Comments on: (at least) 3 more Friedmans

By: DallasNE

DallasNE — Tue, 15 May 2007 04:28:19 +0000

Thanks for the reply Eric. The Sy Hersch article in many ways supports what I said. I know, it is reading between the lines, but what else can we make of Hersch’s statement that “The Saudis and some in the Administration have been arguing that the biggest threat is Iran and the Sunni radicals are the lesser enemies. This is a victory for the Saudi line.” Hersch goes on to say that the “Saudi’s are starting to use their leverage–money”.

Is it that much of s stretch to claim that Hersch’s “Sunni radicals” are the same people I call “tribal leaders” formerly beholden to Saddam and that they are being financed by Saudi Arabia. To me, it fits.

I did have the correct King Abdullah in mind when I made my first post.

By: Eric Brewer

Eric Brewer — Mon, 14 May 2007 07:37:45 +0000

Dallas: Maybe so, but as Sy Hersh has emphasized recently, the Saudis are primarily worried about Iran and a Shiite take-over of Iraq, and they've never had qualms about supporting Sunni jihadists (most notoriously al-Qaeda in Afghanistan back in the '80s) when it served their purposes. Hersh says that the Saudi ruling family is "gambling that they will not be overthrown as long as they continue to support religious schools and charities linked to the extremists." So the Saudis may be more involved in supporting the anti-Shiite activity in Iraq. bite: Thanks for stopping by. I was talking about this King Abdullah.

By: biteoftheweek

biteoftheweek — Sat, 12 May 2007 07:10:35 +0000

Abdullah is King of Jordan, not SA>

I know you know that, but it doesn’t read that way

By: DallasNE

DallasNE — Fri, 11 May 2007 22:33:45 +0000

I have wondered for some time if the Saudi’s are financing the Sunni tribal leaders that have been fighting against al Qaeda in Iraq. Many of these fighters are probably former members of Saddam’s army. If this is correct it means that Saddam loyalists are bailing Bush out in Anbar. Now, how is that for irony!