What's new

What Will Trump Do About Saudi Arabia?

Kuwaiti Girl

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 8, 2016
Messages
2,287
Reaction score
0
Country
Kuwait
Location
Kuwait
What Will Trump Do About Saudi Arabia?
Having vowed to “eradicate” “radical Islamic terrorism,” the new US president cannot stand by idly regarding Saudi Arabia’s actions in Africa.
http://www.theglobalist.com/donald-trump-do-about-saudi-arabia-united-states/

Having vowed in his inaugural address to “eradicate” “radical Islamic terrorism,” President Trump ought not stand by idly regarding Saudi Arabia’s actions in Africa.

Let me be clear: Within Africa, Saudi Arabia — that is to say the government, the religious establishment and members of the ruling family and business community — does not fund violence.

At the same time, Saudi Arabia has unabashedly launched the single largest public diplomacy campaign in history over the last half century. The country has pumped up to $100 billion dollars into ultra-conservative interpretations of Islam.

That Saudi campaign has succeeded in making ultra-conservatism a force in Muslim religious communities across the globe. It involves the promotion of an intolerant, supremacist, anti-pluralistic interpretation of Islam.

Even where it rejects an active involvement in politics, Saudi Arabia fosters a mindset in which militancy and violence against the other is not beyond the pale.

What that campaign has done, certainly in Muslim majority countries in Africa, is to ensure that representatives of Saudi-backed ultra-conservatism have influence in society as well as the highest circles of government.

Religion or geopolitics?


This is important because, contrary to widespread beliefs, the Saudi campaign is not primarily about religion. It’s about geopolitics, specifically it’s about a struggle with Iran for hegemony in the Muslim world.

As a result, it’s about anti-Shiism and an ultra-conservative narrative that counters that of Shiism and what remains of Iran’s post-1979 revolutionary zeal.

The campaign also meant that resolving the question whether the kingdom maintains links to violent groups takes one into murky territory. Saudi Arabia has made countering jihadism a cornerstone of its policy. That is however easier said than done.

What is evident in Africa is that the kingdom or at least prominent members of its clergy appear to have maintained wittingly or unwittingly some degree of contact with jihadist groups, including IS affiliates.

Let me illustrate the impact of Saudi-backed ultra-conservatism by taking a closer look at Nigeria – and lay out how this relates to political violence in the region.

Saudi Arabia enters Nigeria

One of the earliest instances in which Saudi Arabia flexed its expanding soft power in West Africa was in 1999 when Zamfara, a region where Islamic State affiliate Boko Haram has been active, became the first Nigerian state to adopt Sharia.

A Saudi official stood next to Governor Ahmed Sani when he made the announcement. Freedom of religion scholar Paul Marshall recalls seeing some years later hundreds of Saudi-funded motorbikes in the courtyard of the governor’s residence.

They had been purchased to enforce gender segregation in public transport. Sheikh Abdul-Aziz, the religious and cultural attaché at the Saudi embassy in Abuja, declared in 2004 that the kingdom had been monitoring the application of Islamic law in Nigeria “with delight.”

Northern extremism

Later on, a Boko Haram founder who was killed in 2009, Muhammad Yusuf, was granted refuge by the kingdom in 2004 to evade a Nigerian military crackdown.

In Mecca, he forged links with like-minded Salafi clerics that proved to be more decisive than his debates with Nigerian clerics who were critical of his interpretation of Islam.

Once back in Maiduguri, the capital of Nigeria’s Borno state, Yusuf built with their assistance a state within a state centered around the Ibn Taymiyyah mosque.

Yusuf’s religious teacher, Sheikh Ja’afar Adam, a graduate of the Islamic University of Medina, presided over a popular mosque in the Nigerian city of Kano that helped him build a mass audience.

Adam’s popularity allowed him to promote colleagues, many of whom were also graduates of the same university in Medina, who became influential preachers and government officials. Adam was funded by Al-Muntada al-Islami Trust, a London-based charity with ties to Saudi Arabia.

Adam publicly condemned Yusuf after he took over Boko Haram. In response, Yusuf in 2007 order the assassination of Adam.

Sufis and Shiites

Nigerian journalists and activists see a direct link between the influx of Saudi funds into Yusuf’s stomping ground in northern Nigeria and greater intolerance that rolled back the influence of Sufis that had dominated the region for centuries and sought to marginalize Shiites.

