if we were fighting a war on terrorism, wouldn't it have made more sense to go to saudi arabia?

Question

i'm not saying i'd have advocated either war, i'm just wondering what the war lovers think.

14 of the 19 9/11 terrorists came from saudi arabia. saudi arabia has the largest AQ following. saudi government is doing nothing to stop the anti american terrorist problem (saddam killed terrorists in his country). bin laden himself is a saudi.

is the reason we don't go to saudi because private saudi investors invest billions and billions of dollars in u.s. stock?

g man: an "ally" that harbors terrorists

Answer 1

Theyre one of our only allies, the hijackers weren't envoys of the Saudi Government they were crazed Islamic hijackers

Answer 2

Yes it deffinately would have but we rushed into afghanistan as soon as it came apparent OBL was responsible If we had actually have taken a second to think we would have realized this important fact. As for why we invaded Iraq instead of sadia arabia Bush was being a coward The saudis are
1. Important to the economy as you said
2. They are more powerful and more of a threat than iraq and Bush and his cabinet were being the bully of the playgroung picking on the more vulnerable
3. Bush was following daddys footsteps
As you said no war is good but If we had to start one it would make sense to invade the saudis

Answer 3

The war started in Saudi Arabia, Desert Storm...1989-90's...

In 1990's, after the Soviet defeat, generals like Musharraf dispatched thousands of those fighters to wage a guerilla campaign in Kashmir. Many trained across the border in Afghanistan, in the same camps that Al Qaeda had set up unde the Taliban.
After 9/11 Musharraf promised Washington that he would cut off support for such groups, including the Talibans. Early on, he authorized the arrests of several top Qaeda leaders in Pakistani cities, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the MASTERMIND OF THE Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, and Aba Zubaydah, a top Qaeda orgranizer. But Musharraf's efforts have always been somewhat halfhearted, constrained by the deep sympathies that many of his countrymen have for jihadists. For decades Pakistanis were taught that the guerillas were Muslim heroes, fighting for national honor and security. Such loyalties cannot be turned off like a tap. Several of the militants' onetime spymasters, both inside and outside the government, maintain links to their former charges. The security services will go after certain figures, particularly foreign Qaeda fighters, but ask others simply to lie low. Many officials , even many ordinary citizens, still think the jihadists should be preserved for future use as a strategic weapon, especially against India, long after America's War on Terror is over.

"In Washington, a senior administrative official involved in counterterrorism said U.S. intelligence is chronically fearful that Islamists might get hold of nuclear material, equipment of know-how in Pakistan. He recalled that after 9/11, a group of rogue Pakistani nuclear scientists met with Osama Bin Laden. "Given that history, we continue to look at this issue very closely." he said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue."

"The most Dangerous nation in the World isn't Iraq...IT'S PAKISTAN...."

Answer 4

While they are clearly paying for terrorism on a large scale, we need to save them for later- we cannot afford to destabalize that country right now.\

Bin Laden is a Saudi who hates Saudi Arabia so that isnt a good argument.

Yes they need to eventually be dealt with

Answer 5

No. As you stated in your question, we are fighting a war on terror - not a war against any individual country.
We are in the Middle East trying to end an ideology of hatred and domination - our intent isn't to battle a country, but rather to battle the Islamic, radical militants - where ever they are from.

Answer 6

Bush had to deal with the fact that this nations economy runs on oil. It would be idiotic and extremely detrimental to our country to go after Saudi Arabia. Bush didnt create our dependance on foreign oil, but when devising strategic foreign policy he does have to deal with and consider our economy and our oil dependancy.

Answer 7

Yes of course it would that's if anyone had been telling the truth but of course no one was.

Anyway, the US owns Saudi so it would be rather ridiculous to invade it. Rather like invading Hawaii.

Answer 8

In Bush's mind, the Saudis are good terrorists.

http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l176/musiclover1992/BushSaudiKing.jpg

Answer 9

Let's see you try to find an underground terrorist cell in a country buried in sand.

Answer 10

The answer is because private saudi investors invest billions and billions of dollars in u.s. stock.