What's new

Saudis give nod to Israeli raid on Iran

DarkStar,

Does all the above justify an invasion of Israel on Iran using KSAs airspace?

I have interacted very closely with Arabs, not only from KSA but from Sudan, Iraq, Palestine, Egypt, and Yemen. It was when I was doing my PhD and many other MD, MS, and PhD students were from these Arab countries. Since all of us were expatriates, we kind of formed a close group and used to spend time together in the hostel. Once they told me that Arabs are better than the non-Arabs. OK, even though my family originally migrated from Hijaz centuries ago, I never took it for something to be proud about. Anyway, I asked them, why Arabs are better than non-Arabs? and the answer was "well Muhammed was Arab". "Indeed, Muhammed (PBUH) was an Arab, but do you remember his last sermon?" I asked. When he said "No Arab has any preference over an Ajam, and all that depends on Taqwa", I continued. They had no answer to that, yet they kept reiterating that Arabs were better.

In a similar incident, I asked my Arab friend, "why did KSA invite non-Muslims troops to fight against the Iraqis?" and the answer was "Iraqis are Kafir", and in Islam, it is OK to take help from another Kafir to kill another Kafir. " OK, if Iraqis are Kaafir, why did you help them against the Iranians? " I asked. And the answer was "Well, Iranians are Kaafir, and we helped one Kaafir to destroy another Kaafir".

These pearls of wisdom are not from illiterate Arabs, but MDs, PhDs. No DS, I have worked with these Arabs for more than four years, and some one has to present something really concrete to change my perception about them.

You are absolutely right.

Yet I am not justifying anything. I was merely commenting upon Iran, and the notion that it is some kind of angel when it comes to foreign affairs. Still, I would not support a strike upon Iran, no matter via which country it comes.

I live in a city full of ARabs, so I can see where you are coming from.

Once, an Arab family visited, and said...you cannot be muslims, because you do not know arabic. Such ignorance can be found among some, you are right.

And we all know that many of them are not the sharpest knives in the box.

As for Pakistan, then it is well known that Iran is a strategic threat to Pakistan, and has been for 60 years. Iran has always been frendlier to Bharat than to Pakistan, and used Pakistan as a ground for their proxy war with Saudi Arabia. Most Baloch insurgencies can be traced back to masters operating from Iran.

Saudi arabia and other gulf countries, no matter what our opinion of them, are not a strategic problem for Pakistan...Iran is.
 
Does all the above justify an invasion of Israel on Iran using KSAs airspace?

Despite Biden inclination to speak before he thinks, were exactly did he say that he authorized Israel to violate Iraq airspace ? :what:
 
Say it ain't so, Joe

Sun, 07/05/2009 - 4:25pm

It's hard to tell exactly what Joe Biden was trying to say this morning on "This Week" with George Stephanopolous. But his remarks are being widely interpreted as a green light for an Israeli strike on Iran. If that isn't the case, Biden needs to issue a strong clarification immediately. If it is, then he has just committed the worst foriegn policy blunder of the Obama administration.

Here's what Biden said:

STEPHANOPOULOS: And meanwhile, Prime Minister Netanyahu has made it pretty clear that he agreed with President Obama to give until the end of the year for this whole process of engagement to work. After that, he's prepared to make matters into his own hands.

Is that the right approach?

BIDEN: Look, Israel can determine for itself -- it's a sovereign nation -- what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Whether we agree or not?

BIDEN: Whether we agree or not. They're entitled to do that. Any sovereign nation is entitled to do that. But there is no pressure from any nation that's going to alter our behavior as to how to proceed.

What we believe is in the national interest of the United States, which we, coincidentally, believe is also in the interest of Israel and the whole world. And so there are separate issues.

If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But just to be clear here, if the Israelis decide Iran is an existential threat, they have to take out the nuclear program, militarily the United States will not stand in the way?

BIDEN: Look, we cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do when they make a determination, if they make a determination that they're existentially threatened and their survival is threatened by another country.




That sounds an awful lot like a green light -- especially when paired with the poorly sourced Times of London story suggesting that the Saudis had agreed to facilitate an Israeli airstrike (there doesn't seem to be anything to it beyond John Bolton's wishful thinking, but it helps fuel a crisis atmosphere). It's not obvious that it actually is such a green light -- but that's how it is being interpreted by Israelis across the spectrum and by the Arab media (few differences between the Saudi al-Arabiya and al-Sharq al-Awsat on the one hand, and al-Jazeera and al-Quds al-Arabi on the other side of the great Arab divide).

If that's the case, and Israel takes up the offer, then the politics of the Middle East are about to take a sudden, potentially disastrous turn for the worse. An Israeli strike on Iran would almost certainly fail to seriously set back its nuclear program, and almost certainly would not lead the Iranian people to rise up against the regime (although one has to pause... has John Bolton ever been wrong about such a thing before?). It would almost certainly terminate the efforts of the reformist camp to challenge the results of the election and rally the Iranian public around the flag -- as attacks by the most hated foreign enemy of any country generally do even during times of turbulent politics (see: Iran, 1980).

Does it really need to be said that such an attack would radicalize the region, and place a wide range of American interests at risk -- especially since Biden's comment will be cited forever as evidence that the attack had an American imprimatur? Even if the attack does not happen, Biden's comment will likely further inflame the regional atmosphere, while helping the Iranian hardliners, who will use it as evidence of malign American intentions, throwing away much of the value of Obama's carefully and appropriately nuanced response to the unfolding crisis.

Look (to use a Bidenism), nobody could really object to Biden's statement that any state has the sovereign right to act when it feels existentially threatened. In fact, he may have just been trying to say the opposite of how this is being read --- that sovereign states have the right to defend themselves, but that the U.S. would also define its own national interests. But he had to understand how such a statement would be received, with the ink not even dry on John Bolton's ham-handed agitation for just such an American permission slip for such an attack.

And he might have added to his entirely appropriate understanding of Israeli perceptions and concerns that the United States also has vital national interests at stake. An Israeli strike on Iran would likely throw all the progress in Iraq into grave danger, a reality of which American commanders in Iraq have routinely warned in public and private. That might not matter much to the Israeli government, but it matters a lot to the American government. The same for the negative impact it would have on efforts to achieve a two-state solution... something else which might suit Netanyahu just fine, but not the U.S.

Why would Biden have made a statement which so radically undermines Obama's policy towards Iran? Maybe it reflects bad new advice coming from a new NSC adviser of vague portfolio. Maybe it's a clumsy attempt to ratchet up some pressure on the Iranian regime without actually doing anything, without regard to the spiral dynamics it could kick into gear. Or maybe it is just a major Biden gaffe, not a dramatic departure in the Obama administration's policy. That would still be bad, but would be salvagable. Either way, the administration urgently needs to come forward quickly with a restatement of its policy -- and make sure the Israelis and others in the region understand it clearly -- or else it risks paying some extraordinarily serious costs.

UPDATE: a senior White House source tells me that this is being misreported, and points me to this from White House spokesman Tommy Vietor:

"The Vice President refused to engage hypotheticals, and he made clear that our policy has not changed. Our friends and allies, including Israel, know that the President believes that now is the time to explore direct diplomatic options, as with the P5+1."

Good. This needs aggressive pushback though, because the regional media is overwhelmingly reporting the 'green light' headline interpretation of Biden's remark. Time to flex those public diplomacy and strategic communications muscles, folks...

Say it ain't so, Joe | Marc Lynch
 
DarkStar,

Does all the above justify an invasion of Israel on Iran using KSAs airspace?

I have interacted very closely with Arabs, not only from KSA but from Sudan, Iraq, Palestine, Egypt, and Yemen. It was when I was doing my PhD and many other MD, MS, and PhD students were from these Arab countries. Since all of us were expatriates, we kind of formed a close group and used to spend time together in the hostel. Once they told me that Arabs are better than the non-Arabs. OK, even though my family originally migrated from Hijaz centuries ago, I never took it for something to be proud about. Anyway, I asked them, why Arabs are better than non-Arabs? and the answer was "well Muhammed was Arab". "Indeed, Muhammed (PBUH) was an Arab, but do you remember his last sermon?" I asked. When he said "No Arab has any preference over an Ajam, and all that depends on Taqwa", I continued. They had no answer to that, yet they kept reiterating that Arabs were better.

In a similar incident, I asked my Arab friend, "why did KSA invite non-Muslims troops to fight against the Iraqis?" and the answer was "Iraqis are Kafir", and in Islam, it is OK to take help from another Kafir to kill another Kafir. " OK, if Iraqis are Kaafir, why did you help them against the Iranians? " I asked. And the answer was "Well, Iranians are Kaafir, and we helped one Kaafir to destroy another Kaafir".

These pearls of wisdom are not from illiterate Arabs, but MDs, PhDs. No DS, I have worked with these Arabs for more than four years, and some one has to present something really concrete to change my perception about them.

Totally agree with you.
Arabs and Persians, Saudi and Shia are enemy of each other from their heart.
 
UPDATE: a senior White House source tells me that this is being misreported, and points me to this from White House spokesman Tommy Vietor:
"The Vice President refused to engage hypotheticals, and he made clear that our policy has not changed. Our friends and allies, including Israel, know that the President believes that now is the time to explore direct diplomatic options, as with the P5+1."

Say it ain't so, Joe | Marc Lynch

Of course this does not excuses Biden for managing to shoot himself in the leg... again. :lol:
 
The Damage Saudi has caused Pakistan has already been quiet substantial and i will side with the Iranians any day of the week over Arabs. The Iranians in general are really good, educated moderate people. I've met countless Iranians, some mostly exchange students and all have been really wonderful. I cant say the same for Arabs. Until let go of the Wahabi/Salafi Ideology i will always be against them..
 
DarkStar,

Does all the above justify an invasion of Israel on Iran using KSAs airspace?

