Saudi Arabia Steps Up Efforts to Oust Syria's Assad
Source: Radio Free Europe
<snip>
"Since about June-July this year, they have taken the lead in funding the Syrian opposition and also deciding to an extent who is leading the Syrian opposition, to putting more and more money for arms, and probably also arms, into the arsenal or coffers of the Syrian opposition, and also to become more diplomatically active, both in the West and in Russia," says Volker Perthes of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs in Berlin.
What is driving Saudi Arabia, Perthes says, is fear. "It fears, probably in descending order, that Iran may win, or Iran may establish hegemony in the Middle East and in the Levant, build a land bridge from Iran proper thorough Iraq and Syria to Lebanon," he says. "It fears that Hizballah would win in Lebanon against Sunni politicians whom Saudi Arabia has been supporting for ages, and it fears that Assad could prevail or, if the opposition wins, that it is the wrong part of the opposition that wins."
But Riyadh has other concerns, too. Among them is the danger the Syrian conflict will destabilize Jordan, where King Abdullah II faces a determined domestic opposition movement at the same time the country struggles to cope with hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees.
"If the Kingdom of Jordan seemed to be in trouble, the Saudis would rush in to try to protect it as the Saudis rushed into Bahrain," says Theodore Karasik of the Dubai-based Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis. "From their point of view the collapse of a monarchy would be a huge disaster, with intense geopolitical ramifications for other monarchies."
Read more: http://www.rferl.org/content/saudi-efforts-syria-assad/25071262.html
Ah, the Saudis, keeping the Middle East safe for Sunni monarchies.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)He really knew what he was doing. I mean he must have as it is now the policy de jour.
MarkLaw
(204 posts)D.C. and the Pentagon profit from weapon sales and war. Nothing has changed.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)It's curious that the terms Jihadi, Salaafist, and extremist are often applied to the Sunni militants the Saudis support, yet it is never seen in the corporate media to describe the character of the Royal Family, itself?
Why is that? Are they simply too rich to be described as dangerous, or are they actually so rich and dangerous that we dare not provoke them?
Devil Child
(2,728 posts)JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)that the Saudi monarchy is less repressive than the Assad regime was prior to the civil war?
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Or the Shiites in Saudi Arabia itself.
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)in influencing foreign conflicts and governments...
they were a major player in the first Afghanistan war with the soviets too :p
them and Iran both funded their favorite groups during the conflict.. sending money and arms all the time.
Syria is turning into Afghanistan part 3 :p
John2
(2,730 posts)that whole family is corrupt, and not necessarily the population. Their religion is money and power, just like the mercenaries they funnel money and weapons to. I think they re using religion as a tool to hold on to their power. The West props them up.
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)I mean , for the most part (besides most of the hijackers on 9/11 being Saudi) they seem to keep their fanatics in check...
so, as long as they promise to do that and let us have access to their oil fields.. they'll always get away with anything and have our support in doing some of those things.. especially concerning their own nation.
its amazes me that there has been no attempt at a revolt there in recent history honestly :p
the governments of all the middle east countries are corrupt in their own ways..
seems to be a trend all over the world these days 
John2
(2,730 posts)the way they govern, they use preventive measures to restrict dissent. They do not even allow freedom of assemble, even for religion, except the state religion. They restrict the practice of any other religion period. I suggest you check out their jails and how many people they expell from the kingdom. For example, they expelled an entire population of 800,000 Yemenis. That is how they prevent revolts, and they are the West's top Arab Ally. The Saudi monarch was the brain child of the British Empire to protect their oil reserves. Saudi Arabia has the most oil reserves in the World, which makes it a vital interest for the West. Saudi Arabia just made a huge weapons deal with Israel. What other Arab country do you know have the guts to do that? Those monarchs are the ones the people need to get rid of if they really want Democracy. They are the biggest tyrants in the Middle East.
John2
(2,730 posts)absolute Monarch. You can't practice any religion in this country, unless the monarch allows it. You can't even assemble, without their approval. The Shites live on the land with most oil, that is why the monarch oppresses them. The reason they are able to keep control, is because they buy a lot of Western weapons, to control the population. Saudi Arabia banned slavery in 1962. They are the West's top Arab Ally from the British Empire, that installed them, the same as the Jordan monarch, which has problems with the population of their country.
Saudi Arabia bans Palestinians from becoming citizens and the monarch expelled Yemenis and Iraqis, when they asked the U.S. to invade Iraq because of Kuwait. They gave Saddam 25 Billion dollars to invade Iran. Osama Bin Laden rebelled against the monarchs because they allowed U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia. That is why they have problems with Al Qaeda. They don't allow any dissent period.
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)the first Iraqi war...
you know, ive always heard that Iraq contacted the united states government before it invaded and stated its position and asked our opinion of their plans for invasion.. we responded with a indifference... then leaped at him as soon as he did (with the call for help from Saudi and Kuwait)..
Kuwait was infact stealing Iraqi oil by practicing slant drilling under the boarder.. so Iraq had legitimate complaints that nobody was taking heed too.. I don't think that justifies killing folks , but still.
John2
(2,730 posts)about Sadam was true. Sadam was just their Bully. I saw a video, where he just shot a poor fella himself, without one thought. The only problem was, Sadam turned on them when they wouldn't excuse his debts. He felt betrayed by the Saudis and Kuwait. Sadam was just pretending to be religious. I think there is a difference between Sadam and Assad's personality. I can see that when both men gave interviews. Sadam just played to the masses, kinda like Hitler, while Assad uses more reason and logic, to make his point. I think he is more intelligent than Saddam, which makes it tougher for his opponents to discredit him. He has been able to use the media in a smart way. He has sent envoys to Russia, Iran, Lebanon, and Iraq. He even went to Russia and Iran in person.
He has even given personal interviews to certain media outlets in countries like Germany and Turkey, where he doesn't come off as a monster, portrayed by the opposition or the West. He doesn't evade any question put to him by the media, even the accusations. He has an answer for everything. He just gives his side and comes off very believable. Assad even sounds more intelligent or believable than the people accusing him. I think if you put Assad on one side of an argument with any Saudi official in the same room, including the royal family, Assad would probably win the debate, on an intellectual level. He sounds like a very educated person and professorial, kinda like Presdent Obama sometimes. I would love to see those two men in a debate, within the same room. Whereas Saddam acted the role of a Bully and madman. You don't see Assad having the same tirade.
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)Qatar and Saudi Arabia have challenged each other for greater influence across the Middle East and North Africa since the Arab Awakening began by placing bets on different horses. Qatar has invested substantial monetary resources in support of the Muslim Brotherhood across MENA to become the organization's primary benefactor. Saudi Arabia deems the Brotherhood a threat to the House of Saud's religious authority within and beyond the Kingdom, and has generally supported rival political forces, including Salafists and secularists. This past month's developments in Egypt and Syria suggest that the tide may be turning in Riyadh's favor.
The rivalry is rooted in history. During the 1950s and 1960s, Saudi Arabia offered the Muslim Brotherhood a home in the Kingdom after Egypt (and other Arab nationalist regimes) purged the movement. Riyadh used the Brotherhood as a proxy in larger conflicts against nationalist and left-wing forces in the Islamic world. When Saudi Arabia and Nasser's Egypt waged proxy wars in the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood was given Saudi support, as the movement was used to undermine the socialism and leftist nationalism Nasser sought to spread across the Arab world. A Muslim Brotherhood leader, Mamoum Al Hodeiby, even became one of Prince Nayef's advisers.
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3585424
Xolodno
(6,390 posts)...the US Government actually sided with Shiites first...when Israel intervened in the Lebanon Civil War, they were welcomed. But due to numerous mis-steps and drastic over-reaching by prodding of our government...the Shiites turned against. And hence, our government started courting the Sunni's. The Shiites are actually much more liberal than the Sunni's, but due to the cluster fucks of our government...they are forced to deal with the Sunni's. Talk about irony.....
ConcernedCanuk
(13,509 posts).
.
.
Everyone stopped fucking around with other people's countries???
OH
I get it.
Where the hell would the MIC sell all their weapons . . . ?
(sigh)
CC