• Wednesday, May 22, 2019

Wikileaks: S Arabia had urged US to attack Iran

Discussion in 'World Affairs' started by Fighter488, Nov 29, 2010.

  1. Fighter488

    Fighter488 FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,050
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    Ratings:
    +0 / 571 / -0
    Wikileaks: S Arabia had urged US to attack Iran



    London: Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region urged US to attack Iran and destroy its nuclear facilities, The Guardian reported citing the secret US diplomatic communications leaked Sunday by whistle-blowing website Wikileaks.

    The revelations of secret memos from US embassies across the Middle East expose behind-the-scenes pressures in the scramble to contain the Islamic Republic, which the US, Arab states and Israel suspect is close to acquiring nuclear weapons.

    King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia was recorded as having "frequently exhorted the US to attack Iran to put an end to its nuclear weapons programme", said the paper which was among the few media outlets that have been given access to the over 250,000 diplomatic cables by Wikileaks.

    "He told you (Americans) to cut off the head of the snake," the Saudi ambassador to Washington, Adel al-Jubeir said, according to a report on Abdullah's meeting with the US general David Petraeus in April 2008.

    King Abdullah warned the Americans that if Iran developed nuclear weapons "everyone in the region would do the same, including Saudi Arabia".

    The documents also describe how other Arab allies of the US have secretly agitated for military action against Tehran.

    Israel's defence minister Ehud Barak estimated in June 2009 that there was a window of "between six and 18 months from now in which stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons might still be viable". After that, Barak said, "any military solution would result in unacceptable collateral damage."

    Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, warned in February that if diplomatic efforts failed, "we risk nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, war prompted by an Israeli strike, or both".

    Israeli's military intelligence chief, Major General Amos Yadlin, warned last year: "Israel is not in a position to underestimate Iran and be surprised like the US was on Sep 11 2001."

    "If the Iranians continue to protect and harden their nuclear sites, it will be more difficult to target and damage them," the US embassy reported Israeli defence officials as saying in November 2009.

    The US embassy reported: "The IDF (Israeli Defence Force), however, strikes us as more inclined than ever to look toward a military strike, whether launched by Israel or by us, as the only way to destroy or even delay Iran's plans."

    The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, told US officials in May last year that he and the Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak, agreed that a nuclear Iran would lead others in the region to develop nuclear weapons, resulting in "the biggest threat to non-proliferation efforts since the Cuban missile crisis".

    The leaked US cables say that officials in Jordan and Bahrain have openly called for Iran's nuclear programme to be stopped by any means, including military.

    Leaders in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt termed Iran as "evil", an "existential threat" and a power that "is going to take us to war".

    In a conversation with a US diplomat, King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa of Bahrain "argued forcefully for taking action to terminate their (Iran's) nuclear programme, by whatever means necessary. That programme must be stopped. The danger of letting it go on is greater than the danger of stopping it."

    Zeid Rifai, then president of the Jordanian senate, told a senior US official: "Bomb Iran, or live with an Iranian bomb. Sanctions, carrots, incentives won't matter."

    In talks with US officials, Abu Dhabi crown prince Sheikh Mohammad bin Zayed favoured action against Iran, sooner rather than later. "I believe this guy is going to take us to war ... It's a matter of time. Personally, I cannot risk it with a guy like (President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad. He is young and aggressive."

    Source: IANS
    Wikileaks: S Arabia had urged US to attack Iran -  International News ? News ? MSN India
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  2. GUNS-N- ROSES

    GUNS-N- ROSES FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,604
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 796 / -0
    oh god. so much so for islamic brotherhood!!!
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  3. LaBong

    LaBong ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,507
    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Ratings:
    +4 / 8,074 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Seems Iran scaring the sh!t out of everyone in ME.
     
  4. luckyyy

    luckyyy SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    2,337
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 549 / -1
    so , this is it ....
    Wikileaks is out...

    but no india related news so far........or will be kept waiting..
     
  5. Ammyy

    Ammyy BANNED

    Messages:
    7,394
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2010
    Ratings:
    +1 / 6,354 / -14
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Yar any one know those websites on which these documents released ??
     
  6. Durran3

    Durran3 FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,010
    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2008
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,223 / -0
    Saudi's are the true cancer of society and to the entire world
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 6
  7. GUNS-N- ROSES

    GUNS-N- ROSES FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,604
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 796 / -0
    come on dude now u r being too hard on saudis. remember saudi govt has bailed u out many times in terms of financial crisis.
     
  8. TechLahore

    TechLahore FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,741
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,078 / -0
    Let's lap up these leaks as gospel and pretend they reflect the true picture of reality. Whatever floats your boat.

    These "leaks" were given to Assange by a serving member of the US Military, right?
     
  9. Thomas

    Thomas PROFESSIONAL

    Messages:
    2,684
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2009
    Ratings:
    +0 / 1,200 / -0
    lol, a Mod is saying it's a conspiracy and the leaks are all a ruse?
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  10. muse

    muse PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    13,019
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Ratings:
    +0 / 12,519 / -0
    Some Pakistanis have a very difficult time coming to grips with the reality of what Arabia of the Saud family is - their first problem is to imagine that Arabia fo the Saud family is a real country and not a fiefdom, I mean the country itself belongs to a single family which is allied to a radical religious movement, among whose contribution to Islamic thought (or what passes for it) are ideas such as Takfir.

    The second problem Pakistani compatriots have a problem coming to grips with is that to the arbi, Ummah means other arabs, not the Ajam, and certainly not any Bakistani or Hindi - but our compatriots derive a certain comfort in denial, their slumber is less painful to them than is reality.

    But not only is Ummah a nasty idea to the arbi, to the rulers, it's a convenient fiction, a opium of the masses if you will, in the meantime, the rulers of the arbi serfs, identify not with Muslims but with ferengis, not with brother Iran but with it's enemies.

    The danger for Pakistanis in this ought to be clear but is not - insurrection and terrorism in Pakistan is being supported by these arbis and the day is not far, unless challenged that it could plunge Pakistan into civil war, indeed the arbi are a the source of cancer eating away at Muslims
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 6
  11. jha

    jha ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    10,967
    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2009
    Ratings:
    +0 / 9,324 / -8
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    very well written post..
     
  12. TechLahore

    TechLahore FULL MEMBER

    Messages:
    1,741
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,078 / -0
    Wow. Why so defensive?

    No. What I am saying is that these leaks reflect a sliver of reality. For one, they only reflect US cables and do not represent what the other side took away from the exchange. Second, they do not provide a complete picture even from the US perspective. They give a glimpse into a fraction of the documentation which reflects various meetings and exchanges, and that too just by the State dept. For example, if Gen. Petraeus is part of a meeting, there is US Military documentation of the exchange also. These leaks don't reflect those views.

    You cannot discount the possibility that what was fed to Assange is a controlled subset, or what was fed to the US serviceman was a controlled subset. After all, the very essence of these leaks is that there is more to the news than meets the eye. How can you completely rule out with 100% confidence that these documents - while actual cables - weren't filtered somewhere.

    Finally, these leaks are also widely being misreported in the popular press and people are taking the misreported versions as gospel. Sparklingway just did a nice post on how the NYT has changed the actual text in the leaks to the word "progress" in context of the King Abdullah/Zardari quote. That makes a *world* of a difference. Considering that no private citizen has the resources to inspect 250,000 cables on their own time, they will simply take what is being fed to them by the popular press. And early on in this process we have evidence (NYT, case in point) that the material is being molded and malformed to suit specific interests.

    To me, so far these leaks don't really have a shocker. If you think a conversation between a US diplomat and an Arab sheikh reflects 100% of the Arab sheikh's thinking on the subject being discussed, then you are quite mistaken. People usually tailor their words based on who they are talking to. These same Arab sheikhs will say interesting things about the US and/or Israel when they are talking to a different (even if private) audience. I just don't think a limited sliver of the State dept's abbreviated cables should be taken by anyone as the true and complete picture of reality.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  13. Awesome

    Awesome RETIRED

    Messages:
    22,046
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Ratings:
    +5 / 20,604 / -0
    Its what the US documented... How much of it was fact and how much of it was US interpretation?

    Not counting the conspiracy angle, they have not been claimed by the US state, but by an anti-establishment website. It's interesting, but not fact.

    But nonetheless, I will admit, its pretty much expected.
     
  14. Developereo

    Developereo PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT

    Messages:
    14,100
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Ratings:
    +25 / 15,835 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Australia
    and

    Well, the US should attack Iran then, or let Israel do the honors.

    It will be a selfless act of generosity by these good Samaritans for the benefit of the Muslims, won't it?
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  15. LaBong

    LaBong ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    8,507
    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Ratings:
    +4 / 8,074 / -1
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    Well last time it was Iraq. Let's see who is used this time by Sauds and US to quell the Iranians.

    Admit it. Muslims are not homogeneous lot. Why blame US when they can be as ruthless as to use Chemical weapon against each other. Guess, it has more to do with geography than religion.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2010