Saudis say Iran must 'pay the price' for alleged plot as US resists retaliation |

the split between Sunni Arab countries and Shiite Iran is real

Where in this statement does it say the split involves America? Yet we are involved in many splits, perhaps causing some, all over the world. This is like high schoolers running to a fight. There is Israel and Palestine. There is India and Pakistan. NATO seems more like a gang with its members at times. We are not there to end the splits. We end up helping to fuel the splits at a great cost to the countries involved as-well-as ourselves. I am sick of wars and conflicts. That is all we know. Let Saudi Arabia and Iran deal with this. Yet our goal is to see that Iran is weakened like Iraq and Afghanistan

Mr. Discipline

This is about a world order, not this law of the jungle saying let the two savages fight it out amongst themselves.

Yep is sure is and how we are involved in and cause much of the world's disorder. What makes you think that Saudi Arabia and Iran are savages? What makes you think that their resolution would be for them to fight it out? It will be if we have any involvement

Mr. Discipline

Ever look at the amount of military spending as a portion of GDP in all those middle eastern countries.

No country in the world comes close to our military spending. If we can spend an exorbitant amount on war, military and security, who are we to judge another country's expenditures? Most countries need to weapons to protect themselves from our direct or indirect aggression.

Japan did not attack us for oil. They attacked us for our interference in their dealings with other countries like Russia. Saudis do not need us to buy their oil. We need them to sell us their oil. They can always sell it to China and bypass us.

After Japan attacked us, we attacked the entire East, including Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos ... and caused a divide in Korea and the Philippines. The same with countries of Islam post September 11, 2001. One country in the East we could not take on was China. Yet during the 50's and 60's we agitated conflict with China. We are doing the same in regards to Iran and being attacked September 11, 2001. As with China, we agitate conflict with Iran. She is their China.

Where in this statement does it say the split involves America?

The split itself doesn't.

However, this was a plot by a foreign country to commit an act of terrorism on U.S. soil.

No nation can just look the other way when someone attempts to commit terrorism in their country.

We have been looking for a way to invade Iran for some time now

When do you figure the U.S. will attack Iran? (Approximate date-- within the next week? Month?)

And then we will control all of the worlds oil

Not sure how, according to your strategy, we will control Russia's oil? Do you feel we will conquer Russia-- or that Putin will voluntarily let us control it?

When do you figure the U.S. will attack Iran? (Approximate date-- within the next week? Month?)

So you are in denial that there hasn't been any talk about attacking Iran over the past 5 years? Have they not been accused of building a nuclear weapon facility? Of course that is just too close to the Iraq WMD excuse, so that one has already been used so.... a foiled terrorist plot should work.

Not sure how, according to your strategy, we will control Russia's oil?

Russia won't matter.

New World Order. Isn't that what George H.W. Bush said? A one world economy. Outsourcing has caused China to pretty much become the world manufacturing center. You can see how this is taking shape. You have to laugh in a way because all of these wise right wing religious factions have supported a party that has completely support the outsourcing which set up this new world order that they have been preaching would become a one world government, which would lead to the mark of the beast. And they have been right behind it pushing it along. What irony.

The term was written in latin on our currency

Yep. You're right. Under the pyramid is it? Since the thirties?

So you are in denial that there hasn't been any talk about attacking Iran over the past 5 years?

Denial..that there hasn't been?

That's a double negative-- WTF are you trying to say?

Perhaps you meant to say "denial"...that there has been?

In any event-- if you re-read what I said, you will notice that I neither confirmed nor denied that there has been talk about invading Iran.

But who cares-- talk is cheap (ask the phone company!).

In fact, what I said wasn't even a statement-- it was a question:

When do you figure the U.S. will attack Iran? (Approximate date-- within the next week? Month?)

It did not deny-- nor did it conform-- anything-- it was a question! I wasn't stating anything-- I was asking something! (Someone thinks we will attack Iraqn I was neither agreeing nor disagreeing-- but since they thought we'd attack, I was asking when they thought we'd attack!)

When the time is right. We'll have someone else do it first.

What are you basing that assumption on?

(It is an assumption-- but how do you know that, in the extremely unlikely event that we end up attacking Iran-- that we will "have someone else do it first"?)

Russia won't matter.

You said:

And then we will control all of the worlds oil

Well-- Russia is a major oil producer. If we will control all the worlds oil (as you stated)-- then obbviously we would have to control Russia's oil as well. If we are to control all the world's oil (wghich of course include's Russia's_— how do we control Russia in the scenario you laid out?). IMO Putin may be less than cooperative...)

This is about a world order,

Ah-- now I see!

A New World Order!

How .... cool!

Clipped to the NV group Friends of the New World Order!

(Many apply...few are chosen!)

He's right to some extent Krish. Why would we even think of attacking a place like Iran when we can maneuver someone else into doing it for us. The best part is that it won't even cost us anything; in fact, it will make us money. The Saudis pay cash (oil money) for all that military hardware, you know. We'll get them to pay us for the equipment to do something we wanted them to do in the first place. Actually that's not that bad a plan.

We have been looking for a way to invade Iran for some time now

Another war where our military members will most likely die is not the answer. Hurting them economically is. They become a country non gratis. No aid, no exports, no anything that earns them one red cent. All citizens of Iran that hold only Iranian citizenship go on the no fly list. If any American business are there, they are told if you insist of continuing there, we no longer recognize you and you can not import any of your products here.

He's right to some extent Krish. Why would we even think of attacking a place like Iran when we can maneuver someone else into doing it for us.

Of course many countries would rather have someone else do their dity work.

But who-- i can't think of any country that would attack Iran (especially not the Saudis-- they are a good example of trying to get others to do what they'd like to see militarily.Getting the Palestinians agitated and having them attack Israel-- while the Saudis rest at home-- is an example)

There is only one country that I could see having the cojones to attack Iran-- and that's Israel. But-- they are fiercely independent-- no way the US can make them do it-- unless they themselves want to. (And obviously they haven't-- for several years now)

. (And obviously they haven't-- for several years now)

One clarification-- they have attcked Iran-- but they were quite brilliant-- avoiding a military attack entirely! it was an amazing joint US-Israeli strike on Irans nuclear programme-- supposedly it set it back two years. (I am referring, of course, to "Stuxnet")

There is only one country that I could see having the cojones to attack Iran-- and that's Israel

While I could see the Israelis not minding attacking Iran (hell, they wouldn't mind attacking the Saudis), they probably wouldn't bother in a case like this. After all, it wasn't their ambassador. If the Iranians and Saudis got into it, the Israelis would probably just sit on the sidelines applauding each bomb that fell, no matter which side got hit. That would also be the proper attitude for the US to take (it wasn't our ambassador either). The Saudis might just do it too. Remember that their idea of war with Iran is not the same as ours. There would be none of that nonsense about boots on the ground. They don't particularly wish to convert the Iranians to their way of thinking or to make them behave. They'd simply like to destroy them. It would just be a numbers game; do the Saudis have more bombs and missiles than the Iranians have cities. Their response wouldn't be just because of a hit on an ambassador either. Once those inconvenient people are gone, there's all that lovely oil sitting there waiting to be picked up.

That would also be the proper attitude for the US to take (it wasn't our ambassador either).

I think the reason the US reacted so strongly even though he wasn't our ambassador was because the plot was an attempt to attack a diplomat in the U.S.

Regardless of who was the target, countries do not like terrorists committing acts of terrorism on their soil! (in addition the target was a diplomat of a country that is supposedly a U.S. ally)...plus we have to make them love us because we need their oil!

I think the reason the US reacted so strongly even though he wasn't our ambassador was because the plot was an attempt to attack a diplomat in the U.S.

There are contracts put out all the time, some for political reasons, in this country and others. They are essentially a police problem, not a reason to go to war (unless it's one of our people who is the victim). That would be a good reason to encourage the Saudis and give them a good price on all the weaponry we might sell (not give, sell) them; and, of course, to make scary, outraged noises toward the Iranians. Nothing more than that though.

.plus we have to make them love us because we need their oil!

We don't have to make them love us; we just have to make them not hate us enough to forgo all those beautiful profits they're making from us. That would take a lot of hate. Easier to make them hate the Iranians since Iran is their main competition in the oil business.

No, no, no. I wasn't saying for a minute that we started this. To be clear, Iran did this. We stopped it.

Add to all that Iran's nuke capabilities. And somehow, Israel would have been dragged into this because it is a U.S. ally.

There is that little "Mutual Defense Treaty" that I personally feel that Israel used as a one way street for survival. They are a tough bunch and I do admire them sticking their thumbs int the eyes of the world but do not think that they will rush their armaments to the defense of the US under attack.

Fin, I don't think Israel would just jump into any of this. They are tough and they are smart. I think it would be more along the lines of a 1967 scenario if this plan had been successful.

There is that little "Mutual Defense Treaty"

Link?

But, why not let Saudi handle this...it IS their issue, is it not?

They didn't plan on sending a hit team to off the ambassador. They planned to set off a bomb in a Washington DC restaurant. That makes it more a US concern then a Saudi concern.

They want to start some @!$%# and will draw the Isrealis in and they are friends with Syria. Iran is scared of their own people and an Arab spring in their countries. We need to get out of Iraq and stay out. We need to dis-engage from the area and let Russia and China deal with Iran. This is how world wars get started. WWI started with assassination of Ferdinand in Croatia.

But weren't they doing the jobs that Americans don't want to do?

Is this another WMD created by USA against another nation in the middle east?

Nope. Not unless you are accusing President Obama of blatantly lying to us!

Obama Says Facts Support Accusation of Iranian Plot

WASHINGTON — President Obama vowed on Thursday to push for what he called the “toughest sanctions” against Iran, saying that the United States had strong evidence that Iranian officials were complicit in an alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States.

Mr. Obama insisted that American officials “know that he had direct links, was paid by, and directed by individuals in the Iranian government.”

“Now those facts are there for all to see,” Mr. Obama said. “We would not be bringing forward a case unless we knew exactly how to support all the allegations that are contained in the indictment.”

There's no doubt in my mind that he's telling the truth-- what's your take? Do you really believe he's lying?

Give me a break . He's had to clean up after you Republicans who have sent this economy in the @!$%#ter and started two wars costing billions to when Obama got Osama and your still pissed because every time he gets the real terrorist he makes Repubs look bad.

The Saudis are on their own

nope-- as long as they have oil they will have friends in high places.

nope-- as long as they have oil they will have friends in high places.

That is so true, but sad.

nope-- as long as they have oil they will have friends in high places.

And when they choose new friends to sell their oil to, they will be on their own and treated as Iran.