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.

 

Middle East split over Iraq deepens

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 05:19 AM
link   
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki has put off a planned visit to Saudi Arabia after the two countries publicly clashed over the situation in Iraq.



Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia has accused Shia Iran of meddling in the affairs of the violence-ravaged country, but Tehran has denied the charge, which also drew a scathing attack on Saudi Arabia from an Iraqi Shia minister

"Iraqis are complaining of interference by Iran. If there is indeed such interference, especially in provinces neighbouring Iran, that would be quite serious," Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said last month

Saud has also charged that Washington was effectively handing Iraq to Iran by pursuing a policy that deepened sectarian divisions. Tehran dismissed Riyadh's concerns.

Interior Minister Bayan Baqer Sulagh said the oil-rich Sunni-ruled kingdom had several problems of its own to take care of. "Saudis should first allow women to drive, as is the case in Iraq," he said, adding that "four million Shia live like second-class citizens in the Saudi kingdom."

Source:
Al-Jazeera.Net

And the Great Divide between the East and the West deepens, as does the Abyss between the Fellow Muslim Brothers. It's easy to keep control over the Middle East (or just about over any country). All you must do is to DIVIDE them. And US Foreign Politics in Middle Eastern Area have done just that Magnificently over past few decades. With their Endless Support for Isreal and for Saudi Arabia they have sparked numerous Conflicts and international disputes over Land, Religion and Politics.

To me is quiet obvious that if Saudi Arabia did not have this kind of Support in the Bush Administration, that they would soon end up as #1 on the Terrorist Countries Hit List. Instead that Role was chosen for Iran. I bet if Iran had these ammounts of Oil, USA would be VERY Friendly to them and would probably be "Best Friends" just as they are with Saudis today.

Fair and Balanced?




posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 06:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
I bet if Iran had these ammounts of Oil, USA would be VERY Friendly to them and would probably be "Best Friends" just as they are with Saudis today.

Fair and Balanced?


Souljah, Iran does have huge oil reserves. The U.S. is opposed to the government of Iran because it is a repressive regime that supports terrorism and wants to proliferate nuclear weapons.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Souljah, Iran does have huge oil reserves. The U.S. is opposed to the government of Iran because it is a repressive regime that supports terrorism and wants to proliferate nuclear weapons.


Saudi Arabia is even more repressive than Iran so that's not it.
The majority of foreign insurgents in Iraq are Saudis, not Iranian so that's not it either.

The proliferation of nuclear weapons in Iran is debatable.

I think the reason they are opposed to the Iranian regime is because Iran is not friendly to the US and because Israel doesn't like Iran and views them as a threat.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Souljah, Iran does have huge oil reserves. The U.S. is opposed to the government of Iran because it is a repressive regime that supports terrorism and wants to proliferate nuclear weapons.

If I remember Correctly the Majority of the Terrorist from the 9-11 WTC Crash were Suadi. OBL is a Saudi. But Bush Administration attacked Afganistan after 9-11 and at the Beginning of the War on Terror. They attacked Iraq, but he had NO connection to Al-Qaeda or to 9-11 or was he in possession of any WMD's. You could say that US Attacked and Invaded two countries without any REAL Reason - they were all based upon Lies.

So, when it Comes to Iran - yes they have alot of Oil, but they are behind Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq, currently in USA Control. Yes they want Nuclear Power - and nuclear power is like a screwdriver: you go and buy it in the hardware store to repair stuff, not to go around and kill people (well you can do that with it if you really NEED to). And the third problem is that Iran does not Agree with Foreign US Politics in the Middle East (like AceOfBase said before me). Does that make them Terrorists? And why does the same Criteria does not apply to Saudi Arabia?



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by Souljah
I bet if Iran had these ammounts of Oil, USA would be VERY Friendly to them and would probably be "Best Friends" just as they are with Saudis today.

Fair and Balanced?


Souljah, Iran does have huge oil reserves. The U.S. is opposed to the government of Iran because it is a repressive regime that supports terrorism and wants to proliferate nuclear weapons.


The US is only opposed to them because they know they can't get them to side with them.

I agree on Iran having huge oil reserves though, they already surpassed Iraq?

[edit on 6-10-2005 by shire19]



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by shire19
The US is only opposed to them because they know they can't get them to side with them.

I agree on Iran having huge oil reserves though, they already surpassed Iraq?

I stand Corrected:



Top Ten Countries with Oil Reserves in Billion Barrles:

1. Saudi Arabia 261.9
2. Canada 178.81
3. Iran 125.8
4. Iraq 115.0
5. Kuwait 101.5
6. United Arab Emirates 97.8
7. Venezuela 77.2
8. Russia 60.0
9. Libya 39.0
10. Nigeria 35.3

One More Reason that Bush Administration wants this War with Iran.

And Canada.




posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase
I think the reason they are opposed to the Iranian regime is because Iran is not friendly to the US and because Israel doesn't like Iran and views them as a threat.


Israel can care less for Saudi Arabia.
Iran is supporting terrorism in Iraq and else where in the world.
Your reasoning borders on an excuse to protect Iran.
If US foreign policy is an issue, then either they and the Middle East need to deal with it, or openly contest it.
Saudi Arabia and Iran can blow for all I care.




seekerof



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 07:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Iran is supporting terrorism in Iraq and else where in the world.

If Iran is the Supporter of Terrorism,
then Saudi Araiba is what?
The Founding Father of Terror?
The World Terrorist Bank?
The Terrorist Foundation?



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Seems to me that terrorism is increasingly being defined in the UK and US media as anything thatconfronts US foreign policy. This is why the UN couldn't agree on a definition.

Let's not forget that the "Coalition of the Foolish" brought all of this on themselves and that they are the ones who have been violating Iranian airspace and Iranian territorial waters and threatening to bomb legal nuclear facilities.

As for nuclear proliferation. Iran is not signed up to that treaty and do not have to abide by it. Current geo-politics show that if you have Nukes other nations respect your sovereignty. How else could Pakistan continue to harbour Ossama bin Laden. How else can Israel openly abuse human rights and ignore UN resolutions. If all countries were treated the same then there would be no need for Nuclear weapons.

But I know those blinded by the Bush propaganda years won't have there minds changed. They have oil and they defy the USA so they must be terrorists.

[edit on 6-10-2005 by John bull 1]



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by John bull 1
As for nuclear proliferation. Iran is not signed up to that treaty and do not have to abide by it.


That is not true, Iran is indeed a signatory of the NPT.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   
OK, sorry.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
If I remember Correctly the Majority of the Terrorist from the 9-11 WTC Crash were Suadi. OBL is a Saudi. But Bush Administration attacked Afganistan after 9-11 and at the Beginning of the War on Terror. They attacked Iraq, but he had NO connection to Al-Qaeda or to 9-11 or was he in possession of any WMD's. You could say that US Attacked and Invaded two countries without any REAL Reason - they were all based upon Lies.


no arguments about saudi....oil and a US friendly government are the only reasons we havent pursued them. however, you know darn well why we attacked the taliban...you cant honestly say we attacked that country obviously supporting terrorism and OBL for no reason.



One More Reason that Bush Administration wants this War with Iran.

And Canada.


NOW youre talking out of your rear....i think they made a movie about that....Canadian Bacon with Alan Alda.



posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 09:54 AM
link   


Originally posted by snafu7700
And Canada.


NOW youre talking out of your rear....i think they made a movie about that....Canadian Bacon with Alan Alda.

Did you see the Smiley below that statement?



I saw that Movie - Funny, but in a Scary Way.




posted on Oct, 6 2005 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah


Originally posted by snafu7700
And Canada.


NOW youre talking out of your rear....i think they made a movie about that....Canadian Bacon with Alan Alda.

Did you see the Smiley below that statement?



I saw that Movie - Funny, but in a Scary Way.



oh, ok....gotcha



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join