I have interacted very closely with Arabs, not only from KSA but from Sudan, Iraq, Palestine, Egypt, and Yemen. It was when I was doing my PhD and many other MD, MS, and PhD students were from these Arab countries. Since all of us were expatriates, we kind of formed a close group and used to spend time together in the hostel. Once they told me that Arabs are better than the non-Arabs. OK, even though my family originally migrated from Hijaz centuries ago, I never took it for something to be proud about. Anyway, I asked them, why Arabs are better than non-Arabs? and the answer was "well Muhammed was Arab". "Indeed, Muhammed (PBUH) was an Arab, but do you remember his last sermon?" I asked. When he said "No Arab has any preference over an Ajam, and all that depends on Taqwa", I continued. They had no answer to that, yet they kept reiterating that Arabs were better.

In a similar incident, I asked my Arab friend, "why did KSA invite non-Muslims troops to fight against the Iraqis?" and the answer was "Iraqis are Kafir", and in Islam, it is OK to take help from another Kafir to kill another Kafir. " OK, if Iraqis are Kaafir, why did you help them against the Iranians? " I asked. And the answer was "Well, Iranians are Kaafir, and we helped one Kaafir to destroy another Kaafir".

These pearls of wisdom are not from illiterate Arabs, but MDs, PhDs. No DS, I have worked with these Arabs for more than four years, and some one has to present something really concrete to change my perception about them.

Your preception about Arabs is not right, majority of Arabs are good muslims and very kind to non Arabs.I lived in Saudia for 9 years and as nation they are better then all other muslim countries because their government dont support music,alchohal,intrest , no fight in mosques, no salary tax for any body ,which are haram in islam ,individually few arabs may be not good.


They dont like Iranian because of incident happened during Haj , which show Iranian aims and objectives .

They helped Pakistan in nuke development and missile technology.Their minorchy is better then Iranian democracy , we have seen recently what Iranian islamist regime did in with elections.

They can buy the best brain from the world as US did and have potiential to become super power .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Damage Saudi has caused Pakistan has already been quiet substantial and i will side with the Iranians any day of the week over Arabs. The Iranians in general are really good, educated moderate people. I've met countless Iranians, some mostly exchange students and all have been really wonderful. I cant say the same for Arabs. Until let go of the Wahabi/Salafi Ideology i will always be against them..

You should not just make your preception about iranian by meeting with few educated iranian, the islamist regime sitting in iran is real danger for peace .

Majority of Saudi dont belong to Sulfi idealogy only one area known as Kaseem is famous for this school of thought, The Majority of Saudi basically migrated from other countries Iraq,Iran,Syria,Jorden,Oman,Yeman they are belong to different school of thoughts (Maliki,Hanafi,Hanbli,Shafi).

Their new generation is well educated and presently more then 50000 students are studing in world top universities , which is highest in the world .
 
Totally agree with you.
Arabs and Persians, Saudi and Shia are enemy of each other from their heart.

Their is major difference in their believe ,but no sunni mufti declared shia as non muslim.

Please dont use word enemy , which is not acceptable .
 
shame on ARABS.... this is the reason of their DEMISE!!! the LAST FORTRESS O ISLAM is now PAKISTAN and i guess that is why everyone is concentrating so much on systematically destroying us and our leaders are just fast tracking the process for the world....

shame on the arabs shame on US for doing exactly what the world wishes we would do destroy ourselves!!!!!
 
Saudis are right.Although if Iran attacks Saudi Conventionally Saudi will recover but you can't afford to have nuclear missiles pointed at holy cities.Iran Nuclear Program should be crushed.

Wrong attitude bro. Iranian are Muslim just like you and me and perhaps even better. I am sure if ever holy cites(god forbid) get attack by outsider than it will be ordinary Muslims all over Islamic world including Iranian that will defend and sacrifice lives while royal will be spending time in some western country safe and secure. Most of the royal from gulf are anything but Muslim. Atlantic city and Las Vegas comes in mind.
 
arabs are racists and backstabbers no surprise they'd do this.
 
Both Arabs and Iranians think they are superior to Pakistanis and stay neutral when it comes to India vs Pakistan (some of them even lead towards India) so I dont know why some Pakistanis are so worried about Arabs and Iranians.

Seriously, its time for Pakistanis to be nationalists like every other nation on earth, everyone just cares about their own people. Saudis care only for Saudis, Lebanese care only for Lebanese, Iranians care only for Iranians...its time Pakistanis start caring only for Pakistanis.

Iran's problem with Israel doesn't concern us at all, we have problems of our own.
 
I sadden me to see some of our Muslim bros having ill wish that Iran should get attack by Zion with Saudis help. It's so sad that it's pathetic. Why the hell are we having so much ill wish for our fellow Muslims brothers????:cry:

Lets not isolate our Iranian brother from main stream Islam as they are second class where reality is it could be other way around as most of so called Sunni nations does not even have the balls to stand up against west aggression while Iranian are standing tall alone. It's time for us to unite as one instead of further division.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the modest and simplest Islamic leader who happen to follow the lifestyle of our khalifs.:)
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom