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 Arabia on the brink of Civil War!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Secure your Gold & Oil Positions Saudi Arabia is on the Brink of Civil War

The last thing the United States needs right now is another conflict in the Mid East to deal with, but unfortunately Americas key ally in that troubled region is showing signs that they are on the brink of a civil war. With 25% of the worlds oil at stake, our next military mission will likely be in Saudi Arabia.

This does not look good!

john

news.goldseek.com...




posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 01:07 PM
link   
And I always thought the reason USA will use to use military action in Saudi Arabia would be another "terrorist attack" in the United States.



posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 01:08 PM
link   
I cannot imagine the US ever going into Saudi Arabia even if there is a civil war. Since this is seen as the "home country" for Osama and his thugs not to mention Mecca our presense there could inflame the entire region against us.

Bad bad stuff if we were to see American troops in Mecca or some of the other holy sites in the kingdom.

I know we need their oil so I could see us funding insurgents to fight on our behalf before sending in troops.



posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Just a simple response from me: what a .......mess!!!! I have always been a pessimist by nature, but this whole Mid-East thing is getting worse than even I imagined.
joey



posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 07:23 PM
link   
this is what happens when warhawks dont think through the consequences of their actions.



posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Lets see how bad is the situation in Saudi Arabia? obviously Saudi had his shared of civil war before and the main ruler is King Fahd is considered by the majority of population corrupt, Osama bin laden been a Saudi have his eyes in Saudi in the past his agenda to bring a Taliban type of government, but his dreams were halted by US.

In US eyes is better to support the corrupt monarchy that is more friendly to US than allowed a Taliban rule, this brings me to this question I wonder if US really when into Afghanistan to get Bin Laden because 9/11 or to keep one of our major suppliers of oil from the Taliban treat



www.danielpipes.org...


[edit on 16-6-2004 by marg6043]



posted on Jun, 16 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   


The last thing the United States needs right now is another conflict in the Mid East to deal with, but unfortunately Americas key ally in that troubled region is showing signs that they are on the brink of a civil war. With 25% of the worlds oil at stake, our next military mission will likely be in Saudi Arabia.

Really what was said just pissed me off!!
Our next mission to Saudi Arabia? The last thing the U.S. needs right now is another conflict in the Mid East???? Are you a Bush supporter? We dont need any $hit like that!! We need our troops back home, and not in the Mid East. The Mid East is it's own separate region that the stupid damn U.S. does not need to be involved in! There is absolutly no need fir the damn U.S. to even get in anywhere in the Mid East. If it is done I thikn the person responsible (99.9% of the time the president) should be brought to court, and arrested, or impeached!



posted on Jun, 17 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   
A civil war in Saudi would be a nightmare scenario for the US. Strangely enough about a month ago I read a hypothetical article on what would happen to the western world, specifically the US, if there was a civil war in Saudi. Lets jst say it wasn't an optimistic piece.

Saudi oil is The US's lifeblood and without a regular supply the US would collapse. The US would definately send troops in to Saudi if a civil war broke out - they would lose everything if they did not.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 01:57 AM
link   
The intelligent thing to do is bring all our troops home from the hundred or so nations we have sent them to and protect our borders.

Next, remember the nations who helped us in this illegal war and remember they are our friends.]

Next, say to all the nations like france who always work against us... BITE ME!

Finnally, put our scientific minds to work developing an alternative fuel to replace oil. I assure you if our oil disappeared tommorow, it would be no time before someone would come up with a reasonable and better alternative.

Then we say to the Middle East...BITE ME! and with a little luck they will kill each other off until there is little left of them to aggrivate civilized people.

That being said, we will keep electing Republicans and Democrats and the only thing which will change is we will loose more freedoms and pay more taxes and still piss the whole world off at us by meddling in affairs which are none of our business.

Ghostwolfemoon



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 02:59 AM
link   
Don't make me laugh, The USA can't withdraw troops from every country in the world and bring them back to protect there borders, Simply because the USA and Europe need oil from other countries, bringing all the troops back would be like shooting yourself in the foot.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ghostwolfemoon
The intelligent thing to do is bring all our troops home from the hundred or so nations we have sent them to and protect our borders.



I have to say that what you have suggested is stupid. If the US were to bring all it's troops back home there would be worldwide chaos. Israel would prbably be attacked, the Taliban would return to power in Afghanistan, a fundamentalist Islamic government would come to power in Iraq, China might possibly invade Taiwan, and terrorist groups would see it as a sign of the US's weakness and most probably would carry out even more attacks worldwide.

The US has made the mess so it should clean it up. Also, why would the US need to bring it's troops back anyway? Is the entire US army required to stop immigrants coming in or something?

I don't live in the US but I hope the general mentality of US citizens is not the same as yours.

[edit on 18-6-2004 by Eddie999]



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 07:53 AM
link   


he USA can't withdraw troops from every country in the world and bring them back to protect there borders, Simply because the USA and Europe need oil from other countries, bringing all the troops back would be like shooting yourself in the foot.


Why can't we bring our troops back? The only countries who have stood by us in the Iraq conflict are the United Kingdom, Spain, Bulgaria, Australia, Norway and Poland. To my knowledge, we have no troop concentrations in any of these countries.

There are other places we can get oil like our own soil were it not for the enviro-terrorist tree huggers. We could take the grains we send to feed millions upon millions of ingrates and make Ethanol and adapt our vehicles to run with a blend...some areas mandate blended fuels now.

I could care less about the rest of Socialist Europe. We have bailed Europe out of two wars and spent billions rebuilding the mainland and for what?

These ingrates in mainland Europe stabb us in the back at ever opportunity. Let them figure out how to get their own oil, they certainly do not deserve our help!

And:



From Eddie999-I have to say that what you have suggested is stupid.


Our founding fathers warned about foreign entanglements! America should cut out all foreign aid to any nation which has not backed us on Gulf War II. The money we taxpayers save the first year would pay for the Iraqui war. We should also no longer going to pour money into third world hell-holes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption. If they need help with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France.

We should also demonstrate that if you are a terrorist, screw with us and we will hunt you down like the dogs you are and eliminate you, all your friends and your entire country from the face of the earth. POOF!



You also stated:Israel would prbably be attacked, the Taliban would return to power in Afghanistan, a fundamentalist Islamic government would come to power in Iraq, China might possibly invade Taiwan, and terrorist groups would see it as a sign of the US's weakness and most probably would carry out even more attacks worldwide.


Who cares and how would it effect America? To Israel and the Palestinian Authority. work out a peace deal now, Camp David is closed! Deal with it!

As for China, at some point in time, they will take Taiwan back. I would not give the life of one more American soldier for all of South East Asia. I think 58,000 is enough. World wide terrorism is not our problem. Most of the rest of the world has not lifted a hand to assist us fighting terrorism in Afganistan and Iraq, why should we be concerned about them?

We should also sever diplomatic relations with France and Germany, thanks for all your help, comrades, we are retiring from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes amis. Next give the U.N. socialist, which is most of the U.N. 24 hours to leave American soil and never return.

To our neighbors, Canada, you folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change and to Mexico, President Fox and his entire corrupt government really need an attitude adjustment. A good start would be placing our Marines on the border with shoot to kill orders against illegals.

And the comment:


The US has made the mess so it should clean it up


I beg to differ with you but our military has done nothing of the kind. Our lilly livered wimpy so called leaders have again screwed our soldiers just like they did in Korea, Viet Nam, Somalia, Lebanon, and too many other places they have sent our troops illegially and it is they who have made the mess by not letting the military run the war.

There is no provision in our Constitution to send any troops ourside the country unless we have been invaded. That is our law which our politicans fail to keep. It is time for America to put America first and it would amaze you just how many Patriotic Americans are fed up with the rest of the world!

To quote a friend: " Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the planet. It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens. Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying darn tootin'."

