A "proportionate" response to Iran

They had NOTHING to do with 9-11 , but OBL wanted to hit the US and have the US blame KSA.. He hated them after they revoked his citizenship and named AQ a terrorist group. OBL was a vicious fool enamored of the ideas of Syyid Qubt and Hassan al Banna... so was Muhammed Atta.

The world is full of fools and dupes.

 

Is there a link that illustrates that treaty?

 

Saudi Arabia–United States relations refers to the bilateral relations between Saudi Arabia and the United States, which began in 1933 when full diplomatic relations were established and became formalized in the 1951 Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia–United_States_relations

 

Read it but that is not the same type of defense treaty we have with NATO,

 

Perhaps you have never read the Congressional Report on Saudi involvement in 9/11

Page 415: “While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support and assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government.… [A]t least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers.”

Page 417: One of the individuals identified in the pages as a financial supporter of two of the 9/11 hijackers, Osama Bassnan, later received a “significant amount of cash” from “a member of the Saudi Royal Family”

One of the individuals identified in the pages as a financial supporter of two of the 9/11 hijackers, Osama Bassnan, later received a “significant amount of cash” from “a member of the Saudi Royal Family”

during a 2002 trip to Houston.

Page 418: “Another Saudi national with close ties to the Saudi Royal Family, [deleted], is the subject of FBI counterterrorism investigations.”

Pages 418 and 419: Detained al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaida had in his phone book the unlisted number for the security company that managed the Colorado residence of the then-Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan.

Page 421: “a [deleted], dated July 2, 2002, [indicates] ‘incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists inside the Saudi Government.’”

Page 426: Bassnan’s wife was receiving money “from Princess Haifa Bint Sultan,” the wife of the Saudi ambassador. (Her correct name is actually Princess Haifa bint Faisal.)

Page 436: The general counsel of the U.S. Treasury Department, David Aufhauser, testified that “offices [of the Saudi charity al-Haramain] have significant contacts with extremists, Islamic extremists.” CIA officials also testified “that they were making progress on their investigations of al-Haramain.… [T]he head of the central office is complicit in supporting terrorism, and it also raised questions about [then-Saudi Interior Minister] Prince Nayef.”

 

False? What's false?

In March 1974, the embargo against the United States was lifted after U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger succeeded in negotiating a military disengagement agreement between Syria and Israel. Oil prices, however, remained considerably higher than their mid-1973 level. OPEC cut production several more times in the 1970s, and by 1980 the price of crude oil was 10 times what it had been in 1973. By the early 1980s, however, the influence of OPEC on world oil prices began to decline; Western nations were successfully exploiting alternate sources of energy such as coal and nuclear power, and large, new oil fields had been tapped in the United States and other non-OPEC oil-producing nations.

 

Game set match.

 

I'm not debating with anyone advancing the idiotic idea that President Bush ever talked about a "bogus attack" on the U.S.

And U.S. interests do not begin or end at the waters edge.

 

You have any actual evidence that the Saudi government had anything to do with 9/11.

 

See post 32, and please try to keep up....

 

It certainly would be helpful if anything the admin says about the attack can be trusted. But there have been too many lies told and too much mistrust built up and to many cases of erratic behavior for ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING coming out of this admin to be accepted without independent verification.

 

That is where we find ourselves.

This is the American Way:

"Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?"

Transcript of President George Washington's Farewell Address (1796)
https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=15&page=transcript

 

Even if all true then none of that is evidence. of Saudi government involvement .

 

3. - Gas prices sky rocket.

 

The U.S. does not have any mutual defense agreement with Saudi Arabia.

If we did then President Bush wouldn't have had to get Congressional authorization for Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1991.

 

Let Saudi Arabia respond to Iran, they are the ones who may have been harmed by their actions

 

Yea, Saudi government officials paying large sums of money the people who are accused of the attack means nothing at all...

 

You have 'truth' in your forum name, so am i out of line to ask if you have proof that this Bush person is a traitor?

 

WELL, THAT’S A TAKE: The US blames Iran for the Saudi Arabia oil attacks, further escalating tensions.

When a bully sucker-punches your friend, you’re “escalating tensions” if you point it out.

 

Defenses have to be properly manned and maintained. We sold them the tech, that doesn't mean they run it properly or maintain it properly or deployed it properly etc.

In fact, mid east militaries are fraught with a baksheesh problem. In some you straight bribe your commander for duties and gear etc. Things are sold, maintenance funds are embezzled etc. People are ****ing tea boys on duty and ****.
If they didn't work, I'd point to user error to include maintenance and set up problems as well as improper operation, rather than the tech being faulty overall. You know.... since its been tested and used elsewhere fairly effectively.

 

You know how many thousands of people in Saudi Arabia are "government officials"?

 

That has been what I saw with my own personal experiences with many of the Mid Eastern countries. They purchase our equipment, we set it up for them, they have us train them how it all works, and once we leave them to it, everything falls into disrepair and anarchy. Those million dollar, state of the art systems may as well be paper weights and conversation pieces.

 

Personally I think its a testament to their robust effectiveness that they can be misused in that manner and still be even marginally effective. Seems we should just sell them MORE, taking into account the ****ery that will ensue as soon as our observers leave.

 

Because wars lead to death, carnage, and the destruction of a lot of assets. We don't have a lot of spare assets with our current debt load.. We used them up in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you want the option to engage in military conflict, it behooves you to pay for the past military conflicts still sitting on the credit card. That would have required we pass more tax increases, not more tax cuts.

 

What the hell are you talking about? These are references to the Royal Family and Ambassadors. This was a sanctioned operation.