Saudi Arabia-The Old Target Becomes New Again

Annie

Diamond Member
Nov 22, 2003
50,848
4,828
1,790
Interesting and likely analysis in my opinion:

http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/pfriendly_new.php

SEEKING SAUDI SAFE HAVEN
By AMIR TAHERI

WHEN the Taliban fell, two visions emerged within the Islamist terror movement.

One vision, identified with Osama bin Laden, wants the movement to continue targeting the West, especially the United States. The other, advocated by Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda's No. 2, wants the "holy war" concentrated in Muslim countries, especially Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

The events of the past year or so show that the al-Zawahiri vision is in the ascendancy. Outside the bomb attack in Madrid just over a year ago, the movement has scored no successes in the West, while at least 130 of its operatives have been picked up in half a dozen European countries and the United States.

To be sure, the Madrid attack briefly boosted bin Laden's prestige by triggering a victory for the (anti-Iraq War) Socialists. And the terror underworld has recently been abuzz with rumors of a coming spectacular attack in Britain, to achieve another change of government in a major Western democracy.

Nevertheless, it is clear that majority opinion within the terror movement favors the al-Zawahiri strategy — which aims to seize control of at least one Muslim country to provide the safe haven that the Islamists enjoyed in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. This is why the past two years have witnessed a dramatic rise in the number of attacks in the four targeted countries.

But even there, things are not going well for the movement.

In Pakistan, two attempts at killing President Pervez Musharraf have failed, and hundreds of terrorists have been killed or captured. In Afghanistan, the movement and the remnants of the Taliban failed to stop the presidential election and has little chance of preventing next September's parliamentary polls. New Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari's plan is to bring the insurgency under control before the end of the year, when Iraqis are scheduled to elect a new parliament.

To win in Afghanistan and Iraq, the terror movement would have to defeat not only the local national forces but also the United States and its Coalition allies. To win in Pakistan, al-Zawahiri must crush the Pakistani army, one of the strongest in the world.

All this means that Saudi Arabia is increasingly seen by al-Zawahiri as the softest target for a terrorist take-over.

This is why the terror campaign in the kingdom appears to have moved beyond its initial stage of "propaganda through action" and into a new phase that looks like a military-style effort designed to seize and hold territory which could then be transformed into bases and safe havens.

This was evident in at least three areas (Duwaisar, al-Unaizah and Ras) in the Qassim heartland of Najd, where Saudi forces last week fought regular battles with terrorist forces entrenched in what looked like permanent operational bases. According to Saudi sources, the terror movement had also acquired a number of safe havens in the Jowf province, in northern Saudi Arabia, which also served for the smuggling of fighters and arms into Iraq.

As elsewhere, a majority of the terrorists appear to have spent some time in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. After the liberation of Afghanistan, these individuals poured into the kingdom and went underground until the al-Zawahiri strategy required them to emerge and move onto the offensive. Of the estimated 200 or so terrorists killed or captured by the Saudis since 2002, fewer than a dozen appear to have been new recruits to the cause.

Many are foreign fighters. The Saudis forces have already killed or captured terrorists with Moroccan, Algerian, Canadian, Yemeni and French nationalities. Documents seized from the terrorists also show that they had logistical support centers in a number of Western European cities, including Rotterdam, Brussels, London and Paris....
 
NATO AIR said:
Fascinating and I'd bet good money its quite accurate. Well, guess we better help the Kingdom out eh?

:smoke: and :coffee3: I'd say! They wanted us out, we're out. Germany et al, keep a watch on this...
 
While seizing a safe haven might be in their minds, they don't show much vision in their strategy. Such a place would be an inviting, no-holds-barred target, and they would have to stand and defend (get blown off the face of the Earth), or run, as they are doing now.

I would actually opt for OBL's strategy myself. I'd target the west. The libby's may have erased 9/11 from their minds, but they sure looked like a bunch of scared sheep looking for a leader on 9/12.

If OBL could launch successive terrorist strikes against the West we'd go into paranoia overtime.
 
the wahhabi poison spreading bastards. But then we would be imperialists attempting to horde oil. Oil for blood libs would have a fit. On the other hand if gas hits $5.00 bucks a gallon I'll bet a lot of tree huggers would shut the hell up.
Okay so much for the Yankee Imperialism moment but we and the Brits did build their stinking oil operations before they nationalized them. And wouldn't the world be better off if Texans and Okies were pumping oil out of Saudi rather than the wahhabists dictators? Ah well so much for my AMERICAN EMPIRE rant. 'Sides we have sold the stinkin' House of Saud some of our best weapons they can take care of themselves, or maybe there will be a revolution and we will be facing Wahhabist maniacs shooting at us with our own planes and technology. Just a thought, er, nightmare scenario... Bad dream go away, bad dream go away...
 
BR-549 said:
the wahhabi poison spreading bastards. But then we would be imperialists attempting to horde oil. Oil for blood libs would have a fit. On the other hand if gas hits $5.00 bucks a gallon I'll bet a lot of tree huggers would shut the hell up.
Okay so much for the Yankee Imperialism moment but we and the Brits did build their stinking oil operations before they nationalized them. And wouldn't the world be better off if Texans and Okies were pumping oil out of Saudi rather than the wahhabists dictators? Ah well so much for my AMERICAN EMPIRE rant. 'Sides we have sold the stinkin' House of Saud some of our best weapons they can take care of themselves, or maybe there will be a revolution and we will be facing Wahhabist maniacs shooting at us with our own planes and technology. Just a thought, er, nightmare scenario... Bad dream go away, bad dream go away...

I think the only way to rid the world of terrorist is to stop saying "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," because as shortly after our common enemy is beaten these "friends" (like Osama, Saddam, and Fidel) are no longer our friends.

Saudi would be a good target, to give us more control over the main source of energy, and ruin a major Islamic Extremist stronghold, but the backlash would be so large we would need some sort of UN support, at least for now, to make it feasible.
 
IControlThePast said:
I think the only way to rid the world of terrorist is to stop saying "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," because as shortly after our common enemy is beaten these "friends" (like Osama, Saddam, and Fidel) are no longer our friends.

Saudi would be a good target, to give us more control over the main source of energy, and ruin a major Islamic Extremist stronghold, but the backlash would be so large we would need some sort of UN support, at least for now, to make it feasible.

God save us from having to resort to UN support. I'd rather go it alone or with willing allies. The UN is an absolute joke. To quote Colonel Kurtz, "The horror, the horror".
 
BR-549 said:
God save us from having to resort to UN support. I'd rather go it alone or with willing allies. The UN is an absolute joke. To quote Colonel Kurtz, "The horror, the horror".

It is, but also about the only significant military force that might be willing to help us (we put them in charge of Iraq recovery and attack SA with our forces).

The whole attack scenario will probably not happen until we alone have the resources, but at least until then we can stop pretending they are friends.
 
IControlThePast said:
It is, but also about the only significant military force that might be willing to help us (we put them in charge of Iraq recovery and attack SA with our forces).

The whole attack scenario will probably not happen until we alone have the resources, but at least until then we can stop pretending they are friends.

Please, tell me you are joking?
/Falk
 
IControlThePast said:
It is, but also about the only significant military force that might be willing to help us (we put them in charge of Iraq recovery and attack SA with our forces).

The whole attack scenario will probably not happen until we alone have the resources, but at least until then we can stop pretending they are friends.

Dude... if we conquered Iraq in three weeks, we could take over Saudi Arabia in four, if only because it's bigger.
 

Forum List

Back
Top