Replies

hi DO, we debate again :)

What possible gain would the Saudis get from damaging the United States? --> In 2000 Bush was not bothered with foreign adventures and under Clinton, the Iraq mess was left to smoulder. The Saudis would have seen no action and definitely had nothing more to fear from a defeated Saddam. I don't believe the Saudi government was behind 9/11, but don't put it past some Wahabbi crazed princes from doing something

We were standing between them and Saddam Hussein. -- Saddam was weakened heavily in 2001 -- the Kurds were practically independent and the Shias were stronger. As we now know, in the late 90s he realised that his earlier hardline approach against jihadis (and yes, he was hard against Sunni jihadis, Iranis and the Wahabbis before 1991 -- that Gulf War one was a colossal mistake in my humble opinion) and was turning to political Islam (his lieutenants now purportedly lead the Islamic State's strategy)

We know of 19 people involved in the 2001 effort. If Saudi Arabia was truly behind this effort, there would have been literally thousands of active agents here. -- When we say "Saudi Arabia" remember that it is ruled by a family of literally thousands of princes -- all with money. These are tribal entities. We can probably say that the King at that time was not involved, but not much more

hi DO, we debate again :) = :^)

What possible gain would the Saudis get from damaging the United States?

In 2000 Bush was not bothered with foreign adventures and under Clinton, the Iraq mess was left to smoulder. I agree here.

The Saudis would have seen no action and definitely had nothing more to fear from a defeated Saddam.

During the period leading up to 09/11, Saddam Hussein had started testing the resolve of the United States to contain him. He had moved troops closer to eithere Kuwait or Sauda Arabia. I don't remember the exact details now, and I can't find old reports of it because the search is burried deep inside other articles about the region. He had crossed certain makers on the map he wasn't supposed to cross. I don't think this prompted actions by the Saudi's, but it may have been on their mind.

I don't believe the Saudi government was behind 9/11, but don't put it past some Wahabbi crazed princes from doing something.

Ultimately, that's my conclusion as well. And yes, technically some government money may have funded some of the efforts. I don't think that was by the design of the government.

We were standing between them and Saddam Hussein. -- Saddam was weakened heavily in 2001 -- the Kurds were practically independent and the Shias were stronger. As we now know, in the late 90s he realised that his earlier hardline approach against jihadis (and yes, he was hard against Sunni jihadis, Iranis and the Wahabbis before 1991 -- that Gulf War one was a colossal mistake in my humble opinion) and was turning to political Islam (his lieutenants now purportedly lead the Islamic State's strategy)

We didn't have troops on the ground did we? We had aircraft there to monitor, but I don't recall much else going on there.

I agree with your comments about the Kurds. That worked out pretty good in that time frame. They had autonomy and didn't push for more as we had requested. There was a level of trust of the United States there.

I could buy your analysis of Hussein's mindset a lot more, if he hadn't been locking on U. S aircraft and moving his troops into areas in volation of the post Gulf War agreements (or more likely Western Dictates). Recall if you will his bluster directed at terrorist groups, and his very vocal urging of them to attack the United States and it's interests. His denial of inspection teams, and other moves led me to beleive he was crazy enough to start more trouble. He was an old guy with time running out, and he seemed to want to execute some sort of a grand plan. He also contributed to the idea he had WMDs. He was proud to give the U. S. cause for concern. He didn't mellow IMO at all.

We know of 19 people involved in the 2001 effort. If Saudi Arabia was truly behind this effort, there would have been literally thousands of active agents here. --

When we say "Saudi Arabia" remember that it is ruled by a family of literally thousands of princes -- all with money. These are tribal entities. We can probably say that the King at that time was not involved, but not much more

Yes, I agree with this. I dont' think there's much to debate between us. We do see some things different, but overall I think we're in agreement on the big stuff.

I almost missed this post, and only found it doing a review.