Guesses?
Bush's oil buddies are confident that they'll make a lot of money with those oil deals in the coming years as the US government continues to occupy Iraq.
The Saudis are like Chalabi - they cut so many deals that nobody ever knows whose camp they're in. However, the last thing the Bush gang wants is unity among Iraq-Iran-Saudi Arabia. They prefer the divide and conquer strategy. So, are the Saudi's diddling Iran or the US, or both? I haven't a clue, but expect whatever it is, it's win-win for the Saudis.
Posted by Marie at September 13, 2007 01:20 PMSo, are the Saudi's diddling Iran or the US, or both?
Both. And others as well.
I haven't a clue, but expect whatever it is, it's win-win for the Saudis.
The Saudis have no options. Their actions are entirely dictated by their need to keep themselves in power. In that respect they are very much like Saddam Hussein. And look where he is now.
Posted by snark at September 13, 2007 01:37 PMAnd another thing that burns my ass: CNN's Carol Costllo was shocked, shocked, I say, that one of the top Iranian TV shows is a series that is centered around .... the Holocaust. Don't we all know that everyone in Iran denies that the holocaust ever took place? Why, their president said so! She is shocked.
Fucking idiots. This country is full of fucking idiots.
Posted by via at September 13, 2007 01:43 PM
I'm not sure we could say they're "diddling" their neighbors. The have a smaller population than Iraq with almost 5 times the area and effectively, no water.
They have a restive population, who actually outnumber the royal family and live in a rough neighborhood. I think they would REALLY like to have stable neighbors. Maybe we should think of them as Middle Eastern Rodney Kings.
Posted by DeminNewJ at September 13, 2007 01:47 PMWhy hasn't Fallon been called before Congress?
Wouldn't the head of Middle East forces, CENTCOM, have an opinion on the debacle in Iraq?
Eisenhower complex? WTF? This clown is far more like McArthur or Westmoreland; both failures in their final commands.
Posted by redneckrepub at September 13, 2007 03:41 PMSpeaking of Petraeus:
Ever wonder why his actions always seem more political than military? Ever wonder how someone whose record in Iraq is a string of failures somehow manages to get himself touted as a military genius?
Here ya go - something I have suspected for quite a while now:
The US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, expressed long-term interest in running for the US presidency when he was stationed in Baghdad, according to a senior Iraqi official who knew him at that time.
Sabah Khadim, then a senior adviser at Iraq's Interior Ministry, says General Petraeus discussed with him his ambition when the general was head of training and recruitment of the Iraqi army in 2004-05.
"I asked him if he was planning to run in 2008 and he said, 'No, that would be too soon'," Mr Khadim, who now lives in London, said.
General Petraeus has a reputation in the US Army for being a man of great ambition. If he succeeds in reversing America's apparent failure in Iraq, he would be a natural candidate for the White House in the presidential election in 2012."
Posted by Shirin at September 13, 2007 09:42 PM7o6
I think you know the answer to your question.