The Syria Analysis Thread

10 posts

Niccolo and Donkey
Don't listen to Ango: every Saudi outreach program has resulted in extreme Islamism. It's part of the deal that they've struck with Salafists who tried to overthrow them back in 1979: don't fuck with us and we'll fund your adventures in every place from Afghanistan to Bosnia to Chechnya to Libya to Burma to Syria.
Angocachi

The Saudi government is not Islamist, nor does it support Islamists. Since the collapse of actual Islamic government, regimes with majority Muslim populations have taken two roads;
1. Declare themselves a secular state and stomp the heads of anyone who opposes it.
2. Run a secular state, but declare themselves an Islamic state because they'll get their heads stomped if they don't.
Over the last half century many of the overtly secular regimes have appeased the Islamists and wider Islamism in the public by making psuedo-Islamic declarations and legislation; Muammar Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, Bashar Al Assad, Hosni Mubarak, etc.
On the other hand, the Saudi regime began as a nearly puritanical Islamic state because it needed the Wahhabists. Since then it has moved away from Islamism, but to keep from being overthrown by a public that demands Shariah, they've made mouth pieces of the clerics and scholars because if the mosques approve the masses will not differ.
Outsiders see that the Saudi government funds mosques around the world, but they're selling rat poison from ice cream trucks. The same is true of the other GCC monarchies.

There is a reason the Saudi royalty has faced multiple coup attempts led by members of the elite, Osama Bin Laden and his brother are representative of a wider discontent that reaches from the bottom to the top of that society.

Niccolo and Donkey
SteamshipTime SweetLeftFoot Dionysian Thomas777 Angocachi President Camacho

Just another case in which the USA and Salafist Islaimsts are on the same side. Just like in Afghanistan in the 80s and 90s, just like in Bosnia, Chechnya, Uzbekistan, Libya, etc.

Al-Qaeda leader publicly sides with Syrian opposition

[​IMG]

President Camacho
President Camacho
Just because the Saudis are hypocrites with domestic policy doesn't nullify what they're doing abroad. From a foreign policy standpoint, the fact that they're supporting Sunni rebel groups around the world isn't somehow negated by the fact that the House of Saud themselves are irreligious scumbags.
SweetLeftFoot

I remember being in Damascus and walking to the Christian Quarter. It struck me how difficult it would be to defend against a baying mob. No wonder the Christians are supporting Assad. Most of them if not literally would have personally met and assisted Christian refugees from Iraq. They know what will happen in the event of a chaotic overhrow.

Angocachi
They are two sides vying for the same prize, just as in Bosnia and Libya (where the Salafis actually took to killing NATO agents). It is the same as in Russia, where Communists and Nationalists opposed to Putin see on their shoulder US sponsored exiles and other such blog faggots.
You've never shown me how the US was on the side of Salafis in Chechnya or Bosnia.
The US assisted Georgia in combating Chechen Jihadists and flushing them out of Pankisi Gorge.
How was the US on the same side as Jihadists in Uzbekistan?
You can only see the world in terms of NATO-MNNA vs SCO-CIS, and their lesser satellites. There are third, fourth, and fifth parties and the world is not perfectly polarized.

Camacho,
There are in Saudi Arabia opposing factions, Qutbists and regime loyalists. Whenever there is a Jihad abroad, the Qutbists will throw money and fighters at it, but the monarchy does not support Salafists anywhere but to put out counterfeits, 'moderates' and so on. If you're familiar with the discourse in Saudi Arabia, and the Arab world, you'd see it.
Nic on the other hand believes in an imaginary pact between Jihadists and the Saudi royalty, where they support them abroad if they don't attack within. No such deal was made. Jihadists in Yemen, Iraq, Syria etc are there because the monarch's SS stomped them in the KSA, under Bush Jr and before. Now the king has the real prospect of AQ statelets on two borders.

As for AQ trying to stay relevant. Do you think that they're not relevant?
nuclear launch detected

While doing some hardcore Jew naming today on a nerd forum full of skinny fat pasty white liberal betas, I've come to the realization that the grand strategy USA/Israel/NATO is that collective of failed arab states not unlike Somalia is preferable to a semi modern, highly centralized one like that of Assad's Syria. This is the ultimate wet dream of the neo con Jews I think. Destabilize Arab states that are hostile to Israel, embroil them into a perpetual civil war and keep it that way. Forever.

For example, Somalia has been a failed state for the last 20 years and hasn't posed a serious military threat to its neighbours since the 1970s when it had the second largest army in Africa after Egypt and almost captured the capital of Ethiopia during the Ogden war (until the Soviets and Cubans intervened to save Ethiopia). Since than the Ethiopians have been intervening, playing off tribes against each other, making sure that Somalia never gets back on its feet.

Niccolo and Donkey
Angocachi
Britain & America do not hope it will be democratic.

Al Qaeda's Saudi allies are Saudi opposition.


The Saudi government wants an Ikhwani regime in Damascus, Al Qaeda wants a Salafi regime. The Ikhwani/Salafi split is apparent in Cairo even now, as Noor rises.


The Awakening Councils were never insurgents. They were always mafia, and they remain mafia today.

Al Qaeda wants to overthrow the Saudi monarchy, they have never been and never will be allies.
The US-GCC are competing with the Salafis for control of Cairo, Damascus, Sanaa, and Tripoli, because if they lose those capitals to the Black Flag then Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Amman, and Algiers are next.