King Abdullah, feel the love

[x0847Marine]

King Abdullah, King of Saudi Arabia, recently said the US invasion of Iraq is  “an illegal foreign occupation”. He also accused Iraq pres Maliki of aiding our enemies and being an agent of Iran, otherwise he cant be trusted... they think our dude sucks.

So the Saudis have offered financial support to Sunni "groups" in Iraq opposed to our dude, Maliki... they give cash money to Sunnis who want the Iraq .gov to fail. Just a wild guess.. but I bet those Sunnis buy arms and, oh I dunno, attack whoever is trying to support the Iraq .gov... like US troops perhaps?

So Sunnis supported by the Saudis who oppose to the Iraq .gov are "groups", but Iranians supporting the *****es with the same motivation are "insurgents"?... makes perfect sense, "axis of evil" stuff and all that.

Insurgents defined; "..guerrilla combat against the armed forces of the established regime, or conduct sabotage and harassment in the land in order to undermine the government's position as leader."

Wait just 1 second here!?, does this mean the Saudis support insurgents?  and don't insurgents kill US troops? Well heck, lets reward them with $20 Billion in arms, sounds like a great idea.

From "Saudis’ Role in Iraq Frustrates U.S. Officials" ; http://www.nytimes.com

[SFRT - Frenchy]

Invade!

[Rino]

Surrender!

[DYNAMITE]

Order a pizza!

[wrag]

Originally posted by x0847Marine
King Abdullah, King of Saudi Arabia, recently said the US invasion of Iraq is  “an illegal foreign occupation”. He also accused Iraq pres Maliki of aiding our enemies and being an agent of Iran, otherwise he cant be trusted... they think our dude sucks.

So the Saudis have offered financial support to Sunni "groups" in Iraq opposed to our dude, Maliki... they give cash money to Sunnis who want the Iraq .gov to fail. Just a wild guess.. but I bet those Sunnis buy arms and, oh I dunno, attack whoever is trying to support the Iraq .gov... like US troops perhaps?

So Sunnis supported by the Saudis who oppose to the Iraq .gov are "groups", but Iranians supporting the *****es with the same motivation are "insurgents"?... makes perfect sense, "axis of evil" stuff and all that.

Insurgents defined; "..guerrilla combat against the armed forces of the established regime, or conduct sabotage and harassment in the land in order to undermine the government's position as leader."

Wait just 1 second here!?, does this mean the Saudis support insurgents?  and don't insurgents kill US troops? Well heck, lets reward them with $20 Billion in arms, sounds like a great idea.

From "Saudis’ Role in Iraq Frustrates U.S. Officials" ; http://www.nytimes.com

Just how many of those that committed the 911 actions were Saudis?

[AKIron]

Guess ya gotta pet the tamer arabs from time to time.  

(pay no attention to the man behind the keyboard)

[USRanger]

One shi'itehole at a time boys!:aok

[Gunslinger]

Actually you got it backwards.  It's not the S h e i t s that are the insurgants (although i'm sure some are) its the sunnis.  They are the minority population in Iraq that have been in power all these years.  They are no longer in power and are feeling the pain of it.  The Shia are the majority population in Iraq next to the Kurds who are everyones black sheep for some reason.

Ironicly it's the Kurds that are the most peacufull (right now) and are less likely to blow crap up.  There's cities in kurdish areas of Iraq that American GIs can walk through with out carrying weapons and feel completly safe.

[LePaul]

New York Times....yeah...that's pretty rich

[rpm]

Originally posted by LePaul
New York Times....yeah...that's pretty rich

Yeah, ignore the facts. You could be in the administration.

[Elfie]

Originally posted by wrag
Just how many of those that committed the 911 actions were Saudis?

Were they backed by the Saudi government? Is Al-Qaida backed by the Saudi government? If both answers are no, then I don't think the Saudi government is the least bit liable.

[USRanger]

Oh trust me, I know, Gunslinger.  It's just sunnihole didn't sound as cool!:D

[Shuckins]

When middle eastern Muslims didn't have any money they were a lot less trouble.

The nations of the West should establish an international policy of developing energy resources that would help them wean themselves from middle eastern oil.  The goal of that policy would be to reimpoverish the nations funneling so much of their excess wealth into militant jihadi movements.

Done without a lot of fanfare over a couple of decades it would break the back of militant Islam.  

When they're riding camels again instead of Mercedes they'll be a lot easier to deal with.

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by DYNAMITE
Order a pizza!

[cpxxx]

Welcome the world of 'realpolitik'. He knows he can remain 'friends' with America while keeping onside with Sunni population in his own country via some pointless rhetoric. America remains friends with him because they need to and they know it's neccessary rhetoric. Anyway cosying up to America is not the way to stay safe in the Middle East these days. Beside Iran and the shia represent a threat to their point of view and the last thing they need is another Shia state on it's borders beholden to Iran.

So it's all played out in the great game in which the Iraqi people and the men and women of the US military are the pawns to be played at the whims of the powers that be.

There are no good guys and bad guys out there just future allies/enemies. It was always that way in power politics.