“They built their own mosques with Saudi funds so that they will not follow ‘Kafirs’ in prayers and they erected their own madrasa schools where they indoctrinate people on the deviant teachings of Wahhabism.

With Saudi petro-dollars, these Wahhabis quickly spread across towns & villages of Northern Nigeria… This resulted in countless senseless inter-religious conflicts that resulted in the death of thousands of innocent Nigerians on both sides,” said Shiite activist Hairun Elbinawi.

No surprise then that a recent phone call to Nigerian President Mohammed Buhari in which King Salman expressed his support for the government’s fight against terrorist groups was widely seen as Saudi endorsement of the military’s crackdown on the country’s Shiite minority.

The state-owned Saudi Press Agency quoted Salman as saying that Islam condemned such “criminal acts” and that the kingdom – in a reference to Iran – opposed foreign interference in Nigeria.

Fueling new sectarian divisions

Over the past decade or so, ultra-conservative, sectarian forms of Islam have cut across Africa at an often dizzying pace.

In the process, African politicians and ultraconservatives in cooperation with Saudi Arabia have let a genie of intolerance, discrimination, supremacy and bigotry out of the bottle.

Despite all that, Iran is putting up tough cultural and religious resistance to Saudi-backed ultra-conservatism in Africa.

Indeed, Africa is witnessing the world’s highest rates of conversion to Shi’a Islam since many Sunni tribes in southern Iraq adopted Shiism in the 19th century.

Shiites were until recently virtually non-existent in Africa, with the exception of migrants from Lebanon and the Indian subcontinent. A Pew Research survey suggests that that has changed dramatically.

The share of Shiites has jumped from 0% in 1980 to 12% of Nigeria’s 90-million strong Muslim community in 2012.

This pattern is not uniquely African even if Africa is the continent where Iranian responses to Saudi promotion of Sunni ultra-conservatism have primarily been cultural and religious in nature — rather than through the use of militant and armed proxies as in the Middle East.

Battle for influence

It is nonetheless a battle that fundamentally alters the fabric of those African societies in which it is fought. It is a battle that potentially threatens the carefully constructed post-colonial cohesion of those societies. la

The potential threat is significantly enhanced by poor governance and the rise of jihadist groups like Boko Haram, Al Qaeda in the Maghreb and Al Shabab in Somalia.

While their ideological roots can be traced back to ultra-conservatism, their political philosophy views Saudi Arabia as an equally legitimate target because its rulers have deviated from the true path.

At the bottom line, both Africans and Saudis are struggling to come to grips with a phenomenon they opportunistically harnessed to further their political interests; one that they no longer control and that has become as much a liability as it was an asset.

While it may be tempting for the next U.S. administration to extend to sub-Saharan Africa its policy of taking Saudi Arabia’s side against Iran, it would be better to acknowledge that the Saudis are the ones creating the conditions for more chaos in places like Nigeria, regardless of the situation other theaters of confrontations.
 
. .
Well both UAE and Saudis are now supporting Trump's muslim ban..if that tell you something
 
.
He was asked by Sean Hannity about saudi arabia and he skirted the direct question but did say that certain countries are radicalizing people and he does not like that.

don't have time to skim through the entire clip for the time-stamp but it is somewhere in this interview:
 
.
Well both UAE and Saudis are now supporting Trump's muslim ban..if that tell you something
True, but we all know how unpredictable Trump is.

I personally think he's gonna milk the GCC states dry in exchange for security guarantees.
 
.
Until Iran has been destroyed no western nation will do anything against Saudi Arabia. The day Iran has been neutralized - whether that's 10-20-30 years down the line...I don't know - will be the day, the destruction of the House of Saud starts.

Every nation serves a purpose - the Saudis are the counterweight to Iran in the region and will remain so for the time being.

But, from the American POV their day of reckoning will come - it certainly won't be under Trump and won't be for a while yet.
 
.
Until Iran has been destroyed no western nation will do anything against Saudi Arabia. The day Iran has been neutralized - whether that's 10-20-30 years down the line...I don't know - will be the day, the destruction of the House of Saud starts.

Every nation serves a purpose - the Saudis are the counterweight to Iran in the region and will remain so for the time being.

But, from the American POV their day of reckoning will come - it certainly won't be under Trump and won't be for a while yet.
Interesting perspective you have.

But there's also a theory that says that all major Muslim countries in the wider region will collapse at the same time due to exhaustion.

