[ken21]

so be it.

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

[nunya bidness]

.

[Aristophanes]

(rubbing my hands together with glee) Oooh! I can't WAIT to read the responses to this one!

[quimby]

Another false headine from the guardian.

[Shermy]

Dear Saddam:

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

[Husker24]

This wont throw anything in disarray, we can simply use Kuwait as a base.

[Jhoffa_]

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?

[Republic]

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.

[steveo]

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.

[Sabertooth]

SAUDIS TELL U.S. FORCES TO GET OUT

So who will the Wahabis hide behind?

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

[DainBramage]

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.

[Hagrid]

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.

[Gladwin]

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

[Arleigh]

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.)

[Map Kernow]

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.

[blam]

Screw The Saudi's!!

[Dan Day]

Unless I'm missing some behind-the-scenes stuff, this strikes me as a very poor move. Even aside from the downside for the U.S., it would be bad for the House of Saud itself, on several levels.

First, it's always a bad idea to reduce military strength for "policital" reasons.

Second, rather than mollify the militants (both internal, and Al Qaeda and others), it would only send them the message that they can get what they want if they cause enough chaos -- so they have every incentive to try *more*, for *more* "reforms" to their liking.

Third, if the militants ever get strong enough to mount direct confrontation, a US military presence would be a big asset to the Sauds.

Fourth, the nations of the Middle East are at a turning point. Do they choose the road which leads to further ties, commerce, prosperity, and peace with the west, or do they make further and further concessions to the forces of Islamic radicalism? This is a big step down the wrong path for the Sauds.

[oldvike]

Alrighty then. I think we should tell Sadam that Saudi Arabia is fair game.

[Cachelot]

Senior Saudi officials have privately complained that the US has "outstayed its welcome"

Why do I get the feeling that Saudi may be past its "best before" date?

[Psycho_Bunny]

I guess they really want to be a province of Iraq.