[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Regardless of whether Qatar deserves it or not, countries abusing and/or invading other countries based on phony justifications like "oh hey it took us 15 years but we finally remembered you support terrorism!" is very bad. If this situation escalates into an armed conflict (which is likely now that it's no longer just about some diplomats), it could easily grow way beyond the Middle Eastern region and would become a precedent for a dozen more such dangerous situations.

[Samseau]

Of course it's going to escalate, why else would the Saudis purchase $400 Billion worth of arms? What do you guys think it is for? Just parading it around on the streets?

[RIslander]

(06-06-2017 02:02 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

If the US can declare Qatar a funder of terrorism with Saudi Arabia, then what's to stop the USA from taking over Qatar in a day? We have a massive military base there already, the Saudis and USA could easily divvy up the country in a day. It would also probably spark an open war with Iran, pleasing Israel. And then Iran and the Saudis would be focused on killing each other, while the US sits back and reaps in the profits.

Sick fucking game but it's easy to understand why it is being played.

Possibly, but Iran's ability to project military power across the Persian Gulf would be destroyed in hours. There won't be war on the Arabian Peninsula. It could only be fought in Iran.

Even with the might of the US military I highly doubt Iran could be occupied. Their soldiers fought like lions in the Iran/Iraq war. They'd mobilize every able man and fight tooth and nail. It would likely be the bloodiest war in US history, at least since the Civil War, and I doubt they have the stomach for it.

[911]

(06-06-2017 02:02 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

If the US can declare Qatar a funder of terrorism with Saudi Arabia, then what's to stop the USA from taking over Qatar in a day? We have a massive military base there already, the Saudis and USA could easily divvy up the country in a day. It would also probably spark an open war with Iran, pleasing Israel. And then Iran and the Saudis would be focused on killing each other, while the US sits back and reaps in the profits.

Sick fucking game but it's easy to understand why it is being played.

The US would never do that, a takeover of Qatar would instead be a clean palace coup and/or an assassination of the ruler. See the script of "Syriana".

This has happened before, when Saudi king Faisal, who was a bit of a defiant nationalist that went off-script, was assassinated by his nephew. He was the only Saudi ruler to ever die from an unnatural cause.

[Robert High Hawk]

This will be very interesting to play out. Even if the government of Qatar capitulates, or undergoes some sort of Royal Coup, even the next friendly regime will quietly reduce their reliance on other Gulf States.

Also, what exactly are the demands from the Saudis? To stop paying the Muslim Brotherhood and saying nice/neutral things about Iran on TV? Disband Al-Jazeera? How can the Qataris do any of this without totally losing face? There doesn't seem to be a good way out of this. I doubt the Qataris will do anything that makes them lose control over their gas.

As for us having a base there in Qatar. I assure you that it can be shut down in a day if the Qataris want to, simply by turning off the water and electricity. The logistical footprint of these bases is huge, and it's overstaffed and highly dependent on local contractors. Such is our military largesse. That does not mean that there will be any real military opposition to an invasion/strike, just that the CentCom Forward base there doesn't have much tactical value in it's own country (someone more knowledgeable please correct me if I'm wrong)

[RIslander]

FNN reporting that Russia hacked Qatar and that's why Saudi kicked them out. You have to be shitting me.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/06/politics/r...index.html

[Arado]

We have been doing Saudi's bidding for decades - I really hope Trump is playing them to force them to stop funding terrorism, but I'm still very worried, regardless of the multiple d chess Trump may be playing.

What is the Israeli position on all of this? That should give an indication of what Trump's intentions are.

[Robert High Hawk]

ZH reporting that Saudi just gave Qatar 24 hours to comply with 10 demands. Apparently cutting off all funding for Muslim Brotherhood and Al Nusra are on the list. Other demands are unknown at this time.

Also what's unknown is what will happen in 24 hours if they don't comply.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-06...frontation

[porscheguy]

I would be skeptical if Qatar is really funding any terrorist organizations. The last I checked, the Muslim brotherhood was yet another Saudi group (remember the huma abedin connection to them last year.).