The US might not need to directly intervene against Iran. It can kill multiple birds with one stone by pushing all regional players to the brink of collapse.

In a way, this is already happening. Syria has exhausted Iran, Yemen is exhausting Saudi Arabia, and the Kurds are exhausting Turkey.
 
.
What Will Trump Do About Saudi Arabia?
Having vowed to “eradicate” “radical Islamic terrorism,” the new US president cannot stand by idly regarding Saudi Arabia’s actions in Africa.
http://www.theglobalist.com/donald-trump-do-about-saudi-arabia-united-states/

Having vowed in his inaugural address to “eradicate” “radical Islamic terrorism,” President Trump ought not stand by idly regarding Saudi Arabia’s actions in Africa.

Let me be clear: Within Africa, Saudi Arabia — that is to say the government, the religious establishment and members of the ruling family and business community — does not fund violence.

At the same time, Saudi Arabia has unabashedly launched the single largest public diplomacy campaign in history over the last half century. The country has pumped up to $100 billion dollars into ultra-conservative interpretations of Islam.

That Saudi campaign has succeeded in making ultra-conservatism a force in Muslim religious communities across the globe. It involves the promotion of an intolerant, supremacist, anti-pluralistic interpretation of Islam.

Even where it rejects an active involvement in politics, Saudi Arabia fosters a mindset in which militancy and violence against the other is not beyond the pale.

What that campaign has done, certainly in Muslim majority countries in Africa, is to ensure that representatives of Saudi-backed ultra-conservatism have influence in society as well as the highest circles of government.

Religion or geopolitics?


This is important because, contrary to widespread beliefs, the Saudi campaign is not primarily about religion. It’s about geopolitics, specifically it’s about a struggle with Iran for hegemony in the Muslim world.

As a result, it’s about anti-Shiism and an ultra-conservative narrative that counters that of Shiism and what remains of Iran’s post-1979 revolutionary zeal.

The campaign also meant that resolving the question whether the kingdom maintains links to violent groups takes one into murky territory. Saudi Arabia has made countering jihadism a cornerstone of its policy. That is however easier said than done.

What is evident in Africa is that the kingdom or at least prominent members of its clergy appear to have maintained wittingly or unwittingly some degree of contact with jihadist groups, including IS affiliates.

Let me illustrate the impact of Saudi-backed ultra-conservatism by taking a closer look at Nigeria – and lay out how this relates to political violence in the region.

Saudi Arabia enters Nigeria

One of the earliest instances in which Saudi Arabia flexed its expanding soft power in West Africa was in 1999 when Zamfara, a region where Islamic State affiliate Boko Haram has been active, became the first Nigerian state to adopt Sharia.

A Saudi official stood next to Governor Ahmed Sani when he made the announcement. Freedom of religion scholar Paul Marshall recalls seeing some years later hundreds of Saudi-funded motorbikes in the courtyard of the governor’s residence.

They had been purchased to enforce gender segregation in public transport. Sheikh Abdul-Aziz, the religious and cultural attaché at the Saudi embassy in Abuja, declared in 2004 that the kingdom had been monitoring the application of Islamic law in Nigeria “with delight.”

Northern extremism

Later on, a Boko Haram founder who was killed in 2009, Muhammad Yusuf, was granted refuge by the kingdom in 2004 to evade a Nigerian military crackdown.

In Mecca, he forged links with like-minded Salafi clerics that proved to be more decisive than his debates with Nigerian clerics who were critical of his interpretation of Islam.

Once back in Maiduguri, the capital of Nigeria’s Borno state, Yusuf built with their assistance a state within a state centered around the Ibn Taymiyyah mosque.

Yusuf’s religious teacher, Sheikh Ja’afar Adam, a graduate of the Islamic University of Medina, presided over a popular mosque in the Nigerian city of Kano that helped him build a mass audience.

Adam’s popularity allowed him to promote colleagues, many of whom were also graduates of the same university in Medina, who became influential preachers and government officials. Adam was funded by Al-Muntada al-Islami Trust, a London-based charity with ties to Saudi Arabia.

Adam publicly condemned Yusuf after he took over Boko Haram. In response, Yusuf in 2007 order the assassination of Adam.

Sufis and Shiites

Nigerian journalists and activists see a direct link between the influx of Saudi funds into Yusuf’s stomping ground in northern Nigeria and greater intolerance that rolled back the influence of Sufis that had dominated the region for centuries and sought to marginalize Shiites.

“They built their own mosques with Saudi funds so that they will not follow ‘Kafirs’ in prayers and they erected their own madrasa schools where they indoctrinate people on the deviant teachings of Wahhabism.

With Saudi petro-dollars, these Wahhabis quickly spread across towns & villages of Northern Nigeria… This resulted in countless senseless inter-religious conflicts that resulted in the death of thousands of innocent Nigerians on both sides,” said Shiite activist Hairun Elbinawi.

No surprise then that a recent phone call to Nigerian President Mohammed Buhari in which King Salman expressed his support for the government’s fight against terrorist groups was widely seen as Saudi endorsement of the military’s crackdown on the country’s Shiite minority.

The state-owned Saudi Press Agency quoted Salman as saying that Islam condemned such “criminal acts” and that the kingdom – in a reference to Iran – opposed foreign interference in Nigeria.

Fueling new sectarian divisions

Over the past decade or so, ultra-conservative, sectarian forms of Islam have cut across Africa at an often dizzying pace.

In the process, African politicians and ultraconservatives in cooperation with Saudi Arabia have let a genie of intolerance, discrimination, supremacy and bigotry out of the bottle.

Despite all that, Iran is putting up tough cultural and religious resistance to Saudi-backed ultra-conservatism in Africa.

Indeed, Africa is witnessing the world’s highest rates of conversion to Shi’a Islam since many Sunni tribes in southern Iraq adopted Shiism in the 19th century.

Shiites were until recently virtually non-existent in Africa, with the exception of migrants from Lebanon and the Indian subcontinent. A Pew Research survey suggests that that has changed dramatically.

The share of Shiites has jumped from 0% in 1980 to 12% of Nigeria’s 90-million strong Muslim community in 2012.

This pattern is not uniquely African even if Africa is the continent where Iranian responses to Saudi promotion of Sunni ultra-conservatism have primarily been cultural and religious in nature — rather than through the use of militant and armed proxies as in the Middle East.

Battle for influence

It is nonetheless a battle that fundamentally alters the fabric of those African societies in which it is fought. It is a battle that potentially threatens the carefully constructed post-colonial cohesion of those societies. la

The potential threat is significantly enhanced by poor governance and the rise of jihadist groups like Boko Haram, Al Qaeda in the Maghreb and Al Shabab in Somalia.

While their ideological roots can be traced back to ultra-conservatism, their political philosophy views Saudi Arabia as an equally legitimate target because its rulers have deviated from the true path.

At the bottom line, both Africans and Saudis are struggling to come to grips with a phenomenon they opportunistically harnessed to further their political interests; one that they no longer control and that has become as much a liability as it was an asset.

While it may be tempting for the next U.S. administration to extend to sub-Saharan Africa its policy of taking Saudi Arabia’s side against Iran, it would be better to acknowledge that the Saudis are the ones creating the conditions for more chaos in places like Nigeria, regardless of the situation other theaters of confrontations.

Like many of Iran's supporters and secret or public lovers in Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Pakistan, you are all hoping and dreaming of KSA's collapse. Let's be honest, you are all Shia with secetarain mind-set. Please don't try to make yourself sound Westernized, or indifferent about the secetarian side of matters. You are all secetarians to the core. And please keep dreaming.

Until Iran has been destroyed no western nation will do anything against Saudi Arabia. The day Iran has been neutralized - whether that's 10-20-30 years down the line...I don't know - will be the day, the destruction of the House of Saud starts.

Every nation serves a purpose - the Saudis are the counterweight to Iran in the region and will remain so for the time being.

But, from the American POV their day of reckoning will come - it certainly won't be under Trump and won't be for a while yet.

What a very shallow way of thinking as if the Western powers can't counter Iran without us.
 
.
Like many of Iran's supporters and secret or public lovers in Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Pakistan, you are all hoping and dreaming of KSA's collapse. Let's be honest, you are all Shia with secetarain mind-set. Please don't try to make yourself sound Westernized, or indifferent about the secetarian side of matters. You are all secetarians to the core. And please keep dreaming.



What a very shallow way of thinking as if the Western powers can't counter Iran without us.

How old are you? You know throughout history big powers have always used other nations/proxies. Saddam was a useful ally against the Ayatollahs - he got plenty of photo ops. When he over stepped the mark and thought he was untouchable - he was discarded.

The US has more than enough oil to meet domestic demand - it is not dependent on oil from the middle east. Why do you think it continues to be friends with a nation where a majority of the 9/11 bombers came from? A nation which the average american has a very negative view of? Geo Politics and pragmatism.

I've got nothing against Saudi Arabia per se - but, you must be really naive if you don't think the US looks at Saudi Arabia as a counter weight to Iran. Like I said Trump won't do anything against Saudi Arabia - he and the administration will continue the long standing partnership.

But, there will come a time...

The relationship, one of America's longest-running in the Arab world, began in 1933, centering on oil exploration. But during the Cold War it became more about fighting communism, and after that about preserving a political status quo in the Middle East that seemed to serve both nations' interests quite well.

http://www.vox.com/2016/1/6/10719728/us-saudi-arabia-allies

What do you think the status quo is?
 
Last edited:
.
Trump won't do anything against Saudi Arabia - he and the administration will continue the long standing partnership.

But, there will come a time...
He might initiate something against them if a big attack can be traced back to them, and let's be honest, in the ideological sense, 110% of all 'radical islamic terror' attacks can be traced back to sallafist ideology. I believe the Trump administration (generals Flynn, Mattis etc) are deeply aware that the ideological roots of all jihadi terror is the saudi version of islam (sallafi/wahhabi/ultra orthodox sunni) or whatever the hell you want to call it, it's a problem.

Given an excuse, I think they'll do something about it too, but only in his second term (if he gets it, which he probably will)
 
.
He might initiate something against them if a big attack can be traced back to them, and let's be honest, in the ideological sense, 110% of all 'radical islamic terror' attacks can be traced back to sallafist ideology. I believe the Trump administration (generals Flynn, Mattis etc) are deeply aware that the ideological roots of all jihadi terror is the saudi version of islam (sallafi/wahhabi/ultra orthodox sunni) or whatever the hell you want to call it, it's a problem.

Given an excuse, I think they'll do something about it too, but only in his second term (if he gets it, which he probably will)
Mattis and Flynn have a hard on for Iran - and that's before you get to Bibi whispering to Trump - 'gotta bomb Iran...gotta bomb Iran'. Hell even McCain is a hawk when it comes to Iran.

So, all the focus will be on Iran.

As for Saudi Arabia - I think they're safe simply because the regime is definitely pro-western and groups like AQ/ISIS hate them and if they could, they'd depose the House of Saud. So the regime is pretty active when it comes to trying to ensure terrorists aren't using the Kingdom as a base.

The ideology - that's a whole different topic and maybe for another day (because, I know it'll derail the thread :lol: )
 
.
Well both UAE and Saudis are now supporting Trump's muslim ban..if that tell you something
So is Pakistan.

"Every country has right to form its immigration policy'

"Every country has the right to form its own immigration policy," Zakaria said, referring to an Executive Order issued by United States President Donald Trump last week that bars immigrants belonging to seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the US.

"Pakistan has always had close relations with America," Zakaria added, hoping for better relations with the Trump administration.

http://www.dawn.com/news/1312278/in...s-itself-before-pointing-fingers-at-others-fo
 
.
Mattis and Flynn have a hard on for Iran - and that's before you get to Bibi whispering to Trump - 'gotta bomb Iran...gotta bomb Iran'. Hell even McCain is a hawk when it comes to Iran.

So, all the focus will be on Iran.
General Mattis is highly respected for, among other things, being a bit of a scholar, he's apparently very well read on the ideological/civilizational issues that confront the US and legend has it the man chose not to have a family and has dedicated his whole life serving in the military. The call him the warrior monk.
notbad-obamaplz.png


Flynn is a hard ***, he's been in the the thick of it and knows the enemy well, hands on guy who sucks at diplomacy lol.

but neither of them are crazy rabid neocon warmongers like crazy John 'jihad' McCain, who is only a war hero because he got captured, remember this. :azn:

If they have a focus on Iran, it's because of Iran's foolish stance on Israel, they're not foaming at the mouth looking for a new war in the area.

As for Saudi Arabia - I think they're safe simply because the regime is definitely pro-western and groups like AQ/ISIS hate them and if they could, they'd depose the House of Saud. So the regime is pretty active when it comes to trying to ensure terrorists aren't using the Kingdom as a base.
Yeah, that's the double game the Saudis have played for so long, not gonna fly anymore with the Trump administration.

In Saudia, the all powerful clergy is probably holding the royals hostage to their insane sallafist ideology because they have the power to unleash hell in the form of the zombified masses on the regime if they stop being 7th century savages socially.

Who knows what will happen but imo something has to give, this can not be allowed to go on:

The country has pumped up to $100 billion dollars into ultra-conservative interpretations of Islam.

they are poisoning the whole world with their crap and it has to be stopped. In India, entire towns have gone from local traditional colourful garb and culture to the garbage bag niqab and young men leaving for Syria within a decade.

btw, you don't have flags on your profile, are you Pakistani ? because Pakistan in the 1970s etc was a very different society than what it is now. saudi arabian wahhabism has destroyed Pakistan's reputation and continues to drag it through the mud and humiliate their 200 million people globally.

The ideology - that's a whole different topic and maybe for another day (because, I know it'll derail the thread :lol: )
I know, I've tried to keep it ultra simple and main points only too, the nuance is all baked into it.

Here's the thing though, imo, the saudis should no longer be allowed to hide behind the historically significant geographical areas they currently control (mecca/medina) and dictate, and put out diktats/fatwas that legitimize their barbaric ways to all other muslims of the world.

let's see how it goes..
 
.
General Mattis is highly respected for, among other things, being a bit of a scholar, he's apparently very well read on the ideological/civilizational issues that confront the US and legend has it the man chose not to have a family and has dedicated his whole life serving in the military. The call him the warrior monk.
notbad-obamaplz.png


Flynn is a hard ***, he's been in the the thick of it and knows the enemy well, hands on guy who sucks at diplomacy lol.

but neither of them are crazy rabid neocon warmongers like crazy John 'jihad' McCain, who is only a war hero because he got captured, remember this. :azn:

If they have a focus on Iran, it's because of Iran's foolish stance on Israel, they're not foaming at the mouth looking for a new war in the area.


Yeah, that's the double game the Saudis have played for so long, not gonna fly anymore with the Trump administration.

In Saudia, the all powerful clergy is probably holding the royals hostage to their insane sallafist ideology because they have the power to unleash hell in the form of the zombified masses on the regime if they stop being 7th century savages socially.

Who knows what will happen but imo something has to give, this can not be allowed to go on:



they are poisoning the whole world with their crap and it has to be stopped. In India, entire towns have gone from local traditional colourful garb and culture to the garbage bag niqab and young men leaving for Syria within a decade.

btw, you don't have flags on your profile, are you Pakistani ? because Pakistan in the 1970s etc was a very different society than what it is now. saudi arabian wahhabism has destroyed Pakistan's reputation and continues to drag it through the mud and humiliate their 200 million people globally.


I know, I've tried to keep it ultra simple and main points only too, the nuance is all baked into it.

Here's the thing though, imo, the saudis should no longer be allowed to hide behind the historically significant geographical areas they currently control (mecca/medina) and dictate, and put out diktats/fatwas that legitimize their barbaric ways to all other muslims of the world.

let's see how it goes..

Savages, barbarians...Should I be posting pics about the great Indian slums? Tens of millions of people in India live life that only animals should live, and I think that even animals can't endur the lives that some Indians live today. Think of Wales and New Zealand sheep on the ever green mountains, and Indian slums next to truck loads of garbage. Clearly you have no right to lecture to others on the civilized way of living. Why didn't we radicalized Jordanians or Bahranis? Why didn't niqab spread in the UAE or Bahrain? Why there are no terror attacks in Qatar or the UAE? All of these countries that are %100 closer to us than Pakistan and India and they do speak the same language as us. When countries like Pakistan has decades of no effective security forces, what else would you expect to happen? The countries I mentioned earlier do have the basic security forces and they managed to keep law and order. That is the real prevention for any security problem. But it is so convenient to blame KSA and others when the fault is theirs.
 
Last edited:
.
Like many of Iran's supporters and secret or public lovers in Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Pakistan, you are all hoping and dreaming of KSA's collapse. Let's be honest, you are all Shia with secetarain mind-set. Please don't try to make yourself sound Westernized, or indifferent about the secetarian side of matters. You are all secetarians to the core. And please keep dreaming.
This is beyond ironic lol.

You accuse others of having a sectarian mindset, and yet you just called me a Shia Muslim lol.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom