• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Saudi king ‘repeatedly requested’ US attack Iran: WikiLeaks

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Before we start another Ostensible "War for Israel" (which isn't going to happen) let's remember who were the real benficiaries/protected of the Iraq war.

Saudi king ‘repeatedly requested’ US attack Iran: WikiLeaks documents
By David Edwards
Nov 28th, 2010

Included in 250,000 documents being released by WikiLeaks this week was a secret diplomatic cable that indicated Saudi King Abdullah had urged the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, to use force to stop Iran's nuclear program.

According to the document, Abdullah repeatedly requested that the US attack Iran. Other leaked documents also described how other Arab countries pushed for military action.

One cable said the Saudi king "frequently exhorted the US to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons program," the British newspaper Guardian reported.

The Saudi Ambassador to the US, Adel al-Jubeir, recalled in April 2008, "[Abdullah] told you [Americans] to cut off the head of the snake."

Al-Jubeir added "that working with the US to roll back Iranian influence in Iraq is a strategic priority for the King and his government."
[......]
 
Last edited:

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The Saudi king is a wahabi fool, Iran does not threaten the saudi's militarily, nor have i read provactive anti-saudi statements coming out of Tehran, on the other hand the saudi's are flapping their lips constantly, im sure iran wouldnt mind having a truce with the saudi's it's definitenly not in iran's interest to go to war with one of the world's energy suppliers who are protected by a hyper power, the saudi king looks down on the iranians for the simple fact their shia (as most already know) he is in my opinion a dictator, even irans government more closely resembles a democracy than saudi arabia, he wont even let women drive. and ofcourse im sure he's aware that Iran would rain down powerful ballsitic missles on Saudi arabia if the U.S. attacks, especially after this wikileak.In essence he is putting his country and people at risk, for what? no invasion or attack whether it be militarily or economic on saudi arabia have been threatened. Where's the saudi people's voice in this matter? o what they don't have one. The Saudi's also mistreat their shia brethern living in their own country (saudi arabia). When it boils down to it their is no reason good enough for the u.s. or saudi's to attack Iran. Why have US soldiers injured, killed and maimed, for no good reason? The hypocrisy is astounding when you look at what north korea isdoing.
 

Albert Di Salvo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
5,544
Reaction score
685
Location
Undisclosed
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
There are an amazing number of apologists for Iran living in America.
 

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Is that the only retort you got? I look at things rationally from both sides, the pro's and con's for each nation involved. Your totally biased views, prevent you from sharing with us an interesting and insightful post.:cowboy:
 

Demon of Light

Bohemian Revolutionary
DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
5,095
Reaction score
1,544
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Before we start another Ostensible "War for Israel" (which isn't going to happen)

Are you saying that there is not going to be a war with Iran or that it would not be a war for Israel?

let's remember who were the real benficiaries/protected of the Iraq war.

Saudi Arabia did not really benefit from the Iraq War. Actually the main beneficiary was Iran.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The Saudi king is a wahabi fool, Iran does not threaten the saudi's militarily, nor have i read provactive anti-saudi statements coming out of Tehran, on the other hand the saudi's are flapping their lips constantly, im sure iran wouldnt mind having a truce with the saudi's it's definitenly not in iran's interest to go to war with one of the world's energy suppliers who are protected by a hyper power, the saudi king looks down on the iranians for the simple fact their shia (as most already know) he is in my opinion a dictator, even irans government more closely resembles a democracy than saudi arabia, he wont even let women drive. and ofcourse im sure he's aware that Iran would rain down powerful ballsitic missles on Saudi arabia if the U.S. attacks, especially after this wikileak.In essence he is putting his country and people at risk, for what? no invasion or attack whether it be militarily or economic on saudi arabia have been threatened. Where's the saudi people's voice in this matter? o what they don't have one. The Saudi's also mistreat their shia brethern living in their own country (saudi arabia). When it boils down to it their is no reason good enough for the u.s. or saudi's to attack Iran. Why have US soldiers injured, killed and maimed, for no good reason? The hypocrisy is astounding when you look at what north korea isdoing.
It isn't just the sentiment of the Saudis.
Virtually every arab sunni country wants Iran declawed.
Certainly all the Gulf States.... as well as Jordan and Egypt.

Iran is a threat to many thru it's support for hamas and hezbollah in the short run.. in furtherance of the 'Shia Crescent'/new sphere of influence in the long run.

