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.

 

Saudi FM: More urgent solution than sanctions needed on Iran

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Saudi FM: More urgent solution than sanctions needed on Iran


www.jpost.com

Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal expressed doubt on Monday evening about the usefulness of seeking more sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. In a joint appearance with US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, he said the threat posed by Iran's nuclear ambitions demanded a more immediate solution.

"Sanctions are a long-term solution. But we see the issue in the shorter term because we are closer to the threat," he said.

Faisal did not specify a preferred short-term resolution.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 08:06 PM
link   
What can be a more urgent solution than sanctions urged by the Saudis against Iran? Military strikes? If indeed that is the case, then this could be a significant development in the middle east. It looks like the Saudi royal family is increasingly getting worried by Iran's proactive regime and is thus pressing for tougher steps.

If the Saudis are also pressing for military action against Iran, I wonder how long the Obama administration would ponder the diplomatic or the sanctions route. We must also remember the rumors that were afloat a few months back regarding the Saudis granting airspace access to the IAF for possible future air strikes against Iran.

www.jpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Saudi Arabia and Iran both want control of the region.

War against Iran would be win-win for Saudi Arabia...

- Higher oil prices (150$/barrel, possibly more than that)
- Elimination of regional adversary
- Elimination of religious adversary

The only possible downside :
- Missiles coming from Iran

But even then, it would be win...
- Even higher oil prices
- Minimal damage to infrastructure
- Iran would be even more destroyed
- Patriot anti-missile batteries are protecting the important stuff

And that is if Iran even consider launching missiles at Saudi Arabia...they need enough to strike US and Israeli targets.

The thing is that the Wahabists, the craziest branch of islam, was created in Saudi Arabia and the stronghold is there. Al-CIAda is wahabist...

Iran, on the other hand, helped NATO in 2001-2003 fight the Talibans and handed over more Talibans to NATO than any other country.

Iran were basically our ally and relations were warming up...until 2003 when Bush did his BS speech ``countries supporting terrorism`` and named Iran... that destroyed relations.

And now because of this, a retarded president like Ahmadinejad was elected and we're on the brink of war with Iran....

When, according to the official 911 story, most hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and the whole terroristic ideology came from there. But eh, like the elite would go against their friends in Saudi Arabia... better to take out the bad former CIA puppet Saddam... helping on the way Saudi Arabia...

In the US middle-east policy, only two things matter : Saudi Arabia and Israel. Everything else count for squat.

Why Saudi Arabia is so important? Oil is sold in US dollars and Saudi Arabia have a big say in OPEC. They need them to keep the US dollar as the mean of exchange. Saudi investments in the US. Arms contracts with Saudi Arabia. And of course the important relationship with one of the biggest oil supplier in the world. If any big conflict happens, the US would have priority over the Saudi oil...

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Vitchilo]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Dubai Hotel Video, the night of the murder.....must see!!!!






www.youtube.com...



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 





Saudi Arabia and Iran both want control of the region.

But I thought Saudi Arabia was in control of the US, soooo shouldn't this statement get rewritten?

Maybe something along the lines as: The US being an empire wants full control of the region. Iran is the only country standing in its way. So therefore boom boom shakalakaboom. Something similar to Afghanistan and Iraq.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


Yeah by ``control`` of the region, I meant, being a US puppet but having control in the middle-east area over muslims.

They are like the mayor of the middle-east town while the US is the president of the world...kinda.

And I didn't say Saudi Arabia controls the US, I said they were a big part of the decision taking process of the US when it comes to middle-east policy.

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Vitchilo]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Wow, Hilary is really getting the war machine primed over there


So far today I've heard:

- Iran is a military dictatorship

- the US won't let Israel face another holocaust

- Saudi Arabia wants urgent solution

I think we're reaching terminal velocity, folks!



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Curio
 


I've lost all faith that an attack on Iran is even going to happen at all let alone we are at terminal velocity.

I'll believe it when I see it.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Israelis might need the assistance of U.S military assets to take on multiple opponents at the same time. The chances of any limited conflict triggering a regional war remains very high. Perhaps, that might explain the reason why the Israeli government has chosen to follow Obama's line as far as the Iran policy is concerned.

It looks like the Saudi elites are pursuing a "enemy of my enemy is my friend" line by making such statements on Iran. It is possible that the Israelis could have established a covert alliance with the Saudi Royal family on the Iran issue.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join