Posted on 03/28/2007 8:28:48 AM PDT by saganite
Saudi King Abdullah, whose country is a close US ally, on Wednesday slammed the "illegitimate foreign occupation" of Iraq in an opening speech to the annual Arab summit in Riyadh.
"In beloved Iraq, blood is being shed among brothers in the shadow of an illegitimate foreign occupation, and ugly sectarianism threatens civil war," Abdullah said.
He also said that Arab nations, which are planning to revive a five-year-old Middle East peace plan at the summit, would not allow any foreign force to decide the future of the region.
In the past, Saudi leaders including Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal have often criticised US policy in Iraq but have never described its presence there as "illegitimate."
If Arab leaders recover trust in each other and regain their credibility, "the winds of hope will blow on the nation, and then, we will not allow forces from outside the region to determine the future of the region, and only the flag of Arabism will be raised on Arab soil," Abdullah said.
Arab foreign ministers meeting ahead of the summit agreed on Monday to call for an amendment of Iraq's 2005 constitution to give Sunni Arabs a greater share of power in the war-ravaged country and prevent its breakup.
But Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari responded by saying the government did not need a "diktat" from the Arabs on how to amend its constitution and boost national reconciliation.
The Iraqi government has initiated moves to review a de-Baathification law in a bid to woo former members of the regime of executed dictator Saddam Hussein back into politics and government jobs.
Under a controversial de-Baathification law, tens of thousands of members of Iraq's former ruling Baath party were stripped of their posts in government, at universities and in business after the 2003 US-led invasion.
The law has been a major source of grievance for the minority Sunnis, who have waged a deadly insurgency against US troops and the Shiite-led American-backed government in Baghdad.
Iraq's once-ruling Sunnis also want an amendment of the constitution, which they fear leaves their central regions without natural resources and Iraq's oil wealth in the hands of the governing Shiites and the autonomous Kurds.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1808106/posts
The Saudis are nothing but pragmatic. From the action in Congress they can no longer be sure the US will "take care" of Iran before we leave, so they need to play nice with Imanutjob. One more blow to America's reputation, courtesy of the Rats.
He's speaking to Arabs. They'd likely stone him if he said anything else.
The Saudis keep their friends close, and their enemies even closer. That's why James Baker is so "close" to them.
The Saudi's OBVIOUSLY see the writing on the wall now, and will position themselves to survive the coming slaughter....
We LOST the Propoganda War over Iraq, and millions will end up dead because of it...
lol....yeah, and Islam is a ROP.
How quickly the Saudis forget how we protected them when Saddam invaded Kuwait in 1990.
The Saudis are our enemies, and no amount of Presidential smooching, handholding, Crawford red carpet treatments, and wishful thinking will change that.
Isn't this the country whose citizens actually brought down the World Trade Center? Apart from the oil, why we are friends with these people is beyond me.
Wonder what ticked him off
Well this explains why his excellency canceled the state dinner at the White House.
"Consider Saudi Arabia, the native home of most of the September 11th hijackers. The Saudis, unlike the Iraqis, have proven connections to al Qaeda. Saudi charities have funneled money to Islamic terrorist groups. Yet the administration insists on calling Saudi Arabia a “good partner in the war on terror.” Why? Because the U.S. has a longstanding relationship with the Saudi royal family, and a long history of commercial interests relating to Saudi oil. So successive administrations continue to treat the Saudis as something they are not: a reliable and honest friend in the Middle East." - Ron Paul, Feb 26th 2007
Maybe he found out that pork was on the menu.
"Wonder what ticked him off"
For the 60 years prior to 9/11, they were a strong ally. After 9/11, certain people (like Rudy Giuliani) stirred up anti-Saudi sentiments in the US. The political situation in SA is complex, with the ruling party distanced from the people and the Imams. They have an understanding where they are separate and leave each other alone. As a result, the Saud family had no knowledge of the 11 Saudi hijackers, but still got stereotyped as the guilty party in lots of people's eyes. Then we invaded a Sunni muslim country (Iraq) and gave the Shiite's lots of power when SA is predominantly Sunni. The Saud family's hold on power is weak and this threatened it greatly. They are thinking about their own interests.
SA would also be very unhappy if the US pulled out, as Democrats want. They figure expressing this "displeasure" to their domestic audience, however, will not have an impact on US policy at the moment.
That remark would be nicely punctuated by a missile bisecting his burnoose, launched by an overhead USAF drone.
But if he refused to attend a state dinner in DC and now he's saying this, it sounds like something ticked him off recently.
"He's speaking to Arabs. They'd likely stone him if he said anything else."
No, not really. The Saudis are completely duplicitous; or as a saying often attributed to native American's goes: "He speaks with a forked tongue."
The Saudis do not mind fanning the flames of anti-American sentiment in the region and then, in conversation with American representatives offering that negative sentiment as evidence for why America should agree with some position or other that the Saudis are taking.
The fact is that America has tried to be a good friend to the Saudis but the Saudis have never thought of themselves as a friend of the U.S.
The fact is that Gulf War I was fought because Saddam had placed his military machine within striking distance of the population centers of Saudi Arabia. Had Kuwait been located along the northern border region of Iraq, and not on the doorstep of the Saudis, the U.S. would not have "saved" Kuwait, the UN sanctions and "no fly" zones would never have been erected, and all the conditions regarding Iraq leading up to 2001-2003 would have provided no grounds for the current war, because, in fact, saving the Saudis was the real objective - not "saving" Kuwait.
We have been duped into "protecting" the duplicitous, radical Wahabi Saudis long enough.
No more.
"Saudi family had no knowledge?" Prince Salman, who was named by Abu Zubaydah as his chief Saudi contact, retired his top thoroughbred ,Point Given, on Aug. 30,2001 and made sure he was sold to a Kentucky breeding farm before the 9-11 attacks.
It's time for new leadership in Saudi Arabia.
The oil fields should be returned to their original American owners.
Saudis are highly attuned to US politics. They recognize the way the Democrat winds are blowing and are adjusting their policy accordingly.
Guess we can say goodbye to our influence in the Middle East.
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.