Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 223 posts

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#141

Post by dionidium »

tptacek wrote: post #130
salafi wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't, for the life of me, understand why people associate being a Salafi with the various terrorist groups. I have never heard a Salafi scholar promote any acts terrorism. In fact, every single high-ranking scholar in Saudi Arabia (those who call themselves Salafi), are all opposed to groups like ISIS, Al Qaida, and Al Nusra. There are dozens of audio clips on Youtube from such scholars who clearly warn the Muslim…

I really have no idea what it means to be a Salafist, but there's something unsettling about an HN debate about whether a particular religion is or isn't fundamentally terroristic. That's especially true if you are yourself somehow affiliated with the religion, in which case: I'm sorry you find yourself litigating this here. Whether or not you are, and whether or not these are good faith comments, I think this is a p…

Why is that weird? You don't think different religions can be more or less supportive of violence in their foundational texts? What would be weird is if that weren't possible for some reason.

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#142

Post by s_q_b »

tome wrote: post #102
s_q_b wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good questions. First, Saudi Arabia's government is in favor of the United States, but their wealthy citizens often fund non-state actors to attack Western targets. Second, my experience comes from studying International Relations at Princeton. For sources, there are too many sources to count for the assertion that Saudi citizens continue to give money to Salafist (for lack of a better word) non-state actors that tar…

> Saudi Arabia's government is in favor of the United States, but their wealthy citizens often fund non-state actors to attack Western targets. Can someone please (perhaps you if you're willing, s_q_b) help me clear this up once and for all? Is there sponsorship of terrorism and other anti-Western activities coming from the rulers of Saudi Arabia? I don't mean distant members of the royal family who are given control…

The summarize one piece of evidence, the 20th hijacker says he had support from the core Saudi Royal family, and listed specific individuals, along with a host of other financial evidence:

">Zacarias Moussaoui, a convicted 9/11 co-conspirator, says members of Saudi Arabia’s royal family helped finance al Qaeda in the years just prior to the 2001 terrorist attacks..."

When facing deposition, Moussaoui named specific names:

"He said in the prison deposition that he was directed in 1998 or 1999 by Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan to create a digital database of donors to the group.

Among those he said he recalled listing in the database were Prince Turki al-Faisal, then the Saudi intelligence chief; Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, the longtime Saudi ambassador to the United States; Prince al-Waleed bin Talal, a prominent billionaire investor; and many of the country’s leading clerics.

“Sheikh Osama wanted to keep a record who give money,” he said in imperfect English — “who is to be listened to or who contributed to the jihad." [Factcheck.org]

Then of course there are the charity fronts:

"Former Sen. Bob Graham, chairman at the time of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, called for the release of the 28 pages on the day the report was made public, Dec. 11, 2002, and still holds that position.

Graham told ABC News last month that the U.S. government’s refusal to release the 28 pages is an effort to protect Saudi Arabia, which he said is “the most responsible for that network of support.”

“The 28 pages primarily relate to who financed 9/11, and they point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier,” Graham told ABC News.

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#143

Post by tptacek »

dionidium wrote: post #141
tptacek wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really have no idea what it means to be a Salafist, but there's something unsettling about an HN debate about whether a particular religion is or isn't fundamentally terroristic. That's especially true if you are yourself somehow affiliated with the religion, in which case: I'm sorry you find yourself litigating this here. Whether or not you are, and whether or not these are good faith comments, I think this is a p…

Why is that weird? You don't think different religions can be more or less supportive of violence in their foundational texts? What would be weird is if that weren't possible for some reason.

I think it is a very bad idea to have those kinds of discussions on HN.

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#144

Post by bbatsell »

mseebach wrote: post #127
bedhead wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terrorists tend to be stupid. Honestly. Look at Richard Reid, the shoe bomber. The guy goes to the airplane bathroom to prepare his shoe bomb, then he returns to his seat, covers himself with a blanket, and tries to detonate the bomb by lighting the fuse with matches. People next to him notice this easily and maul him. Plot over. So, ummm, why not just detonate the thing while locked in the bathroom??? The guys in fl…

When you only have a small explosive, you want to detonate it as close to the wing as possible, as this is the weakest spot on the plane - you're basically hoping for the wing to fall off, or at least sever the connections to the control surfaces. Even with a decent hole in the fuselage, there is a very good chance of landing the plane safely as long as the wings stay on. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Airline…

To be clear, the wingbox is, by far, the strongest part of a plane, but it's the most devastating if you can compromise it. (And its primary design goal isn't to account for explosive loads coming from the fuse.)

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#145

Post by d883kd8 »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #128
matwood wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - "Hypocritical" doesn't begin to describe the opulence of the Sauds (the ruling family; yup, Saudi Arabia is the world's only country named after its rulers). For example, the massively lucrative alcohol smuggling racket is generally acknowledged to be run by one of the princes (of whom there are hundreds; Ibn al-Saud was such a horny old goat that he had 45 sons who survived to adulthood and had children of their…

On a tangent: more countries named like that: Rhodesia. Bolivia. Colombia. Liechtenstein. Swaziland. Uzbekistan. Denmark. Russia and Belarus.

Today I learned, thanks. But I don't think any of those are named after the current leaders. What we have in Saudi Arabia is a group of people, (the Saud family) who managed to take personal power over everyone else in a particular region, and then wrapped that power in the mechanisms and trappings of a modern state. It's an interesting and unique situation.

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#147

Post by gasull »

The militarism in the article is repulsive:

U.S. military and intelligence officials should at the very least, and immediately, run some rigorous planning exercises to test different scenarios and potential actions aimed at reducing codependence and mitigating risk.

Why? Why cannot we just leave them alone? Why do we have to invade every country whenever there is an opportunity to do so?

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#148

Post by scarmig »

tptacek wrote: post #130
salafi wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't, for the life of me, understand why people associate being a Salafi with the various terrorist groups. I have never heard a Salafi scholar promote any acts terrorism. In fact, every single high-ranking scholar in Saudi Arabia (those who call themselves Salafi), are all opposed to groups like ISIS, Al Qaida, and Al Nusra. There are dozens of audio clips on Youtube from such scholars who clearly warn the Muslim…

I really have no idea what it means to be a Salafist, but there's something unsettling about an HN debate about whether a particular religion is or isn't fundamentally terroristic. That's especially true if you are yourself somehow affiliated with the religion, in which case: I'm sorry you find yourself litigating this here. Whether or not you are, and whether or not these are good faith comments, I think this is a p…

Is Aum Shinrikyo fundamentally terroristic?

A lot of this gets into questions of what defines a religion, if a religion even has a definition, or if it's just a contentless cultural virus that people use to interpret their own preconceived notions and practices in a predefined rubric.

Salafism is an easy target because many of its famous adherents are the unsavory sort, and it's "obscure" enough that people can bash it without seeming Islamophobic and even manage to present themselves as a bit cosmopolitan and knowledgeable. But there are definitely many peaceful adherents of it, and many who oppose terrorism within its ranks. You can deduce calls to terrorism from its muddled mess of scriptures and thinkers, but you can also deduce calls to peacemaking. Same as any other religion.

In the end, though, in a world with limited resources, focusing counter-propaganda efforts on Salafist communities seems like a pretty good idea. On the flip side, that almost certainly involves not stigmatizing all Salafists as terrorists.

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#149

Post by chiph »

cordite wrote: post #86
_0nac wrote: post #22

I've worked a fair amount in Saudi Arabia, and yeah, even by (low) Gulf standards it's a deeply fucked-up place and definitely a ticking time bomb. A few things people don't realize until they've actually been there: - Not all Saudis are rich. Quite the opposite, there are destitute beggars on the streets of Riyadh. The women were the saddest side, kneeling by the roadside begging for alms in their all-enveloping pit…

Medical professionals too are imported, mostly from Europe with English skills. Which means that as far as documenting things in Arabic, only the legal names of people and their relations would need such electronic support. Maybe a few others, but not much. I am not sure what ramifications this has for patients.

This was an interesting book.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004H8G5FA

The author worked as a paramedic in Riyadh for several years, dealing with auto accidents, revenge killings, and the cultural implications of "Inshallah" as it applied to telling a family that their loved one didn't have long to live.

Re: Washington Should Prepare for Saudi Arabia's Collapse

#150

Post by JoeAltmaier »

gasull wrote: post #147

The militarism in the article is repulsive: U.S. military and intelligence officials should at the very least, and immediately, run some rigorous planning exercises to test different scenarios and potential actions aimed at reducing codependence and mitigating risk. Why? Why cannot we just leave them alone? Why do we have to invade every country whenever there is an opportunity to do so?

I think that quoted phrase may have been all about doing just that - retreating to non-Saudi air bases; getting out of the way of a Saudi conflict.
Post reply on HN