The article also included:
""Officials in Jordan and Bahrain have openly called for Iran's nuclear program to be stopped by any means, including military.

"Leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt referred to Iran as "evil", an "existential threat" and a power that "is going to take us to war".
So one cannot just discount it as the "Wahab fools" of Saudi Arabia.
Unless you want to call virtually all of the ME Arab countries, except Syria, "fools".

I've previously posted on this new dynamic,
The most significant development in the area since the Gulf War.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/middle-east/77420-quiet-axis-forms-against-iran-middle-east.html
 
Last edited:

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It isn't just the sentiment of the Saudis.
Virtually every arab sunni country wants Iran declawed.
Certainly all the Gulf States.,... as well s Jordan and Egypt.
I believe the never ending propaganda of the Saudi's against Iran, played a major part in allegedly wanting Iran declawed,i have not seen another arab country even come close to the ferousity of the saudi's regarding anti-iran sentiment. in fact their was in an arab gulf country, i think qatar, who reached out to Iran recently in a cooperative manner,i can post the source if you like? just say the word. this anti-iranian sentiment among arab sunni countries is blown out of proportion by biased media's who want to do their best to validate an attack on iran. i believe at worst the sunni arab countries ( their corrupt governments at least, not their population) just would rather keep a distance between them and iran, if that, i believe their foreign policy(sunni arab countries) towards iran is pressed upon them by saudi arabia and the U.S. they don't want to anger or lose financial support from a hyper power and a large petrol supplier. Syria and iran have a defense pact also btw.
Iran is a threat to many thru it's support for hamas and hezbollah
both of them are fighting obvsiouly within in a small range of territory, with truly who they believe is their only enemy, no surprise of the fighting over there, it's between them. that's another whole different story. those groups which are militia's dont and cant threaten the u.s. hamas's arsenal is equivalent to firecrackers by today's military standards they have hard time hitting their targets from a few miles away, ofcourse you already know that, but chose to downplay it. the saudi govt are obvious religious bigots who despise others not for being in adifferent religion but a different sect( as you know) the biggest winner if iran is attacked is Israel, as i know your 1 billion % aware of.
 

Albert Di Salvo

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
5,544
Reaction score
685
Location
Undisclosed
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Is that the only retort you got? I look at things rationally from both sides, the pro's and con's for each nation involved. Your totally biased views, prevent you from sharing with us an interesting and insightful post.:cowboy:

No, but I don't give enough of a spit to fully respond. The truth is that Saudi Arabia and Iran are both America's enemies.

Iran does present a threat to Saudi Arabia, but except for Mbig, no one here is sufficiently knowledgable to address the threat.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I believe the never ending propaganda of the Saudi's against Iran, played a major part in allegedly wanting Iran declawed,i have not seen another arab country even come close to the ferousity of the saudi's regarding anti-iran sentiment. in fact their was in an arab gulf country, i think qatar, who reached out to Iran recently in a cooperative manner,i can post the source if you like? just say the word. this anti-iranian sentiment among arab sunni countries is blown out of proportion by biased media's who want to do their best to validate an attack on iran. i believe at worst the sunni arab countries ( their corrupt governments at least, not their population) just would rather keep a distance between them and iran, if that, i believe their foreign policy(sunni arab countries) towards iran is pressed upon them by saudi arabia and the U.S. they don't want to anger or lose financial support from a hyper power and a large petrol supplier. Syria and iran have a defense pact also btw.
ALL the gulf states have felt this way for quite a while.
My post from another board as link expired:
me said:
Kuwaiti strategist: Israel should strike Iran
March 9, 2008
//AP/Jpost

The destruction of Iran's nuclear capabilities would be in the interest of the Arab nations in the Gulf, and it would be "less embarrassing" if it was done by Israel rather than the US, a top Kuwaiti strategist said in remarks published Sunday.

Officially Kuwait, like the other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, wants a peaceful solution to the nuclear standoff between Teheran and the West and will not allow the US to use its territories for any attack on Iran.

But when asked in an interview with the daily Al-Siyassah about the consequences of an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear reactors, analyst and former government adviser Sami al-Faraj said it would not be such a bad thing.

"Honestly speaking, they would be achieving something of great strategic value for the GCC by stopping Iran's tendency for hegemony over the area,"
He said, adding that "nipping it in the bud by Israeli hands would be less embarrassing for us" than if the Americans did it.

Al-Faraj said Teheran was interfering in Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian territories, and inciting strife between Sunnis and Shiites.


