a hammer to hold over the heads of the Saudi's should they decide to ever play the oil card. But Hussein now has a different agenda.
The oil pipeline rumored to be placed through Afghanistan to transport oil from the former USSR may indeed be a factor. It may also be why Saudi Arabia wants Afghanistan in chaos by exporting its militant Islam there- not to mention all the Saudi nationals involved. Saudi Arabia loses its oil power if the West developes these other supplies.
Oil is the 800 pound gorilla setting in the room that is ignored and never mentioned whenever Mid-East issues are discussed. The West is vulnerable and doesn't want to mention it, and OPEC doesn't want to mention it until they are ready to use it- no use to further inflame the West until necessary.
We have no viable military force without oil, our planes won't fly without it.
I could more readily accept a U.S. protectorate system in these oil producing regions than be dependent on the political games we play. The political games always come back to bite us.
posted on January 31, 2002 01:47:29 AM new
What light ? The oncomming train in tunnel ?
Whether it is for oil or national security we still have battles and wars to fight, and oil can not be separated from national security.
I have always maintained that oil plays a large role in Mid East politics. But, even if oil has nothing to do with the terrorist attacks, we still have the same battles and wars to fight.
The cultures involved are heading at each other on a collision course. When the USSR was intact, the world's malcontents had a ready ally and competitive unilateral superpower support. Do to this competition fro superpower "attention" the superpowers could also exercise controls over these factions and often did. The pressure relief effect of bilateral super powers was useful. But, there is only one superpower left and its interests are the target of every malcontent on the planet.
That being said, it works wholly against all the conspiracy theories about the CIA somehow being involved with Osama post USSR invaision and the terrorist attacks.
If the goal of the U.S. were to stabilize Afghanistan in order to facilitate an oil pipeline, we would have taken steps to that end years ago. But this does not refute the possibility that al Qaeda appears to operate exclusively in regions where oil is an issue.
posted on January 31, 2002 08:27:54 AM new
'Don't know if you heard Clinton's speech at Berkeley this week. He hit the nail on the head. The entire terrorist movement is based on the "haves" and "have nots." Islamic Jihad is just a tool to keep the nations of Islam in bondage. With all their oil money, Islamic leaders could afford to bring their people out of the 13th century. Now with WOMD the West is forced to take action. Even without our dependency on foreign oil, we'd still be faced with proliferation of nuclear weapons.
posted on January 31, 2002 09:49:30 AM new
That was a good analysis, REAMOND. I think that the answer, once again, lies in an immediate change-over in new automobile sales from petrolium-based to anything else. If we did just that, then 80% of our oil consumption would vanish overnight (surprize! 80% is how much we import!). Please note the other threads here where we discuss WHY different technologies have not come about on the marketplace, it's links to Big Oil and Saudi Arabia.