All of this Sunni/Shia/terrorist bullshit is a smoke and mirror show to obfuscate from the west the real reason the saudis are hellbent on waging a war against Qatar: they want qatar's natural gas.

Money and resources are the only reason wars are fought. The only way you'll ever end all war is if you make it so no one can get rich from them.

[komatiite]

(06-06-2017 03:45 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Of course it's going to escalate, why else would the Saudis purchase $400 Billion worth of arms? What do you guys think it is for? Just parading it around on the streets?

Remember during the campaign when Trump said to Chuck Todd:

Quote:

GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump said on Sunday that Saudi Arabia is not properly compensating America for its diplomatic partnership.

Trump called on Riyadh to share its vast wealth with the U.S. in exchange for the alliance between the two nations.
“They make a billion dollars a day,” he told host Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“Saudi Arabia, if it weren’t for us, they wouldn’t be here,” Trump said. “They wouldn’t exist.”

“They should pay us,” the billionaire businessman added. “Like it or don’t like it, people have backed Saudi Arabia. What I really mind though is we back it at tremendous expense. We get nothing for it.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/pres...uld-pay-us
August 16 2015


Call me a tinfoil hat conspiracist but I have an inkling of doubt that this "weapons deal" actually took place. Trump sat down with King Salman, told him what the fuck is up, and structured a "weapons deal" to settle the score so the Saudis could save face.

[Rossi]

So, Qatar is funding terrorism and Saudi Arabia is not?

Weren't 16/19 terrorist who blew up Twin Towers Saudi's? Wasn't Osama Bin Ladin Saudi?

There's no election in Saudi Arabia. They execute people left and right in center of the cities. Women can't drive, etc. But, United States is saying Qatar is funding terrorism and Saudi Arabia is perfect altogether.

If I have to pick one country that cause most terrorism in the world, that would be Saudi Arabia. Then, rest of the Arab countries.

[komatiite]

(06-05-2017 02:49 PM)HighSpeed_LowDrag Wrote:  

(06-05-2017 02:36 PM)Hypno Wrote:  

(06-05-2017 11:21 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

This would explosively help raise oil prices if the whole area starts going to war.

that alone is sufficient motive for all of this, although that is probably not what caused this one.

Unless war actually breaks out between the Saudis and Qataris, oil prices are probably more likely to drop, as this diplomatic conflict will cause doubts as to whether OPEC can maintain its recent oil production cuts indefinitely.

Yeah I agree. Gas prices and associated liquids (ethane - propane - butane - pentane - condensate) will be worth keeping an eye on

[RaccoonFace]

Quote:

Turkey's Tayyip Erdogan criticises Qatar sanctions

Gulf countries making 'serious accusations' about Doha supporting 'terrorism', Turkish president says.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan defended Qatar after several countries severed diplomatic ties with it, saying he personally would have intervened if accusations that the tiny Gulf emirate supports "terrorism" were true.

Erdogan stood by Qatar on Tuesday, saying he intends to "develop" ties with the embattled Gulf state hit by sanctions from Saudi Arabia and its allies.

"Let me say at the outset that we do not think the sanctions against Qatar are good," Erdogan said in a speech in Ankara.
Sean Spicer responds to Al Jazeera on Trump tweets about Qatar

"Turkey will continue and will develop our ties with Qatar, as with all our friends who have supported us in the most difficult moments," he added in reference to last year's failed coup.

Turkey has close ties with Qatar but also has good relations with the other Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia.

Erdogan was careful not to criticise Riyadh, calling on the member nations of the Gulf Cooperation Council to "resolve their differences through dialogue".

"Efforts to isolate Qatar ... will not solve any problem," said Erdogan, praising Doha's "cool-headedness" and "constructive approach".

Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates severed diplomatic ties and transport links with Qatar on Monday, accusing it of supporting "extremism".

"Presenting Qatar as a supporter of terrorism is a serious accusation," the Turkish leader said. "I know [Qatar's leaders] well and if that had been the case, I would have been the first head of state to confront them."

http://archive.is/usNaN

[Traktor]

Turkey has approved sending troops to Qatar.

http://theduran.com/breaking-ww3-is-on-t...-to-qatar/

[RIslander]

(06-07-2017 01:24 PM)Traktor Wrote:  

Turkey has approved sending troops to Qatar.

http://theduran.com/breaking-ww3-is-on-t...-to-qatar/

[AManLikePutin]

Ha! Turkey is going to spice things up. a Saudi invasion looks imminent.

On Trump: LOL

So Trump yesterday and today thanked the Saudi regime for identifying the source of terrorism funding (HAHAHAHAHHAHA), now offering to mediate and let them kiss and make up ? (I thought he said Qatar funds terorrism ? )

[/url]

[url=https://twitter.com/AP/status/872514717645930503]

[Matrixdude]

(06-06-2017 09:56 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

Saudi Arabia is playing 4D chess while DJT is playing Tic-Tac-Toe.

If the nigga can't tell that Saudi is the biggest pusher of terrorism worldwide and the 9/11 hijackers are mostly from there, then there's not much we can do to save him.

[Samseau]

[url=https://twitter.com/Alwaleed_Talal/status/869644604857098240][/url]

I found an Saudi's twitter and he had the above posted. It is the "official" Saudi position and is extremely interesting to read. They maintain all innocence to ISIS and that they are working hard to crack down on illegal funders of ISIS.

Believable as Santa Claus, yet I hardly expect Iran to be innocent in this. It is most likely that both Iran and Saudi Arabia both do heavy meddling within the Middle East, both have tremendous amounts of blood on their hands.

We see Islam rising, and not only is Islam at war with the West, but there is a battle of control between Muslims for the throne of Islam itself. The potential for a horrible worldwide caliphate rising out of the ashes of an Iran-Saudi Arabia war is terrifying. It's like we're unleashing evil demons out of the Middle East that have lied dormant for centuries, and the return of Islam as a worldwide military menace will cast a long shadow over the rest of the 21st Century.

[911]

Turmoil, yes, plenty,, but "military menace" is a bit overstated. Saudis are like the characters in Wall-E, fat spoiled people (might be the fattest large country on earth, huge market for American fast food chains). They can't get boots on the ground in Yemen. A hundred Turks could hold off five Saudi divisions in Qatar.

[Blaster]

You have to remember Trump uses twitter as a persuasion tool. It's how he has always used it. He always gives favorable public attention to people who make deals with him. He did that predictably before he was elected and is a big reason why I voted for him.

[Mekorig]

(06-08-2017 01:41 PM)911 Wrote:  

Turmoil, yes, plenty,, but "military menace" is a bit overstated. Saudis are like the characters in Wall-E, fat spoiled people (might be the fattest large country on earth, huge market for American fast food chains). They can't get boots on the ground in Yemen. A hundred Turks could hold off five Saudi divisions in Qatar.

After watching the splendid work of the Saudi armed forces and its mercenaries in Yemen, i would say that a hundred ghetto gangsters could handle 5 Saudi divisions.

[AManLikePutin]

(06-08-2017 01:09 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

[url=https://twitter.com/Alwaleed_Talal/status/869644604857098240][/url]

I found an Saudi's twitter and he had the above posted. It is the "official" Saudi position and is extremely interesting to read. They maintain all innocence to ISIS and that they are working hard to crack down on illegal funders of ISIS.

Believable as Santa Claus, yet I hardly expect Iran to be innocent in this. It is most likely that both Iran and Saudi Arabia both do heavy meddling within the Middle East, both have tremendous amounts of blood on their hands.

We see Islam rising, and not only is Islam at war with the West, but there is a battle of control between Muslims for the throne of Islam itself. The potential for a horrible worldwide caliphate rising out of the ashes of an Iran-Saudi Arabia war is terrifying. It's like we're unleashing evil demons out of the Middle East that have lied dormant for centuries, and the return of Islam as a worldwide military menace will cast a long shadow over the rest of the 21st Century.

Shi'a islam does not believe in a caliphate. It believes in leadership/emergence of the 12th Imam (Mehdi, who is the great great great great great grandson of Muhammed) to come out of hiding and lead the umma and rest of the world to afterlife. (somewhat like how some christians believe Jesus isn't dead and he'll rise from wherever he is one day). They believe the time will come one day (When god is willing), and hence they don't have to aggressively force their faith and beliefs on non-believers...and that's why you never see Shi'a bombing themselves and others in the West or investing in mosques etc.

The concept of caliphacy is one of the major beefs of Sunnis and Shia's. While Sunnis believe in CALIPHATES, Shia's believe in Imams (Who are natural heir of Muhammed).

Post Muhammed's death:

Sunni caliphates: Abu Baker, Omar (the cunt who invaded Persia), Osthman, Ali (Mohammed's son in law who was later executed by Sunnis)

Shia Imams: Ali, Hassan, Hussein, yada yada yada (8 more) , number 12 Mehdi (Whom they say there is no news of his death and that he simply vanished one day with promise to return when the time is right to lead the umma).

[Paracelsus]

(06-08-2017 11:56 PM)AManLikePutin Wrote:  

(06-08-2017 01:09 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

[url=https://twitter.com/Alwaleed_Talal/status/869644604857098240][/url]

I found an Saudi's twitter and he had the above posted. It is the "official" Saudi position and is extremely interesting to read. They maintain all innocence to ISIS and that they are working hard to crack down on illegal funders of ISIS.

Believable as Santa Claus, yet I hardly expect Iran to be innocent in this. It is most likely that both Iran and Saudi Arabia both do heavy meddling within the Middle East, both have tremendous amounts of blood on their hands.

We see Islam rising, and not only is Islam at war with the West, but there is a battle of control between Muslims for the throne of Islam itself. The potential for a horrible worldwide caliphate rising out of the ashes of an Iran-Saudi Arabia war is terrifying. It's like we're unleashing evil demons out of the Middle East that have lied dormant for centuries, and the return of Islam as a worldwide military menace will cast a long shadow over the rest of the 21st Century.

Shi'a islam does not believe in a caliphate. It believes in leadership/emergence of the 12th Imam (Mehdi, who is the great great great great great grandson of Muhammed) to come out of hiding and lead the umma and rest of the world to afterlife. (somewhat like how some christians believe Jesus isn't dead and he'll rise from wherever he is one day). They believe the time will come one day (When god is willing), and hence they don't have to aggressively force their faith and beliefs on non-believers...and that's why you never see Shi'a bombing themselves and others in the West or investing in mosques etc.

I'm glad to see you restricted Shia activities to non-believers and the West, mainly because there's a fair number of Shia terror groups -- Tehrik-e-Jafaria, Sipah-e-Mohammed for example -- but they seem content to blow up Sunnis rather than anyone else, and doubtless the nails in their nail bombs can detect when they're approaching an innocent person and adjust their trajectory.

I'm being generous and excluding Hezbollah since they seem rather focused on killing Israelis, though their makeup is mainly Shia with a smattering of Christians.

And jihad still exists in Shia, in modified form. Per Leftiepedia:

Quote:

In Shia Islam, Jihad is one of the ten Practices of the Religion,[19] (though not one of the five pillars). Traditionally, Twelver Shi'a doctrine has differed from that of Sunni on the concept of jihad, with jihad being "seen as a lesser priority" in Shia theology and "armed activism" by Shia being "limited to a person's immediate geography".[128]

According to a number of sources,[which?] Shia doctrine taught that jihad (or at least full scale jihad[129]) can only be carried out under the leadership of the Imam,[130] (who will return from occultation to bring absolute justice to the world).[59] However, "struggles to defend Islam" are permissible before his return.[129]

At least one important contemporary Shia figure, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the leader of the Iranian Revolution and founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, wrote a treatise on the "Greater Jihad" (i.e., internal/personal struggle against sin).[131]

Because of their history of being oppressed, Shias also associated jihad with certain passionate features, notably in the remembrance of Ashura. Mahmoud M. Ayoub says:

Quote:

In Islamic tradition jihad or the struggle in the way of God, whether as armed struggle, or any form of opposition of the wrong, is generally regarded as one of the essential requirements of a person's faith as a Muslim. Shi'î tradition carried this requirement a step further, making jihad one of the pillars or foundations (arkan) of religion. If, therefore, Husayn's struggle against the Umayyad regime must be regarded as an act of jihad, then, In the mind of devotees, the participation of the community in his suffering and its ascent to the truth of his message must also be regarded as an extension of the holy struggle of the Imam himself. The hadith from which we took the title of this chapter states this point very clearly. Ja'far al-Sadiq is said to have declared to al-Mufaddal, one of his closest disciples, 'The sigh of the sorrowful for the wrong done us is an act of praise (tasbih) [of God], his sorrow for us is an act of worship, and his keeping of our secret is a struggle (jihad) in the way of God'; the Imâm then added, 'This hadith should be inscribed in letters of gold'.[132]

and

Hence, the concept of jihad (holy struggle) gained a deeper and more personal meaning. Whether through weeping, the composition and recitation of poetry, showing compassion and doing good to the poor or carrying arms, the Shi'i Muslim saw himself helping the Imam in his struggle against the wrong (zulm) and gaining for himself the same merit (thawab) of those who actually fought and died for him. The ta'ziyah, in its broader sense the sharing of the entire life of the suffering family of Muhammad, has become for the Shi'i community the true meaning of compassion.[133]

Jihad has been used by Shia Islamists in the 20th Century: Ruhollah Khomeini declared jihad on Iraq in the Iran–Iraq War, and the Shia bombers of Western embassies and peacekeeping troops in Lebanon called themselves, "Islamic Jihad". Nonetheless it has not had the high-profile or global significance it had among Sunni Islamists.[128] (The Afghan jihad for example was led and populated by Sunni Muslims.)

According to The National, this changed with the Syrian Civil War, where, "for the first time in the history of Shia Islam, adherents are seeping into another country to fight in a holy war to defend their doctrine."[128] Thus, Shia and Sunni fighters are waging jihad against each other in Syria.[citation needed]

[Agastya]

Sure, but Shi'ite militias like Hezbollah have rarely ever launched terrorist attacks on the West or even in the East. The only notable examples I can think of were Hezbollah bombing a UN peace brigade (including a ton of U.S soldiers), a Jewish center in Argentina, and a Bosnian bus full of Jewish tourists (or something of the sort). All atrocities, but they pale in comparison to the havoc wreaked by Saudi and Pakistani-based terrorist groups. You'll never see Shi'ites launching insurgencies in Southeast Asia, stabbing up train stations in China, or slaughtering people in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh. They also never launch attacks into Europe or North America.

The Shi'ites are also allowed to draw pictures of people, including prophets. In Lebanon I saw giant posters depicting the family of 'Ali, their patron saint and Muhammad's cousin (also hugely important in Sunni Islam). I never saw anything remotely comparable in Jordan, Morocco, or the UAE.

All that being said, the Shi'ite regime in Iran is still barbaric as fuck. One of my Lyft drivers the other day was an Iranian Christian who had fled Iran back in the 90's. The discrimination that they put him through sounded horrific, some 1920's Jim Crow shit. The regime is a lot more chilled out than it was back in the 80's and 90's, but still...we should really leave this part of the world to its own devices. I don't understand why we even deal with barbarians like this when we could devote our time and resources to building up our own countries.

[Rossi]