Another angry ally

[abomvubuso]

In just 24 hours Saudi Arabia managed to do two unprecedented things. First, on October 17 the country was selected to be one of the ten temporary members of the UN Security Council for the first time in its history. Later, on October 18 it became the first country in history to decline that very same position.

And all this, given the fact that

Comments

I welcome a break from dining with terrorists

[rick_day]

Hmm, wasn't there a rather convincing and well researched book that linked the 9/11 hijackers with financing from the Saudi regime?

Do you think they would consider doing something like that again in retribution for these peace gestures?

Thanks for the post.

[abomvubuso]

I'd be interested to read that book.

To the question: the Saudis like to consider themselves a major regional player. And as such, they'd rather stick to using proxies. Including political formations in neighbouring countries and/or organisations adhering to their (geo)political agenda.

So the short answer is: would they attack the US interests in the region? - No, that'd be suicidal. Would they fund a direct attack on US territory? Definitely not. But would they feel the need for restraint in pursuing their goals through any means, including nation-building, promoting/toppling regimes according to their purposes and even intervening militarily in lesser neighbouring countries whenever their interests are directly threatened? I don't think so.

[rick_day]

this is the book I was referencing

[abomvubuso]

Given the response of this administration to some recent events like the whole NSA spying fiasco, I'd rather bet on "confusion", possibly coupled with a bit of damage control.

Thanks for the links, will review when I have time.

[sophia_sadek]

The Saudi ties to the Taliban and al-Qaeda are documented in a variety of sources. The CIA connections are there as well.

[rick_day]

yeet no one ever really talks in media levels akin to, say, the Boston bombings...

So we know the enemy, and they didn't live in any of the countries we invaded, and they are still alive and we don't negotiate with terrorists, etc....

Why is this not a 'big deal'?

[sophia_sadek]

It is not a big deal because it involves big money. Money talks, but it also buys silence.

One of my students wants me to qualify my original statement. The sources indicated CIA support during the inception of those organization, but not to the extent subscribed by the 9/11 Truthers.