Saudi army chief replaced on Raheel Sharif’s recommendation: report

[Zarvan]

JEDDAH – A local newspaper made a stunning revelation regarding the role of former chief of army staff and head of Islamic Military Alliance General (retd) Raheel Sharif in change of top command of Saudi Arabia’s army.

The Daily Khabrain newspaper claimed that replacement of Saudi Arabia’s army chief was conducted following the recommendation of Raheel Sharif in order to develop better working relations with the alliance.

Before the formation of a proper army for Saudi-led alliance, Sharif wanted a motivated commander of Saudi Arabia’s ground forces who is able to defend the country from the front.

The newspaper added that the Saudi King also desired to send the former Saudi army head Lieutenant General Eid bin Awad Al-Shalawi on rest due to his some wrong decision during ongoing Yemen war that damaged the national interests directly, besides causing loss of many lives.

The daily claimed that the Saudi King Shah Salman has been reprimanding the ex-chief for conducting operations against a minority sect and its consequences but no new strategy was chalked out.

Keeping in view such failures, General Raheel Sharif recommended the appointment of new head of army. Later, the Saudi government decided to appoint Fahad Bin Turkey as the new army chief.

The major step depicts the importance given by the Saudi Arabia to the head of Islamic Military Alliance in key matters. It is worth noting that Saudi government had given invitation to Iran to join the military alliance on his suggestion.

https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/pak...aced-on-raheel-sharifs-recommendation-report/

 

[StrategicPak]

I see Muslim unity in near future, Insha'Allah

 

[StrategicPak]

A specific lobby is active against Pak Army and Raheel Sharif and IMAFT

 

[Jf Thunder]

How credible is the source?

 

[Sinnerman108]

JEDDAH – A local newspaper made a stunning revelation regarding the role of former chief of army staff and head of Islamic Military Alliance General (retd) Raheel Sharif in change of top command of Saudi Arabia’s army.

The Daily Khabrain newspaper claimed that replacement of Saudi Arabia’s army chief was conducted following the recommendation of Raheel Sharif in order to develop better working relations with the alliance.

Before the formation of a proper army for Saudi-led alliance, Sharif wanted a motivated commander of Saudi Arabia’s ground forces who is able to defend the country from the front.

The newspaper added that the Saudi King also desired to send the former Saudi army head Lieutenant General Eid bin Awad Al-Shalawi on rest due to his some wrong decision during ongoing Yemen war that damaged the national interests directly, besides causing loss of many lives.

The daily claimed that the Saudi King Shah Salman has been reprimanding the ex-chief for conducting operations against a minority sect and its consequences but no new strategy was chalked out.

Keeping in view such failures, General Raheel Sharif recommended the appointment of new head of army. Later, the Saudi government decided to appoint Fahad Bin Turkey as the new army chief.

The major step depicts the importance given by the Saudi Arabia to the head of Islamic Military Alliance in key matters. It is worth noting that Saudi government had given invitation to Iran to join the military alliance on his suggestion.

https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/pak...aced-on-raheel-sharifs-recommendation-report/

No that is neither true, nor possible.

And to add, no one reads daily khabrian. It is a low circulation paper in urdu run by some old farts
whose CD is stuck in 1982.

Knowing how things work in Saudi, I can tell you to delete the thread,
what you are mentioning is totally baseless and a joke.

Gen sharif is in Riaydh, enjoying , moving and picking

 

[Zarvan]

How credible is the source?

This is reported by some local Arab paper

No that is neither true, nor possible.

And to add, no one reads daily khabrian. It is a low circulation paper in urdu run by some old farts
whose CD is stuck in 1982.

Knowing how things work in Saudi, I can tell you to delete the thread,
what you are mentioning is totally baseless and a joke.

Gen sharif is in Riaydh, enjoying , moving and picking

The news is true

 

[AUz]

Islamic Military Alliance? Why not just a military alliance.

Mostly consisting of Islamic nations and tasked with protecting Muslim interests against terrorism.

Strange, giving a religious bent to it when accusing others of being "crusaders", or "crusading armies"

"Accusing"?

Western armies are crusaders by definition. Even Bush called Iraq war a 'crusade'

Btw, what and who is this alliance designed to protect?

3 to 4 Muslim countries have been engulfed in terrorism/internal wars. Alliance is there to protect Muslim world from this menace.

is it Sunni states vs Shia states?

No.

Also, there are no "Sunni states" and "Shia states"....There are only Muslim/Islamic states.

There's no "Sunni-Shia" divide. It's "Iran vs Arabs" divide that predates Islam. Modern Sunni vs Shia conflict is a byproduct of Persians vs Arabs conflict.

 

[salarsikander]

Islamic Military Alliance? Why not just a military alliance. Strange, giving a religious bent to it when accusing others of being "crusaders", or "crusading armies"

Btw, what and who is this alliance designed to protect?
is it Sunni states vs Shia states?

Well if not calling it crusading armies has made any difference. They were in essence against Islamic countries. They happen to have fancy name as NATO or coalition. So what's the burn ?

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

3 to 4 Muslim countries have been engulfed in terrorism/internal wars. Alliance is there to protect Muslim world from this menace.

Internal wars pitted by their own sometimes on opposite sides.

 

[The SC]

Then why are you helping the crusading army or is it a sell out in exchange for our lifestyles?


No burn, we get paid regardless. I do find it ironical that an alliance was openly named with a religious bend, for only Islamic countries to be members yet supplied its finest weaponry by Christian nations.

So what did you expect them to do, go defend the US or EU, and against whom?
Also looking at the recent Christian uproar against Turkey in Europe, and the EU leadership saying openly that Turkey as a Muslim country has no place in the EU (Covert Christian economic coalition)..One can conclude easily that The Muslims labelled their coalition with the Islamic word to make a statement that it does not trust the Christian world for its defence against terrorism, because it is clear that the latter plays in the hands of the Judaeo-Christian world..Look at what has happened in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen where "Christian" forces intervened without any success, just to leave more chaos and destruction behind them and where the Muslims had to intervene themselves anyhow to get some semblance of peace.. not to forget Afghanistan, Pakistan or Malaysian civilian airplanes disappearing in the Indian Ocean or being shot down over Europe, because of the Malaysian Muslim stance against Christianisation of its populace.. If one can not see a religious war being covertly directed/waged against the Islamic nations, then he is pretending to be blind or it comes from ignorance of the too many facts pointing to this covert war..
As for weapons, the International market is quite open, it is a matter of competition where capitalism take precedence over religion..

 

[takeitwithyou]

Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen

We have not invaded Syria or Yemen. When we do invade they ultimately become pro-America. I would say that is a freaking awesome outcome- would you agree? Throughout our history, it has happened so. Japan, Germany, Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq, Lybia...soon hopefully N Korea

Malaysian civilian airplanes disappearing in the Indian Ocean or being shot down over Europe, because of the Malaysian Muslim stance against Christianisation of its populace

I was waiting for that infamous conspiratorial trait you guys are known for to show sooner than later. Thank you for not disappointing.

 

[The SC]

We have not invaded Syria or Yemen. When we do invade they ultimately become pro-America. I would say that is a freaking awesome outcome- would you agree? Throughout our history, it has happened so. Japan, Germany, Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq, Lybia...soon hopefully N Korea


I was waiting for that infamous conspiratorial trait you guys are known for to show sooner than later. Thank you for not disappointing.

Who was bombing Syria and Yemen then?
You dream too much of people becoming pro-Americans after being invaded by the US!
In Iraq, you had to pack and leave or face a whole population fighting your presence..
Japan, you had to use an atomic bomb to subdue it, they will never forget that!
Vietnam, you lost the war, so what are you talking about?
Germany you had Russia to invade it, otherwise, no chance..
The rest, like Somalia or Libya... are still unstable countries, half of them like Russia and the other half wants US weapons.. So you might be confusing, they want American weapons and tech with pro-American per se..
NK, you should not count on that at all, the only thing they ask you is to stop your too numerous manoeuvers with SK near their shores, and the word or message might be coming from China..

And as far as conspiracies are concerned, it was proven many times that the US has conspired with others, the example of Iraq WMD lies can Enlighten you.. So please do not try to cover the obvious, all humans have shown that infamous conspirational trait throughout history, some in short term actions, some in medium term, and the Judeo-Christians had proven to work on long and very long term conspiracies.. like the creation of Usrael, the destruction of Iraq and the 11/11 conspiracy to attack Afghanistan.. there are hundreds of examples on which you can enlighten yourself if you study history, politics and military matters..

 

[salarsikander]

yet supplied its finest weaponry by Christian nations.

So how is that Ironic ? Its just good business. The very same weapon is used by Terrorists to butcher the Christians in Afghanistan. Didn't you know that ?
That is why out of sheer frustration Christian USa had to use Moab on rag tag terrorists

When we do invade they ultimately become pro-America

Like Afghanistan and Iraq ?

Then why are you helping the crusading army

Oh yes we helped Crusdaing Army in Afghanistan and look what has happened there

Crusaders had to use Moab On a guerilla fighters. Even after so long armed invasion, we have seen insignificant results

we get paid regardless.

Paid by ? Mercenaries do get paid though

 

[takeitwithyou]

Who was bombing Syria and Yemen then?
You dream too much of people becoming pro-Americans after being invaded by the US!
In Iraq, you had to pack and live of face a whole population fighting your presence..
Japan, you had to use an atomic bomb to subdue it, they will never forget that!
Vietnam, you lost the war, so what are you talking about?
Germany you had Russia to invade it, otherwise, no chance..
The rest, like Somalia or Libya... are still unstable countries, half of them like Russia and the other half wants US weapons.. So you might be confusing, they want American weapons and tech with pro-American per se.. NK, you should not count on that at all, the only thing they ask you is to stop your too numerous manoeuvers with SK near their shores, and the word or message might be coming from China..

And as far as conspiracies are concerned, it was proven many times that the US has conspired with others, the example of Iraq WMD lies can Enlighten you.. So please do not try to cover the obvious, all humans have shown that infamous conspirational trait throughout history, some in short term actions, some in medium term, and the Judeo-Christians had proven to work on long and very long term conspiracies.. like the creation of Usrael, the destruction of Iraq and the 11/11 conspiracy to attack Afghanistan.. there are hundreds of examples on which you can enlighten yourself if you study history, politics and military matters..

Bombing is not same as invading. We bomb several regions in Pakistan too through drones, we have NOT invaded Pakistan. We did invade those countries I listed.

It's you my man that seems to mix your conspiracies with several assumptions. There is no "half like" Russians in Libya or Iraq. They are welcome to do business but it's America which has a strong foothold in those countries.

 

[salarsikander]

We bomb several regions in Pakistan too through drones

With our permission, using our defined coordinates