Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SAUDIS TELL U.S. FORCES TO GET OUT
The Guardian ^ | 01-18-02 | The Guardian

Posted on 01/18/2002 5:13:23 PM PST by StopDemocratsDotCom

Saudis tell US forces to get out ;Foreign soldiers seen as political liability

Saudi Arabia's rulers are poised to throw US strategy in the Middle East into disarray by asking Washington to pull its forces out of the kingdom because they have become a "political liability". Senior Saudi officials have privately complained that the US has "outstayed its welcome" and that the kingdom may soon request that the American presence - a product of the Gulf war - is brought to an end.

Both the White House and the US state department insisted yesterday that the military arrangement between the two countries was still working. The White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer, said that the president, George Bush, "believes that our presence in the region has a very helpful and stabilising effect in a dangerous region".

Relations between the US and Saudi Arabia, Washington's closest Arab ally, have been severely strained since September 11. Both sides have been desperately denying for months that there is a rift.

The US is reluctant to withdraw its 4,500 troops from the Prince Sultan air base, south of Saudi's capital Riyadh, because it could be perceived as a propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden, who frequently protested at the presence of non-believers so close to the main Muslim holy sites.

But the increasingly brittle and vulnerable ruling House of Saud is nervous about an internal revolt by Bin Laden's al-Qaida terror network and other extremist militants, and has been publicly loosening its links with Washington.

The huge Prince Sultan air base played a crucial logistical role in the bombing of Afghanistan. Withdrawal would upset the military balance in the Middle East by providing a boost to the Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein. US planes based in Saudi regularly bomb along the Iraqi border as part of its policy of containment of Saddam.

Britain, which jointly patrols the Iraqi no-fly zone with the US, has planes based both in Saudi and Kuwait. A pull-out by Washington would switch the focus to the British air base in Kuwait, whose leaders try to avoid drawing attention to the British presence.

Two senior US state department officials have been in Saudi this week: William Burns, the assistant secretary for the near east, and Lincoln Bloomfield, the assistant secretary for political and military affairs.

The US state department insisted yesterday that at no point during Mr Bloomfield's visit, either formally or informally, had the Saudis said they wanted the US to leave.

But the US ambassador to Saudi, Robert Jordan, was quoted as saying when Mr Bloomfield arrived in the kingdom: "He is here for consultations with the Saudi government to review our presence here and to discuss what we need and what we don't need."

The US secretary of state, Colin Powell, who is in Nepal, denied the Saudis wanted a withdrawal: "There has been no discussion of such an issue."

Many in the US have been upset with Saudi because not only is it Bin Laden's native country but 15 of the 19 terrorists involved in the September 11 attacks were from the kingdom. The Saudi media have reported that about 200 Saudis have been captured in Afghanistan fighting with al-Qaida and the Taliban.

The kingdom is volatile, with a stagnant economy, high unemployment, no democratic outlets and King Fahd unable to crack down on militant clerics.

Hostility to the US is widespread but that is mirrored in the US where there is a huge well of resentment that, having fought to push back Iraq in 1991 and having protected Saudi since, Riyadh refused to provide military help during the Afghan campaign.

Reflecting this, Carl Levin, who heads the US Senate armed services committee, said: "We need a base in that region, but it seems to me we should find a place that is more hospitable."

Bin Laden listed as the main justifications for the attacks on New York and Washington the presence of the US soldiers in the kingdom, US support for Israel in the conflict with the Palestinians, and the US campaign against Iraq. He said six years ago: "There is no more important duty than pushing the American enemy out of the holy land [of Arabia]."

The US could continue its containment of Iraq from aircraft carriers based in the Gulf. But the US air force secretary, James Roche, said a pull-out would make life awkward: "It would be difficult, unless we could replicate the air operations centre somewhere else."


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: saudiarabia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-170 next last

1 posted on 01/18/2002 5:13:23 PM PST by StopDemocratsDotCom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
so be it.

it's not as if the sauds were on our side during wtc.

2 posted on 01/18/2002 5:15:27 PM PST by ken21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Bill; OKCSubmariner
.
3 posted on 01/18/2002 5:17:41 PM PST by nunya bidness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
(rubbing my hands together with glee) Oooh! I can't WAIT to read the responses to this one!
4 posted on 01/18/2002 5:19:43 PM PST by Aristophanes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Another false headine from the guardian.
5 posted on 01/18/2002 5:20:40 PM PST by quimby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Dear Saddam:

Give up the WMDs, avoid Kuwait, Qatar, and the small states, and we won't complain.

