Saudi Arabia - The next front in the War on Terror?

reply to post by muzzleflash


Every Country is in a row of Dominoes.

Every Country is watching America closely.

Everything has to do with the Petrodollar, and Many Countries are slowly getting away from it.

Petrodollar warfare.

In 2000, Iraq converted all its oil transactions under the Oil for Food program to euros.[2] When U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, it returned oil sales from the euro to the USD.[3]

The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran takes this theory as fact. As retaliation to this policy seen as neoimperialism, Iran has made an effort to create its own Iranian Oil Bourse which started selling oil in Gold, Euros, Dollars, and Japanese Yen. In mid-2006 Venezuela indicated support of Iran's decision to offer global oil trade in the euro currency.[4]

Petrodollar warfare

reply to post by muzzleflash


I think most royal families in the world have known the fact for years that eventually their kingdom is going to fall apart.A monarchy regime is not acceptable by today's moderate standards at all.....I am sure the time will come for every each and one of them to face the uprising of their people even without the usual interference from the elites.

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Every Country is in a row of Dominoes.

Every Country is watching America closely.

Everything has to do with the Petrodollar, and Many Countries are slowly getting away from it.

Petrodollar warfare.

Scenario : US takes control of Saudi oil fields by force.

Prerequisite : Saudi interests decide to pull out of the Dollar.

Ultimately technology is power.

I can just picture the Saudis saying one day that they won't give anymore oil.

And then the US President will paraphrase some of my favorite movie lines from There Will Be Blood.

"Oh, you see, we had a milkshake; and you had a milkshake.

And then we made a looooooooooong straw.

And then we drank your milkshake!

Yes, we drank 90 percent of it up!

Now have a nice life."

Not likely though.
It seems they already want some kind of development fund in case the oil runs out (not sure about this however).

Michael Ledeen,

an American neoconservative specialist on foreign policy. His research areas have included state sponsors of terrorism, Iran, the Middle East, Europe (Italy), U.S.-China relations, intelligence, and Africa (Mozambique, South Africa, and Zimbabwe). He is a former consultant to the United States National Security Council, the United States Department of State, and the United States Department of Defense. He has also served as a special adviser to the United States Secretary of State. He held the Freedom Scholar chair at the American Enterprise Institute where he was a scholar for twenty years and now holds the similarly named chair at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

wiki Ledeen

Who apparently is really influential in our system, had this to say a few years ago (In reference to the 1991 Iraq war that didn't go far enough in his assessment:

Strategy should have been: “regime change in Baghdad” (as) “one piece in an overall mission”, which should have been: “one battle … against Iran, Iraq, Syria and Saudi Arabia.”

Link to quote

This is a small tidbit example of how people in our political system actually talk.
Notice he did mention Saudi Arabia. This is important and revealing.

I found this within just a few seconds of googling.

Keywords to Google :
Saudi Arabia +
Project New American Century
American Enterprise Institute

And maybe throw this one in for good measure:
World League for Freedom and Democracy

Originally posted by muzzleflash


Scenario : US takes control of Saudi oil fields by force.

Prerequisite : Saudi interests decide to pull out of the Dollar.

Plausible.....

Of course only the future can tell, but really it seems there are most likely plans drawn for this type of scenario already on the shelves.

Here is an insight from 2003, in a random article by Pepe Escobar of the Asia Times

They've won. They got their war against Afghanistan (planned before September 11). They're getting their war against Iraq (planned slightly after September 11). After Iraq, they plan to get their wars against Syria, Lebanon, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Last Sunday, one of them, Vice President Dick Cheney, said that President George W Bush would have to make "a very difficult decision" on Iraq. Not really. The decision had already been taken for him in the autumn of 2001.

Talking about how all these wars were planned a long time ago and we are only now seeing them come to fruition.

Former CIA Director James Woolsey says the US is engaged in a world war, and that it could continue for years: “As we move toward a new Middle East, over the years and, I think, over the decades to come… we will make a lot of people very nervous.” He calls it World War IV (World War III being the Cold War according to neoconservatives like himself ), and says it will be fought against the religious rulers of Iran, the “fascists” of Iraq and Syria, and Islamic extremists like al-Qaeda. He singles out the leaders of Egypt and Saudi Arabia, saying, “We want you nervous.” This echoes the rhetoric of the PNAC, of which Woolsey is a supporter, and the singling out of Egypt and Saudi Arabia echoes the rhetoric of the Defense Policy Board, of which he is a member. In July 2002 (see July 10, 2002), a presentation to that board concluded, “Grand strategy for the Middle East: Iraq is the tactical pivot. Saudi Arabia the strategic pivot. Egypt the prize.”

Historycommons.org source

Wiki James Woolsey, Jr

So even this former CIA director agrees that Saudi is a very valid target in what he called, "WW IV".

He wants the Saudis nervous, according to this article from April 3, 2003.

This is just a little of the stuff I found in an hour or so of reading and looking around.

Just think of the case I could build for making an "intervention" of some sort, a "contingency operation", in Saudi Arabia, if only you gave me a few weeks to devote to the research.

It's looking viable.

reply to post by muzzleflash


Would like to see that.

I think I will also take a good look again into this theory.

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Would like to see that.

I think I will also take a good look again into this theory.

Plausible hypothesis.

Let's hope it never reaches the "working theory" stage.
Another war would suck.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Would like to see that.

I think I will also take a good look again into this theory.

Plausible hypothesis.

Let's hope it never reaches the "working theory" stage.
Another war would suck.

Agree.

Just to point out "how" involved they are already.........

Terrorism in Saudi Arabia

Whoa, this is nuts:

"Could Saudi Arabia Be Next?"

This was written on Dec 31, 2012, just a few months ago. Very recently.

It is insinuating that Saudi Arabia is the next big hot spot, and references historical events and the recent spate of revolutions in the surrounding region.

And the Gulf? Arabia, where the first Arab awakening began? Where, indeed, the first Arab revolution – the advent of Islam – burst forth upon the world. There are those who say that the Gulf kingdoms will remain secure for years to come. Don’t count on it. Watch Saudi Arabia. Remember what that British diplomat wrote 130 years ago. “Even in Mecca...”

Very strange timing.

"Is Saudi Arabia a Nuclear Threat?" - Link to .mil

Saudi Arabia may become one of the next states to acquire nuclear weapons. The Saudis have the challenge of securing a large border area with a relatively small populace against several regional adversaries. The 1979 Iranian Revolution and subsequent overthrow of the Shah, a U.S. ally, sent shockwaves across the Gulf states and prompted the Saudis to increase defense spending and purchase the longest-range ballistic missile in the Gulf region: the Chinese CSS-2. These missiles have since reached the end of their lifecycle and the Saudi regime has since considered their replacement.

This thesis examines the potential for the Saudis to replace their aging missile force with a nuclear-tipped inventory. The United States has provided for the external security of the oil Kingdom through informal security agreements, but a deterioration in U.S.-Saudi relations may compel the Saudis to acquire nuclear weapons in order to deter the ballistic missile and WMD capabilities of its regional adversaries. Saudi Arabia has been a key pillar of the U.S. strategy in the Persian Gulf, however, a nuclear Saudi Arabia would undermine the efforts of the NPT and could potentially destabilize the Persian Gulf by initiating a new arms race in the region.

You can scroll down if you like to past page 59, where it talks about the possible future of Saudi Arabia in geopolitics. Why they may not need, or may need to get a nuke, etc.

It states the US - Saudi interests converge and diverge equally, and oil is a prime factor in conjunction with the Saudis taking the initiative over their neighbors.

While reading this I was wondering, what if the Saudis already have a few nuclear weapons? Or what if they are actively seeking to acquire one?

What if Saudi Arabia falls into widespread revolt and chaos, and someone needs to go in to secure the oil fields and military hardware?

There are a whole lot of valid military contingencies here.

The biggest threat to the global economy could be Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia has had a bi-polar relationship with America for decades. They supply us oil and we protect their Islamist Monarchy.

When President Barack Obama called for Mubarak (former president of Egypt) to step down, Saudi Arabia was furious at Obama, since Mubarak was the main ally in the region against Iran. Saudi Arabia has now looked for other allies in the region, and there have been many reports that Saudi has helped the rebels in the rebellion against President Bashar Assad of Syria, who is a strong ally of Iran.

Recently Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have been increasing ties. There are reports that if Iran attacks Saudi Arabia, Pakistan will respond possibly with nuclear weapons. Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com www.moneynews.com... Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

So what if Pakistan secretly supplied nuclear weapons to the Saudis?
You know the Saudis could easily afford it, and the Pakistani military likes money.

There are claims the Saudis were backing various rebel factions (are still possibly) in he conflict ongoing in Syria. Also in conjunction with claims of Al Qaeda operating coincidentally in the same capacity and region with aligned objectives.

It's a subliminal reference whispering in our subconscious " Saudi Arabia funds Al Qaeda directly".

And now add them up:
Al Qaeda + Nuke

I am not saying that is the ultimate reality, I am saying that is how the picture has been painted from my limited perspective.

Also rather than an open and declared war, perhaps another possibility for Saudi Arabia is what I will call a "Silent Covert War".

One that may not be reported on, or if it is, it gets spun into obscurity.
A type of foreign incursion of corporate mercenary style elements conducting operations as they see fit for whatever agendas.

Complete lawlessness, and when some form of "law" does take shape, it's incredibly tyrannical localized clan warlords.

Illicit international arms and drugs sells through the roof, education rates in decline, sanitary and other infrastructure deterioration, etc.

I just described Libya, Egypt and Syria present day.
Think about it.

Originally posted by havok
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

If what I've read in the past has any meaning to it...
The focus is for the public to accept war in Saudi Arabia.
That justifies our reason because they want to get away from the dollar as the reserve oil currency. If they want to get away from it, the elites just make up a reason to level the country.
To make sure the price goes to $200 a bbl.
Then we open our own oilfields and profit tremendously.
Did I say we? I meant they.
We don't gain anything.
We just fund it all.



I don't know about any of you, but it sounds about right.

Indeed.
Good post.

Don't we invade and occupy places that have a lot of oil? Isn't that why we haven't attacked N. Korea? We've already decimated Iraq and Afghanistan -- Israel is our "ally" along with Jordan. Why not just occupy Saudi Arabia?

EDIT:

Oh wait, I forgot that Mecca is in Saudi Arabia. We'd probably piss every Muslim the world over if we did anything to Saudi Arabia. Way to have some balls America ... *slow clap*

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
Don't we invade and occupy places that have a lot of oil? Isn't that why we haven't attacked N. Korea? We've already decimated Iraq and Afghanistan -- Israel is our "ally" along with Jordan. Why not just occupy Saudi Arabia?

EDIT:

Oh wait, I forgot that Mecca is in Saudi Arabia. We'd probably piss every Muslim the world over if we did anything to Saudi Arabia. Way to have some balls America ... *slow clap*

edit on 18-4-2013 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)

Hey we do "need" a crisis like that to justify the final crackdown on our liberties after all don't we?

Saudi Arabia is a hornets nest. This is the truth.

Afghanistan and Iraq were nothing compared to this species. This is like your Killer Bee style of extremism.

You cannot whack this nest with a stick, that's begging for a disaster.

Maybe that's why the US Govt chooses the failed policy of "Appeasement" , because they fear whacking the nest of killer suicide bomb-laden hornets.