6 ms·

Saudi Arabia is at the center of a lot of stuff going on in the middle east right now (their support for ISIS, their involvement in Yemen, the chess game with I

Saudi Arabia is at the center of a lot of stuff going on in the middle east right now (their support for ISIS, their involvement in Yemen, the chess game with Iran, etc. etc.). It would be interesting to see what these cables turn up, once translated.

skeuomorf 11y ago
erm "their support for ISIS" citation?
- fweespeech 11y ago
  http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/saudi-funding-of-isis http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/saud... > Although Saudi donors and other private contributors were believed to be the most significant funding source for the original forerunner to ISIS, the importance of such donations has been marginalized by the group's independent sources of income. This income, which is now estimated to overwhelmingly exceed private donations, is generated by activities such as smuggling (of oil, weapons, antiquities), extortion (e.g., the group levies around $8 million per month in "taxes" on local businesses), and other crimes (e.g., robberies, counterfeiting). The group's June 11 seizure of Mosul's central bank alone netted tens of millions of dollars (though U.S. officials note that the $400 million figure often cited in connection with the heist is not accurate).
  - fossuser 11y ago
    To me this doesn't read as government support, but support by private interests within the country. The population of KSA is generally more conservative than the government (though the government is hardly progressive). ISIS is a threat to the stability of KSA and they're definitely not interested in supporting them.
    - Salamat 11y ago
      Ideological links between Saudi Arabia and Isis are tangible, includes beheading and violence against others, when arms shipments to ISIS have been exposed in Turkey, many western media outlets downplayed the incedent as it counters western propaganda. ISIS seems a renegade Wahabi faction but still it is Wahabi as Saudi is, which means it holds the same beliefs of Jihadi Salafism.. http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-isis-how-saudi-arabia-exported-main-source-global-terrorism http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-... and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-wahhabism-saudi-arabia_b_5717157.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-wahhabism... AND http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/saudi-arabia-anxious-ideological-links-isis http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/saudi-a... But nobody nails it as good as Dore Gold in his book in 2003, yet he is in secret talks with Saudi Arabia now: http://www.jcpa.org/hkingdom.htm http://www.jcpa.org/hkingdom.htm
  - skeuomorf 11y ago
    Well, for starters, this doesn't say anywhere that the Saudi government supports ISIS. I keep seeing variations of this reiterated mostly by western political analysts but this only goes to represent to their ignorance of middle-eastern geopolitics, as a matter of fact, if anybody knows two shits about the middle-east, he/she wouldn't say something like that. To clarify, ISIS is in itself a threat to most forces that are currently in power in the middle-east. By ideology, ISIS considers most arabic governments to be infidels "Kuffar" and allies of the west "Dar al Harb". Regarding private contributors, this is undoubtedly true but as clarified in the linked article, it's not the large sum currently. Why are there private contributors you ask? Because morons "Sunni" governments fund morons -like ISIS- to fight other morons "Shia" governmets e.g. Iran which in its own right funds some morons -Hezbollah and its ilk- to fight the original morons, in dreams of having a moronic sectarian consolidated power dream. [Edit]: I originally put the phrases "Sunni" and "Shia" in quotes because they're usually misrepresented by non-muslims. There are different branches of Shia and different branches of Sunna "Sunni". There are newer terms like Wahabism and Ahmadiyya. Each of these terms can be interpreted in a number of ways, the "academic" distinction is quite clear but the reality is quite complicated -in short, several groups, members with different ideologies claim one of the aforementioned terms to be the one that identifies them and that they fit the most accurate description of that term-. Note that this is a gross oversimplification.
    - discardorama 11y ago
      > this doesn't say anywhere that the Saudi government supports ISIS.... if anybody knows two shits about the middle-east, he/she wouldn't say something like that. KSA is a totalitarian regime. Do you think the people would be able to fund ISIS against the wishes of the government? This is a government that doesn't even let women drive and lashes bloggers for mild criticism. And yet you claim they didn't know/approve of people funding the ISIS? I'm afraid it's you who a little ignorant about the middle east. The Saudis may not fund the ISIS now; but they did heavily fund it it and helped set it up. The aim was to destabilize and topple Assad. Just like they did with OBL and Al Qaida; and, predictably, got similar results.
NN88 11y ago
You mean...everything?
themeekforgotpw 11y ago
ISIL is used as a proxy force by all powers that can effectively manipulate them, but they are also a force of their own. The US heavily invests in using video games for propaganda and ISIL and Sunni-insurgent forces have been exposed to a number of anti-Assad video games. Hamas is unlikely to be the progenitor of anti-Assad video themed video games. It's speculative, but it makes a lot of sense that the US would do what it can to direct ire at Assad. What's not speculative is that Turkey and the US were running guns to groups that became ISIL factions in Syria. There's lots of influence to be had all over. The larger powers are trying to manage the situation to achieve their ends. That means funding insurgent groups where it benefits them and bombing the same groups from the air where they are challenged.
- boreas 11y ago
  Can you provide a source for US "gun running" to ISIL factions in Syria? It is well known that Turkey's intelligence agency is doing this, but I've never heard the same accusation leveled at the US. Also I would love to see these anti-Assad video games, even though it seems like American involvement is your own analysis.
  - SmokyBourbon 11y ago
    Here's some sources unrelated to the new leak: http://www.examiner.com/article/did-cia-and-state-department-run-illegal-arms-trafficking-benghazi http://www.examiner.com/article/did-cia-and-state-department... Remember Christopher Stevens, the US ambassador to Libya who got murdered in Benghazi? When he was killed, he was working to secure the stockpiles of weapons in Libya after the US helped al-Qaeda oust Gaddafi. The article, which was written in 2012 identifies Abdulhakim Belhadj as the guy who was telling the Americans which groups they could trust and give arms to. According to this article from March of this year, he's now the head of ISIL/ISIS in Libya: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/3/frank-gaffney-jr-us-backed-rebel-reportedly-leads-/print/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/3/frank-gaffney... Back in 2004, the CIA and MI6 captured him and his wife and secretly flew them to Libya so that Gadaffi could torture him for information. He was "chained to a window, deprived of sleep, beaten, hung from the walls and kept in solitary confinement" with British intelligence providing the questions for the interrogation. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/30/abdel-hakim-belhaj-court-kidnap-mi6-cia-torture http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/30/abdel-hakim-bel... I don't know what would be worse: that the Obama administration deliberately armed ISIS/ISIL or that it was stupid enough to give weapons to a guy the CIA had tortured. I guess the leaks will tell us which.

