Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Downed Choppers - Saudi Citizens Funding Shoulder Fired Rockets

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 05:56 PM
Original message
Downed Choppers - Saudi Citizens Funding Shoulder Fired Rockets
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

Interesting. Earlier I noted that American helicopters appear to be getting downed at a much faster rate of late. Now I see that at a press conference today, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Peter Pace said that "ground fire ... has been more effective against our helicopters in the last couple weeks."

So what's going on? A friend passes on to me this AP story from early December, which notes that ...

Private Saudi citizens are giving millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons, including shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles, according to key Iraqi officials and others familiar with the flow of cash.
Saudi government officials deny that any money from their country is being sent to Iraqis fighting the government and the U.S.-led coalition.

But the U.S. Iraq Study Group report said Saudis are a source of funding for Sunni Arab insurgents. Several truck drivers interviewed by The Associated Press described carrying boxes of cash from Saudi Arabia into Iraq, money they said was headed for insurgents.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-12-08-saudis-sunnis_x.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
gatorboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. But..But the Saudi's...Are our friends!
It's must be Iran, it MUST BE!!! *faints*

K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ktlyon Donating Member (733 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. our friends that cut production to move the price higher
Bush's friends
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #1
30. Master betrayed us! They stole it from us. And we wants our precious oil back.
We will lead them into Iran, yes. And after the Persians kill the Sunnis, then we will takes it! The precious oil contracts will be ours again...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ms liberty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. Funny how often our friends in Saudi Arabia keep turning up that way, isn't it?
Of course, we're not going to hear about that...after all, we don't want to go to war with them, do we?

K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. ever notice that no matter how much the House of Saud screws us over
we just keep comin' back for more?

crazy, huh? :crazy:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. more evidence linking Saudi Arabia than Iran
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Good observation. Sunnis attack U.S. forces the most.
The gas passed about Iran (which favors the Shi'a) is suspect: The Shi'a can take their fair share of bloodshed in the civil war, but U.S. forces are usually attacked by the Sunni insurgency. Folks, I hate to say it, but GWB is working up a big one to get in Iran. When he does, we have to be ready to act or we will be stuck with a regional war after he leaves his stinker on the carpet. By the way, our local daily (Austin American Statesman) titled one letter-to-editor, which opined that the GOP was going to blame the Dems for the Iraq debacle, as "another conspiracy." Fair & balanced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theHandpuppet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. Well, look how quickly we "forgot" the Saudi-9/11 connection
What was it -- something like 14 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi? Osama himself is a Saudi and last I heard he was still secretly receiving funds from sympathetic family members. Now we have Saudis funding their fellow Sunnis in Iraq.

Of course, you won't hear any of THAT on the nightly news. IRAN, IRAN, IRAN. Amazing how easily the American public can be manipulated and duped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Iran did 9/11, right?
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananarepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
26. Yep! Gates reckons it's a slam dunk! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shallah Kali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. duped like this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
5. k & r -- people have GOT to understand the anti-Iran propaganda is BULLSHIT! (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:13 PM
Response to Original message
7. One of the posts on TPMmuckrakers points out how it will probably end
Just back from the mid-east. Wonderful friend of mine who I have known for 20 years and I had dinner. He is utterly despondent. This entire study in idiocy will end precisely in the only way it ever could. The artificial construction known as Iraq will disolve into it's historic parts...Kurdistan, Basrah and a warlord rich no man's land surrounding Bahgdad. Unfortunately , Bush would prefer an apolyptic conflagration on which he could blame the failure of his venture...over any other outcomes.

My despondent friend, who I paraphrase slightly, who addressed the entire conversation to me as "you" as if i represented America, which we all to some extent do. He has been going in and our of Bahgdad since the occupation began. But since leaving in December he will no longer go back. It's no longer useful, and far too dangerous.

"The Reserves are now full. Sadr now has only to give the word and 10,000 Americans will die in a day. You have trained them. they are standing right there with you! Sadr has more soldiers in Bahgdad than America. You will be killed by the men you thought you trusted. The men you patrol with. The men who feed you. By men in your Green Zone. America no longer has a snake in it's tent. The snake is now inside your own body. Sadr can not believe how stupid you are. You have taught him everything. He was nothing under Saddam. Now he will be the next Saddam. He just needs to decide when enough of the Sheiks will support him. When he can pay them off. Then he will kill you like dogs. And Bush will then blame Iran. He will blame Iran and the whole region will suffer. Iran doesn't want any of this. It is just trying to keep itself from being destroyed too. Bush should be a man and blame himself, but he is a boy, and a boy does not know to blame himself for what he has done."
Posted by: Spoon
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lyonn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
24. Quite a story. When you piece together all the info that is
out and about it makes sense. Others here have said we are training the enemy that will eventually attack us with their new skills. They have a better idea how we think, and don't think.

"The snake is not in our tent it is inside us" paraphrased. He is referring to our Green Zone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cui bono Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #7
25. Wow. That's pretty heavy stuff. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #7
28. So much for the buddy system egh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #7
35. This implies that "the Sheikhs" (Saudis) are supporting Sadr, a Shi'a militant, and the Sunnis.
If one wanted to set off an intra-Shi'a civil war, that's EXACTLY the way it would be done.

Its been in the back of my mind. We know that the big, effective, American tank-killing IEDs first appeared in May 2005 in the Sunni areas west and north of Baghdad. They later spread to areas controlled by Sadr. The Bush-Cheney Administration blaimed Iran, even though it makes no sense for Iran to destabilize the Shi'a-dominated al-Maliki regime.

Now, we see the same thing happening with shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles.
I think Saudi extrenal intelligence is behind this, and the Bushites are playing right into their hands. Again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oblivious Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #7
40. "Sadr can not believe how stupid you are." He's not the only one.
There can't be many people on earth who don't think the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
8. So, when will we be invading Saudi Arabia?
Edited on Fri Feb-02-07 06:15 PM by mtnester
heavy, heavy :sarcasm:


Or maybe not
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #8
36. If it was "all about oil", why wouldn't we invade SA?
We have as much justification (they're support for "terrorists") as we did with Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #36
43. Because B*sh is virtually a kissing cousin
to the Saudi Royals, they bankrolled his family. Most of Bushco foreign policy benefits the Saudis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ArmchairMeme Donating Member (390 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
10. Saudia Arabia and hijackers
And do we all remember how many of the hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudia Arabia?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #10
46. 15. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roamer65 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
11. I say leave and dump it all right into King Abdullah's lap.
Edited on Fri Feb-02-07 06:39 PM by roamer65
But it won't happen. Just look at all the "love" goin around in this picture of Abdullah, Cheney, Daddy 41 and Powell. This is a guy that is helping to kill our soldiers and these pukebags hold hands with him.



:puke:

Makes me sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPisEvil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
15. Does this sound more and more like Afghanistan, circa 1980?
It does to me...

I'm so glad the adults are in charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
file83 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #15
37. I wonder what the shelf life is for the Stinger Missles the CIA gave to the Afghans?
Edited on Sat Feb-03-07 12:07 PM by file83
Wouldn't that be the ultimate "blow back"? Our helicopters getting shot down with missles that WE supplied to our enemy 20 years before?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Less than 20 years, I think...
Edited on Sat Feb-03-07 11:48 PM by benEzra
I've read that by now, they'd probably need depot-level maintenance in order to function.

Having said that, Iraq is probably swimming in ex-Iraqi-army shoulder-fired missiles. The Stinger is just one (American) example, but most in Iraq are probably Warsaw Pact pattern.


Strela-3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SA-14_Gremlin (Strela-3)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MANPAD
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critters2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
16. So we'll be invading Saudi Arabia when? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. I don't object to this idea in principle. It's just sadly impractical.
The Saudis cause us way too much grief and are responsible for most of the terrorism in the Middle East. Hint: Iran does not support Wahabbi Islam.

At a minimum, we should take away all their fancy military toys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critters2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. As my grandma used to say..."I wouldn't wait sitting on a hot stove." nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
19. we'd better attack Iran soon....
That'll show those Saudis! Oh, wait....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Miss Chybil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
20. Are we going to blow them up now?
/sarcasm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
21. NO... those are Iranians dressed as Saudi citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lyonn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
22. Well hell, now we must put Saudi Arabia on our bombing list
since they are giving all that aid and comfort to our enemies (Sunnis). That is after we bomb Iran who is giving aid and comfort to our enemies (Shiites).

Now, have we left anyone out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
23. BushCoUSA is a fully-owned subsidiary of Saudi Arabia.


The enemy has an operative occupying the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
27. Kind of goes along with this detailed Post about Fundin from DU'er Today!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-02-07 11:59 PM
Response to Original message
29. Ah, so then those naval battle groups are for our assault on the
Saudis! After all, we cannot tolerate their interference in our internal affairs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symbolman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 01:18 AM
Response to Original message
31. Please send this to Keith Olbermann
He might actually SAY something about it, and if it's on TV, it might actually MAKE THE ROUNDS..

All this needs is a good Insertion point, ala Keith if we're lucky.

He's the only NEWS on TV anymore outside of Colbert and Jon Stewart :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hawkowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
32. Should've invaded Saudi Arabia
That is where the hijackers were from. That is the nationality of Bin Laden. It is the home of Wahibism--the terrorist, anti-western form of Islam. It has more oil than Iraq.

Yes, I'm being facetious, but there sure were a lot more reasons to invade Saudi Arabia than Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #32
44. That's why 9/11 was a de facto "false flag"
attack. It was carried out by operatives connected to Bushco allies and blamed on a mutual enemy/rival (Iraq).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #32
45. I know that you were being facetious, but why didn't we invade
SA, if it was all about oil. Plus, as you said, SA was the home of most of the terrorists and Wahibism. I know that SA sells oil to us now, but who was Saddam selling his oil to? If it was to other countries, not us, where do those countries get their oil from now that Iraq is essentially shut down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-04-07 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #45
47. Sorry to jump in, hawkowl88..
but the reason is pretty obvious - B*sh is working (directly or indirectly) for Saudi interests. They are his long-time friends and allies and as a result his policies are designed to benefit them. Hence his desire to knock down their rivals (Iraq, Iran, Syria) and (until recently) deny global warming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 01:49 AM
Response to Original message
33. Everyone needs to read this liberal Muslim writer...
Tarek Heggy. I've been living in Egypt for over a year, and often read Heggy's columns in the local English-language press. (Usual Disclaimers: I'm an atheist and an American.)

Heggy is one of the leaders for liberalism and women's rights in the Muslim world. But in an unusual career move for an "academic," he's also an expert in natural gas and oil production.

His web site is here: http://www.heggy.org/

And here's his brief history of the shotgun wedding between the West and Saudi religious fanatics. The "Al-Azhar" he mentions is Egypt's Al-Azhar University, the oldest Islamic university in the world:

Years after the defeat inflicted on them by (Egypt), the Saudis reemerged as a political force in the eastern region of the Arabian peninsula.

Basing themselves in Riyadh, they began to meddle covertly in political affairs. This placed them on a collision course with the al-Rashid family in Ha’il, and the two sides were soon locked in battle. The Saudis, under the leadership of Abdul Rahman, father of the founder of the current Saudi dynasty, King Abdul Aziz, were defeated in 1891.

Abdul Rahman fled to Kuwait with leading members of the House of Saud, where they remained in exile until 1902. During this period, they were the guests of Sheikh Mubarak al-Sabbah, who played an important role in the formation of the young Abdul Aziz.

Born in 1876, Abdul Aziz, who came to be known as Ibn Saud, was encouraged in his dream to recapture Riyadh by the ruler of Kuwait. In 1902, Ibn Saud (Abdul Aziz) seized Riyadh and waged a 30-year campaign to assert his dominion over the Arabian Peninsula. In 1925 he entered first Mecca then Medina, and, in September 1932, the 56-year old proclaimed himself king over the Kingdom of Najd and Hejaz, later to become the first kingdom named after its ruling dynasty, Saudi Arabia.

Concomitantly with the birth of the new kingdom, which officially adopted the doctrine of Wahhabism, came the discovery of vast reservoirs of oil under its deserts. This provided the Wahhabis with a virtually endless source of funds which they used to propogate their model of Islam.

Three decades after the creation of Saudi Arabia and the discovery of oil, many things had changed in the world:

One, Saudi Arabia had built up a huge fortune that enabled it to further the cause of Wahhabism not only within its own borders but throughout the Arab and Muslim world. Its efforts proved successful, as many once moderate Muslims were gradually won over to the harsh version of Islam preached by the Wahhabis.

Two, beginning in the ‘sixties, Egypt suffered a reversal of fortune at all levels, including a decline in its general cultural climate, allowing Wahhabi influence to infiltrate the venerable institution of Al-Azhar. The defeat of June 1967 opened the door wide to groups which espoused the Saudi understanding of Islam and who translated their radical views into political action, often at the point of a gun.

Three, in the context of the Cold War, the West in general and the United States in particular adopted a number of misguided policies towards the region, including turning a blind eye to the spread of Wahhabi influence in the Arab and Islamic world, and even occasionally supporting radical groups inspired by the Wahhabi doctrine to achieve their own political ends, such as ending the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Senator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 03:54 AM
Response to Original message
34. What, exactly, is a "Private Saudi Citizen" ... Hmm?
It is a kingdom -- a monarchy. You are either a ruler or a subject.

There is no "private citizen" status, which confers on one the right to act independently -- you know, with freedom.

This cannot happen without royal approval.

--
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
38. The Saudis are just following Bush orders....
"Smuggle in weapons to shoot down our troops so we can blame it on the Iranians" WINK WINK!
A big MIHOP K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happydreams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
39. ATTACK! ATTACK! ATTACK!....
SAUDI ARABIA!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-03-07 11:48 PM
Response to Original message
42. The Saudi Royals told Bush they would give support 110% to the sunni's if the US.
leaves Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 03:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC