Saudis tell Bush to moderate Israel support or face "Grave Consequences"!

CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush and Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah have met amid Saudi warnings that Bush must moderate U.S. support for Israel or risk "grave consequences."

The two leaders met for nearly five hours on Thursday at Bush's ranch as world oil prices jumped on reports -- later denied by the Saudis -- that frustration over perceived U.S. favouritism toward Israel could drive Saudi Arabia to consider supporting an Iraqi suspension of oil exports.

The U.S. side declined to immediately characterise the talks, but a Saudi foreign policy adviser told reporters that Abdullah had come with a warning that U.S. relations with the Arab world would be endangered unless Washington persuaded Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to end the occupation of Palestinian areas.

"He (Abdullah) doesn't mince his words, like the president. ... If the U.S. doesn't do more to reduce the violence, there will be grave consequences for the U.S. and its interests," adviser Adel al-Jubeir said.

The New York Times on Thursday quoted a source close to Abdullah as saying there was talk within the Saudi royal family of using the "oil weapon" against the United States.

But Saudi officials said the country was not considering supporting an Iraqi suspension of oil exports to the United States and that it was committed to maintaining a supply-demand equilibrium and "fair" prices.

"Oil is not a weapon. Oil is not a tank. You cannot fire oil," al-Jubeir told reporters.

BEARS CONCERNS OF ANGRY ARAB PUBLIC

Bush met Abdullah at the door to his ranch house wearing a suit and silver, Western style belt buckle. Abdullah wore a traditional gold-trimmed, brown robe. After two hours of formal talks -- an hour longer than scheduled -- the two broke for a tour of the sprawling ranch.

Abdullah, who has assumed day-to-day control of the Saudi government because of King Fahd's illness, is the author of a Middle East peace plan accepted at a recent Arab summit. As an increasingly influential voice in the region, he came to the meeting bearing the concerns of Arab nations whose citizens are outraged at the Israeli crackdown on Palestinian areas.

Underscoring the importance of the meeting, Vice President Dick Cheney, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice all took part. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld met Abdullah on Wednesday.

Arab anger toward the United States has risen along with perceptions Washington is unabashedly pro-Israel.

Many Arabs were looking for the Saudi crown prince to press Bush for Israeli agreement to end its occupation of Palestinian territory, including the siege of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Ramallah compound, and accept a Palestinian state.

"If he (Sharon) is left to his own devices, he will drag the region over a cliff," al-Jubeir said.

Bush, on the other hand, wants Abdullah and other Arab leaders to refrain from inciting anti-Israeli violence, and to urge Arafat to make peace. He was expected to raise concerns about Saudi support for the Palestinian uprising.

Bush's conservative Republican base has strongly backed Israel, which also has a significant lobby in Congress and long-term Democratic support. Opinion polls show most Americans sympathise with the Jewish state.

Republican senators debating new energy legislation seized on the New York Times report to accuse Saudi Arabia of arrogance and "blackmail" for any suggestion of a link between oil supplies and foreign policy.

"We're looking at a situation in the Mideast today where clearly oil is a weapon," said Republican U.S. Sen. Frank Murkowski, an advocate of opening an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling.

'NEITHER SIDE CAN MAKE THAT PLEDGE'

The main issue at the summit, Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow Youssef Ibrahim said, was: "Can Bush actually come out and say, 'We pledge to deliver Israel, if you pledge to deliver the Arab world'? I think neither side can make that pledge."

A starting point was Abdullah's proposal for normalised Arab relations with Israel in exchange for the return of land captured by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war. Bush has sought to build on the plan which he views as a "new portal" to peace.

But Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said on Wednesday no peace talks could be held until Israel pulled out of Palestinian areas and ended Arafat's isolation.

The original U.S. aim for the meeting, to build support for Washington's campaign to unseat Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, has been overshadowed. But it would nonetheless be discussed, as would trade and economic issues, a senior U.S. official said.

U.S.-Saudi relations were strained by the September 11 attacks. The United States says 15 of the 19 men suspected of carrying out the hijackings were Saudis.

Saudi Arabia has been a longtime U.S. ally, allowing the United States to use its bases for attacks on Iraq during the Gulf War and for air patrols since then.

Osama bin Laden, a Saudi-born exile blamed by the United States for the Sept. 11 attacks, has said closing the bases was a priority in his campaign to drive the United States from the region.

The Saudi Embassy has begun a television ad campaign in the United States promoting Saudi-U.S. ties and urging Americans to "Please keep your eyes, ears and especially your minds open."

I'm very far from being a peacenik, but war should only be a diplomatic tool of the last resort, like our very survival is at stake?

It may very well be our very survival. If one of these Islamics gets a hold of nuke,they will use it. Accept it people,we are at war with Islam. It will come down to Us,the Israelis and the British against the rest of the world.

Sentry, I don't beleive that America can win a war unless it is in high moral ground, remember Vietnam? BTW, I don't blame our gallant troops who fought that war, I blame the politicians(mostly democrats who fed our courages military into the flames). Was it really necessary that America get involved in that war, was communism breaking the door of America? The way I see it is that if armed men(known street gang killers) are walking my street, and looking at my house, should I start shooting, and killing these people? I think not, I can't live with myself if I did that. Now if these armed men start banging and breaking down my door, then I will defend my family with all I have.

I sure would not like to be in President GWB shoes right now. He will have to decide when to let loose the dogs of war. Please read my replies to sentryoveramerica, if you wish to know when I feel it is the right time to fight. It is a decission I feel will be unique, and will depend on the person's conscience, and life's experience when to go to war. Meanwhile, I urge you to pray with me that the world will be at peace in our lifetime.

Ok, you want to start a war now. I think you are a little too late, the USA had declared war on the terrorists last year. If the war you want to start goes beyond the known, and proven(by standards accepted by the world, and most Americans) terrorist, and you are the POTUS, please tell us how you are going to start it, who will be your 1st target, and how you are going to justify it to the People of the USA. You know of course the POTUS is not a dictator, and is accountable to the other 2 branches of our Govt., and the People.

Are you talking about the Israelis, and the Arabs having at it, without US involvement? Why then did you not say it loud and clear at the beginning. I don't think we have much arguement there. Have a good evening, and a nice day tomorrow.

I can't speak for President Bush, but I'd tell the Prince That he he wants to play his games, then we'll play ours. I'd love to see them eat that oil. You see, these Royal oil freeloaders forget from time to time who really props up their phony royal govt. In other words, BRING IT ON!!!

I believe the majority of mohammedans have declared war on the rest of the world; therefore, these people need to feel the brunt of whatever the rest of the world can deliver militarily and diplomatically to those morons who have volunteered themselves for the role of enemy of the rest. Mohnammedans either will win or must, I repeat, must, be forced to unconditionally surrender. They would probably rather die than renounce their irrational religion and culture-- so let 'em! Don't postpone the clash of civilisations for our grandchildren to deal with; take these idiots out everywhere and do it right away.

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.