Mattyfisk wrote on Jan 11^th, 2019 at 4:42pm:


soon after I posted, I suddenly started thinking about the issue of Saudi Arabia. If deposing the taliban can be justified in the name of countering the threat of global terrorism, surely deposing the Wahabist Saudi regime would be far easier to justify. From memory, all but 2 of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi - bin Laden was Saudi, and his personal fortune that he used to fund his jihad came from Saudi Arabia. But more importantly, Saudi Arabia has been the breeding ground for sunni/salafist terrorism for decades, not to mention using their considerable petro-dollars to embark on the most aggressive and effective proseltysing project of extreme Islamist ideology we have seen - that has reached all corners of the Islamic world. You could pretty much take any sunni Islamist terror incident or movement from the last couple of decades - and Saudi Arabia, one way or another, directly or indirectly, have their grubby paws all over it.

So... next stop Saudi Arabia? Of course FD now will probably come up with sound and sensible reasons why this would be a bad idea. And yet, if it ever happened, I have a feeling he would feel some sort of perverse duty to defend it - and when the regime change turns to custard for the west - as it most surely would - FD would be all "oh not to worry - Islam is to blame. Us? we shurly can't be blamed when Islam turns everything to custard - now stop apologizing for Islam!!"

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 11^th, 2019 at 8:22pm:


Ah yes, but until then, I'm shure FD will be more than happy to hand the security of the Middle East over to the Saudis as it is the current US policy. Oh, he'll evade and grumble, but he'll never speak out against a tyrannical Islamic regime engaged in murder and genocide if they're in a cosy partnership with Uncle.

Do you know? The one thing FD has never discussed here is the current US president. FD will evade most topics, but this is a subject he won't touch.

Freeeeedom, innit.

freediver wrote on Jan 11^th, 2019 at 9:57pm:


note that I never said we should "prop up" the taliban. Not overthrowing them is not the same as propping them up.

Quote:


Gladly: Saudi Arabia is a far greater threat to the west as a supporter of terrorism, and sponsor of islamist extremism - than the taliban ever was.

Quote:


Unless History has been re-written, wasn't it Bin Ladin's  Al-Qaeda and a bunch of others from the House of Saud?

Aussie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2019 at 2:24pm:


Yes, but what do they all have in common?

Aussie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2019 at 2:37pm:


No, I mean the Muselmen. What do they all share?

Aussie wrote on Jan 14^th, 2019 at 2:24pm:


Indeed it was Aussie. bin Laden's recruits, wealth, and of course salafist ideology - all came from Saudi Arabia. The salafist extremism that fuels sunni terrorism (basically the only kind of Islamic terrorism), is vigorously propagated from Saudi Arabia to all corners of the muslim world, with the help of their considerable petro-dollars.

In terms of who is/was posed the greater terrorist threat to the west, Saudi Arabia and the taliban are chalk and cheese. Even now the taliban has no jihadist agenda outside their own borders.