Ghostwolfemoon



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Eddie999
a fundamentalist Islamic government would come to power in Iraq


I don't know that I entirely agree with this. Iraq has been a secular nation for a long time, with women involved fully in work and education. As such, I don't think that they are likely to go for a fundamentalist state. I recall seeing in a survey, that fundamentalist parties were only likely to get about 15-20% of the vote were Iraq to have an election. I can't provide a link for this, as I don't recall when/where I saw it. Icertainly don't believe that Iraqis would be willing to go from Saddam torturing them, to the US/UK torturing them, to a fundamentalist state chopping off their hands and stoning their wives to death. I get the feeling they actually want a reasonable quality of life. At least, that's what I'm told by Iraqi friends who are in contact with family who are still stuck there.
Sorry, Just realised that's not really on topic.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 10:36 AM
link   

By Ghostwolfemoon
I could care less about the rest of Socialist Europe. We have bailed Europe out of two wars and spent billions rebuilding the mainland and for what?


Interesting to see that when most historians are debating whether the US had any real effect on the outcome of WW1 you are so sure that they won it single-handedly. As for WW2 the US military was not needed at all. All they did was speed up the inevitable. The Sovet Union defeated Germany and proceeded right into Berlin without any US military help.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 11:17 AM
link   
Ghostwolfemoon - I agree that we have troops in places that we should not. I agree with you about Africa and in most cases SE Asia as well. And what the HELL are we doing in Columbia anyway? So, I'm not saying you're entirely wrong, OK?

Your view that we can tell the middle east to go hang because we don't need their oil and that we could adapt are extraordinarily naive. Take a look at where your food comes from, for instance. Our entire distribution structure is based on long haul trucking. Worse than that, virtually all our agriculture also relies on fuel to run machines and crude oil to create nitrogen fertilizer.

Ethanol is not a real option -- Americans need their cars to keep the economy from grinding to a halt and right now, virtually none of them accept ethanol as fuel.

While we do have oil here, you'd be looking at $100 a barrel prices for it. Do I need to tell you how fast the dominos would fall if we were looking at those kind of prices on anything but a very short-term basis?

It disgusts me that we are so dependent on other nations, but realistically, the oil in the middle east is strategically critical to our way of life. It's a shame that we've let Jefferson's America come to this, but like it or not, WE HAVE. Ever since humans have been fighting wars they have ultimately been about scarce resources, and that's exactly what this is about.

I still believe that Iraq was entirely about preparation for the eventual revolution in Saudi Arabia, and I'm OK with that. I hope the Bush Admin. strategy in this regard was the right one. I suspect we're about to find out, in any case.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eddie999

Interesting to see that when most historians are debating whether the US had any real effect on the outcome of WW1 you are so sure that they won it single-handedly. As for WW2 the US military was not needed at all. All they did was speed up the inevitable. The Sovet Union defeated Germany and proceeded right into Berlin without any US military help.


WW1 was not really 'won'. It just ended in a stalemate, which lasted until 1939. The millions in the American Expeditionary Force did help sway the war, but not that much.

The Soviets defeated Germany? They proceeded into Berlin, because Germany was fighting a war on two fronts. Less manpower vs. a totally undisciplined, but overwhelming Soviet army= disastor.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 06:24 PM
link   
First of all, thanks to all for a rather civilized discussion on a difficult subject. We all have our opnions and we can agree to disagree on many things in peace. All of you have made very good points and in all probability, there is no answer for the mess in the Middle East.

I do not think American troops belong in the Middle East mainly because of our laws and our track record in matters such as this. I also do not think Americans owe any people or any country anything if they do not support us.

Sad to say, we, for better or worse are in the Middle East and withdrawal would be at best difficult. Now, what will be accomplished by us being there?

From the track record of the United States Imperial Federal Government, I see little hope of anything happening other than a lot of our soldiers and some civilians dying for no purpose. I see tens of thousands of Iraquis dying for no purpose. I see much if not all of the Middle East in flames possibly with Saudi Arabia as the next victim.
___________________________________________________________
An interesting story from Newsmax shows how much trouble the House of Saud is really in.: "Saudis, Heads-in-Sand, Saw No Evil"

Arnaud de Borchgrave
Saturday, June 19, 2004

www.newsmax.com...

