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.

 

Why are Americans so against Saudi Arabia?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 03:22 PM
link   
This pdf is a great analysis of the situation over there.

I currently am looking for a better analysis of the struggles of the Kingdom in the War on Terror that was far more optimistic and I have that saved on another computer so I will just get it later.

My point is that most Americans are very "boo" to the Kingdom? Why is this?

They say "most of the hijackers were Saudis" but this is not even true.

In Saudi Arabia there is little understanding of "nationality". The Saud family has tried to create a "national identity" but has done so poorly; their motives are to unite the people as one unit but the people there are tribal and their allegiance to the Saud family is mostly through marriage and through force.

Thus; what makes a Saudi a Saudi is his blood; and whatever princes have been involved with Al-Qa'ida have been executed.

The hijackers were born in Arabia; but I (more learned in the Kingdom) refuse to call them Saudi. They did not uphold the As-Saud policy of friendship towards their American partners; they were serving more-so the former ideology of the Ikhwan, which was destroyed by the As-Saud in the 1930s when the Ikhwan turned on them for modernistic views.

Them and the Imam's who still have a power in their state force the As-Saud to compromise and allow terror what we perceive as a "safe-haven" but to them it's merely a necessary lee-way that allows them to have any control at all.

Without the sanctification of the Imam the As-Saud family would quickly lose control of the tribes and the Arab peninsula would return to a state of civil war over control of the land.

Maybe that will one day be a good thing but not whilst the land is so important concerning oil.




posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 06:44 AM
link   
It's ridiculous that the Americans are so down on the Saudis;
1. the Saudis keep the price of oil down by always being the voice of moderation at OPEC.
2. The Saudis look the other way as America supports Israels racist policies against arabs, particularly America's support for aphartied in Palestine, and their insistence on colonizing Iraq and enslaving it as a puppet state, killing a 100,000 Iraqis in a process of imperialist oppresion.
3. The Saudis buy America's useless crap, their inferior cars (at least they used to) and they buy American military hardware instead of Russian or Chinese.
4. The Saudis trade oil in Petro dollars and not Euros.
5. The Saudis refrain from using harsh language vs the US like I'm doing now..

I could go on..but anyways, the Americans STILL hate the Saudis, you can't do enough for them, their zionists..they think everyone is here to serve them



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
Most Americans are very "boo" to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia? Why is this? Americans say "most of the hijackers were Saudis" but this is not even true.

In Saudi Arabia there is little understanding of "nationality." The people are tribal. Their allegiance to the Saud family is mostly through marriage and through force. The Saud family tried to create a "national identity" but has done [it] so poorly.

Whatever princes have been involved with al Qaeda have been executed. Yes, most of the hijackers were born in Arabia; but I refuse to call them Saudi. They did not uphold the As-Saud policy of friendship towards Americans. They were adherents of the former ideology of the Ikhwan, which was severely put-down by the “As” Sauds in the 1930s, when the Ikhwan turned on them because of their easy acceptance of western, modernistic attitudes and life-styles.

Without the sanctification of the Imams, the As-Saud family would quickly lose control of the tribes and the Arab peninsula would return to a state of civil war over control of the land. Maybe that will be a good thing but not whilst the land is so important concerning oil. [Edited for brevity by Don W]


OK, Stratrf_Rus, I think I comprehend your message. How does the 18th century Mr Mohammad Wahhab play out in this today, 2006? Now, post 1922 map making, what can realistically be done in the region in the next two or three years?


jajabinks: “It's ridiculous that the Americans are so down on the Saudis;
1. the Saudis keep the price of oil down by always being the voice of moderation at OPEC.
2. The Saudis look the other way as America supports Israel’s exclusionist policies against Arabs, particularly America's support for a subordinated Palestinian sub-state,
3. The Saudis buy America's military hardware instead of Russian or Chinese.
4. The Saudis trade oil in Petro dollars and not Euros.
5. The Saudis refrain from using harsh language vis a vis the US like I'm doing now.
I could go on, but anyways, the Americans STILL hate the Saudis . . [Edited for cogency by Don W]


Americans are easily propagandized, especially by a calculating demagogue in the White House who has managed to use the Nine Eleven Event to salvage a failed or failing presidency. Life is tough, everywhere.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   
Can You Believe Nine Eleven Began Here?

WWI
By 1914, sides were being chosen anticipating a coming war. The Young Turkish Party, which controlled the government of the Ottoman Empire following a coup in 1913, entered into a secret treaty with Germany because it promised not to divide the Empire if Germany won the war.

Unaware of the secret treaty, Churchill seized two Turkish warships, the "Reshadieh" and "Sultan Osman I," then being built under contract in British shipyards. These warships were of the latest and most powerful designs and the British wanted them for service against Germany. This upset the Turks enough to drive them into open cooperation with the Central Powers.

When Germany (Central Powers) surrendered to the Allied Powers in 1918, the victors got to divide the spoils of war. These included the Arabian lands of the Ottoman Empire. The American’s late entry into the war had turned the tide militarily against the Germans. The financial help that came from “Wall Street” - international bankers - was even more important. The British were so indebted to J.P. Morgan and other U.S. financiers that the U.S. government got important inputs into the post war settlements.

The region called the Middle East was a semi-autonomous region of the Ottoman Empire. It ended when the British and Americans drew lines on a map without consulting the people who lived there. In dividing a tribally-oriented group of people into arbitrary countries, the British and Americans continued the western policy of weakening their opponents by dividing them into small units. Then they attempted to graft new and compliant secular governments onto these predominantly Islamic cultures.

Perpetual war. A strategy. We are now at war with some of those artificial constructs the American and British governments created out of whole cloth in 1922. When Britain’s Sir Mark Sykes, a British aristocrat, set pen and ruler to the map of the old Ottoman Empire, he drew the playing field for the conflicts to come for the next 100 years.

Statement 1. If the U.S. and Britain wanted freedom and democracy to develop in the region, they would accept that secular governments are not the natural orientation of these populations. Muslim law and secular law do not easily coexist in the region, as the Muslim law always trumps secular law and religious leaders are always supreme. We don’t understand this concept in the West where secular law is the norm.

Statement 2. “Perpetual War” in the Middle East is entirely a construct of the West to exploit Arabian oil. While compassionate people would view western policies in the Middle East as a dismal failure, corporate people, on the other hand, view western policies in the region as extremely successful and profitable.

Considering the two statements above, people who do not stand to make $billions in profits through the exploitation of oil might like to pull western influence from the region and allow the Arab people a chance to restore their own sense of balance to the Arabian Peninsula; those who wish to suck the last drop of oil from the Middle East prefer that the region remain angry and unstable.

Since the influence of corporations is greater than the influence of sentimental and compassionate people, western leaders are now deviously at work sustaining a perpetual conflict in a region that has been at war since the West first drew its ‘OIL’ lines in the Arabian sand in 1922. This is also the underlying unspoken reason the United States prefers NO settlement of the Israel vs. Palestinian conflict. From a story by Tom Fowler, The Idaho Observer. proliberty.com...



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by jajabinks
3. The Saudis buy America's useless crap, their inferior cars (at least they used to) and they buy American military hardware instead of Russian or Chinese.


Useless crap
Of yeah they could have bought some sweet T-72S instead of M1A1s what a deal
Instead of Apaches they could have bought Hinds

As for "Inferior" cars its just your opinion.I would take a US sports cars over any Japanese sportscar in a sec under powered over expensive junk.

In the ME most of the rich like SUVs/trucks, sedans and sportscars so much so smuggled stolen sport cars and SUVs from the US can sell for 3 times their retail value in the ME. They dont really care about great MPG of say Japanese cars. Thats not really a huge selling point in the ME.

They also buy German sedans Italian super cars they buy whatever they like there is no conspiracy making them buy USA cars thats absurd to even suggest that



[edit on 8-3-2006 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

Originally posted by jajabinks
3. The Saudis buy America's useless crap, their inferior cars (at least they used to) and they buy American military hardware instead of Russian or Chinese.


Useless crap
Of yeah they could have bought some sweet T-72S instead of M1A1s what a deal
Instead of Apaches they could have bought Hinds

As for "Inferior" cars its just your opinion.I would take a US sports cars over any Japanese sportscar in a sec under powered over expensive junk.

In the ME most of the rich like SUVs/trucks, sedans and sportscars so much so smuggled stolen sport cars and SUVs from the US can sell for 3 times their retail value in the ME. They dont really care about great MPG of say Japanese cars. Thats not really a huge selling point in the ME.

They also buy German sedans Italian super cars they buy whatever they like there is no conspiracy making them buy USA cars thats absurd to even suggest that



[edit on 8-3-2006 by ShadowXIX]


He's talking more specifically about useless American Pick-ups which are a dime-a-dozen over there.

To donwhite, don't post stupid articles when I have presented well published papers.

Your argument that the US perpetuates war to exploit Arabian oil is rediculous considering that Arabian oil is now 100% owned by Arabs and that before-so the US and Arabs had a strong partnership.

Arabia was not cut out of whole cloth by the "West" either; only a few nations in that region were: Israel, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, and of these nations we're only at war with one.

Also; I think you over-looked my point that Saudi Arabia are good allies...



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Stratrf_Rus

What are you? a member of the saud family? because if you are then you should be aware of the links of the Saud family to the Bush family when it comes to business deals and investments with the Carlyle firm.

Or perhaps you are just going to say is just propaganda.

By the way the Saud family has been known to support terror groups and finance them.

Many business deals before 9/11 with the Bin laden family and Saud family were done through the Dubai banks.

Now what is that about scrap and oil?

Oh yeah, you mean all the business and land deals that the Saud hold in the US. Right? scrap indeed.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Stratrf_Rus

What are you? a member of the saud family? because if you are then you should be aware of the links of the Saud family to the Bush family when it comes to business deals and investments with the Carlyle firm.

Or perhaps you are just going to say is just propaganda.

By the way the Saud family has been known to support terror groups and finance them.

Many business deals before 9/11 with the Bin laden family and Saud family were done through the Dubai banks.

Now what is that about scrap and oil?

Oh yeah, you mean all the business and land deals that the Saud hold in the US. Right? scrap indeed.




Firstly; Osama is disowned by the Bin Laden family, he had to betray one of his closest brother's trust just to escape Saudi Arabia (he was under house arrest).

What's wrong with Bush having business deals...oh that's right...you're a poor hippy communist who hates investment and thus you're poor...but you'll just blame "the Man" for it.

You make it out like there's some "evil conspiracy" it's just business and there's nothing bad about it.

Like 2 Sauds supported terror and they have been killed so what's your point?



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus

What's wrong with Bush having business deals...oh that's right...you're a poor hippy communist who hates investment and thus you're poor...but you'll just blame "the Man" for it.



Or. . . perhaps you are just pushing your brand of propaganda to bring points to your thread.

I see that that is what you want, good luck but this nothing more than rant.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus

What's wrong with Bush having business deals...oh that's right...you're a poor hippy communist who hates investment and thus you're poor...but you'll just blame "the Man" for it.



Or. . . perhaps you are just pushing your brand of propaganda to bring points to your thread.

I see that that is what you want, good luck but this nothing more than rant.


Care to prove that your claims are significant or problematic or even relevant?



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   
Saudi Arabia Friend or Foe?

Good link...do read.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join