"The question is what would it do if it were a nuclear nation?
We have to call a spade a spade and say that burying the military nuclear Iranian project is in the interest of GCC states," and other countries in the area, added al-Faraj, who heads the independent Kuwait Center for Strategy Studies.

Teheran has denied it is seeking nuclear weapons and insists its program is for peaceful purposes. Despite three sets of United Nations sanctions, it is still defying demands to suspend uranium enrichment.

GCC countries -Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Oman and Bahrain - have announced they want to use nuclear energy for civilian uses as well.

Al-Faraj told the daily the GCC "offered" to cooperate with Teheran on a joint nuclear fuel station, but Iran turned down the offer.
Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar all host US military facilities.
Egypt has let Israeli submarines use the Suez Canal.. and much else has ben going on very quietly.
All the Arab states are rightfully concerned about the "Shia Wahabs"/Hamas/Hezbolla/Radicals that Iran is supporting and of course about Iran's Nuclear Flexing.

and again, for justabubba, et al... It's IRAN'S drive for Nukes that is Ruining parity and starting a New Arms Race.
Qatar and others have recently announced Nuke programs; certainly Not because of Israel's 40 year old capability.

These new alliances previously posted by me... http://www.debatepolitics.com/middle-east/77420-quiet-axis-forms-against-iran-middle-east.html
 
Last edited:

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No, but I don't give enough of a spit to fully respond. The truth is that Saudi Arabia and Iran are both America's enemies.

Iran does present a threat to Saudi Arabia, but except for Mbig, no one here is sufficiently knowledgable to address the threat.

but I don't give enough of a spit to fully respond.
in other words you have no retort..again:roll:

The truth is that Saudi Arabia and Iran are both America's enemies.
Both, really?
but except for Mbig, no one here is sufficiently knowledgable to address the threat.
I see your at least talented in one thing.:kissass to mbig

hey, al are you sure your not sgtrock's twin?:confused:

:lamo
:peace
 

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, it seem's i can't find an open minded, rational, both sides of the coin debate in this thread any longer.

:peace Ya'll
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Well, it seem's i can't find an open minded, rational, both sides of the coin debate in this thread any longer.

:peace Ya'll
It seems you just gave up due to contrary and documented evidence.
I think everyone is posting "rationally" and the discussion very civilized.
I take it you are on the Iran-supported hamas/hizbollah side here... as opposed to virtually all the other Arab states side; which again is Not just the "Wahab fools" of Saudi Arabia.
I guess having that pointed out/proved was your idea of not "open-minded".
 
Last edited:

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It seems you just gave up due to contray and documented evidence.
I think everyone is posting "rationally" and the discussion very civilized.

you really think al, is posting ''rationally'' with any sort of content, to explain his sentiments?

Im sorry, specifically what documented evidence that is '' contrary'' to what i said? otherwise this statement is just a different way of saying, ''im right your wrong and that's final''.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
you really think al, is posting ''rationally'' with any sort of content, to explain his sentiments?

Im sorry, specifically what documented evidence that is '' contrary'' to what i said? otherwise this statement is just a different way of saying, ''im right your wrong and that's final''.
The contrary evidence being the MANY statements of other Arab states beyond Saudi Arabia.
In fact, the near unanimous position of every state in the area except Syria.
But I've already shown this more than adequately.

And again.. I take it you are on the Iran/Hamas/Hizbollah side in this.
Because it wasn't in any way just the "wahab fools"
 
Last edited:

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
btw, as always the source is taken into consideration when presenting ''documented'' facts, as if ''documented facts'' have never been altered to serve the differing parties interests in the war of public opinion for support in the history of politics.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
btw, as always the source is taken into consideration when presenting ''documented'' facts, as if ''documented facts'' have never been altered to serve the differing parties interests in the war of public opinion for support in the history of politics.
I've provided MANY sources including an older string documenting this months ago.

What are your sources to the contrary besides yourself?
 

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The contrary evidence being the MANY statements of other Arab states beyond Saudi Arabia.
In fact, the near unanimous position of every state in the area except Syria.
But I've already shown this more than adequately.

And again.. I take it you are on the Iran/Hamas/Hizbollah side in this.
Becaudse it wasn't in any way just the "wahab fools"

regarding those arab dictatorships you seem to legitimize, lets look at jordan, he is a sheep that follows any policy from the western side, as long as he gets financial support and remains ''king'' a large percentage of Jordan's population are Palestinian, maybe half, and they don't hate iran they hate israel you know that.