"Osama Bin Laden running for high office in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia? And winning a free election hands down? A preposterous scenario, but one that was suggested by one of the most important Saudi businessmen, speaking privately in a European capital this week." (SNIP)
_____________________________________________________________
The Saudis have been playing both ends to meet the middle in trying to placate America while at the same time keeping the Wahhabi clergy happy. It is a game they will ultimately loose because too many of their citizens who will fall in line with the Wahhabist.

Despite all our efforts the terrorist strike at will or so it seems. They have it within their power to destroy the entire output of Middle Eastern oil should they desire to take that step. They know America, due to incompetent leadership over the years is too dependant on Middle East oil.

Iraqui oil production has been hurt lately and will in all probablility stop completly should the terrorist want it. They can stop production of Saudi oil as they have shown in recent attacks.

Another sad factor in the Middle East is that only about 10% of the people are really dangerious. The remaining 90% just want what most in the world want, to live in peace. That being said, the 10% of radicals have put so much fear into the majority, they will run the show. We see almost daily the carnage inflicted on the innocients including children by the terrorist. You must also keep in mind that in all the wars between Israel and the Arabs only about 60,000 have died while during the same time period, the Arabs have killed over 8,000,000 of their own people in tribal/national/religious/ethnic conflicts. They are barbarians!

There is no way to separate the terrorist from the peaceful, therefore our military might is severly crippled in the fact that we as a country lack the will for total war. Total war is crushing the enemy to the point it is impossible for them to fight no matter what and collateral damage to civilians and cities is not an issue.

The only way we will ever win anything over there is to instill so much fear into the populations they will be far more afraid of us than they are of the terrorist. That will never happen. The world will never support what would amount to crushing the Middle East and that is the only thing which will ever work against such dedicated religious zelots.

Back to the question...What will be accomplished by our presence in the Middle East other than death and destruction? We have two choices, either completly take over the region to insure the supply of oil or we will loose in a big way. I suspect we will loose because of leadership as usless as disc brakes on a turtle!

Ghostwolfemoon


df1

posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 06:58 PM
link   
IMHO the US would not participate in a saudi civil war except to seize the oil fields which are for the most part in and adjacent to the to the arabian gulf. www.gregcroft.com...

.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 07:05 PM
link   


Then we say to the Middle East...BITE ME! and with a little luck they will kill each other off until there is little left of them to aggrivate civilized people.


Ah spoken like a true American (probably white at that). Would love nothing more than to see any one of brown skin killed off the planet. Please, like the white race has a squeaky clean record. Racists policies towards other nations still are numerous today, and hell even in this country things aren't were they should be. Publically most confirm but privately they still harbor the same ignorant thoughts and would love to see nothing more than minorities (especially blacks) purged from this country. Hell you only have to go back 30yrs to see how some from this so called civilized group acted openly towards innocent blacks in this country.


Not condoning terrorism at all but just funny to see how hypocritical some people are when comparing one group to another. I know some of you will chime in and say "well that was 30yrs ago" but there's still a lot of white males in their 40's etc. who during the civil rights movement were 10yrs old etc. and probably lined along the roads saying "Nigger go home." You really think those people have changed at all!? No, b/c once you reach your teenage years you're pretty much set in your ways.



posted on Jun, 18 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eddie999

By Ghostwolfemoon
I could care less about the rest of Socialist Europe. We have bailed Europe out of two wars and spent billions rebuilding the mainland and for what?


Interesting to see that when most historians are debating whether the US had any real effect on the outcome of WW1 you are so sure that they won it single-handedly. As for WW2 the US military was not needed at all. All they did was speed up the inevitable. The Sovet Union defeated Germany and proceeded right into Berlin without any US military help.


err yes this is true but we would have replaced the Nazis with the Red Army. There is this thing called the Cold war you know.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join