• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Saudi King Condemns U.S. Occupation of Iraq

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal

source


Thanks to our dear old "allies" of Saudi arabia issuing such a rally cry to the Sunni's within Iraq. But thank you Bush for making us illegitimate through lies to get us into this war.



But then as for the Palestinian plan, I have one question for anyone here; why won't Israel accept the Palestinian populace?
 
Surprise, Surprise :roll: :rofl If you tree huggers ever got off your *** and let us drill for oil in this country we might not be so beholding to SA and they would not be able to hold us hostage..........
 
I'm thinking it's just an oversight. Bush Corp. probably was late on last month's payment to King Saud.

I'm sure it will all be cleared up soon. If I were a Bush, I'd probably just blame it on the mail. :rofl

And, yet again, in a series of recent anomolies, NP is absolutely correct (minus the viotrol.) With today's technology, oil field drilling sites can be cleaned up faster than we can screw 'em up. If this were the 70's, 80's or even the 90's we'd have cause for environmental concerns. But thanks to the "tree-huggers" of both past and present we have made great strides in environmental protection over the past couple of decades.

That being said, I still think that any tax reliefs towards oil, or any monies spent trying to put a band-aid on our energy situation, are best spent weaning us off of petroleum fuels altogether. That cannot be so difficult. One has to ask oneself just why we are not more aggressive towards that end?

It is, however, wise to be wary and perhaps overprotective regarding our environment during the current administration. It is no secret they are no friend to the environment. Neither are their supporters, or so it seems. In fact, they cannot seem to see six months down the road. Much less the future of my grandchildren. There are too many polluters that are in bed with the Whitehouse. If our gov't could be paralleled to the mob, it would be much like saying the polluters have already paid for their protection. But this too will pass.

100 Bush Profiteers
 
Navy Pride said:
Surprise, Surprise :roll: :rofl If you tree huggers ever got off your *** and let us drill for oil in this country we might not be so beholding to SA and they would not be able to hold us hostage..........
Click to expand...

:rofl

That's awesome. Now "tree huggers" have some sort of connection to Saudi Arabia? Let's ask your boyfriend's Bush and Chaney how they feel about ******* off Saudi Arabia.
 
Gibberish said:
:rofl

That's awesome. Now "tree huggers" have some sort of connection to Saudi Arabia? Let's ask your boyfriend's Bush and Chaney how they feel about ******* off Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...

:rofl
..........
 
Navy Pride said:
Surprise, Surprise :roll: :rofl If you tree huggers ever got off your *** and let us drill for oil in this country we might not be so beholding to SA and they would not be able to hold us hostage..........
Click to expand...

What can I say to this except a lot of this::spin: :spin: :spin:
 
Saudis reportedly funding Iraqi Sunni insurgents
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-12-08-saudis-sunnis_x.htm

Official: 15 of 19 Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudi
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/02/06/saudi.htm


Yep, They want us out so they can control the Iraqis. It is not just idle talk either. They back their words with action.

Ironic how so many Americans want to attack Iran. So many Americans wanted to invade Iraq. So Many Americans did not question why invading Afghanistan didn't really bear much fruit, but most certainly was left to rot on the vine. Yet few question the Saudi governments true intentions.

Now, I'm not saying we should invade Saudi Arabia. I'm simply saying that they are a major player in the terror world. They are a far greater threat to our nation than Iraq, Iran or Afghanistan. The use religion to control their people. As a result hatred and ignorance run rampant. An angry population can be useful to its government as long as they are angry at someone else. Seem familiar, my fellow Americans?
 
Gibberish said:
:rofl

That's awesome. Now "tree huggers" have some sort of connection to Saudi Arabia? Let's ask your boyfriend's Bush and Chaney how they feel about ******* off Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...

Tree huggers prevent us ffrom being energy independent........
 
Navy Pride said:
Surprise, Surprise :roll: :rofl If you tree huggers ever got off your *** and let us drill for oil in this country we might not be so beholding to SA and they would not be able to hold us hostage..........
Click to expand...
Farce, as always you've absolutely no idea what you are talking about other than what the apologetic rhetoric blow horns tell you.
1. What % of oil in the US comes from the US?
2. Who's are largest supplier of oil?
3. Oil is a global commodity that is priced based on market value, how much would drilling domestically be able to offset the international market price?
But I'm going to predict you're not going to answer any of these but instead make another comment about liberals.

Yet, none of this has anything to do with our Allies bailing out on us.
 
jfuh said:
I'm going to predict you're not going to answer any of these but instead make another comment about liberals.
Click to expand...
Exactly the same way you make comments about others (i.e., blowhorns)
 
Navy Pride said:
Surprise, Surprise :roll: :rofl If you tree huggers ever got off your *** and let us drill for oil in this country we might not be so beholding to SA and they would not be able to hold us hostage..........
Click to expand...

_______
Don't worry, as soon as oil gets to be $160.00 per barrel we will find out how fast we get new found oil and how much oil we have.
BTW: We have had a Republican Congress since 1994 and Bush has been in for almost 6 years and I didn't see any of them pushing for more oil drilling here.
 


Did you ever hear of a senate tactic called the filibuster?????????
 
CurrentAffairs said:
Exactly the same way you make comments about others (i.e., blowhorns)
Click to expand...
And what is your opinion of the subject of this thread?

Do you have anything to contribute?

Let me help you here....The kingdom of Saudi Arabia once were best, best buds with Papa Bush and all of his men. Typically, due to the complete incompetence of Bush's foreign policy as executed by our amazing Sec. of State the Saudis have determined that Bush et al are so weak, so impotent so unable to compute data and intellectualize fact that they have decided to lash out against America because they know as long as Bush is President they have nothing to lose.

This one is all Bush all the time.

What do you think CurrentAffairs?
 
jfuh said:
You going to actually respond to the topic or just beat around the bushes?
Click to expand...

That IS my response. It's nice when you are forced to stare at the truth.
 
C'mon people, you think the King of Saudia Arabia is condemning our occupation because of oil?? We aren't exactly replacing their oil with Iraqi oil, now are we??

It might have something to do with an emerging democracy in the ME being a threat to the traditional roles of their monarchy, but that doesn't satisfy anyones need to blame Bush, since the only thing people tie him to is oil.....
 
Even if we opened every oil well full bore and punched holes from here to Corpus Christi, the global oil prices wouldn't differ significantly.

If someone thinks that we can produce more oil here, which we can, and it would make much a difference, they are sadly dissillusioned.

In a perfect world, perhaps. We would produce our own oil and tell the rest of the world to take a hike. But that is so naive that it's not worth discussing.

Like the oil barons are going to suddenly become patriotic and produce American oil for American people? Gimme a break.

Why would an oil company sell it's own countrymen cheap fuel when Russia or China would be willing to pay double?

As soon as people get a better grip on how the oil market operates, these delusions might subside.

Oil, all oil, no matter what spicket it comes from, goes into a global "trough", if you will. If we went full bore on production, and flooded the market, we, as well everybody else around the globe, might see a small decrease in price but nothing significant.

The real reason we shouldn't go gung-ho on production is that is is throwing good money after bad. It might be a quick fix, or a band-aid, for the moment but as I mentioned earlier, the money would be better spent seeking solutions to eliminate common petroleum fuels altogether. THEN, we could tell the ME to go to hell.
 
Stace said:
How about you respond to the actual topic. Which has nothing to do with jfuh.
Click to expand...
Look closely. I did respond to this topic. Then jfuh attacked, and I defended myself. As you were.
 
Captain America said:
It might be a quick fix, or a band-aid, for the moment but as I mentioned earlier, the money would be better spent seeking solutions to eliminate common petroleum fuels altogether. THEN, we could tell the ME to go to hell.
Click to expand...
Dang, if a musician can grasp the concept why is it so hard for cons? (j/k cap'n)...:lol:

I love it when someone says this war is about oil and the cons say 'well then, how come I'm payin $3.00 a gallon for gas'.
clueless
Remember the ol' saying...'Just because you're on their side, doesn't mean they're on your side'....
 
CurrentAffairs said:
Look closely. I did respond to this topic. Then jfuh attacked, and I defended myself. As you were.
Click to expand...

This:

CurrentAffairs said:
Exactly the same way you make comments about others (i.e., blowhorns)
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with "Saudi King Condemns U.S. Occupation of Iraq".

Get on topic. That's NOT a suggestion. And if you have any further problems, you can address them via PM.
 
Stace said:
This:



Has nothing to do with "Saudi King Condemns U.S. Occupation of Iraq".

Get on topic. That's NOT a suggestion. And if you have any further problems, you can address them via PM.
Click to expand...
oh, you noticed the blowhorn comment, eh?
 
jfuh said:
source


Thanks to our dear old "allies" of Saudi arabia issuing such a rally cry to the Sunni's within Iraq. But thank you Bush for making us illegitimate through lies to get us into this war.
Click to expand...



