It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Okay, so let's go occupy Saudi Arabia!

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Shots, Corinthas, the person you quoted, never said we invaded Saudi Arabia. You even quoted him. You missed something in his reply called "Irony"

Here, some help from Dictionary.com:

irony
n. pl. ironies

1) The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning.
2) An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.
3) A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect. See Synonyms at wit1.




posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Corinthas

Remember europe in 1945? Well Yanks are stll crawling all over it now, 15 years after the Russians went home! You were invited (no invasion) but never left (yes invasion).

[edit on 20/12/2004 by Corinthas]


Do you know why they are still there?

I can tell you, why. In one word. "NATO."



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 01:55 PM
link   
What ? (N)o (A)ction (T)alk (O)nly ? Hardly. I would agree with those views which relate to historical economics (ie: cronyism) and possibly, the backlash on the religious front. Can you imagine Mecca and the Black Stone being under the control of Bible thumping American Republicans ? The reaction from the Muslim world would be too horrendous to even contemplate !



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Iraq was invaded because

1) The people are oppressed
2) There's no democracy and it is ruled by a dictator
3) They had (????) Weapons of mass destruction
4) They had links to terrorist organisations
umm.... did I miss anything.

Well, If I go by that logic...
Doesn't Pakistan fit the description to a "T"?

Ha ha, they even have the WMDs for sure. Add them to the list too. Right after the Saudis


[/sarcasm]

[edit on 20-12-2004 by Vivek]



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by dixon
What ? (N)o (A)ction (T)alk (O)nly ? Hardly.


You missed my point as I expected. NATO by treaty is required to come to the aid of any member nation that has been attacked. That is also the reason we have troops stationed in the UK, Germany and France.


On 12 September 2001, less than 24 hours after the terrorist attacks against the United States, NATO declared the attacks to be an attack against all the 19 NATO member countries.

The Allies - for the first time in NATO's history - invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which states that an armed attack against one or more NATO member country will be considered an attack against all.

[quote/]



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Again...

We already DID pull out of Saudi Arabia.

Is everyone forgetting this?

216.26.163.62...

It's old news...


If this was truly Osama's beef, then it was solved about a year ago.... His beef is more to the West in general, and to the Saudi Royals for ever agreeing to us being there in the first place.

Indeed, remember that the Iraqi war was directed not from Saudi, but from a new base in Qatar.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vivek
Doesn't Pakistan fit the description to a "T"?

Ha ha, they even have the WMDs for sure. Add them to the list too. Right after the Saudis

Musharaff is threatened by the fanatical militants in pakistan himself, so why would the US bother to attack pakistan? Better to aide musharraf and keep those members of the military that are 'borderline' over there on his side than invade the country and have an uprising.


gazrok
Is everyone forgetting this?

Yikes! I certainly forgot.



posted on Dec, 20 2004 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Again...

We already DID pull out of Saudi Arabia.

Is everyone forgetting this?

216.26.163.62...

If this was truly Osama's beef, then it was solved about a year ago.... His beef is more to the West in general, and to the Saudi Royals for ever agreeing to us being there in the first place.

Indeed, remember that the Iraqi war was directed not from Saudi, but from a new base in Qatar.


Not totally true all members of the US forces have not been removed.


Officials said several hundred U.S. military advisers will remain in the kingdom and will concentrate on training and arms procurement. French military personnel will also remain at Prince Sultan and will deal with search-and-rescue training, Middle East Newsline reported.[quote/]
That was taken from your link.

Perhaps it is those several hundred that have his panties in a wad.



posted on Dec, 21 2004 @ 01:06 PM
link   
We've officially pulled out.

Several hundred hardly constitutes more than a token presence. One poster had mentioned that we had invaded with our presence there. I was merely reminding that such a presence is no longer an issue...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join