Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Saudis deny base access for Iraq attack
The Boston Globe ^ | 11/04/02 | AP

Posted on 11/04/2002 3:53:52 AM PST by wewillnotfail

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:08:30 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

AIRO - Saudi Arabia will not allow bases on its soil to be used for an attack on Iraq even if the United Nations authorizes military action, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said in an interview broadcast yesterday.

Saudi Arabia earlier ruled out the use of its territory for unilateral US action against Iraq, but had indicated it would cooperate if the UN Security Council approved. In the CNN interview, however, Saud said more clearly that Saudi cooperation would not include permitting use of its territory for strikes against Iraq.


(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: base; iraq; saudi; war
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last
Lovely...
1 posted on 11/04/2002 3:53:53 AM PST by wewillnotfail
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
Isn't that what they have to say for public consumption?
2 posted on 11/04/2002 4:02:08 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
The Saudi's are the main base for terrorist and for terrorist money supply, lets go get them.
3 posted on 11/04/2002 4:03:46 AM PST by Texbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
SAUDIS: YOU CAN'T BASE IRAQ ATTACK HERE

Saudis tell US: You can't base Iraq attack here

By Paul Gilfeather, Whitehall Editor

Article HERE SAUDI Arabia said last night it would not allow the US to use its land as a base for war - throwing America's plans to blitz Iraq into chaos.

Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said his country would not join forces, even if the US secured United Nations backing for an attack.

The news came as a blow for US President George Bush.

He had secured a deal with the Saudis to use its territory as a launchpad for war with Saddam Hussein - conditional on UN support for such drastic action.

Now America is coming to terms with losing one of its key allies in the region.

The Prince told TV news network CNN: "We will abide by the decision of the United Nations Security Council and we will co-operate with the Security Council.

"But as to entering the conflict or using facilities, that is something else.

"Our policy is that if the United Nations takes a decision ... it is obligatory on all signatories to co-operate - but that is not to the extent of using facilities in the country or the military forces of the country."

He added: "Saudi Arabia's position is to support political settlement of this issue because we think it is feasible."

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer refused to comment.

Asked if it would be a serious military setback, White House aide Mary Matalin said: "We have many friends and allies in the region."

The Saudis allowed the US to use their territory in the 1991 Gulf War. But Saddam has repeatedly begged them not to side with Bush again.

Saudi Arabia already hosts some 5,000 US troops but Washington admits it needs regional help for any offensive.

Experts said the US could attack Iraq without using bases but conceded an air campaign would be difficult if Saudi airspace was refused too.

4 posted on 11/04/2002 4:04:37 AM PST by wewillnotfail
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
Enough is enough, The crazy islamists don't want us in Saudi
The Saudi's take us for granted


Out of Saudi now!, Tell Iraq that they can have the Saudi's oil fields if they want them
5 posted on 11/04/2002 4:11:06 AM PST by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
Saudi Arabia Says Will Not Help Any U.S. Strike on Iraq

By Ghaida Ghantous

Article HERE

DUBAI (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia, a key U.S. ally in the Middle East, said Sunday it would not allow the United States to use facilities in the country to attack neighboring Iraq, even if a strike was sanctioned by the United Nations.

"We will abide by the decision of the United Nations Security Council and we will cooperate with the Security Council. But as to entering the conflict or using facilities ... that is something else," Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said.

"Our policy is that if the United Nations takes a decision on Chapter 7, it is obligatory on all signatories to cooperate but that is not to the extent of using facilities in the country or the military forces of the country," he told CNN.

Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter makes it mandatory for member states to implement any measure immediately as part of international law.

The remarks were the strongest rejection by Saudi Arabia -- which was a launchpad for the U.S.-led 1991 Gulf War that drove Iraqi troops out of Kuwait after a seven-month occupation -- of any assistance to a possible U.S. attack on Iraq.

The rejection comes in the midst of strained relations between the strategic allies over last year's Sept. 11 attacks on the United States, in which 15 of the 19 men believed to be the suicide attackers were Saudis, and Saudi anger at what it sees as U.S. bias toward Israel in the Middle East conflict.

Saud said there was no crisis in ties between the U.S. and the kingdom, the largest oil exporter to the United States.

Washington could launch an attack on Iraq without using bases inside Saudi Arabia, but the air campaign would be more difficult if it could not use Saudi air space.

Mary Matalin, counselor to Vice President Dick Cheney, told CNN's "Late Edition" program following Saud's comments that the United States had many other allies it could depend on.

Asked if Saud's comments marked a serious military setback to any U.S.-led effort against Iraq, she said: "We have many friends and allies in the region and we have many friends and allies around the world ... We would never engage unless we were sure that we could get the job done well."

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters aboard Air Force One as President Bush flew to Illinois on a domestic political trip: "I don't talk about operational issues or basing issues" and declined further comment.

APPARENT SHIFT IN SAUDI POSITION Prince Saud has in the past indicated the United States could use bases in Saudi Arabia for an attack on Iraq if it was sanctioned by the United Nations. It was not clear what prompted the apparent shift in the Saudi position.

Faced with Riyadh's possible refusal to be a launch pad for strikes on Iraq, the United States has spent $1.4 billion to expand Qatar's Al Udeid facility into a major air base and military staging ground.

Washington has several Gulf bases, mainly in Bahrain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and Qatar is increasingly becoming a key base for U.S. military operations in the region. The U.S. used Udeid base last year after Riyadh refused to let U.S. planes and troops heading to Afghanistan use its Prince Sultan base.

Gulf power Saudi Arabia and its tiny neighbor Qatar are currently locked in a diplomatic row over several issues, including Doha's decision to allow U.S. access to Udeid base.

Western diplomats say Riyadh, which recalled its ambassador from Doha in September, was incensed at what it saw as Qatar's efforts to present itself as Washington's main regional ally, a role Saudi Arabia has had for decades.

Saud told CNN the kingdom wanted a political resolution to the Iraq crisis and that Baghdad had made a "very clear and unambiguous promise" to Arab states that it would abide by U.N. resolutions. "We think the road is set for that."

Washington wants to end Baghdad's alleged pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and has threatened military action. The United Nations is seeking a resolution to allow U.N. weapons inspectors back into Iraq after a four-year absence.

Iraq denies U.S. weapons charges and has agreed to the return of arms inspectors.

"Saudi Arabia's position is a position to support the political settlement of this issue because we think it is feasible," Saud said.

The oil-rich Gulf region is bristling with U.S. troops and weaponry, Saudi Arabia alone has 5,000 U.S. troops, and Washington has said it would require regional military help for any offensive against Iraq.

Saud said the Iraqi people should decide the fate of their president and warned against a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq in the event of an attack. "You can never make a permanent change through occupation by foreign forces," he said.

6 posted on 11/04/2002 4:13:15 AM PST by wewillnotfail
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
How many American soldiers died in 1991 in the Persian Gulf War protecting Saudi Arabia's precious oil fields? If the Saudi lack of cooperation in the looming war with Iraq gripes your butt as much as it does mine, you can make your feelings known to the Saudi Embassy website at info@saudiembassy.net (email) or visit the official Saudi Embassy website at www.saudiembassy.net, go to "Links" and then click onto "Contact us". They have heard from me and I encourage others to follow suit!
7 posted on 11/04/2002 4:18:30 AM PST by ctnoell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
This is one relationship that needs immediate attention, one more area where our government places politics before nat'l security.
8 posted on 11/04/2002 4:20:59 AM PST by MountainYankee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
Time to take over the Saudi oil fields and evict the "royal" family. All of these so-called princes can go live in France or some other equally worthless EU country.

Lease the oil rights to 100% U.S. corps. - not multinational conglomerates. Fund the U.S. military from the rental payments.

Pay a 10% royalty to the Saudi people (not the "royal" family), drop foreign aid to Israel and toss 10% of the oil revenues to them instead.

Exile Arafat to France. Relocate all of the Palestinians to Saudi Arabia, and name it "New Palestine." Let the Arabs fight with each other over who owns which waterhole, camel, etc.

Make every surviving member of Bin Laden's family live on a diet that requires pork or ham to be eaten at every meal.
9 posted on 11/04/2002 4:23:43 AM PST by Young Rhino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Young Rhino
Make every surviving member of Bin Laden's family live on a diet that requires pork or ham to be eaten at every meal.

I'd rather a few thousand worms and grubs live on a diet that requires members of Bin Laden's family.

10 posted on 11/04/2002 4:26:27 AM PST by Wormwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ctnoell
I am sure the Saudi's are concerned about American public opinion (thus their multi million dollar PR effort in this country to "improve" their image.) But they are far more concerned about the stability of their regime. And allowing US military action to be launched against Iraq from their soil would serioulsy destable their regime if not topple it to pro Osama, anti western Islamacists. The reason Osama was expelled from Saudi Arabia in the first place was his vehement and public denunciations of American (infidel) military forces on "sacred" Saudi land during the first Gulf War. Osama wanted to raise a purely Islamic army and fight a jihad without American assisstance against Sadam.

And Iraq never had any intention of going to Saudi Arabia after taking Kuwait.

11 posted on 11/04/2002 4:28:13 AM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Young Rhino
And that will reduce terrorism and prevent another 9/11.
12 posted on 11/04/2002 4:30:05 AM PST by Burkeman1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ctnoell
BTT

Thank you for the opportunity to deliver a well crafted and thoughtful obection to the Saudis.

13 posted on 11/04/2002 4:40:31 AM PST by wewillnotfail
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
If the United States had not taken a stand against Iraq in August 1990, I feel confident that Saddam would not have stopped at the Kuwaiti/Saudi border.
14 posted on 11/04/2002 4:44:15 AM PST by ctnoell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Young Rhino
Sorry kid, that doesn't work in my book.
15 posted on 11/04/2002 4:44:24 AM PST by wewillnotfail
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
Saudi Arabia will not allow bases on its soil to be used for an attack on Iraq

As someone else pointed out here, down the road Iraq will make an excellent base for an attack on Saudi Arabia.

16 posted on 11/04/2002 4:46:30 AM PST by Numbers Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Numbers Guy
As someone else pointed out here, down the road Iraq will make an excellent base for an attack on Saudi Arabia.

And fast-flowing oil from a liberated Iraq will undercut the Saudi position in the oil markets. They know this better than anyone, I'm sure.

They can feel the noose tightening, and all they can do is writhe helplessly, knowing that they were the ones who foolishly put it over their own necks.

17 posted on 11/04/2002 4:53:16 AM PST by Imal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dila813
Tell Iraq that they can have the Saudi's oil fields if they want them

Better yet, let's just "un-nationalize" them and return them to the American oil companies who discovered them, and brought them into production back in the 50's.

18 posted on 11/04/2002 5:01:27 AM PST by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail

Reservists Ordered To Mobilise (UK)

19 posted on 11/04/2002 5:10:46 AM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wewillnotfail
For those who think Iraq's dictator is a pussycat, I read an article recently that described Saddam calling for the assassination of the leaders of all countries that might side with or show support for the US in a strike against Iraq.

I've said all along that this is precisely why countries in the area have been mute regarding support of US preemptory action for fear of this kind of preemptory reprisal by Saddam.
20 posted on 11/04/2002 5:12:43 AM PST by EODGUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson