• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would flood Saudi Arabia and the world with the facts about the overall atmosphere that is pressuring the Shi'ites in Saudi Arabia today. The ugliest of these facts is what occurred in the 1979intifada of the Shi'ite regions, in which dozens were killed, hundreds were imprisoned, and their regions were blockaded for more than four consecutive months.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would familiarize the world with the injustices done to many Saudi Shi'ites since the establishment of the Saudi Kingdom in 1932 and since the Wahhabis took control of the Arabian Peninsula. [I would let the world know about] the Shi'ites' being deprived of any [part in] government, even in their own regions, where they have been barred from the high-level political posts and executive positions they deserve - not to mention their being denied any ministerial post.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would create a ruckus in Saudi Arabia, and in the world, because I live in the richest region in the world, with one-third of the world's oil reserves, [yet] the Shi'ite cities are the cities that the state most neglects. Many basic services are lacking, and the city residents are barred from receiving any position in the large oil companies on their land.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would make a huge commotion in the world, because the government spends millions of dollars on building thousands of mosques throughout the kingdom, but the Saudi government has not shared [in the costs] of building a single Shi'ite mosque or a single Husainiya since the establishment of the state. In addition, the Shi'ites are prevented from building their mosques and Husainiyas with their own funds, and they are punished for practicing their religious rituals - even though all the country's oil resources are pumped from their regions.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would make my voice heard in the world, because since the kingdom's establishment to the present day, there has been no Shi'ite minister appointed in the country - and, as of this writing, they [i.e the Shi'ites] are barred from working in the Foreign Ministry, the army, the armed forces, and the National Guard.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would publish articles, one after another, about how the [Saudi] media ignores matters [concerning me] and my religious holidays - as if I and the Shi'ites did not exist in Saudi Arabia.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would flood the world with complaints about what the suffering Shi'ites go through [merely] in order to found a mosque or a Husainiya. These are built clandestinely and in complete secrecy, with [the Shi'ites'] their own funds, and if [those responsible] are discovered, they are imprisoned and fined, and everything they have built is destroyed.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would bring the world to its feet because of the terrible things written by some writers, members of the Council of 'Ulama… and all the Wahhabi sheikhs who are close to the Saudi government, on the permissibility of shedding Shi'ite blood, of defiling their honor, and of seizing their money and their possessions.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would conduct a campaign within [Egypt] and outside it, against classifying Saudis according to sect. Why should someone who conducts a relationship with me on the general and public level want to know what my sect is?
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would lead a publicity campaign about the Saudi bureaucracy, which has made judicial law in the state courts into a means of oppressing the people and, in particular, a means of crushing the Shi'ites. I would demand that it be annulled, because it is prejudicial and an offense to the most basic of human rights.
• "If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would make the world understand that the issue of the Shi'ites in Saudi Arabia is one of the symptoms of a [certain] mentality whose influence has spread through this region of the world, and that all humanity must force [those with] this mentality to reconsider this discriminatory path."
"If I were a Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia, I would make the world understand that the issue of the Shi'ites in Saudi Arabia is one of the symptoms of a [certain] mentality whose influence has spread through this region of the world, and that all humanity must force [those with] this mentality to reconsider this discriminatory path."
By that I assume you mean the racism and the supremacist philosophies that inspire wealthy Saudis to support terrorism worldwide.
A Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia would also note that the world already knows that Saudis support terrorism. Our leaders know that Saudi terrorism is responsible for thousands of deaths worldwide. Our leaders know that weathy Saudis are responsible for the deaths of our own people and they don't care. Our leaders respond to Saudi terrorism against us by trying to make life easier for terrorism's Saudi sponsors.
A Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia would then have to note that if our leaders don't care about their own citizens who have been murdered and terrorized by Saudis, they're certainly not going to care about a powerless minority thousands of miles away.
Most governments worldwide believe that an alliance with these terror supporters is essential to our survival. There's no rational reason for this belief, but it exists. You heard the thundering silence that was the international community's response to the Myanmar monks' protest - and most governments don't even like the junta. Most governments love wealthy Sauds.
A Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia would then realize that, if they want to do something about the regime, they have only one advantage - the government of Saudi Arabia is a mystery to the rest of the world. We don't understand their inner world, we don't know their strengths and their weaknesses. A Shi'ite from Saudi Arabia does know how the system works, and they can learn how the system can be broken.
Most governments and most media outlets get huge sums of cash from wealthy Sauds, so they have a huge interest in keeping the Saudi Royals in power. But, there are literally billions of people out there who do not love the way the system is working right now. If they learned more about how the it works, they would love it even less.
Saudi billionaires are willing to go through huge efforts to sue to keep books about their terror support from being published, even though most governments know all about it. For some reason, these billionaires are worried about that information getting out. In an odd way, they have more confidence in our ability to change things than we do...
The Saudi regime keeps the oil tap open and supplies Relatively stable. This covers a multitude of sins. The last thing I want the U.S. to get itself involved in is another sectarian war in the Middle East.
This covers a multitude of sins.
Like mass murder and efforts to spread a genocidal fascist philosophy worldwide. Our policies are pennywise and pound foolish, to say the least.
However, we should avoid getting involved in another sectarian war in the Middle East. So, why is everyone focusing on Iran's support of terrorism while ignoring the armies of car bombers that were sent to Iraq by members of the Saudi government?
..and why did Moammar Gadhafi try to assassinate Saudi Prince Abdullah? Did we ever figure that one out?
Somehow when discussing the KSA it always gets back to oil. Who owns the oil? It seems to me there are several prospective answers.
If one takes the Lockean view that the oil belongs to those who work for it, then Saudi oil belongs to the U. S. and English. We've been robbed.
If one takes the view that the oil belongs to whomever can seize and control it, that would appear to be an argument in favor of invading.
If one takes the view that the oil belongs to the people of the place where the oil was found, then it belong to the Shi'a of Saudi Arabia, most of whom live in the area from which most of the oil has been taken.
#3 from mary at 3:50 pm on Oct 10, 2007
This covers a multitude of sins.
Like mass murder and efforts to spread a genocidal fascist philosophy worldwide. Our policies are pennywise and pound foolish, to say the least.
__________________________________
Do you want to invade and occupy Saudi Arabia? I don't. We are also no responsible for every sparrow that falls from the sky. There are limits to out power. If the invasion of Iraq has taught us anything, it ought to have taught us that.
*********************************
However, we should avoid getting involved in another sectarian war in the Middle East. So, why is everyone focusing on Iran's support of terrorism while ignoring the armies of car bombers that were sent to Iraq by members of the Saudi government?
______________________________________
Because you don't spit in the soup that is given you if it is the only thing that is offered.
************************************
..and why did Moammar Gadhafi try to assassinate Saudi Prince Abdullah? Did we ever figure that one out?
_______________________________________
To quote an old Jack Nicholson movie. Because "that's Chinatown".
Somehow when discussing the KSA it always gets back to oil. Who owns the oil? It seems to me there are several prospective answers.
If one takes the Lockean view that the oil belongs to those who work for it, then Saudi oil belongs to the U. S. and English. We've been robbed.
If one takes the view that the oil belongs to whomever can seize and control it, that would appear to be an argument in favor of invading.
If one takes the view that the oil belongs to the people of the place where the oil was found, then it belong to the Shi'a of Saudi Arabia, most of whom live in the area from which most of the oil has been taken.
____________________________________________
How about the oil belonging to anyone who can sell it to us for a reasonable price who will save us the trouble of invading and keep the lid on an area where we, quite obviously, haven't the faintest idea what is going on.
If you are going to run an Empire, the Brits had a really good run basing theirs on indirect rule.
We are also no responsible for every sparrow that falls from the sky. There are limits to out power. If the invasion of Iraq has taught us anything, it ought to have taught us that
After our Saudi allies murdered thousands of Americans on 9/11, we responded by invading Iraq at the urging of our Saudi allies because we believed the invasion would put an end to the 'threat' of Saddam and his evil WMDs.
After we invaded Iraq at the urging of our Saudi allies, the same Saudi allies sent an army of car bombers into Iraq to destabilize the country and to kill American soldiers and Iraqi civilians.
Now Iran threatens to have evil WMDs. Our Saudi allies want us to do something about it...
If you are going to run an Empire, the Brits had a really good run basing theirs on indirect rule.
The British basically gave the Sauds control of Mecca and Medina despite the fact that they're hated by the majority of the Muslim world. Of the Wahhabis, Winston Churchill said:
"Austere, intolerant, well-armed, and bloodthirsty, in their own regions the Wahabis are a distinct factor which must be taken into account, and they have been, and still are, very dangerous to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, and to the whole institution of the pilgrimage, in which our Indian fellow-subjects are so deeply concerned."
The British ignored Churchill because the Sauds proved their worth by 'keeping order' in the Middle East. Basically, Ibn Saud and his ilk 'kept order' by stirring up trouble, then getting credit for helping the Brits put it down.
They're doing the same thing with us. Our alliance with Saudi Arabia isn't a moderating force in the Middle East, it's actually causing problems there.
Now Iran is making noises about evil WMDs, just as Saddam did and just as Gadhafi did before him. What do you think will happen when we rush in to save Saudi Arabia? What do you think will happen when we make the same dumb mistake we (and the Brits) made many times before?
There are limits to our power, but we should also realize that our Saudi allies are one of the weakest and most vulnerable nations in the world. They only have the power and legitimacy that we give them.
Because you don't spit in the soup that is given you if it is the only thing that is offered.
We don't have to put up with anything our Saudi allies offer us. The only power they have is the power we give them. We should stop giving them power.
I'm pretty sure that Tarek doesn't want another sectarian war in the Middle East either. Rather, I think he'd like the US and the West in general (including the Left) to exercise what moral authority they have to raise the level of discomfort among the Saudi elites resulting from their position standing on the necks of the Shi'ite population. Absent that moral authority, the pressure between the tectonic plates will continue to build to the point that a sectarian earthquake becomes inevitable. With that, the current "balance of power from within" strategy that seems to be working in Iraq at the village and neighborhood level might actually allow the improvement of conditions for everyone. There's no reason this needs to be a zero-sum game.
Of course, who believes in the Philosopher's Stone any more? Can we have a hand count?
I have always been of the opinion that the invasion of Iraq was an historic strategic blunder.
I also think the idea that we were somehow God's appointed to deliver democracy to the region nothing more than a monomaniacal delusion on the part of the neo-cons.
There are a lot of things not to like about the political and human rights situations in most of the Middle East. It seems to me that Iraq is not only teaching us that, but it should teach us how impotent we are in trying to change those situations.
Rather, I think he'd like the US and the West in general (including the Left) to exercise what moral authority they have to raise the level of discomfort among the Saudi elites resulting from their position standing on the necks of the Shi'ite population.
I wouldn't want to see a sectarian war in the Middle East either, which is why we should note the Saudi tactic of inciting these wars.
About Iraq: our government knows that the Saudi government is responsible for sending their army of suicide bombers in to Iraq to kill Americans and they are putting absolutely no pressure on the Saudi royals to stop the slaughter or to save the "balance of power from within".
It's clear that we have no moral authority in the area - in fact, we have no authority at all. With their relentlessly obsequious attitude towards the Saudi royals, and with their willingness to believe their implausible deniability, it's clear that the members of our government are complete and utter tools. I wouldn't advise anyone to rely on them for anything.
Huh? The Saudis were, in fact, urging us to not invade Iraq. If we had a problem with Saddam, they said, it'd be better for the region to take him and his sons out, not to invade the country. They feared an invasion would lead to the current situation.
They feared an invasion would lead to the current situation.
Not according to this article, published in the Washington Post with exerpts from Bob Woodward's book on Bush's administration:
After the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution authorizing the resumption of weapons inspections in Iraq, Bush became increasingly impatient with their effectiveness and the role of chief weapons inspector Hans Blix. Shortly after New Year's 2003, he told Rice at his Texas ranch: "We're not winning. Time is not on our side here. Probably going to have to, we're going to have to go to war."
Bush said much the same thing to White House political adviser Karl Rove, who had gone to Crawford to brief him on plans for his reelection campaign. In the next 10 days, Bush also made his decision known to Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and the Saudi ambassador, Prince Bandar bin Sultan. Bandar, who helped arrange Saudi cooperation with the U.S. military, feared Saudi interests would be damaged if Bush did not follow through on attacking Hussein, and became another advocate for war.
Bandar feared Saudi interests would be damaged if Bush did not follow through on attacking Hussein. This push to protect our Saudi allies was echoed by Cheney in 2002:
...in August, 2002, seven months before the war started, Cheney warned that Saddam would be able to seize control of the world’s economic lifeline if he acquired weapons of mass destruction: "Armed with an arsenal of these weapons of terror, and seated atop ten per cent of the world’s oil reserves, Saddam Hussein could then be expected to seek domination of the entire Middle East, take control of a great portion of the world’s energy supplies, directly threaten America's friends throughout the region, and subject the United States or any other nation to nuclear blackmail."
We went to war to protect our Saudi friends like Bandar and his wife, who sent thousands of dollars to finance the 9/11 hijackers
We went to war to protect Saudis like Omar Al-Bayoumi who worked for the Saudi Ministry of Defense and Aviation until August 1994, when he moved to San Diego, California and befriended two of the 9/11 hijackers. This aviation expert was known to be very inquisitive, always carrying around a video camera. His wife began receiving checks from Bandar's family in 1999, and the checks kept coming for years..
Actually the oil was found not in the Wahhabi dominated Nejd; but in the Shia
dominated Hasa province; that's where the major pipelines run through at Ras
Tanura, Abquaiq & Yambu, on the Red Sea. Much like the first Iraqi concession was
found in formerly Kurdish Kirkuk in 1927. Others were found in the Shia rich
Basra vilayet. Although the Sunni tribal
oligarchies from Nuri Al Said to Ghailani
to the Tikriti Hussein's; have been stealing that oil for three quarters of a century.
I'd argue against the idea of Bayoumi being an agent of the Saud's establish
ment. Of the more militant sections of Saudi General Intelligence I don't doubt. The Wahhabi State Religion preaches severe discipline and
abnegation; the Saud's are everything but; despite their protestations. This makes the guardians of their security;
from the Ilkwan in the 20s, to the Mutawa
, National Guard, and General Intell. most likely to plot against them. The current circumstance rises from the consequences of the Siege of the Grand
Mosque in 1979 by the representative of two of the major Ilkwan families; Uteibi
& Quahtani. Yaroslav Trofimov has a new
book on that event. Having used a foreign element to quell the siege; the
Saud's tried to appease the Wahhabis by
first giving them a wider role in the
educational sphere; and convening the great call to jihad in Afghanistan. We
know how well this worked out.
One could argue that the real reason for the particular intractibility of the Iraq conflict, is our denial to see it as a proxy war. For the Wahhabi/Ilkwan
compatriots, for the Iranian IRGC, and
too a lesser extent, the Syrian Mukharabat. It's not a coincidence that
the same tribes (Quahtani, Uteibi, Al Ghamdi) appear on the rosters of 9/11
plotters (actual and thwarted; detainee
# 603, Mohammed Manea Al Quahtani)Gitmo
detainees including one of three Gitmo
suicides, and martyr rolls from Baghdad, Fallujah and Al Quaim. Recent fiction, like the Kingdom for all it's ideological
backsliding, the Chris Reich novel about an Uteibi directed plot, Daniel Silva's the Messenger; even the younger Haig's
clumsy attempt to tie the Zubeydah case
with that of Larry Franklin,make this point clear; to varying degrees.
One could argue that the real reason for the particular intractibility of the Iraq conflict, is our denial to see it as a proxy war. For the Wahhabi/Ilkwan
compatriots, for the Iranian IRGC, and
too a lesser extent, the Syrian Mukharabat.
That's true. There are many proxy wars being fought, We have the Republicans vs. the Democrats and the resulting opposition to the war in the US (and Nancy Pelosi's visit to Syria, which was mostly an effort to defy President Bush). Saddam defended European interests in the Middle East and he provided them with plenty of bribes, which was a major reason for their continuing opposition to the war.
Right now, it's hard to find a political entity that isn't using Iraq as a stick to beat someone with.
I'd argue against the idea of Bayoumi being an agent of the Saud's establish
ment. Of the more militant sections of Saudi General Intelligence I don't doubt. The Wahhabi State Religion preaches severe discipline and
abnegation; the Saud's are everything but;
The current circumstance rises from the consequences of the Siege of the Grand
Mosque in 1979 by the representative of two of the major Ilkwan families; Uteibi
& Quahtani.
That does make sense. I have read about the influence of particular families.
The Sauds connection to terrorism often seems like the connection between mosquitoes and malaria. Even if the mosquitoes aren't the actual disease, they are the vectors. Befriending them, feeding them and inviting mosquitoes to your home are not the best ways to fight malaria.
Chris Reich novel about an Uteibi directed plot, Daniel Silva's the Messenger;
I'll have to take a look at those.
Who the hell cares about which faction among the enemy has the upper hand? If they are killing each other then less of them will be trying to kill us.
The West in general, and America in particular, should do absolutely nothing to intervene unless and until the oil supplies are threatened. If that happens, we should walk in, blow away the Saudi military, and take the goddamned oil. It was entirely Western money and effort spent on discovering and exploiting it, anyway.
Another thing that should be done is a large, well-funded effort to find energy supplies that will make Saudi oil irrelevant, by making the West independent of oil. There are many possible avenues for this - we should try them all; even if we do, the cost will be a minute fraction of the half-trillion dollars and thousands of lives already spent on the Middle East.
Once that's done, simply confiscate any and all assets held by Saudis and other Arabs in the West - and lay a minefield in the Persian Gulf, and let them rot.