6 posted on 01/18/2002 5:21:19 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
This wont throw anything in disarray, we can simply use Kuwait as a base.
7 posted on 01/18/2002 5:21:42 PM PST by Husker24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Is this more meaningless doubletalk?

I mean, on the one hand.. aren't we helping protect the Saudi Government and keep them safe from agressors?

But oto, they say this stuff because their radical, muslim populace is dumb enough to believe that they don't value our market and our protection?

That's all this is, right?

8 posted on 01/18/2002 5:21:46 PM PST by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Saudi's are such cowards. No wonder one of the world's most horrendous terrorist was born and bred there. Shame on those short sighted spoiled royal jerks. They should be standing up against terrorism and thanking their lucky stars that we freed Kuwait. Instead they are falling prey to their fears, sending signals of compliance to the extreme brutal cowardly sniveling muslim terrorists who can only attack unarmed civilians, baby warriors as it were, the kind of fighters that only strike at ones backside. Shame on them. I once thought they were stand up people, bringing their nation into the cusp of greater freedom but instead, they are proving to be cowards-especially now that it is known that they slipped about ten million into Iran's filthy fingers in order to provide Palestinian terrorists with weaponry.

Like the clintons-they want to change the subject. They know how to side swipe the press off the real issue. They don't want our papers talking about their support of Palestine, about the weapons they just bought to be used there, oh no, they want the press to moan and groan about the US no longer being welcome in Saudi. What jerks.

This is no longer about the fact that they PROVIDE WEAPONS TO PALESTINE, it is now about what will the US do to kiss our royal arses in order to keep their strategic bases here.

Saddam is laughing at them, and giving us the dictatorial finger about now.

9 posted on 01/18/2002 5:21:55 PM PST by Republic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quimby
Freepers I want some reaction to this. I don't know what to make of this.
10 posted on 01/18/2002 5:22:00 PM PST by StopDemocratsDotCom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Oil oil everywhere but not a drop to drink. Fuel cells will be the demise of the Saudi regime. Then they can cut each other and bomb each other in the name of their 'profit' while we drive exhausting H2O.


11 posted on 01/18/2002 5:22:33 PM PST by steveo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Freepers I want some reaction to this. I don't know what to make of this.

Try reading the other threads.

12 posted on 01/18/2002 5:24:33 PM PST by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Victoria Delsoul; harpseal; Travis McGee; susangirl; mae west; poor muttly; Snow Bunny; onyx...
SAUDIS TELL U.S. FORCES TO GET OUT

So who will the Wahabis hide behind?

Oh, that's right... Their own women and children.


13 posted on 01/18/2002 5:25:44 PM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
On the one hand I say "Adios" but on the other hand there are some tough implications for the protection of Israel if we were needed.
14 posted on 01/18/2002 5:27:30 PM PST by DainBramage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
The private messages of the weaker Islamic regimes was pretty clear: You must get Bin Laden or we will withdraw support.

Accepting the Clinton holdover CIA director's plan for fighting a limited war worked great for deposing the Taliban, but VERY poorly for getting Bin Laden. The administration decided to minimize casualties in the War, but if we don't get Bin Laden fairly soon, we are likely to lose more lives than if we had invaded Afghanistan.

15 posted on 01/18/2002 5:27:43 PM PST by Hagrid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Wahabi? Isn't that what comes on a plate of sushi?
16 posted on 01/18/2002 5:27:51 PM PST by Pharmboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom

I thought I would put a map in there. The Saudi are our enemies, and the US shouldn't have a base there.

17 posted on 01/18/2002 5:28:02 PM PST by Gladwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
The US is reluctant to withdraw its 4,500 troops from the Prince Sultan air base, south of Saudi's capital Riyadh, because it could be perceived as a propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden...

IMHO this is the only negative to an otherwise positive situation. America just needs to "spin" the withdrawal properly. (And make sure that all those scumbag Saudi Learjets and G2's don't come streaming into the US when the fundamentalists take over.)

18 posted on 01/18/2002 5:29:06 PM PST by Arleigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Taking out Saddam Hussein will be difficult without Prince Sultan Airbase in Saudi Arabia. But it won't be impossible.

And we are going to take out Saddam. We don't have any choice.

But now that we know what false friends our "moderate" Saudi "allies" are, we should make the choice to prepare for the transition to a new government there, too. I don't think the venal, autocratic, fundamentalist Wahhabist regime in Arabia has much further to go before it collapses. As well it should.

19 posted on 01/18/2002 5:29:21 PM PST by Map Kernow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StopDemocratsDotCom
Screw The Saudi's!!
20 posted on 01/18/2002 5:29:36 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-170 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson