Saudis Back Calls for Syrian Pullout from Lebanon

[Up2Late]

Thu Mar 3, 2005 04:01 PM ET

By Dominic Evans

RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia added a key Arab voice on Thursday to mounting demands that Syria withdraw its troops swiftly from Lebanon, where they have helped secure it powerful influence for decades.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad flew to Riyadh for crisis talks where Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah told him immediate action was needed.

Abdullah, a regional ally of the United States, told Assad that "Syria must start withdrawing soon, otherwise Saudi-Syrian relations will go through difficulties," one Saudi official said.

Syria's official SANA news agency said of the Assad-Abdullah meeting: "The talks have tackled the upcoming Arab summit meeting and the situation in Lebanon and views were identical on this matter."

Arab foreign ministers meeting in Cairo refrained from joining in an increasingly public campaign calling for Syrian withdrawal and said they were opting for quiet diplomacy by individual Arab states.
(more at link)
<http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7801805&src=rss/topNews>

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. I'm still wondering what benefit

Syria saw in blowing up the former prime minister of lebanon?

I realize that, having been told repeatedly that 'the Syrians did it', it must be true. But why would they want to do this? What exactly did they gain from the assasination?

[SouthernDem2004]

3. The currently leader of Syria is not always rational.

[Blue to the bone]

4. Nor is he in total control.....

....from what I understand, after the death of his father, Syria actually has any number of agencies acting independently of one another.

One of them could have had a hand in the assassination without the others, or Assad knowing anything about it.

[Warren Stupidity]

5. on the other hand

I clearly see how Israel and the US and perhaps al qaeda benefit. But I suppose you all must be right.

[Igel]

10. The facile answer is that they got him out of the way.

One report was that he would be in the opposition; presumably there have been discontents brewing for quite a while in the making of the "Cedar Revolution" (neither cedar, nor a revolution, and like all such dubbings, annoying).

On the other hand, it may have been the local intelligence chief that planned it. Intelligence chiefs always seem to be more powerful than the local ruler.

I have no clue who did it.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. me either

but when the compliant media is so f*ing sure without any damn evidence at all nor any motivation that makes sense I smell a rat. Golly there we are beating the war drums and syria, one of our two prime targets, provides a provocation. How very convenient. Either we accept that assad is just stupid, or this very professional bombing was a 'rogue act', or we have to look at the obvious: we did it, we benefited, we had the means and the motivation.

[jmcgowanjm]

6. Every move DoD/Mossad makes into Lebanon/Syria

the Turks will countermove into N Iraq.

Turkish troops operating in N. Iraq without answering to the USofA????

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-03/04/content_2646500.htm

[jmcgowanjm]

7. The assassination of Rafiq Hariri: who benefited?

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/feb2005/hari-f17.shtml

[jmcgowanjm]

8. Bush in Brussels

US Steps Up Threats Of Wider Mideast War

It is a historical fact that Syria originally intervened in
Lebanon with the tacit consent of both the United States
and Israel, to bolster the right-wing Christian Falangist
ruling elite, whose power was threatened by an alliance
of oppressed Shiite Muslims and Palestinian refugees. In
that capacity, Syria presided over atrocities like the massacre
by its Falangist allies of Palestinians at the Tel al-Zaatar
refugee camp.

Not one of the 26 governments cares to state what they all
know to be true: the US intervention in Iraq is illegal, a war
crime under international law, and all those who collaborate
in that effort are themselves war criminals under the
Geneva Conventions and the precedents set in 1946
at Nuremberg. For the European imperialists, as for
their American counterparts, such charges are only for
defeated or second-tier war
criminals.

http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=7342§ionID=11

[lovuian]

9. Syrians dig in as Saudis join calls to leave Lebanon

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=616653

Syrians dig in as Saudis join calls to leave Lebanon
By Hugh Macleod in Damascus
04 March 2005


Syrian troops have been fortifying their positions east of Beirut as pressure mounts on Damascus to pull out of Lebanon without delay.

Syrian troops were digging in at Hammana, part of the mountain range 26km (16 miles) east of Beirut, and at three other positions along the ridge yesterday. "They're certainly not preparing to go home," said an eyewitness at Hammana.

The four positions represent the line to which Syrian troops withdrew in 1992 under the Taif accord, which legitimised the country's military presence in Lebanon.

more...

I find it interesting that the Saudis have taken sides!!! Interesting!!!

[Igel]

11. And if anybody has serious or reasonable speculation as

to what their game is (if, indeed, it is a game), I'd really like to hear it.

[jmcgowanjm]

13. ``The loan wasn't going to be used anyway and had almost been forgotten,''

Anyone think an $8.5 Billion loan
was almost forgotten?

Turkey Says U.S. May Withdraw `Unneeded' Loan Offer (Update2)

March 4 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. may withdraw an offer of a
loan allocated to Turkey for its help in the Iraq war because
the country doesn't need the money, Turkey's Treasury
said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a0crBNjP743Q&refer=us

8 Oct 2003
The US recently granted Turkey, which is undergoing
an economic crisis, a loan of US$8.5 billion, but has made
it clear that the loan is conditional on cooperation over Iraq. In
its motion seeking parliamentary approval, the
Turkish government made no mention of persistent
US demands for Turkish troops, and stressed its own
national interests lie in preventing the establishment of
an independent Kurdish state in northern Iraq that
could embolden its own Kurds - some 20 percent of
the population. US counter-terrorism experts met
Turkish officials last week and agreed on joint efforts to
tackle the some 5,000 Kurdish rebels believed to be holed up
in the mountains in northern
Iraq.

Sunday, 6 February, 2005
Turkey has warned that it could take action if Iraqi
Kurdish attempts to change the demography of Kirkuk lead
to ethnic
clashes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4240121.stm

15. 02. 2005
“If these efforts don’t bear fruit, the US will start concrete action.

Washington remained annoyed at Ankara’s refusal to permit
the deployment of American troops at Incirlik Airbase.
‘Turkey must back our radical Middle East policy,’ Rice
stressed succinctly, ‘Otherwise, there is no way for Ankara
to ensure US support on the issues of northern Iraq,
Kirkuk, Cyprus, EU and even the IMF,’ added Ulsever .
He concluded,”May God help our government in the years
to come!”

http://saag.org/%5Cpapers13%5Cpaper1254.html


Turkey deploys 1,357 troops in Northern Iraq
By: Xinhuanet on: 04.03.2005

"Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) have deployed 1,357 personnel
in northern Iraq to fight against the PKK, gather
information regarding the developments in the region and
work as liaison officers under US forces in Kirkuk, Mosul and
Tal Afar.

[Igel]

14. I don't see how this relates to the Sa'udi call for

withdrawal.

The Sa'udis are trying to provide justification for Turkish actions?

[jmcgowanjm]

16. Quick history: Neither Syria/Lebanon is of any real importance to the US

At one time Syria was a much larger country, which
once occupied what are now Jordan, Lebanon and Israel.
Syria was a hub in the Middle East where the
Romans, Persians, Egyptians, and Babylonian
empires.

Eventually it fell into the hands of the Ottoman Turkey. After
WWI when the Ottoman empire broke up. Syria became a
French colony.

http://www.worldrambler.com/article12.htm

The question that interests me? How are the Americans going
to do it? How are they going to start another war on
another sovereign country that poses no threat to the
United States based on this flimsiest and most hypocritical
of excuses? Syria has no links to al Qaeda, no weapons
of mass destruction that could possibly harm the United
States, no nukes or even a nuclear program. Neither Syria
nor Lebanon is of any real importance to the United
States.

http://xymphora.blogspot.com/

There are 3 Powers in the ME:

Iran
Israel
Turkey

As above, Syria is the hub in the wheel.
Whatever Israel gets away w/ in Lebanon
to force Syria's hand, you can be sure
Turkey will get a quid pro quo in Kurdistan.
The problem?- Israel wants the oil pipeline
from Kurdistan.

And you know of the Hizbulah/Iran connection.


http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=38029

[bemildred]

17. And a potential fourth: Iraq, prostrate though it is at the moment. nt

[jmcgowanjm]

19. Yes, Iraq is the lynchpin

"Show us what evidence you have, and we will act upon it."

http://harrybrowne.org/articles/SyrianHoax.htm

I know that Mr. Feith (another Jew, the Turkish press
didn't hesitate to note), and Ms. Rice after him, pressed
Turkish leaders on the need to challenge some of the
more dangerous rhetoric if they value the Turkey-
U.S. relationship. There is no evidence yet that they got
a satisfactory answer. Turkish leaders should understand
that the "public opinion" they cite is still reversible. But after a
few more years of riding the tiger, who knows? Much of
Ataturk's legacy risks being lost, and there won't be any of the
old Ottoman grandeur left, either. Turkey could easily
become just another second-rate country: small-
minded, paranoid, marginal and--how could it be otherwise?--friendless in America and unwelcome in
Europe.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006299

According to Barbara Tuchman, the British view of
Turkey was much the same prior to August 1914.

Israel is not the only state that recognizes the value of buffers
and proxy wars.

[bemildred]

20. Niccollo wrote about buffers and proxy wars long ago.

As with Walter Karp, if you watch what is done, and do not
listen to what is said, Machievelli provides perfect clarity
as to what is going on.

You really should not read the WSJ opinion page,
it will rot your brain in no time.

[jmcgowanjm]

21. Is that where this article is from-the WSJ?

I should've known. Thanx for pointing this
out, bemildred.

You're right. The last time I looked at the WSJ
was at the charts. I remember they changed the format
which degraded the chart info and I haven't looked
at one since.

This is what our corporate chieftains are getting
by way of info. That's sad.

I posted it to show the mindset of
these sockpuppets. When you believe your own
agitprop you're in trouble.

Again, thanx,
James

BTW, a case can be made for just about everything
that Pollack derided the Turks for believing,
except for the "eighth planet" stuff.

The Turks must be reading Resistance Reports.

[bemildred]

22. The Turkey bashing was, I can always tell when it's one of their hacks.

The writing is so florid and foppish. Try this one
if you want something really imaginative:

http://atimes01.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GC05Ak01.html

It turns out the Bushites are really strategic geniuses.

[bemildred]

18. It's a free chance to suck up to Uncle Sugar, an estranged relationship.

It's not like they have any use for little Assad or Syria.
Provided in the spirit of reasonable speculation.

[bushisanidiot]

15. Saudia Arabia, arab voice? uh no. US oil bought and paid for voice.

S.A. doesn't take a shit without asking pres. AWOL what he "thinks" about it.

expect israel to call for syria to pull out of lebanon next..