shouldn't we be invading Saudi Arabia?

Question

The man behind 9/11..... Osama, a Saudi.

Majority of the hijackers... Saudi.

The funding for terroism from.... Saudi royal family.

So why isn't Bush invading Saudi Arabia, which has direct links to 9/11?

Yet he invades Iraq which had no links to 9/11 or Al Qaeda.

Answer 1

Here's a concept: maybe the US shouldn't be invading anyone.

Answer 2

well that's the 64 million dollar question isn't it?

The Saudis after all are quite clearly related to Satin himself,, I mean just look at their beards?..


the better questions we should all be asking ...
why did we invade Iraq?
why did we have publicly viewed plans to invade Iraq before 9/11?
why did we embrace the idea of a "pearl harbor" type event in order to get into the region?
Why Did Condy Rice lie under oath about "never having imagined" that someone would use jetliners as weapons when we were in fact training that very morning for just such an attack?????
Why was all the forensic evidence carted away,
Why did Popular Mechanics a Time Warner owned venture write a book debunking only small portions of one out of over 43 films made about that days events?
???????????????????

The whys are endless and the silence is deafening.

Answer 3

Why did no one ask this 4 years ago when we were being sold the war against Iraq? Logical connections are missing for many of the actions of the US, which may be why so many people suspect conspiracies.

The Saudis did crack down on their domestic terrorists a year or two after 9-11 following a bombing in Mecca.

Answer 4

Just as he was during the Vietnam War, Dubai Dubya is a coward and a traitor. The Exxon Protectorate of Saudi Arabia is our key enemy. We must assassinate the Royal Family and anyone who has the button to waste the oilfields. Then we seize the oil, which costs only a penny a gallon to produce, and bankrupt Islam by confiscating all its other petroterrorist resources. China, Russia, and any oil-consuming civilized state can join in. But Exxon, which owns the GOP, piggybacks on OPEC price-gouging. Exxon is treason and must be nationalized.

Answer 5

Saudi involvement in terrorism and extremism should be addressed, yet why does it continuously could start up with bombs? Bombing Saudi Arabia is the main suitable thank you to start an excellent conflict. Mecca and Medina are placed in that united states of america, so an attack there could in basic terms approximately particularly be seen as an attack on Islam. do we surely need yet another conflict between the faiths? have not we had sufficient of them? Have any of them ever surely solved something? many countries have vast oil reserves. do we get sufficient oil from something of the international and go away the Saudis out? that would have an effect (if it somewhat is achievable).

Answer 6

One word "oil". Yes, there was an initial plan that Saudi Arabia was held responsible for 9-11, but after the Saudis found out they were on America's hit list, bush invited the king to his ranch in Texas. "let's be friends again"

Answer 7

Osama has consistently denied perpetrating 9-11, even amongst his own people.

"I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks." Osama bin Laden in an interview with a Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper, Ummat, on September 28, 2001. (Ummat)

The "secret government" bin Laden is referring to is the folks occupying the very top seats in our government who are all founding members of PNAC, the Project for a New American Century, http://www.newamericancentury.org who in a white paper published exactly one year before 9-11, declared that America needs to show the world it's military might. They believe that through American military and financial power, we should essentially threaten/blackmail the world into forming a Pax-Americana, the new world order, essentially an American global hegemony.

The white paper, entitled, "Rebuilding America's Defenses," was published September 20, 2000. In it they state, "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor.” One year later we had 9-11.

When Bush assumed the Presidency, the men who created and nurtured the world domination schemes of PNAC became the men who run the Pentagon, the Defense Department and the White House. On September 11th, when the Towers came down, these men saw their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy. On September 20th 2001 (exactly one year to the day of PNAC's paper), Bush released the "National Security Strategy of the United States of America." It is an ideological match to PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" report issued a year earlier.

Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with ex-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is the ideological father of the group. Bruce Jackson, a PNAC director, served as a Pentagon official for Ronald Reagan before leaving government service to take a leading position with the weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin. William Kristol, famed conservative writer for the Weekly Standard, is also a co-founder of the group. The Weekly Standard is owned by Ruppert Murdoch, who also owns international media giant Fox News.

The greatest threat to our nation, our way of life, and our liberty, is from within. Even our forefathers understood that, and wrote our Constitution accordingly. Bush's changes in our Constitution reflect that, by further empowering the presidency, further isolating our government from oversight by the people, and by severly degrading the protections American citizens have against unfair and unlawful actions perpetrated against our citizens by our own government.

Nazi Reichsmarschall Hermann Goering, 2nd in command of the Third Reich, and commander of the Luftwaffe:
"It is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

Answer 8

No.
As long as we are getting oil from the Saudis, there is no reason to invade them. /sarcasm
It is true that many 9/11 hijackers and their financial backers are Saudis but we do not believe in collective guilt and they have a US-friendly government in place.

Answer 9

Good point. The problem is that our politicians here, both current and past, are to filthy rich with kick back money and what not from the Saudi's.

Answer 10

Pull USA troops completely out of Iraq would make their military have to preform or get wasted by the more dominate Shiite's! They should have been the ones involved instead of our troops any way!