Egypt- see above post as mubarek's dictatorship is also receiving billions of dollars to have a certain foreign policy to follow or no money

lebanon- is supported by iran financially, in fact ahmedinjad recently received a huge welcome on his trip lebanon, where he rebuilt infrastucture for them.

Palestinians- have mixed feelings about iran, but im sure iran's rivalery with israel softens their stance against iran as they seeisrael as occupiers

Turks- obviously are not arab but 90% sunni, they don't have a conflict with Iran, especially after the flotilla where they nearly did a 360 on certain polices.

Iraq- has a large shia population like iran and that does play a factor.

as you see mbig, it's not really hard to boil things down, and see the actual facts on the ground.
 

24107

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
2,809
Reaction score
824
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Mbig, i am very well aware of your hard nosed positions on certain issues, that you won't budge on, so no sense in going in circles, no offense.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
regarding those arab dictatorships you seem to legitimize, lets look at jordan, he is a sheep that follows any policy from the western side, as long as he gets financial support and remains ''king'' a large percentage of Jordan's population are Palestinian, maybe half, and they don't hate iran they hate israel you know that.

Egypt- see above post as mubarek's dictatorship is also receiving billions of dollars to have a certain foreign policy to follow or no money
So you don't/Can't Disagree with my claim about Egypt.. only claim they're bought/corrupt.
Though even the average Egyptian man in the street isn't thrilled by Iran nor Palestinians for that matter.
But they do hate Jews.

24107 said:
lebanon- is supported by iran financially, in fact ahmedinjad recently received a huge welcome on his trip lebanon, where he rebuilt infrastucture for them.
Exactly what the Majority of other Arab states are worried about, Lebanon and Syria joining the Shia Crescent.
This isn't rebuttal, this is confirmation.

24107 said:
Palestinians- have mixed feelings about iran, but im sure iran's rivalery with israel softens their stance against iran as they seeisrael as occupiers
Palestinians will take any champion against israel.. from Saddam to Osama.
And of course, and AGAIN: Iran Backs Hamas and Hizbollah.

24107 said:
Turks- obviously are not arab but 90% sunni, they don't have a conflict with Iran, especially after the flotilla where they nearly did a 360 on certain polices.
The non-arab Turks are becoming increasingly Islamist and have also made agreements with Iran.
Non-Arab.

24107 said:
Iraq- has a large shia population like iran and that does play a factor.
Agreed. Iraq is 60% Shia so doesn't feel threatened... and probably isn't. It's almost van Iran proxy state in eventuality.

24107 said:
as you see mbig, it's not really hard to boil things down, and see the actual facts on the ground.
No. It's very disingenuous to cherry Pick and leave out ALL the Gulf States (Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait, etc) and of course Jordan, etc.

From my previous string on this which you refuse to look at so.. Silver platter time.

Persian Isolation: A Quiet Axis Forms Against Iran in the Middle East - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International
7/15/10
By Alexander Smoltczyk and Bernhard Zand

Israel and the Arab states near the Persian Gulf recognize a common threat: the regime in Tehran. A regional diplomat has not even ruled out support by the Arab states for a military strike to end Iran's nuclear ambitions.


"....The discussion revolved around the Middle East. When asked whether the UAE would support a possible Israeli air strike against the regime in Tehran, Ambassador Otaiba said: "A military attack on Iran by whomever would be a disaster, but Iran with a nuclear weapon would be a bigger disaster."

These were unusually candid words. A military strike, the diplomat continued, would undoubtedly lead to a "backlash." "There will be problems of people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country," he said.

But, he added, "if you are asking me, 'Am I willing to live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran,' my answer is still the same. We cannot live with a nuclear Iran. I am willing to absorb what takes place at the expense of the security of the U.A.E."...."

We still have NO sources from you refuting this new WIDE-spread fear of and alliance against Iran.. just some minor objections above which didn't "boil down" very much.
And your attempt to limit thes sentiments to the "Wahab Fools" of Saudi Arabia has been shown to be wrong.
 
Last edited:

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
This is obviously false, because George WARMONGER Bush would have taken any chance he had to invade Iran.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This is obviously false, because George WARMONGER Bush would have taken any chance he had to invade Iran.
Had we not invaded Afghanistan and Iraq and got terribly over-extended... I think Bush might well have.

In retrospect, that would have been wiser.. tho Many Iraqis are now free.
 
Top Bottom