• 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 Arabia warns Yemen violence could threaten global security

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
33,000
Reaction score
13,973
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Saudi Arabia warns Yemen violence could threaten global security

DUBAI (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia has said "unprecedented challenges" facing Yemen since Shi'ite Muslim rebels took over the capital could threaten international security, and called for swift action to deal with instability in its southern neighbor.

The world's largest oil exporter, which shares a long border with Yemen, welcomed an agreement signed in Sanaa on Sept. 21 to form a new government incorporating the Houthi rebels and some Yemeni southern separatist forces.

But the kingdom, a key U.S. ally which views itself as protector of Sunni Islam, fears the accord could benefit its main regional foe Iran, which it sees as an ally of the Houthis, and might also bolster the Islamist militant al Qaeda group.


Saudi Arabia has got to be one of the sorriest nations, for their leaders being involved, in the world. Since the 1950's, we've been supporting them and buying their oil, making them one of the richest countries per capita on the globe, and they contribute little to nothing in fighting the extremism in their region. If nothing else, they've actually supported some of it with covert funds, and only get involved in anything that directly affects them.

Now that Yemen, their back door neighbor is being destabilized, they cry again for help but use none of their massive wealth, military or support to fund and fight themselves. What a bunch of dummies we are for not forcing them to take more action, but we're too busy being their protector, since they controlled so much of our energy needs.
 
The Saudis can suck my dick.
 
The hijackers in the September 11 attacks were 19 men supposedly affiliated with al-Qaeda, and 15 of the 19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia. The others were from the United Arab Emirates (2), Egypt and Lebanon. But who do we attack, Afghanistan and Iraq, when the Saudi's clearly have a problem that we're not acknowledging with terrorism and recruiting.

Something is screwy with those statistics and outcomes.
 
Saudi Arabia has got to be one of the sorriest nations, for their leaders being involved, in the world. Since the 1950's, we've been supporting them and buying their oil, making them one of the richest countries per capita on the globe, and they contribute little to nothing in fighting the extremism in their region. If nothing else, they've actually supported some of it with covert funds, and only get involved in anything that directly affects them.

Now that Yemen, their back door neighbor is being destabilized, they cry again for help but use none of their massive wealth, military or support to fund and fight themselves. What a bunch of dummies we are for not forcing them to take more action, but we're too busy being their protector, since they controlled so much of our energy needs.

That isn't what this is about. They don't genuinely believe that the Houthi seizure of Sana'a is a threat to global security, they are trying to shape the narrative of what is going on in Yemen. Saudi Arabia has long maintained extremely close relationships with the Hashid and Bakil tribal confederations which usually dominate the country. When the Yemeni uprisings ousted Saleh they gave critical backing to Sadiq al-Ahmar and his brother Mohsin in their move to support the street protests and topple the government. They have been engaged in incessant combat with the Shia rebels across the border (the Houthi) and in suppressing their own Shia population in Najran and Asir. The apparent double dealing by the tribesmen in allowing the Houthi to march into Sana'a has stoked their anger and fears. I would guess that this is laying the ground work for greater Saudi involvement in Yemen possibly with border incursions, renewed funding for tribal fighters, and demands from the United States for backing in their ventures.
 
The hijackers in the September 11 attacks were 19 men supposedly affiliated with al-Qaeda, and 15 of the 19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia. The others were from the United Arab Emirates (2), Egypt and Lebanon. But who do we attack, Afghanistan and Iraq, when the Saudi's clearly have a problem that we're not acknowledging with terrorism and recruiting.

Something is screwy with those statistics and outcomes.

Because the organization responsible for the attacks was based in Afghanistan, and we had an ally in Saudi Arabia that has been conducting a successful internal campaign against al-Qaeda and its affiliated groups. The partnership has had many flaws but it is a serious and real partnership.
 
Because the organization responsible for the attacks was based in Afghanistan, and we had an ally in Saudi Arabia that has been conducting a successful internal campaign against al-Qaeda and its affiliated groups. The partnership has had many flaws but it is a serious and real partnership.


You really call 15 out of 19 attackers Saudi citizens a successful internal campaign against AQ?
 
You really call 15 out of 19 attackers Saudi citizens a successful internal campaign against AQ?

The campaign obviously didn't begin before 9/11. They took al-Qaeda less seriously than we did, and we didn't take it very seriously until the waning years before the attacks.
 
The campaign obviously didn't begin before 9/11. They took al-Qaeda less seriously than we did, and we didn't take it very seriously until the waning years before the attacks.


How was AL-Qaeda so well established in Saudi Arabia before to accomplish such an attack? And why did they recruit so many of the attackers from there? Those questions have never really been asked or answered.

And why haven't the Saudi's had more involvement in helping with Iraq? It seems to me they just sit back and rake in trillions of petrol dollars, while we clean up all the surrounding messes.
 
How was AL-Qaeda so well established in Saudi Arabia before to accomplish such an attack? And why did they recruit so many of the attackers from there? Those questions have never really been asked or answered.

Oh, please. Let's not pretend you've come up with a new question. That question has, in fact, been asked and answered a million times.

It basically comes down to Saudi being a developing country.

And why haven't the Saudi's had more involvement in helping with Iraq? It seems to me they just sit back and rake in trillions of petrol dollars, while we clean up all the surrounding messes.

They've designated ISIS a terrorist organization, shared intel and have otherwise been involved.

Saudi prince and UAE's first female pilot lead blitz on ISIS in Iraq and Syria | Daily Mail Online

Who is part of the coalition to battle ISIS? - CNN.com


Using ignorance to construct a conspiracy theory is nonsense.
 
How was AL-Qaeda so well established in Saudi Arabia before to accomplish such an attack? And why did they recruit so many of the attackers from there? Those questions have never really been asked or answered.

And why haven't the Saudi's had more involvement in helping with Iraq? It seems to me they just sit back and rake in trillions of petrol dollars, while we clean up all the surrounding messes.

What? It's been answered extensively and voluminously in hundreds of reports, books, and articles. I'll try and very briefly summarize. Saudi Arabia was the primary financial and political backer (alongside the United States) of the anti-Soviet campaign in Afghanistan in which thousands of Saudis fought. The flow of fighters and supporters back from Afghanistan to Saudi Arabia created the domestic nucleus for al-Qaeda. Preexisting strains of radical Islamist thought were already pervasive in the Kingdom as evidenced by the Grand Mosque Seizure of 1979.

As for Iraq the Saudi's strongly opposed the US Invasion and recalled Prince Bandar over his unauthorized endorsements. Afterwards they were deeply suspicious of Malaki and his close ties to Iran and Shia political and militant groups. It was always unreasonable to expect that Saudi Arabia would have warm relations with post-war Iraq. They did however strive to prevent Saudi citizens from crossing into Iraq to fight and Nayef made this a cornerstone achievement of his time at the Interior Ministry.
 
Oh, please. Let's not pretend you've come up with a new question. That question has, in fact, been asked and answered a million times.

It basically comes down to Saudi being a developing country.



They've designated ISIS a terrorist organization, shared intel and have otherwise been involved.

Saudi prince and UAE's first female pilot lead blitz on ISIS in Iraq and Syria | Daily Mail Online

Who is part of the coalition to battle ISIS? - CNN.com


Using ignorance to construct a conspiracy theory is nonsense.


All they do is cut the heads and hands off their own Sharia Law rule breaking citizens and roll in oil profits, laughing at us for doing their dirty work. Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that we've been anything but used like a cheap date.

You know better than to deny the obvious is pure foolishness. :doh
 
Saudi Arabia has got to be one of the sorriest nations, for their leaders being involved, in the world. Since the 1950's, we've been supporting them and buying their oil, making them one of the richest countries per capita on the globe, and they contribute little to nothing in fighting the extremism in their region. If nothing else, they've actually supported some of it with covert funds, and only get involved in anything that directly affects them.

Now that Yemen, their back door neighbor is being destabilized, they cry again for help but use none of their massive wealth, military or support to fund and fight themselves. What a bunch of dummies we are for not forcing them to take more action, but we're too busy being their protector, since they controlled so much of our energy needs.

I could be wrong but I think their school system they teach Wahabism, or at least did prior to 9/11. And we financed it through our gasoline purchases. Analyses - Wahhabism | PBS - Saudi Time Bomb? | FRONTLINE | PBS

Calling for regime change in Saudi Arabia IMHO is not the solution as it will only create more instability in the region. The solution IMHO is start moving away from the monopoly gasoline has on the US and global economy so they are no longer so vitally needed, either by us or anybody else. We can do it with new technologies but there's resistance by the oil industry for obvious reasons. There's resistance by the auto industry because they'd rather manufacture cars that bring in 40% profits in genuine replacement parts and will wear out after 100,000 miles so you'll need a new one while not realizing something longer lasting, requires far less maintenance and with the same mass production as traditional cars would be cheaper. There's resistance from car dealerships because unknown to most of the public, they make more profit from their service departments than their sales departments and the new technology requires far less servicing. There's resistance from elected officials because they get paid big time by the lobbyists who have vested interests in maintaining the status quo; big oil, Detroit, the dealership lobby and through loopholes afforded through Superpacs probably indirect support from OPEC. For example: Fox News Channels parent company has significant Saudi Royal family holdings. Lastly there's resistance by the political right who cannot see past their disdain for environmentalists to the grave national security crisis we're in that is rooted in refusing to modernize our transportation.
 
Last edited:
I could be wrong but I think their school system they teach Wahabism, or at least did prior to 9/11. And we financed it through our gasoline purchases. Analyses - Wahhabism | PBS - Saudi Time Bomb? | FRONTLINE | PBS

Calling for regime change in Saudi Arabia IMHO is not the solution as it will only create more instability in the region. The solution IMHO is start moving away from the monopoly gasoline has on the US and global economy so they are no longer so vitally needed, either by us or anybody else. We can do it with new technologies but there's resistance by the oil industry for obvious reasons. There's resistance by the auto industry because they'd rather manufacture cars that bring in 40% profits in genuine replacement parts and will wear out after 100,000 miles so you'll need a new one while not realizing something longer lasting, requires far less maintenance possible and with the same mass production as traditional cars would be cheaper. There's resistance from car dealerships because unknown to most of the public, they make more profit from their service departments than their sales departments and the new technology requires far less servicing. There's resistance from elected officials because they get paid big time by the lobbyists who have vested interests in maintaining the status quo; big oil, Detroit, the dealership lobby and through loopholes afforded through Superpacs probably indirect support from OPEC. For example: Fox News Channels parent company has significant Saudi Royal family holdings. Lastly there's resistance by the political right who cannot see past their disdain for environmentalists to the grave national security crisis we're in that is rooted in refusing to modernize or transportation.


No, I've never called for regime changes or our forcing cultural shifts away from their preferred practices. I do believe in moving away from petroleum products as primary energy sources. Much of the past few decades and trillions upon trillions of dollars are spent securing these sources for use, and they could be changed or at least have more domestic production temporarily ramped up. If we can ever stabilize that mess over there that we started long enough, we may be able to detangle ourselves and let them descend back into a medieval style of living, if that's what suits them.
 
What global security?

Your cesspool of a region, culture, and religion has destabilized the entire planet.
 
How was AL-Qaeda so well established in Saudi Arabia before to accomplish such an attack? And why did they recruit so many of the attackers from there? Those questions have never really been asked or answered.

And why haven't the Saudi's had more involvement in helping with Iraq? It seems to me they just sit back and rake in trillions of petrol dollars, while we clean up all the surrounding messes.

It's simple, Osama bin Laden was for Saudi Arabia and created al Qaeada. It's not rocket science.
 
It's simple, Osama bin Laden was for Saudi Arabia and created al Qaeada. It's not rocket science.

Then if it's that simple, then why didn't we look harder at Saudi Arabia the birth place of AQ? We should've dug up the roots before trying to burn the branches.
 
Then if it's that simple, then why didn't we look harder at Saudi Arabia the birth place of AQ? We should've dug up the roots before trying to burn the branches.

When you dig there you get oil.
 
No, I've never called for regime changes or our forcing cultural shifts away from their preferred practices. I do believe in moving away from petroleum products as primary energy sources. Much of the past few decades and trillions upon trillions of dollars are spent securing these sources for use, and they could be changed or at least have more domestic production temporarily ramped up. If we can ever stabilize that mess over there that we started long enough, we may be able to detangle ourselves and let them descend back into a medieval style of living, if that's what suits them.

Provided its seen as a temporary transitional measure with a greater and more urgent aim of introducing more automobiles on the roads domestically and internationally that do not require gasoline. Many seem to see more domestic oil production as the permanent solution. Treating domestic oil production as the solution will only force the oil-rich Middle East into strategic alliances with China and Russia, which creates a potentially worse national security dilemma.
 
When you dig there you get oil.

And the oil money is what's been funding the terrorists. The Saudi's have been playing duplicitous games with us and the world. Their princes are secretly a bunch of spoiled fundies, who wanted to play power politics on a global scale, but now it's backfiring.
 
Provided its seen as a temporary transitional measure with a greater and more urgent aim of introducing more automobiles on the roads domestically and internationally that do not require gasoline. Many seem to see more domestic oil production as the permanent solution. Treating domestic oil production as the solution will only force the oil-rich Middle East into strategic alliances with China and Russia, which creates a potentially worse national security dilemma.

If some corporations can make a lot of profit on newer green technology, then others will follow suit but it won't happen over night. There's too much infrastructure to change with airplanes, automobiles, manufacturing plants, filling stations, oil rigs, shipping, etc. We just have to survive the transition period, and keep our economy and markets stable long enough for something new.
 
And the oil money is what's been funding the terrorists. The Saudi's have been playing duplicitous games with us and the world. Their princes are secretly a bunch of spoiled fundies, who wanted to play power politics on a global scale, but now it's backfiring.

So what are you going to do about it? Hmmmm?
 
The hijackers in the September 11 attacks were 19 men supposedly affiliated with al-Qaeda, and 15 of the 19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia. The others were from the United Arab Emirates (2), Egypt and Lebanon. But who do we attack, Afghanistan and Iraq, when the Saudi's clearly have a problem that we're not acknowledging with terrorism and recruiting.

Something is screwy with those statistics and outcomes.

Because yeah, when the British citizen in Syria decapitates a US citizen we should really bomb the UK. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom