Posted on 04/03/2004 1:55:34 AM PST by Piefloater
FORGET Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The real reason the United States invaded Iraq was Saudi Arabia, according to a US intelligence analyst.
Dr George Friedman, chairman of the United States private sector intelligence company Stratfor, said the US had settled on WMD as a simple justification for the war and one which it expected the public would readily accept.
Dr Friedman, in Australia on a business trip, said the US administration never wanted to explain the complex reasons for invading Iraq, keeping them from both the public and their closest supporters.
"That, primarily, was the fact that Saudi Arabia was facilitating the transfer of funds to al-Qaeda, was refusing to cooperate with the US and believed in its heart of hearts that the US would never take any action against them," he said.
Dr Friedman said the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the US prompted the strategy to hunt down al-Qaeda wherever it was to be found. But that proved exceedingly difficult.
"The US was desperate. There were no good policy choices," he said.
"Then the US turned to the question - we can't find al-Qaeda so how can we stop the enablers of al-Qaeda."
He said those enablers, the financiers and recruiters, existed in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
But the Saudi government variously took the view that this wasn't true or that they lacked the ability and strength to act, he said.
Dr Friedman said in March last year, the Saudis responded to US pressure by asking the US to remove all its forces and bases from their territory. To their immense surprise, the US did just that, relocating to Qatar.
He said Saudi Arabia and al-Qaeda shared a number of beliefs including that the US could not fight and win a war in the region and was casualty averse. There was a need to change that perception.
But close by was Iraq, the most strategically located nation in the Middle East, bordering Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Turkey and Iran.
"If we held Iraq we felt first there would be dramatic changes of behaviour from the Saudis," he said. "We could also manipulate the Iranians into a change of policy and finally also lean on the Syrians.
"It wasn't a great policy. It happened to be the only policy available."
Dr Friedman said US President George W Bush faced the difficulty of explaining this policy, particularly to the Saudis. Moves to link Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda failed completely.
"They then fell on WMD for two reasons," he said.
"Nobody could object to WMD and it was the one thing that every intelligence agency knew was true.
"We knew we were going to find them. And we would never have to reveal the real reasons.
"The massive intelligence failure was that everybody including Saddam thought he had WMD. He behaved as if he had WMD. He was conned by his own people."
This is the closest thing to reason that I've seen or heard since 9/11.
"Russian secret services... had selectively kidnapped 16 relatives" of Khambiyev throughout Chechnya, said a rebel statement quoted by several rebel websites.
"Some time later, authorities said that those detained would be sentenced to death unless" Khambiyev and his brother Umar, a former health minister, surrendered, the statement said.
The russians are starting to use the same tactics against islamic fanatics that islamic fanatics have uses against the world. Look for more of it...
I rest my case.
Look at all the countries Iraq borders, which are now bordered by US troops rather than Saddam's people from Takrit and Falluja. It is a fact that Saudi Arabia is now merely one of those countries - and no longer a necessary host and diplomatically immune to military pressure on that account.And as you point out, we there actually was no issue of starting hostilities with Iraq; they were merely put in abeyance by the armistice 13 years ago.
As to the rest of the theory, you'd have to have an IQ of under 2 not to figure that one out. Of course Iraq is of strategic importance to the war on terror. Of course Iraq is the best place to begin to drain the swamp, the dimmness of these so called experts is amazing. The people of FR figured all this out long ago. It was never just one issue, it was all of them together.
If I remember correctly, S.A. lowered the price of oil significantly days before we went into Iraq.
If S.A. is the "real reason" for the war, then why did they do that?
Dr Friedman, in Australia on a business trip, said the US administration never wanted to explain the complex reasons for invading Iraq, keeping them from both the public and their closest supporters.
"That, primarily, was the fact that Saudi Arabia was facilitating the transfer of funds to al-Qaeda, was refusing to cooperate with the US and believed in its heart of hearts that the US would never take any action against them," he said.
OUTSTANDING perceptive ANALYSIS, right on the mark. The Saudi Royals are sponsporing the radical Islamic fundamentalist sect, Wahhabism, the madrassas in Pakistan, the "Talabombed" in Afghanistan and funneling funds to Al Qaeda (the terrorist wing of the Saudi government). U.S. occupied Iraq is like a safe harbor for when the Islamic extremist Jihadis finally overthrow the Saudi Royals who are not our allies in the first place. The Saudi Royals are riding the tiger of terrorism which they have created for themselves. Sure, Iraq had the butcher of Baghdad (Good riddance) and his two barbarian sons (especially Uday) but the real reason for liberating Iraq is because of Saudi Arabia.
Ever wonder why the nation of Qatar allowed the U.S. to have a base of operations within Qatar. Ans: The Saudis tried to assassinate around 1996 the Ruler of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad bin Kalifa Al-Thani with (get this) French mercenaries who screwed up (thankfully the "Cluseauites" botched the job) because the Ruler or Emir of Qatar was too "progressive" and forward thinking ("may Allah forbid" according to the Saudis) allowing Qatari women to drive autos and vote, bring modernity to the country etc. Qatar is a country with a future (an ally of the U.S.) while Saudi Arabia is a future fundamentalist Islamic ghetto.
The author of the article, Dr. George Friedman knows what he is talking about.
I have personally lived and worked in Saudi Arabia and Qatar and have an idea of what is going on in the Middle East.
IMO, both Abdullah and the president knew that S.A. didn't have the strength to act. That was back in the summer of 2002. That's what was talked about at the two Crawford meetings.
So we agreed to go after two traditional enemies of Abdullah. Saddam and of course al Qaeda -- which we were doing anyway. Also, we agreed to remove our troops from S.A., a point of weakness to Abdullah and we also agreed to try a so-called road-map with Israel and the Pali's.
Anyway, a year after the meetings, in 2003, al Qaeda was significantly weakened, Saddam was in his hiddy-hole and our troops were removed from S.A.
Anyway with all of this done late in 2003, Abdullah became strong enough to act -- and it appears that he is acting.
[Excerpt]
The war was waged in order to obtain a strategic base from which to coerce countries such as Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia into using their resources to destroy al Qaeda within their borders.
I'm not sure if Freidman is really saying all of that.
For far too long, U.S. politicians have been BOWING DOWN to the their masters in the House of Saud, talking out of both sides of their mouths and have placated the Saudi Royals. This needs to change NOW. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is not an ally of the United States.
I do recall the rebellions after Desert Storm (both the Kurds and Shi'ites rose up), but not the chemical weapons use then. They were put down the old-fashioned way; with hordes of troops ferried around on and receiving air support from Soviet-built Hinds (the coalition stupidly agreed to the request by the Iraqis to use transports, and Saddam decided that the transport/gunship Hind filled the bill quite nicely; that was the reason for the no-fly zones).
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.