4 ms·

I hope I can find a good explanation for why Saudi Arabia was involved in 9/11 while the US went ahead and attacked Iraq. Wasn't Iran blamed initially? Recall:

by 1-6 6y ago

I hope I can find a good explanation for why Saudi Arabia was involved in 9/11 while the US went ahead and attacked Iraq. Wasn't Iran blamed initially? Recall: Iran Iraq War Bumper Sticker. This looks like a major cover-up and both Republican and Democrat leaders are involved.

redis_mlc 6y ago
I study this area, so I'll try to do a brief overview of what was reported. The US is in ideological wars with China (CCP) and Islam. Those may not be wars the US chose, but it is what it is, because there is no common ground in disparate ideologies. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) relies on the US to buy oil and act as military mercenaries when threatened by local countries. In the short term, KSA is an ally of the US, but in the long term, there are too many ideological and religious differences. So at some level, KSA did cause 9/11, although likely in a circuitous way (some funding here, some operational support there, etc.) It's unlikely there was formal military support in any way, because that's counter-productive to the ruling family's goals, but KSA has strong internal security and they know what's happening. Iraq is a different story, or rather, their leader, Hussein. He invaded Kuwait, threatened to invade KSA, etc. The US govt. was paid to defend KSA. Bush 2 felt he owed Bush 1 the removal of Hussein. And German and French ambassadors massaging arms sales told Hussein he was untouchable by the US. The US sent an envoy to negotiate a peaceful standdown, but was perceived as belligerent. So war it was. The "fig leaves" for invading Iraq were that a man who wanted to become the Iraqi President said bad things about Hussein, and that "aluminum tubes" were found in Iraq, supposedly useful in building a nuclear bomb. So the Whitehouse pretended those were adequate justifications, and that Hussein was tied to 9/11, despite knowing immediately that most of the participants were on Saudi passports. Ironically, Hussein was the only leader capable of uniting Iraq, despite being from a minority ethnic group. Even better, he was a US ally long before the Iraq war. Hussein's desire to become "the modern-day Suleiman" and rule all of the Middle East led to a large part of its destruction. But the US could have been more on top of the situation there - maintaining better relations with Hussein, having better intelligence, training and equipping the Kuwaiti armed forces better, etc. So there's a long backstory to the invasion of Iraq, and the US had reasons, but it wasn't what was told to the American people (I remember the absurd sound bites on TV at the time. I was like, "I can buy aluminum tubes down the street.")
- 1-6 6y ago
  This is a great explanation. Thank you very much, I did not expect to come back to a very well written explanation. I'm not sure why this thread drained in ranking at HN. To also supplement to this topic, I found another good explanation on YT: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6nnz0YRy6So https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6nnz0YRy6So
- danans 6y ago
  > The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) relies on the US to buy oil and act as military mercenaries when threatened by local countries. Also, the other side of this is that KSA buys mountains of US and British made weapons, and sometimes "delivers" them to places like Yemen, but they are mostly to protect the ruling family against their own people.
  - def8cefe 6y ago
    They buy LAVs from General Dynamics in Canada as well. Not sure why the government has allowed it to continue.
    - danans 6y ago
      Connections in high places, and jobs at risk on the ground. For example, in the UK, during the depths of the last recession, a major investigation into secret payments by British Aerospace to parties in the middle east was shuttered by the government after threats by KSA to cancel contracts. A high court later ruled that stopping the investigation was illegal, but within 2 weeks the House of Lords (who are not popularly elected) overturned the courts ruling in a unanimous vote based on the "public interest". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Yamamah_arms_deal#Serious_Fraud_Office_investigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Yamamah_arms_deal#Serious_F...
- dimator 6y ago
  Can you refer books/other material about this?
- nelaboras 6y ago

by 1-6 6y ago

redis_mlc 6y ago

I study this area, so I'll try to do a brief overview of what was reported. The US is in ideological wars with China (CCP) and Islam. Those may not be wars the US chose, but it is what it is, because there is no common ground in disparate ideologies. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) relies on the US to buy oil and act as military mercenaries when threatened by local countries. In the short term, KSA is an ally of the US, but in the long term, there are too many ideological and religious differences. So at some level, KSA did cause 9/11, although likely in a circuitous way (some funding here, some operational support there, etc.) It's unlikely there was formal military support in any way, because that's counter-productive to the ruling family's goals, but KSA has strong internal security and they know what's happening. Iraq is a different story, or rather, their leader, Hussein. He invaded Kuwait, threatened to invade KSA, etc. The US govt. was paid to defend KSA. Bush 2 felt he owed Bush 1 the removal of Hussein. And German and French ambassadors massaging arms sales told Hussein he was untouchable by the US. The US sent an envoy to negotiate a peaceful standdown, but was perceived as belligerent. So war it was. The "fig leaves" for invading Iraq were that a man who wanted to become the Iraqi President said bad things about Hussein, and that "aluminum tubes" were found in Iraq, supposedly useful in building a nuclear bomb. So the Whitehouse pretended those were adequate justifications, and that Hussein was tied to 9/11, despite knowing immediately that most of the participants were on Saudi passports. Ironically, Hussein was the only leader capable of uniting Iraq, despite being from a minority ethnic group. Even better, he was a US ally long before the Iraq war. Hussein's desire to become "the modern-day Suleiman" and rule all of the Middle East led to a large part of its destruction. But the US could have been more on top of the situation there - maintaining better relations with Hussein, having better intelligence, training and equipping the Kuwaiti armed forces better, etc. So there's a long backstory to the invasion of Iraq, and the US had reasons, but it wasn't what was told to the American people (I remember the absurd sound bites on TV at the time. I was like, "I can buy aluminum tubes down the street.")

1-6 6y ago
This is a great explanation. Thank you very much, I did not expect to come back to a very well written explanation. I'm not sure why this thread drained in ranking at HN. To also supplement to this topic, I found another good explanation on YT: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6nnz0YRy6So https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6nnz0YRy6So
danans 6y ago
> The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) relies on the US to buy oil and act as military mercenaries when threatened by local countries. Also, the other side of this is that KSA buys mountains of US and British made weapons, and sometimes "delivers" them to places like Yemen, but they are mostly to protect the ruling family against their own people.
- def8cefe 6y ago
  They buy LAVs from General Dynamics in Canada as well. Not sure why the government has allowed it to continue.
  - danans 6y ago
    Connections in high places, and jobs at risk on the ground. For example, in the UK, during the depths of the last recession, a major investigation into secret payments by British Aerospace to parties in the middle east was shuttered by the government after threats by KSA to cancel contracts. A high court later ruled that stopping the investigation was illegal, but within 2 weeks the House of Lords (who are not popularly elected) overturned the courts ruling in a unanimous vote based on the "public interest". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Yamamah_arms_deal#Serious_Fraud_Office_investigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Yamamah_arms_deal#Serious_F...
dimator 6y ago
Can you refer books/other material about this?
nelaboras 6y ago