Uh...you do realize that Saudi Arabia has and is undergoing state crackdowns of extremist that favor AQ right? Why do people not understand this?
Maybe I don't believe it because I'm still having surgeries on my knees due to a mortar that AQ received from Saudi Arabia and fired at me and my team in Somalia.
AQ wants the House of Saud gone as much as they want us gone.
True to a point. This doesn't diminish the fact that many in the Saud family are financing AQ's fights in certain theaters of operations; Syria being one. Just because the Crown Prince acts one way, doesn't mean that the government, or certain Princes aren't financing AQAP, and other sects.
Only Qatar has no problems getting into bed with the extremists.
There are many factions within Qatar's government. Just like Saudi Arabia. Qatar, UAE, and especially Bahrain (even though the US 5th Fleet is based there) are just as complicit as the Saud family.
The Saudis and the other Gulf States will favor the the secularist and moderate fighters. Not AQ.
They favor whatever keeps them in power. And if giving money and arms to AQ keeps them out of AQ's cross hairs, then they do it. It's like protection money, but also related to Sunni zealots in the governments of all these Principalities. The Bahrain riots (or uprising if you will) in 2012 was by the majority Shia population, the same sect of Islam as Iran and Syria's Assad (although he's part of a minority sub-sect within the Shiite sect). The Sunni government put the riots down with tremendous force and bloodshed.
Israel could be in less danger as the fall of Assad reduces the strength of Hezbollah.
I can agree with that, IF, the power vacuum isn't filled with Sunni's (AQ) or Shia zealots (Iran).
Some nutjob on another thread tried to argue that the removal of Assad would make Hezbollah stronger. I asked him how they'd get money and weapons. He never gave an answer.
Yeah, that makes no sense.
We let Assad go on this and we become a paper tiger. How do you think Iran is going to view that?
Iran is going to do what Iran wants to do, as long as Russia has veto power in the UN Security Council.
I have no problem with getting rid of Assad, if there is some alternative that does not include AQ, or Iranian backed Shiiites. I think that getting rid of Assad would destabilize the area in such a way that the power vacuum would or at least could be filled by Iranian controlled Shiites, since they are mortal enemies of AQ, or AQ or Al Nussra or some other AQ affiliate. I feel that because we, the US, specifically Obama, will not do what is required to ensure a safe transfer of power.
Firing missiles and destabilizing Assad's military will give AQ the upper hand, and Iran will not stand by and let that happen on their doorstep. Neither will Russia.
There's a hell of a lot more to this situation than what the talking points coming from the US government describe.
The unintended consequences are almost unthinkable.
Israel has nukes. And I guarantee you they would use them if Iran became a player in Syria and Israel felt threatened from a potential invasion or massive attack by Iran.
Taking out Assad, without a controlled plan and stable transfer of power to a secular government, could set Iran and the region on the path to the most destructive and deadly conflict in the history of the world. Russia, China, Turkey (and then all of NATO), Israel, Iraq, Egypt, and so on, and so on... Who knows where it would end.
I appreciate your thoughts and your well thought out opinion. I just have a different view given my experience in the region for years. Most of it fighting against these bastards in one form or another.