Whatever You Want, Osama....
From the Guardian:
America signals withdrawal of troops from Saudi Arabia
The US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld yesterday, signalled a transformation in the US military presence in the Gulf region by announcing that all but a handful of American troops will be pulled out of Saudi Arabia by summer's end.
Despite vociferously insisting this week that the US is not "pulling out" of the country, the defence secretary's announcement amounted to that, reducing the 5,000 troops there to 400, who will mainly be there to train Saudi soldiers.
The Prince Sultan air base, largely rebuilt at a great cost to the US, will be largely abandoned, with none of the 200 American planes currently there remaining by the end of August.
Mr Rumsfeld, in a joint press conference at the air base with Prince Sultan, the Saudi defence minister, insisted the decision was a "mutual agreement" motivated by reasons of military strategy.
Now that the Operation Southern Watch no-fly zone no longer exists, the Pentagon argues in public, there is no need for planes to be based in Saudi Arabia to patrol it.
Furthermore, Riyadh refused to let American planes take off on ground-attack strikes from its airfields during the Iraq war, because it would look as if Saudi Arabia was backing an attack on fellow Muslims - a restriction that irritated US military commanders.
Non-strike missions - for refuelling, reconnaissance and other purposes - were permitted.
The announcement "does not mean we requested them to leave Saudi Arabia, but as long as their operation is over, they will leave," Prince Sultan said.
But behind the military considerations, the move is a major positive gesture by Washington towards the Saudi royal family, for whom a high-profile US military presence creates internal pressure, stoking militant opposition.
All but four of the alleged September 11 hijackers were Saudi, and the US troops there have been a key propaganda point made by Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida.
Hints that a major restructuring of the American military footprint in the region were under way came earlier this week, with the news that the US was planning to move the command centre of its air operations to the newly re-equipped al-Udeid air base in Qatar.
Officials confirmed yesterday that the switch had been made.
Before the war, the US had moved large amounts of technology and equipment to al-Udeid in anticipation of opposition from Riyadh.
"Nothing's going to be torn down," Rear Admiral Dave Nichols, deputy air commander for Central Command, said of the Prince Sultan base. "It'll remain wired, but most of the computers and whatnot will be taken out."
"There are political advantages for both," said Tim Garden, security analyst at the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
"The US will have greater freedom of action, the Saudis will feel more comfortable, and neither of them will have to mention that it was a key demand of Osama bin Laden."
America signals withdrawal of troops from Saudi Arabia
The US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld yesterday, signalled a transformation in the US military presence in the Gulf region by announcing that all but a handful of American troops will be pulled out of Saudi Arabia by summer's end.
Despite vociferously insisting this week that the US is not "pulling out" of the country, the defence secretary's announcement amounted to that, reducing the 5,000 troops there to 400, who will mainly be there to train Saudi soldiers.
The Prince Sultan air base, largely rebuilt at a great cost to the US, will be largely abandoned, with none of the 200 American planes currently there remaining by the end of August.
Mr Rumsfeld, in a joint press conference at the air base with Prince Sultan, the Saudi defence minister, insisted the decision was a "mutual agreement" motivated by reasons of military strategy.
Now that the Operation Southern Watch no-fly zone no longer exists, the Pentagon argues in public, there is no need for planes to be based in Saudi Arabia to patrol it.
Furthermore, Riyadh refused to let American planes take off on ground-attack strikes from its airfields during the Iraq war, because it would look as if Saudi Arabia was backing an attack on fellow Muslims - a restriction that irritated US military commanders.
Non-strike missions - for refuelling, reconnaissance and other purposes - were permitted.
The announcement "does not mean we requested them to leave Saudi Arabia, but as long as their operation is over, they will leave," Prince Sultan said.
But behind the military considerations, the move is a major positive gesture by Washington towards the Saudi royal family, for whom a high-profile US military presence creates internal pressure, stoking militant opposition.
All but four of the alleged September 11 hijackers were Saudi, and the US troops there have been a key propaganda point made by Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida.
Hints that a major restructuring of the American military footprint in the region were under way came earlier this week, with the news that the US was planning to move the command centre of its air operations to the newly re-equipped al-Udeid air base in Qatar.
Officials confirmed yesterday that the switch had been made.