Bush was just legally responding to the law voted on by those opposed to the illegal occupation of Kuwait by Iraq. The second Bush was legally responding to that law and the law voted on by former allies like snake in the grass treasonous Democrat John Kerry—Democrats lied to get us into a war and then with a deliberate act of betrayal abandoned the legal mission they signed off on—so it should not be surprising that King Abdullah would become a Democrat. That is what the Democrats wanted, isn’t it? A Democrat like their glorious leader Howard Dean that would call Hamas “soldiers:”

“Howard Dean has said that Hamas’ soldiers—no one has ever called Hamas soldiers before. Howard Dean has said we don’t take sides in the Middle East. We took sides in 1948. Israel’s our ally. We always knew that. We can’t have a president who is conducting American foreign policy by press release clarification, and we’re certainly not going to beat George Bush that way.” (John Kerry Meet the Press (NBC News) - Sunday, January 11, 2004)

“King Abdullah called on Arab governments to increase their unity.” That sounds familiar…

“…there is not enough will power to lead the path of Jihad and proper action." (Saddam Hussein, July, 1997)

*****

The Law:

“H32. Requires Iraq to inform the Security Council that it will not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism;
I
33. Declares that, upon official notification by Iraq to the Secretary-General and to the Security Council of its acceptance of the provisions above, a formal cease-fire is effective between Iraq and Kuwait and the Member States cooperating with Kuwait in accordance with resolution 678 (1990);” RESOLUTION 687 (1991) Adopted by the Security Council at its 2981st meeting, on 3 April 1991

First contact:

March 1997: “Though Bin Ladin had promised Taliban leaders that he would be circumspect, he broke this promise almost immediately, giving an inflammatory interview to CNN in March 1997. The Taliban leader Mullah Omar promptly "invited" Bin Ladin to move to Kandahar, ostensibly in the interests of Bin Ladin's own security but more likely to situate him where he might be easier to control.73
There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. (The 9/11 commission report, page 65-66)
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
details

A possible response to first contact:

July 1997: “Those who desire to face up to the Zionists conspiracies, intransigence, and aggressiveness must proceed towards the advance centers of capabilities in the greater Arab homeland and to the centers of the knowledge, honesty and sincerity with whole heartiness if the aim was to implement a serious plan to save others from their dilemma or to rely on those capable centers; well-known for their positions regarding the enemy, to gain precise concessions from it with justified maneuvers even if such centers including Baghdad not in agreement with those concerned, over the objectives and aims of the required maneuvers." (On the 29th anniversary of Iraq’s national day (the 17th of July 1968 revolution). President Saddam Hussein made an important comprehensive and nation wide address) President Saddam's speech on July 17 1997

A serious plan to save others from their dilemma; a Sunni rallying cry:

February 23, 1998: One (“The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people…”), Two (“despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance…”), Three (“if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq…”)! World Islamic Front Statement Urging Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders

The tit for tat:

“On the basis of what we said about Iraq while confronting aggressions, the world now needs to abort the US aggressive schemes, including its aggression on the Afghan people, which must stop.
Again we say that when someone feels that he is unjustly treated, and no one is repulsing or stopping the injustice inflicted on him, he personally seeks ways and means for lifting that justice. Of course, not everyone is capable of finding the best way for lifting the injustice inflicted on him. People resort to what they think is the best way according to their own ideas, and they are not all capable of reaching out for what is beyond what is available to arrive to the best idea or means.
To find the best way, after having found their way to God and His rights, those who are inflicted by injustice need not to be isolated from their natural milieu, or be ignored deliberately, or as a result of mis-appreciation, by the officials in this milieu. They should, rather, be reassured and helped to save themselves, and their surroundings. It is only normal to say that punishment is a necessity in our world, because what is a necessity in the other world must also be necessary in our world on Earth. But, the punishment in the other world is faire and just, and the prophets and messengers of God (peace be upon them all) conducted punishment and called for it in justice, and not on the basis of suspicions and whims.” (Saddam Hussein Shabban 13, 1422 H. October 29, 2001.)

“Once again, we say that, injustice and the pressure that results from it on people lead to explosions. As explosions are not always organized, it is to be expected that they may harm those who make them and others. The events of September 11, should be seen on this basis, and on the basis of imbalanced reactions, on the part of governments accused of being democratic, if the Americans are sure that these were carried out by people from abroad.
To concentrate not on what is important, but rather on what is the most important, we say again that after having seen that the flames of any fire can expand to cover all the world, it first and foremost, needs justice based on fairness. The best and most sublime expression of this is in what we have learned from what God the Al Mighty ordered to be, or not to be.” (Saddam Hussein Shabban 13, 1422 H. October 29, 2001.)

Who are the magical “they” that Saddam said, “should, rather, be reassured and helped to save themselves, and their surroundings?”

Was that a “rally cry to the Sunni's?”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…