Need help with debate re: Bush-Saud connection and F9/11

[T Roosevelt]

Running email debate with a friend cut-and-pasting stuff he doesn't really understand, but anyway - have at this one:

Why did Moore’s evil Saudis not join “the Coalition of the Willing”? Why instead did they force the United States to switch its regional military headquarters to Qatar? If the Bush family and the al-Saud dynasty live in each other’s pockets…then how come the most reactionary regime in the region has been powerless to stop Bush from demolishing its clone in Kabul and its buffer regime in Baghdad? The Saudis hate, as they did in 1991, the idea that Iraq’s recuperated oil industry might challenge their near-monopoly. They fear the liberation of the Shiite Muslims they so despise. To make these elementary points is to collapse the whole pathetic edifice of the film’s “theory.”

[dave123williams]

1. Why instead did they force the United States to switch its regional milita

Er, because Bush is in the business of capitulating to terrorist demands? Because Fahd fears the Islamists in his own country?

Duh!

[Nite Owl]

2. We withdrew our bases in Saudi Arabia

because OBL told them we had to. The Saudi royals are in danger themselves of being overthrown by the fundamentalist there. We are not wanted on holy soil. The Saudis are also getting paid back for the debt that Iraq owed them with Iraqi oil money. We need the royal family in power.

[karlrschneider]

3. Not sure I grasp the message (assuming the blue text is your friends...?)

The Saudis have nothing really to fear from Iraq's oil reserves, the demand is increasing quickly enough to insure Jupiterian profits from both countries (well, maybe not Iraq as long as they're FUBAR, at least)
...
I'm not aware that the Mecca and Medina 'holy sites' make much distinction between the various factions of Islam, nor do I quite get the reference to "clone in Kabul"....?

Aren't a lot of SAs of the Wahhabist variation? It's hard to keep up even with one of the various scorecards that can be found. :eyes:

[T Roosevelt]

5. The blue text is his

and I'm sure he knows little of its meaning. My first thought was 'clone of Kabul'?

[alcuno]

6. Have him read House of Bush/House of Saud (or vise versa)

by Kevin Phillips. Then only AFTER he's read information can he be argued with. Or you could simply open another line of attack and ask this simple question. What is * protecting in the 28 pages of the Congress' 9/11 report that relates to Saudi Arabia YET cannot be seen by the American people. Even the right-wing senator from Alabama who sits on the intelligence committee says that there is NOTHING in there that would affect our national security.

If nothing else, the connection between the families is UNSEEMLY. I mean, they call the Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar, Bandar Bush. What's that about?

[frankly_fedup2]

4. I'll tell you why . . . Because the Saudis wanted to open their border . .

with Iraq so all of the extremists would use it to get into Iraq and leave the Saudis alone. Bush moved the troops, not for strategic purposes to help anyone but the Saudis. They knew that if our soldiers were no longer protecting that border that those extremists would rush to get into Iraq. There is nothing elementary about it and should not be discussed lightly either.

Since Bush invaded Iraq, the Sunnis and Shiites have joined arms against our troops (using our arms by the way because our intelligent leaders sent tons of ammo for the troops but leave one man to guard like 12 acres of weapons. The Sunnis and the Shiites have hated each other for hundreds of years; however, they will fight together to kill the American Soldiers. So the 1100+ Americans who have been killed, have died from weapons the insurgents have stolen from the Americans.

Bush is always looking out for his friends/business partners, the Saudis. After all, they have been doing business with them since the oil was discovered in the late 1930's, and the stupid Arabs did not know how to get it out of the ground. We show them how to do it, use our equipment and our men, and then over time, our friends and allies the Saudis break their contract with us and started charging us unbelievable amounts for crude oil.

We should have finished the job in Afghanistan. We have deserted those people AGAIN! All we have 11,000 soldiers in there for is the pipeline that is being built. Yep, that was the whole reason anyway for attacking Afghanistan (well for the Bush family anyway).

Also, now Bush knows 100% that Iran and N. Korea have nuclear weapons. So my question would be to a neocon is this . . . why the hell are we not taking care of these two very imminent threats to not just us but the world. We would have a coalition behind us like China, France, Germany, Japan, UAE, Jordan, etc. Another question would be, where is the oil? Soldiers have reported that as soon as they went into Iraq, they were immediately to guard the oil wells/drillers first. Now, some soldiers are spilling their guts telling their families that as soon as they were there, the meters were taken off of the wells. Wonder why? Do you think it is because if there is no meters to tell what they are drilling, then there is no way to account for where the oil has gone. That way one does not have to lie and continue to claim to be a Christian.

Sorry for the tirade . . . just venting. I could go on too.