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

Skip to comments.

Iraq War Was "Colonial" and About Oil: Saudi Envoy
Tehran Times ^ | May 25, 2004 | Tehran Times

Posted on 05/24/2004 7:07:00 PM PDT by Land_of_Lincoln_John

DUBLIN (Reuters) -- The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was a colonial war and there were some in the United States who saw it as a means of getting their hands on Iraqi oil, a senior Saudi ambassador was quoted as saying on Monday.

Prince Turki al-Faisal, ambassador to Britain and Ireland, told the Irish Independent newspaper Washington's stated aims in going to war in Iraq masked a more cynical reality.

"No matter how exalted the aims of the U.S. in that war, in the final analysis it was a colonial war very similar to the wars conducted by the ex-colonial powers when they went out to conquer the rest of the world ...," Prince Turki said. "What we have heard from American sources

[is that] they were there to remove the weapons of mass destruction which Saddam Hussein was supposed to have acquired."

Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. regional ally, opposed the war despite tensions with Iraq since its 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

"What we read and hear from our commentators in America and sometimes congressional sources, if you remember going back a year ago, there was the issue of the oil reserves in Iraq and that in a year or two they would be producing so much oil in Iraq that, as it were, the war would pay for itself," the envoy said. "

[This] indicated that there were those in America who were thinking in those terms of acquiring the natural resources of Iraq for America." Prince Turki said U.S. pledges to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq remained "still just aims".

"The individual Iraqi, until he can actually declare that his government is truly representative of his wishes and aspirations must still consider himself occupied," he said.

On the wider conflict in the Middle East, Prince Turki described Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat as "a living martyr", persecuted by an Israel "that is ruthless and generally devoid of any human considerations (toward the Palestinians)".

Critics of Saudi Arabia, cradle of Islam and the birthplace of Osama bin Laden and 15 of the September 11 hijackers, have accused it of allowing religious militancy to flourish.

The envoy described bin Laden's al Qaeda network as "not so much an organization as a cult with a cult leader and a cult philosophy". "One of the main drawbacks of the operations in Afghanistan is that bin Laden has not been caught," he said. "To bring bin Laden to justice will go a long way to removing some of his mystique."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Israel; News/Current Events; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: princeturki; saudiarabia; saudis; turkialfaisal

1 posted on 05/24/2004 7:07:02 PM PDT by Land_of_Lincoln_John
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Here's what the President should have said in his speech:

"I realize now that we attacked the wrong country. Tonight, we will correct this error. We have secretly assembled a sizable force which is currently ringing Saudi Arabia. Until this moment, this force of arms has gone undetected and I am now giving the order to my field commanders to attack and drive into the desert the source of all radical Islam throughout the world. At the same time, all assests of the House of Saud have been frozen worldwide and will be used to reconstruct Iraq."

At least that's my pipe dream.

2 posted on 05/24/2004 7:14:20 PM PDT by Archangelsk (15 out of 19. The House of Saud must be driven into the desert.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Aahhh. . .our friends the Saudis. What would we do without them?
3 posted on 05/24/2004 7:16:41 PM PDT by zencat (Visit my profile for MAGNETIC Bush/Cheney '04 bumper stickers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John

Someone needs to remind Prince Faisal, that without US support the House of Saud would be out of power and its family members would probably be dead. If the Saudi's had controlled their own, the US military wouldn't be overthere killing and dying for America's freedom.


4 posted on 05/24/2004 7:16:44 PM PDT by Reagan Man (The choice is clear. Reelect BUSH-CHENEY !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Archangelsk
This is a duplicate article, the original post was from Reuters.

Article is here: Saudi Envoy: Iraq War Was 'Colonial' and About Oil

5 posted on 05/24/2004 7:18:43 PM PDT by Itzlzha (The avalanche has already started...it is too late for the pebbles to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John

Sounds like this guy has been in the DNC war room.

The lying crooked liberals always accuse others of what they have done, are doing, or plan to do, and we all know who was benefiting from Iraqi Oil under Saddam, the French and Russians via the UN.


6 posted on 05/24/2004 7:20:01 PM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
.


Reagan Man,


Someone needs to remind Prince Faisal, that without US support the House of Saud would be out of power and its family members would probably be dead.


Good point.

The only attempted "Colonization" in action at this momemt in the Middle East is Iran's Ayatollahs' attempted colonization of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, etc etc ect.


Some day, perhaps sooner than later, The Irrevocable Forces of History will Flush the Filthy House of Saud down the Toilet, probably with extreme prejudice (a la Nuclear Plummage).



Patton@Bastogne



.
7 posted on 05/24/2004 7:21:08 PM PDT by Patton@Bastogne (John "Heinz" Kerry won't be the Nov-2004 Democratic Presidential Nominee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
I believe this is the same Saudi Prince/Ambassador who published an anti American, anti Semitic Poem last year?

It always amazes me how far the left will go to find a negative story, there could be 10 uplifting stories of the struggling Iraqi people in their quest for freedom, and 98% of the Media Maggots would skip right over them to interview some scumbag like this one, they would skip over everything to show a pic of a dead American Soldier and blame President Bush for not waving a "Magic Wand" and delivering peace to a Nation that has only known torture and war for Centuries, and keep in mind that this is the guy they call a moron and a brainless idiot.

The Press in this Country should be widely condemned for their anti-American bias, and their willingness to hurt this War effort, in the name of bringing down President Bush. In my neck of the woods, I call that TREASON

8 posted on 05/24/2004 7:21:12 PM PDT by MJY1288 (Our Wounded Soldiers at Walter Reed Have Yet to be Visited by John Kerry. What's he Afraid of?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
We have three capable enemies. (Not counting the perennial "US" of Walt Kelly's Pogo comic strip.)

Saudi. China. A Certain Class of Volks in Euro-ville.

The muslim terrs are their pawns.

9 posted on 05/24/2004 7:24:35 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Screw the Saudis, may crows make nests in their mustaches.
10 posted on 05/24/2004 7:25:06 PM PDT by John Lenin (Nothing is wrong with California that a rise in the ocean level wouldn't cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
"What we read and hear from our commentators in America and sometimes congressional sources, if you remember going back a year ago, there was the issue of the oil reserves in Iraq and that in a year or two they would be producing so much oil in Iraq that, as it were, the war would pay for itself," the envoy said. "

And Saudi Arabia naturally responded, with Iran, in destabilizing Iraq and its pipelines to earn themselves more money, increasing the price of their own oil.

It's easier to do this way. With Saddam, he might fight back. With the Admin, they appease and hide the links.

11 posted on 05/24/2004 7:26:14 PM PDT by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John

We did it for the oil.

Thats why gasoline is over $2.00 a gallon and rising.

Oh, I get it now !


12 posted on 05/24/2004 7:28:32 PM PDT by Delta 21 (MKC USCG - ret)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zencat

Our fiends the Saudis.. Kuss em*q to them!(@$%%%$#%*&*^%$#!!!)


13 posted on 05/24/2004 7:36:18 PM PDT by sheik yerbouty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
The envoy described bin Laden's al Qaeda network as "not so much an organization as a cult with a cult leader and a cult philosophy". "One of the main drawbacks of the operations in Afghanistan is that bin Laden has not been caught," he said. "To bring bin Laden to justice will go a long way to removing some of his mystique."

Admit it dude, since we pulled out of SA you guys have had to deal with the terrs in an up close and personal way. And with the split in AQ and Zarqawi in Iraq that leaves UBL free to claim his crown in SA.

We'll gladly come back, all you have to do is ask and accept our terms.

14 posted on 05/24/2004 7:42:20 PM PDT by nunya bidness (Yorktown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
Prince Turki al-Faisal, ambassador to Britain and Ireland

With such a hissy-fit it does appear the nominally Wahhabist Queeny has not of late had his share of pre-pubescent teenies-boys (or mayhap he just fared poorly at the Craps in Monte Carlo).

15 posted on 05/24/2004 7:42:26 PM PDT by dodger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John
near as I can figure, nowhere in the article does the Saudi envoy say the war was about oil. He says OTHERS say.....
16 posted on 05/24/2004 8:12:42 PM PDT by stylin19a (How does somebody know when a bagpipe is out of tune?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land_of_Lincoln_John

Then why didn't we keep Kuwait and take-over Saudi Arabia while we were there the first time?


17 posted on 05/24/2004 8:41:30 PM PDT by pragmatic_asian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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