Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I think we are potentially looking at Iran-Saudi war, if

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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 03:30 PM
Original message
I think we are potentially looking at Iran-Saudi war, if
the situation in Iraq gets so bad for the Sunnis that Saudi Arabia enters Iraq with force. As a response to the Saudi land grab, Iran will annex Basra. Saudis will feel threatened at home, because their population in the East (South of Basra) is Shia. If the Saudi Shia people try "invite" Iran to liberate them from the Saudis, we have a Saudi-Iran war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Neocons must be laughing their asses off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Saudis don't make war ......
.... they pay others to fight for them.

So who might be their surrogate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I don't see Saudis paying US to fight in Iraq or we wouldn't be $400 billion in debt from this war
Edited on Tue Jan-16-07 03:39 PM by wordpix
and counting. :puke:

That's only a "small" portion of the $8.5 trillion in debt we owe to Saudis and Chinese.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Oh they wouldn't pay our government.
That's too out in the open first of all, plus it isn't necessary. All you need to do is funnel money towards those who control what our government does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Homer12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. Remeber the scene in Braveheart
Edited on Tue Jan-16-07 03:37 PM by Homer12
When the Irish mMercenaries meet the Scottish rebels. The Irish switch sides at the last minute and fight the English with the Scotts.

Just think if Iran and Saudi Arabi did this to out armed forces, right in the middle of a hammer and anvil.

Although the Saudi's in the end would fight to try to keep their riches, it's just possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
5. solution
Solution: give Sunni-controlled area to Saudi Arabia, give Shia-controlled areas to Iran and give the Kurdish area to Turkey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. That's it! Except, the Saudis would get no oil that way. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PerfectSage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Give the Saudis Texas
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Wallah! No more Iraq...problem solved...we can come home!
We don't even have to say we lost the war with Iraq...face saved! You can't lose war with Iraq if there is no Iraq!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abburdlen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I imagine you're not serious
but in case anyone thinks it's that easy there are a few problems with that idea.

The Kurds in southern Turkey are already trying to secede. Adding more Kurds would likely cause Turkey to split into two.
The Saudi Royal family is less than loved by the masses throughout Arabia. Revolution in Saudi Arabia isn't out of the question even without adding a few million more Sunni.
An expanded Iran gives no one save Iran warm fuzzy feeling in the Middle East.

In short there is no good outcome for the complete F*ck-up Bush has made of Iraq.


*note: this in no way meant to imply Saddam was a good guy*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Midedle East
The Turkish Government's fear of the Kurds uniting is based more on the fact that Turkey's Kurdish area also contains the watershed for most of Turkey's fresh water supply; they really don't have any animosity toward the Kurds. If Turkey could offer the Kurds a certain amount of autonomy, Turkey would get the water and stability they desire.

Saudi Arabia taking over the Sunni areas of Iraq would mean they would no longer need to send in money and material to the area to offset the Iranians, who are doing the same thing.

Such a simple plan would never even be considered, for two reasons. First of all, it would be a complete and utter admission that the war in Iraq was a mistake, and that the war caused an autonomous and sovereign nation state to disappear. The American public will feel shortchanged, as well they should.

Second, American foreign policy of late has been shaped by ideology and religion, as opposed to the Kissinger-era when the balance of power and real politic were the major considerations. The beauty of this plan is that it is simple, it immediately diffuses tensions and allows established, relatively strong (although admittedly not very democratic) regimes to take over and bring stability to the areas involved.

Remember, bin Ladin's and al Qaeda's aim was never just to kill Americans and get them out of the ME; they also wanted to cause chaos so that the established, authoritarian and conservative regimes would fall by the wayside. Granted, I don't believe the US' long-term interest is to prop up these corrupt regimes, but in the near'term we'd better do something (and pronto) to diffuse tension.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
k_jerome Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-16-07 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
12. i think that is a real possibility. nt.
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 Fri Dec 27th 2024, 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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