Why aren't we attacking Saudi Arabia next?

[SHRED]

15 of the 19 hijackers came from there.
Money that funded 9-11 came from there.
The people are oppressed by a brutal regime.

Oh...wait a minute...

[LuckyTheDog]

1. The Saudis own Bush

That much is obvious. Given the choice between the interests of the U.S. and the interests of Saudi Arabia... well, it's pretty obvious which side Bush would be on.

[lligrd]

2. Shouldn't We Do Away With Don't Ask Don't Tell In The

White House? I think the answer to your question is obvious.

[countmyvote4real]

3. Business partners. Carlyle Group.

W is just an offshore shell company masquerading as POTUS. They will ultimately rob our treasury, destroy our military and then sell what remains off to China while W retires to protective retreat in Paraguay.

[Richard Steele]

4. Because, at this point in time, "Nations" are illusions maintained for control of the PEASANTRY.

And, since the "Dark Ages", they always have been.

Anyone who ever bothers to read any sort of "History of Europe"
will quickly realize this FACT.

The "ruling families" over the last thousand years have never
recognized the intangible "national boundaries", they just
invented the idea of "Patriotism" as propaganda to get more
uneducated peasants to die for their bottom-line profits.

The European "Nations" that sent five hundred million 'patriots' to die
for the PROFIT$$$$$ of their various "homelands" over the last
thousand years have mixed-n-matched their "rulers" like a "mySpace page"
run by a a 14yo...

POWER FINDS ITS OWN LEVEL: it flows to whoever is willing to go the furthest to grasp it.

[libnnc]

5. This one's pretty revealing too...

[lligrd]

6. Now There Is Some Body Language

:loveya:

[Dracos]

19. GO gettim George

[Vidar]

7. We should have attacked them first & stopped there.

[roamer65]

8. Plus they are sending money and equipment that are downing our helicopters.

Is our gov't just going to sit back and let them do to us what was done to the Soviets in Afghanistan?:eyes:

[SHRED]

9. I heard about that

Do you have a news story link?
Thanks

[ck4829]

10. They've appointed themselves the Guardians of Mecca and Medina

I would love to see them eliminated, but I get the impression that they've taken over the country not just for the oil, but also that if someone attacks them, then they can scream that Islam itself is being attacked.

[Tesha]

11. We need them! Saudi Arabia is one of our chief suppliers of...

...terrorists.

Tesha

[JacksonWest]

12. It isn't as sinister as you imply.

The United States has always had a good relationship with the government of Saudi Arabia, and we don't have any plausible fear of state sponsored aggression-like we did and do(to some extent) with Afghanistan. Iraq-that was and is just a fucking mess-was fought for a host of reasons that we all know and have discussed ad nauseum.

The complexity of Saudi Arabia is you have a country that is on the fringe. The people of Saudi Arabia are not satisfied with their government. The Osama's of the world provide a governing alternative- a true theocracy. The current government is by far one of the friendliest in the area. It's not surprising that so many hijackers were recruited from Saudi Arabia. Osama is from there, it's the largest Sunni nation, and a lot of the people in the country want to overthrow the government. Bin Laden hates the ruling class in Saudi Arabia-more then he hates the United States. If you want to get really paranoid, you could argue that he put Saudis on those planes just to stir up the pot against the ruling class in his homeland.

Other then that, I think the Cries of "we should attack them" are incredibly disingenuous. I was on the fence about Afghanistan, and I opposed Iraq from the beginning. I don't think attacking any country at this point is in our interests. At all.

[Junkdrawer]

14. It isn't as innocent as you imply.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=125057&mesg_id=125057

[JacksonWest]

15. Like I said, it's a divided country. And the article does not go into great detail beyond this:

"Graham wrote that the staff of the congressional inquiry concluded that two Saudis in the San Diego area, Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Bassan, who gave significant financial support to two hijackers, were working for the Saudi government.

Bayoumi received a monthly allowance from a contractor for Saudi Civil Aviation that jumped from $465 to $3,700 in March 2000, after he helped Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhdar -- two of the Sept. 11 hijackers -- find apartments and make contacts in San Diego, before they began pilot training."


It doesn't say why they were giving them aid- it could have been as simple as a program that helped students find housing and accomodations. It could have been covert, or it could have been sanctioned by the top level officals-who wanted to see the United States attacked by someone that wants to wipe them out as well.

[Junkdrawer]

17. Let's see those 27 pages...here's what Graham said on Hardball....

...

GRAHAM: We‘ve nailed down that a person who was an agent of the Saudi government provided a substantial amount of assistance to two of the terrorists. He may not have known that they were terrorists, but he provided...

MATTHEWS: But this...

(CROSSTALK)

GRAHAM: ... direction. And a CIA agent in August of 2002 submitted a report to the effect that there was incontrovertible evidence that a Saudi agent was assisting the terrorists.

MATTHEWS: Do you believe, could you swear now that the Saudi Arabian government participated in 9/11, Senator?

GRAHAM: I would be prepared to do that.

MATTHEWS: The Saudi Arabian government—Prince Bandar, the whole crowd, the crown prince, everybody.

GRAHAM: The Saudi civil aviation authority, which was no doubt the source of funds for this agent‘s...


....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5953223

[JacksonWest]

26. The line that preceded your quote:

"GRAHAM: We‘ve nailed down that a person who was an agent of the Saudi government provided a substantial amount of assistance to two of the terrorists. He may not have known that they were terrorists, but he provided...

MATTHEWS: But this..."


Like I said- I don't doubt that there are elements in Saudi Arabia that are supportive of terrorism. I don't think the government itself-openly-supports Osama. He was expelled from the country in 1991 for advocating a violent overthrow of the government.

So, there is some ambiguity here. I'm sure people in the Saudi government do support Osama-at some levels. Overall-no. I have no doubt that Bush and friends made it difficult to figure out what actually happened here. But the worst case scenario is that someone in the Saudi government gave money to a legitimate agent. IN this case, the money started with Princess Haifa Al-Faisal, and wound up in the hands of the terrorists.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/11/23/saudi.fbi.911/


If your conclusion is that we should attack Saudi Arabia, based on this incident, I disagree with you. I think it's far removed from logic, and does not implicate or indicate a complicity on their part.

However, it is indeed disturbing, and unfortunate that more light has not been shed on what happened. There is certainly no public pressure from the White House to remove these "elements" from the Saudi government.

[Junkdrawer]

32. I'm not saying "attack Saudi Arabia"..I'm saying investigate the Saudi-NeoCon links...

arrest the guilty and throw their asses in jail. I'm saying "Stop the madness before they kill us all".

[JacksonWest]

33. The title of the OP was "why aren't we attacking".

My post was a response to him.

I also indicated that we should investigate exactly what you're saying.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

13. I know you are just being

The Devil's advocate... But it is a reasonable argument given the way this government uses the DOD ----

I suggest that you read Gerald Posner's "Secret's of the Kingdom" and "Why America Slept" "Secrets" is a great inside look at the House of Saud and how deranged these people are. The Saudi's declared a fatwa on Posner after the release of the book. Apparently it didn't "take" --- Posner is writing a book about the inside operations of the Vatican -- from what I hear the Catholics are going to want to declare their own fatwa on Posner. (I can hardly wait.)

[KharmaTrain]

16. How About Saudi Support For The Sunni Militias?

Ya know, the ones our military leaders are saying are doing most of the "insurgent" actions against the U.S. Those IEDs don't show up from thin air. This regime has hushed up lots of reports of the flow of money, arms and fighters that are flooding across the open southern Iraqi border with Saudi Arabia. Also, we still have little clue why Crashcart was recently called to Riyadh and what deal was struck.

The game here is oil...either control it or put the oil you don't control out of production. This regime can proudly fly the "mission accomplished" flag on that operation.

[lectrobyte]

20. Crashcart was recently called to Riyadh ?

What's that about? Thanks!

[KharmaTrain]

23. Right After The Elections...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15887694/

The word at the time was the Saudi's were all ready to get more involved in assisting the Sunnis and crashcart went running to try to smooth things over.

[lectrobyte]

24. Thanks, I don't know how I missed that. So it sounds like we are in

the middle of the Sunni's (Saudi backed) and Shia's (Iranian supported). Smooth move, George!

[KharmaTrain]

25. It Boggles The Mind Too Much Now

There's several different scenarios playing out that makes it hard for me to keep track of. Letsee...we have the booshies whose main retribution was against the Baathists. Since the Baathists were predominately Sunni, that's what set off that part of the insurgency. But then we have various Shiite factions who we're both using and fighting against at the same time. We support a puppet of Al Sadr who has gotten arms and other assistance from Iran. It's truly Bizantine...and about to get even worse. Watch what happens in Kirkuk...that could be where a real powder keg explodes that turns this mess into a real shitstorm.

Cheers...

:hi:

[JacksonWest]

27. Agreed. We have set in motion the events that will lead to war across the entire region.

I don't want to use the word World War 3-but if Iran and Saudi Arabia start fighting in the playground that was Iraq-all hell's going to break loose. Turkey is a NATO country, and they will likely make a move in the north at some juncture.

Should be fun.

[Gruenemann]

18. MECCA

The holiest city of Islam, ultimate pilgrimage site for a billion Muslims, is within the borders of Saudi Arabia. Attack there and you'll REALLY get Muslims pissed off at us.

[helderheid]

21. I was thinking about this yesterday. 9/11 attacks from mostly Saudis - attack Afghanistan, Iraq and

Iran?



is right!

[Beelzebud]

22. Because they own us.

[KansDem]

28. We'll attack as soon as Bush stops playing kissy-face with them...

But, he's been playing kissy-face with them for decades so I imagine we'll be waiting a looooong time...

[sakabatou]

29. Bush won't do anything.

He has too many ties over there.

[KansDem]

30. And don't forget, two of the attackers carried UAE passports...

The very country BushBoy wanted to turn over management of our ports to...

So to recap:
15 of the 19 attackers were from Saudi Arabia;
2 of the 19 attackers were from UAE;

...for a grand total of 17.

17 of the 19 attackers on 9/11 had relations with the Bush Family. 17 of the 19 or 89.5%. 89.5% of the attackers on 9/11 had ties to the Bush Family...

But we attacked Iraq because...because...because...??? :crazy:

[treestar]

31. Why didn't we attack them first?

Logically speaking, we should have.

That is where the most extremists Muslim theory came from too, wasn't it?

The irony of picking Iraq, one of the more secular Arab nations, is too blatant. And the alliance with Pakistan, a true Muslim theocracy. No separation of religion and state.