Date: 11/23/2002 11:52:00 PM
From Authorid: 23610
I wonder what the Bush Administration will do if they do find ties. I mean didn't Bush say that anybody found collaborating with the terrorists would be punished? I'd be curious to see if he would risk the U.S. ties with Saudi Arabia based on his own words. |
Date: 11/24/2002 6:25:00 AM
From Authorid: 58308
Son!! Hugs! Zeeboette |
Date: 11/24/2002 6:25:00 PM
From Authorid: 55967
Lady Nyx, I don't think he said that. What I heard was him saying "If you are not for us, you are against us" and "Any country harbouring these terrorists are our enemy also." (Possibly not direct quotes, but to that effect). So he wouldn't attack to punish Saudi Arabia, but yea, I wonder how our ties with them will be now, too. Peace. ~GypsyHawk~ |
Date: 11/25/2002 12:42:00 AM
From Authorid: 23610
Here are a couple of Bush's quotes ... “All nations that have aided or are suspected of aiding terrorists or developing weapons of mass destruction must now open their countries to inspection teams from the United Nations and the United States.....The United States will attack in order to defend against all terrorist attacks before they occur on our soil. All nations, including the Arab nations, must realize and accept the fact that the United States is going on the attack as a defensive measure to protect its very survival as a first-rate nation.” ..... and ..... "For every regime that sponsors terror, there is a price to be paid, and it will be paid. The allies of terror are equally guilty of murder and equally accountable to justice.” |
Date: 11/25/2002 1:01:00 AM
From Authorid: 55967
Yea, good point. He pretty much said he's ready to attack any nation that sponsors terror. But I doubt he'll use military force against SA. He'll make them "pay the price" in other ways, I think. Either way, our relationship with them will definitely not be the same. I remember hearing his speeches, but didn't recall those exact words. Thanks. ~GypsyHawk~ |
Date: 11/25/2002 1:05:00 AM
From Authorid: 55967
^^^Reasons I don't think he'll use military force: one, his plate is full with Iraq. Two, when he said this, I believe he was looking at countries who may have been currently harboring terrorists, thus being an immediate threat, and the investigations into that area do not include SA right now, and three, he can still get around those words he said and not attack SA. Peace. ~GypsyHawk~ |
Date: 11/25/2002 1:34:00 AM
From Authorid: 23610
I agree, GypsyHawk. I don't think he would attack them either. I mean how could we, when we need them as allies. But it does make him have to kind of eat his words and it is a bit hypocritical...kind of like "Well, we'll attack you...but only if you can't do anything for us." I quess with my warped sense of humor I just find it kind of ironic and funny. |
Date: 11/25/2002 10:58:00 AM
From Authorid: 11723
Okay...here is what I believe. Saudi Arabia = Oil. Therefore George "Dubblya" will do everything in his power to keep good ties with them. There has been more than one time when Saudi Arabia has been implicated in helping out/harboring terrorists. Many months back, when the Israeli government raided Arafat's Ramahallah compound, they found documents that found the Saudi government has been funneling money to the PLO and other Terrorist factions. And the US government did exactly what I thought they were going to do with the information...they swept it under the rug. Now as to why Bush is trying to remain in the good graces of the Saudi's is beyond me...the only reason I can come up with is Oil. Bush comes from an Oil family. His family made its money on oil. He made money off of oil. Cheney made money from corporations and oil. Saudi's are one of the largest oil exporters in the world...why else would they be kissing their butts? I mean, I've seen ads saying that "Drugs fund terrorists." That's bull. Oil funds terrorists! These oil producing countries support terrorists. I mean, when we went to war in 1941, there was a popular ad campaign for Oil Conservation, "If your riding alone, your riding with Hitler." Its funny, we are supposedly at war...yet I don't see anyone saying to conserve oil. I think Bush is going against his own doctrine for the sake of "good business". Basically at the end of all those statements, he should throw in "Except Saudi Arabia". My theory is, that Bin Laden is hiding out in Saudi Arabia. Its the perfect place for him. That's where he is originally from, he has ties there...and the US refuses to doggedly pursue him in that country. |
Date: 11/26/2002 12:05:00 AM
From Authorid: 55967
lol. True, Lady Nyx. Mydnite Son, okay, a part of the reason we are allies with Saudi is because of oil. But not at all for the reasons you gave. The US has had a long history of doing business with Saudi, and our economy is tied up with inport/exporting with many countries, Saudi included, for oil. They are just a long-standing supplier for our country; it is not because Bush has a personal agenda to snag more crude for his own family business. It can be argued that the US has enough oil for itself for many, many years, and yes, it does. The govn't. has decided, though, that we keep our economic ties for the present, and let the status quo alone; our own oil is sold elsewhere and earmarked for emergencies. About the slogans of war, we are not even close to the kind of war we were in during WWII, and we are much, much richer than we were then. We don't need to ration (that's what that was for). As for Bin Laden, he was kicked out of Saudi long before he attacked us, and I think a much more safer place for him to hide would be Irag, reputed enemy of the US and other Western countries, or Iran. Peace. ~GypsyHawk~ |
Date: 11/27/2002 6:48:00 AM
From Authorid: 11723
You brought up some good points...however, I still think Saudi Arabia is two-faced. I DO NOT think they are our friends/allies. |