Before the war, the US had moved large amounts of technology and equipment to al-Udeid in anticipation of opposition from Riyadh.
"Nothing's going to be torn down," Rear Admiral Dave Nichols, deputy air commander for Central Command, said of the Prince Sultan base. "It'll remain wired, but most of the computers and whatnot will be taken out."
"There are political advantages for both," said Tim Garden, security analyst at the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
"The US will have greater freedom of action, the Saudis will feel more comfortable, and neither of them will have to mention that it was a key demand of Osama bin Laden."
Comments
the usa should get out of the middle east entirely.
Originally posted by niji
this is really the best thing for the usa.
the usa should get out of the middle east entirely.
A real tough one.
I get the feeling that it's somehow or other connected with the "Road to Peace "..& the future of Iraq...
GO or STAY...
By going, the USA & it's allies may be blowing the only real chance of overlooking the establishment of a "western style" democracy in an islamic setting. On the other hand staying may actually increase the chance of generating reactionary islamic states in both Saudia Arabia & Iraq.
Even so, I am not sure that the USA should be too concerned if such a governments were to be established.
Why?, because ultimately, Islamic governments start of tough with lots of anti USA / anti Western rhetoric, but as is happening in Iran, and other middle eastern countries, the pressure of change being exerted by their overwhelmingly large youth demography means that Islamic governments MUST change to fulfill the aspirations of their youthful populations......And that usually means liberalisation...& even increasingly secular democracy.....
Democracy in islamic dress or western dress, will happen no matter what because in the end, muslim countries, are simply being forced by dint of global communications, technology, science & industrialisation to adapt or die....they are emeshed in the global world..whether they like it or not...
Allowing Islamic governments to arise of their own accord means that eventually people will either change such governments or force them out of office......like East European Communism....
All attempts to holt or wind the clock back to year zero will fail as it failed in Cambodia, & as it is failing in North Korea, & Cuba....
So unless such Islamic governments bow to the will of the people, they too will suffer the same ideological fate....
I think ideally we could do what niji says, but I doubt things are that simple. Even if we pull out (and what does that really mean -- dropping support of those governments like Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, etc.?) , I doubt that would stop the resentment/hostility anyway. Besides, if you really want us to pull out, we would have to take our money with us, and imagine a middle east without US money flowing through it.
Also, I agree with Aquafire about letting fundamentalist regimes fall on their faces. I think they will eventually fall on their own, and I would welcome the opportunity to let them do so, despite the near-term risks to our safety if they sponsor terrorist groups.
In any case (again), it is disrespectful to link the quaint custom of wearing cloth on the skull with the incessant stuffing of oneself with unhealthy bullcrap.
In any case, I'm due for a doctor's visit, ain't I?
Originally posted by aquafire
{snip}
GO or STAY...
{snip}
let us sing...
Should we stay or should we go now?
Should we stay or should we go now?
If we go there will be trouble
An' if we stay it will be double
So come on and let us know
Should we stay or should be go now?
i think that about sums it up
Originally posted by mrmister
This move has nothing to do with Osama.
Well, there has to be SOME way to bash Bush.
Come on, play along.
Originally posted by groverat
Well, there has to be SOME way to bash Bush.
Come on, play along.
i think the math on your (that being groverat) website is appropriately sick, but i will agree with you that the number is just about right... lets take the going rate for a human life at around 2 million dollars, current gas prices are about 2 dollars a gallon, so that means that a gallon of gas would buy you exactly 0.000001 lives, exactly as you concluded...
thank you come again...
Anyway, Qatar sounds too much like "gutter" and those angry arabs will still be angry that we're still in the middle east. Oh, but leave your money on your way out, we'll blame the US if you pull out and causing an economic collapse in the region too. That is assuming that the US government can do something about the private enterprises in the region which are of course (and granted that sometimes it does seem like this) not under our government's mandates over there. There's no winning kids. The US always has to lose no matter the alternative, simple really.
Originally posted by billybobsky
let us sing...
Should we stay or should we go now?
Should we stay or should we go now?
If we go there will be trouble
An' if we stay it will be double
So come on and let us know
Should we stay or should be go now?
i think that about sums it up
Hey,
Aren't you singing an old Jimmy Durante number...?
Hachacha....everybuddy wans ta be me...hachacha