skeuomorf 11y ago

erm "their support for ISIS" citation?

fweespeech 11y ago
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/saudi-funding-of-isis http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/saud... > Although Saudi donors and other private contributors were believed to be the most significant funding source for the original forerunner to ISIS, the importance of such donations has been marginalized by the group's independent sources of income. This income, which is now estimated to overwhelmingly exceed private donations, is generated by activities such as smuggling (of oil, weapons, antiquities), extortion (e.g., the group levies around $8 million per month in "taxes" on local businesses), and other crimes (e.g., robberies, counterfeiting). The group's June 11 seizure of Mosul's central bank alone netted tens of millions of dollars (though U.S. officials note that the $400 million figure often cited in connection with the heist is not accurate).
- fossuser 11y ago
  To me this doesn't read as government support, but support by private interests within the country. The population of KSA is generally more conservative than the government (though the government is hardly progressive). ISIS is a threat to the stability of KSA and they're definitely not interested in supporting them.
  - Salamat 11y ago
    Ideological links between Saudi Arabia and Isis are tangible, includes beheading and violence against others, when arms shipments to ISIS have been exposed in Turkey, many western media outlets downplayed the incedent as it counters western propaganda. ISIS seems a renegade Wahabi faction but still it is Wahabi as Saudi is, which means it holds the same beliefs of Jihadi Salafism.. http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-isis-how-saudi-arabia-exported-main-source-global-terrorism http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/11/wahhabism-... and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-wahhabism-saudi-arabia_b_5717157.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-wahhabism... AND http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/saudi-arabia-anxious-ideological-links-isis http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/saudi-a... But nobody nails it as good as Dore Gold in his book in 2003, yet he is in secret talks with Saudi Arabia now: http://www.jcpa.org/hkingdom.htm http://www.jcpa.org/hkingdom.htm
- skeuomorf 11y ago
  Well, for starters, this doesn't say anywhere that the Saudi government supports ISIS. I keep seeing variations of this reiterated mostly by western political analysts but this only goes to represent to their ignorance of middle-eastern geopolitics, as a matter of fact, if anybody knows two shits about the middle-east, he/she wouldn't say something like that. To clarify, ISIS is in itself a threat to most forces that are currently in power in the middle-east. By ideology, ISIS considers most arabic governments to be infidels "Kuffar" and allies of the west "Dar al Harb". Regarding private contributors, this is undoubtedly true but as clarified in the linked article, it's not the large sum currently. Why are there private contributors you ask? Because morons "Sunni" governments fund morons -like ISIS- to fight other morons "Shia" governmets e.g. Iran which in its own right funds some morons -Hezbollah and its ilk- to fight the original morons, in dreams of having a moronic sectarian consolidated power dream. [Edit]: I originally put the phrases "Sunni" and "Shia" in quotes because they're usually misrepresented by non-muslims. There are different branches of Shia and different branches of Sunna "Sunni". There are newer terms like Wahabism and Ahmadiyya. Each of these terms can be interpreted in a number of ways, the "academic" distinction is quite clear but the reality is quite complicated -in short, several groups, members with different ideologies claim one of the aforementioned terms to be the one that identifies them and that they fit the most accurate description of that term-. Note that this is a gross oversimplification.
  - discardorama 11y ago
    > this doesn't say anywhere that the Saudi government supports ISIS.... if anybody knows two shits about the middle-east, he/she wouldn't say something like that. KSA is a totalitarian regime. Do you think the people would be able to fund ISIS against the wishes of the government? This is a government that doesn't even let women drive and lashes bloggers for mild criticism. And yet you claim they didn't know/approve of people funding the ISIS? I'm afraid it's you who a little ignorant about the middle east. The Saudis may not fund the ISIS now; but they did heavily fund it it and helped set it up. The aim was to destabilize and topple Assad. Just like they did with OBL and Al Qaida; and, predictably, got similar results.

NN88 11y ago

You mean...everything?

themeekforgotpw 11y ago

ISIL is used as a proxy force by all powers that can effectively manipulate them, but they are also a force of their own. The US heavily invests in using video games for propaganda and ISIL and Sunni-insurgent forces have been exposed to a number of anti-Assad video games. Hamas is unlikely to be the progenitor of anti-Assad video themed video games. It's speculative, but it makes a lot of sense that the US would do what it can to direct ire at Assad. What's not speculative is that Turkey and the US were running guns to groups that became ISIL factions in Syria. There's lots of influence to be had all over. The larger powers are trying to manage the situation to achieve their ends. That means funding insurgent groups where it benefits them and bombing the same groups from the air where they are challenged.

boreas 11y ago
Can you provide a source for US "gun running" to ISIL factions in Syria? It is well known that Turkey's intelligence agency is doing this, but I've never heard the same accusation leveled at the US. Also I would love to see these anti-Assad video games, even though it seems like American involvement is your own analysis.
- SmokyBourbon 11y ago
  Here's some sources unrelated to the new leak: http://www.examiner.com/article/did-cia-and-state-department-run-illegal-arms-trafficking-benghazi http://www.examiner.com/article/did-cia-and-state-department... Remember Christopher Stevens, the US ambassador to Libya who got murdered in Benghazi? When he was killed, he was working to secure the stockpiles of weapons in Libya after the US helped al-Qaeda oust Gaddafi. The article, which was written in 2012 identifies Abdulhakim Belhadj as the guy who was telling the Americans which groups they could trust and give arms to. According to this article from March of this year, he's now the head of ISIL/ISIS in Libya: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/3/frank-gaffney-jr-us-backed-rebel-reportedly-leads-/print/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/3/frank-gaffney... Back in 2004, the CIA and MI6 captured him and his wife and secretly flew them to Libya so that Gadaffi could torture him for information. He was "chained to a window, deprived of sleep, beaten, hung from the walls and kept in solitary confinement" with British intelligence providing the questions for the interrogation. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/30/abdel-hakim-belhaj-court-kidnap-mi6-cia-torture http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/30/abdel-hakim-bel... I don't know what would be worse: that the Obama administration deliberately armed ISIS/ISIL or that it was stupid enough to give weapons to a guy the CIA had tortured. I guess the leaks will tell us which.