Jordan's king says it's `somewhat ludicrous' to intervene in Iraq while Israeli-Pal conflict rages

Associated Press / SFGate

[montag813]

There is no relation between Iraq and the Arab-Israeli conflict. None. I don't see Abdullah's point.

[Irene Adler]

There is a relationship. Bush is hoping and planning to change the entire balance of power in the ME in favor the the U.S. If he can dump Saddam, then Iran may well turn in our favor (young people there seem to be much more pro-West than their parents and have been demonstrating against the current Shiite govt.); the Saudis' iron hold on SA seems to be weakening with demonstrations there as well.

If the U.S. establishes a strong influence in the region, then Israel will have a far easier time dealing with the Palestinians. Bush has big plans for the ME and the U.S. role in it. Iraq is the first step.

[boris]

Nuking Baghdad would certainly get the terrorists' attention...

[Let's Roll]

Queen Abdullah=King Abdullah

[lexington minuteman 1775]

Guess his majesty would sooner have Saddam unleash WMD attack on its neighbors, particularly Israel before he yell, "Houston, we have a problem" Well kingy boy you keep your head stuck in Jordanian sand so you make a fitting target. Let's Roll!

[Faraday]

Jordan's King Abdullah II finds "somewhat ludicrous" the idea of intervention in Iraq while the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has the Middle East in turmoil.

Memo to King Abdullah: Watch and learn. My guess is you won't be laughing. If you're lucky, you might survive.

[meenie]

Is there a relationship between Iraq and 9/11? 14 Of the 19 involved in 9/11 were Saudis with none being Iraqi. Yet Saudi is our friend and Iraq is our next target in the war on terrorism. To me, this is ludicrous.

We know Sadaam has biological weapons because we gave him the Ames anthrax strain. We know he has chemical weapons because of the GI's involved in the incineration of his weapons dumps in the Gulf War.

We know that he would like to perfect nuclear weapons. The only problem that he has is no delivery systems that could approach the United States. Now my question is: What threat does Sadaam pose to the United States in real terms?

My answer to that is that he poses a real threat to any American troops stationed in the Mideast. He also poses a threat to the Israelis with his Scud missiles.

We counter this threat by preparing an invasion force and subjecting more troops to his threat? Do you think Israel is going to stand by and let its people be attacked by chem and bio weapons?

So when Israel launches a nuclear attack, our troops get peppered with nuclear fall-out as well as the Iraqis. The only sane policy in this whole equation is, we have to warn Sadaam that the first time he attempts to launch an WMD attack, Iraq will be obliterated with nuclear missiles. Then be prepared do just that. Anything else is nonsense.

[DentsRun]

"This is just beginning to raise the issue, what's at stake here, what's the nature of the threat when we go in, and if we go in?" Biden said. "Will it require tens of thousands of troops to be there for three, four, five years? These are questions the American public has a right to have some knowledge about."

As he has previously, Biden said Bush should do nothing before he lays out to Congress his rationale for striking, explains his post-Saddam plans for Iraq and wins congressional support.

Loath though I am to second Biden on anything this time he got it right. We do need a national discussion on Iraq. I see from this morning's paper that Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter also submmitted a resolution asking that Bush get congressional approval before launching any attack. It's good to see (a few) members of congress waking up to their responsibilties, rather than essentially saying to the president, "Here, you make all the decisions for us. Call us when it's over."

[DentsRun]

So when Israel launches a nuclear attack, our troops get peppered with nuclear fall-out as well as the Iraqis. The only sane policy in this whole equation is, we have to warn Sadaam that the first time he attempts to launch an WMD attack, Iraq will be obliterated with nuclear missiles. Then be prepared do just that. Anything else is nonsense.

We did warn Saddam exactly that during the first Gulf War, one of the reasons I expect he didn't fire any SCUDS at Israel with biological or chemical weapons. Also, if I'm not mistaken, Israel has warned Saddam that if he fires WMD at Israel, she will respond with nuclear weapons. Unless Saddam has a death wish (and a need for more glass surfaced parking lots in Baghdad) I can't see what he hopes to gain in attacking U.S. troops in the Middle East or Israel.

[SandfleaCSC]

Kinda reminds me of some of the Black Panther and Malcom X protests in their heyday. These guys would be out chanting "Down with Whitey, Down with the Devil", while marching alongside their caucasian wives and girlfriends. The Arabs are just like that. They rant and rave, but in the end, they fall all over themselves for one of our "Western Infidel Whores".

[yendu bwam]

Jordan's king is dead wrong. If we were to wait for the Palestinian conflict to end before doing what we have to do in Iraq, we'd be here forever. Jordan's king is just (rightfully) afraid of having to support the US in such in a mean neighborhood, and given that a lot of his people will be angry. Well, that's just the way it's going to be.

[Thinkin' Gal]

Abdullah's a cagey, and gentlemanly rascal, fully capable of deception.

Half Arab and half British = duplicity with good manners. This is a good thread, not logjammed with the clueless and deceived.

Lawrence: Yes, you were great.

Feisal: ..nine centuries ago...

Lawrence: Time to be great again, my Lord.

Feisal: ...which is why my father made this war upon the Turks. My father, Mr. Lawrence, not the English. Now my father is old. And I, I long for the vanished gardens of Cordova. However, before the gardens must come fighting. To be great again, it seems that we need the English or... Lawrence: ...or?...

Feisal: ...what no man can provide, Mr. Lawrence. We need a miracle!

"Are you the King of the Arabs or shall we look for another?"

[jwfiv]

Thanks for connecting the dots to Faisal and Lawrence, it's quite appropriate.

And, I love the line beneath the photo.

Personaly, I'm rooting for Abdullah and hope he answers history's call.

[crystalk]

That is not correct. Your picture IS of Noor, but of course Abdullah's mother is Queen Muna, a British girl born April Antoinette Gardiner, who conceived the present King out of wedlock in 1961.

Muna remained married to Hussein, father of the present King, until 1977, over 15 years, and was the mother of twin girls.

Muna never did really like the Middle East, and raised this Abdullah mostly in England, where she resides today. Abdullah is the first Arab monarch to have learned Arabic as a second language. Still, as the Hashemite heir he is at little risk of assassination by Islamic fundamentalists.

[crystalk]

Are you sure of that? My records show the Halabys are Lebanese Christians. Noor's mother, of course, is an American WASP. Isn't her father the same Lebanese Halaby that was head of Pan American in the Sixties?

[crystalk]

That seven-year treaty is already over with, it was Oslo.

[Judith Anne]

IIRC, Saddam is giving money to the families of Pali murder-bombers. I saw one Pali the other day on TV saying, "Saddam Hussein is our father, he feels our pain, he cares for us."

I think it would slow the Palis down some if Saddam were gone.

[blam]

"That is not correct. Your picture IS of Noor, but of course Abdullah's mother is Queen Muna, a British girl born April Antoinette Gardiner, who conceived the present King out of wedlock in 1961."

Thanks, I messed up.

[Hamza01]

The best idea I have heard in a long time. Unlikely, but who would refuse to listen to that grand old man.

[Hamza01]

Lisa Halaby, a Lebanese Arab American-- as I understand it. I like the current queen (Rania) better.