Saudi Arabia has been foiling plots against it's oil facilities since before 9/11. The implications of a successful attack on Saudi Arabian Oil facilities would be devastation to the US, so there is little doubt about terrorist's plans to pursue this end. They will eventually be successful. They extent that they are and to what extent the damage is to our economy is incalculable. Especially since such a devastating event would certainly lead Iran to mine the strait of Hormuz and Chavez would slow step delivery. I've heard gas heard the price of gas estimates range from 15 to 20 gallon and 2/3 of the gas stations shutting down. The price of everything would go through the roof and many people...

Saudi Arabia has been foiling plots against it's oil facilities since before 9/11. The implications of a successful attack on Saudi Arabian Oil facilities would be devastation to the US, so there is little doubt about terrorist's plans to pursue this end. They will eventually be successful. They extent that they are and to what extent the damage is to our economy is incalculable. Especially since such a devastating event would certainly lead Iran to mine the strait of Hormuz and Chavez would slow step delivery. I've heard gas heard the price of gas estimates range from 15 to 20 gallon and 2/3 of the gas stations shutting down. The price of everything would go through the roof and many people would lose jobs. Our economy would be decimated.
To say that Terrorists and terrorist states are only interested in attacking Saudi Arabian Oil facilities because we are in Iraq, is the height of misguidedness .

Man, you should spend some time studying the motivations of al queda, the islamists, jihad and the entire militant Islam actions ALL over the freakin' world. They started long before Bush was even in office. You trying to play a blame game, but the facts are so obvious that only misguided ideology can blind you. What was the fodder for the attempts since Clinton was in office to attack Saudi Arabian oil facilities, The Kohl, The 1st WTC bombing, the Tamil Tigers, Darfur, Islamic Jihad in Somalia? What is the fodder that causes militant Islam to barricade children in a school in Russia and engage in mass killing? How about the mass riots, murders and swelling of militant Islam in France, Eng...

Man, you should spend some time studying the motivations of al queda, the islamists, jihad and the entire militant Islam actions ALL over the freakin' world. They started long before Bush was even in office. You trying to play a blame game, but the facts are so obvious that only misguided ideology can blind you. What was the fodder for the attempts since Clinton was in office to attack Saudi Arabian oil facilities, The Kohl, The 1st WTC bombing, the Tamil Tigers, Darfur, Islamic Jihad in Somalia? What is the fodder that causes militant Islam to barricade children in a school in Russia and engage in mass killing? How about the mass riots, murders and swelling of militant Islam in France, England, Switzerland, Denmark, and Spain. What about the rise of militarism in Turkey and the almost daily lobbing of missiles into Israel that you never hear about anymore? What about the fact that terrorists in Iraq are target civilians, NOT MILITARY. The Islamic world relies on Oil. After oil, they have nothing. States like Iran know that we have passed the "Oil Peak". That and their religious ideology is their over all motivation for their actions. It is nothing America has done.

To say terrorist plots are "fed by the war in Iraq" is the pure silliness.

Kmcolo is not inaccurate in what he has said or quoted. No where in this article does it say that the war in Iraq is solely responsible for all terrorist attacks. The article states that the war in Iraq helps fuel (choose your synonym, adds to, contributes too, increases...etc) radical ideaology. Nothing inaccurate about that.

From the article -

“This did not happen overnight,” said Gen. Mansour al-Turki, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry. “This gives you the idea that terrorists are still trying to re-establish the activities in the kingdom. It is still a war going on.”

Officials said that the suspects had trained abroad, in Somalia, Afghanistan and especially I...

read more»

Kmcolo is not inaccurate in what he has said or quoted. No where in this article does it say that the war in Iraq is solely responsible for all terrorist attacks. The article states that the war in Iraq helps fuel (choose your synonym, adds to, contributes too, increases...etc) radical ideaology. Nothing inaccurate about that.

From the article -

“This did not happen overnight,” said Gen. Mansour al-Turki, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry. “This gives you the idea that terrorists are still trying to re-establish the activities in the kingdom. It is still a war going on.”

Officials said that the suspects had trained abroad, in Somalia, Afghanistan and especially Iraq. The chaos in Iraq has fueled radical ideology among the region’s youth, while providing an environment for militants to train, analysts here said.

“It is the beginning of jihadi operations leaking out of Iraq,” said Abdul Aziz al-Qassim, a retired Saudi judge and moderate Islamic activist. “It is clear that this is some of the effects of what is happening in Iraq, in terms of training and in terms of learning from the Iraqi experience.”

Your silly willhelm.

The chaos in Iraq has fueled radical ideology among the region’s youth, while providing an environment for militants to train

That sentence in itself is kind of misleading. Of course chaos in Iraq has added to radical ideology. So has chaos in the Saudi kingdom, Afghanistan since the 80's Soviet invasion, and a host of other locales. It has ALL been building up since way back when. Iraq is just the latest chapter. If the U.S. wasn't in Iraq it would still show up somewhere else, when its numbers are even larger. It's not going away anytime soon, either, I'm afraid.

Radical ideology while not new is certainly growing. Think about it- They are telling YOUNG MEN t...

The chaos in Iraq has fueled radical ideology among the region’s youth, while providing an environment for militants to train

That sentence in itself is kind of misleading. Of course chaos in Iraq has added to radical ideology. So has chaos in the Saudi kingdom, Afghanistan since the 80's Soviet invasion, and a host of other locales. It has ALL been building up since way back when. Iraq is just the latest chapter. If the U.S. wasn't in Iraq it would still show up somewhere else, when its numbers are even larger. It's not going away anytime soon, either, I'm afraid.

Radical ideology while not new is certainly growing. Think about it- They are telling YOUNG MEN that if they blow themselves and the enemy up with them, they go to heaven to be met by a large group of virgins. These guys look around at their circumstances and situation, and say "I'll take the virgins compared to what I have now, which is nothing." Talk about marketing.

BR, This IS NOT semantics. You simply defy logic.
I think what you are trying to say is the terrorists have become more aggressive and desperate or that we ar fueling their desperation. The ideology definitely fuels their actions. Ideology fuels everyones actions. But you do not fuel ideology. What we see in Iraq is the RESULT of the Islamist's ideology. That is the point. You just rather blame America for " fueling their ideology" rather than understand the reasoned point that this happens TO BE their ideology.
In away you are admitting that radical Islam is a threat to the world. However, you disguise it and blame America for something we could not possibly be doing. Pure ir...

BR, This IS NOT semantics. You simply defy logic.
I think what you are trying to say is the terrorists have become more aggressive and desperate or that we ar fueling their desperation. The ideology definitely fuels their actions. Ideology fuels everyones actions. But you do not fuel ideology. What we see in Iraq is the RESULT of the Islamist's ideology. That is the point. You just rather blame America for " fueling their ideology" rather than understand the reasoned point that this happens TO BE their ideology.
In away you are admitting that radical Islam is a threat to the world. However, you disguise it and blame America for something we could not possibly be doing. Pure irrationality is all it is.
If you cannot understand the basic meanings of words or you try to mislead and misapply words that ignorant people cannot reason through, you are just increasing the divisions in this country, because it makes what you are saying a flat-out lie. Why do I suspect that is your intention?

Never have said that radical islam is not a threat. That is some fantasy you have come up with. I believe there are better ways to reduce it (education, charity, goodwill, statesmanship, regional participation...etc). Conflict is about the least effective way to win someone's trust.

I don't believe what Bush & Cheney have done in Iraq does anything to reduce it. Even Bush said you can't win the war on terrorism you can only reduce it's appeal to those who are attracted to it. Which by George he's finally right. Iraq is a debacle and serves as a recruiting tool for jihadists. That was predictable.

I understand your point about IDEAOLOGY. But you are wrong to say this article is not accurate...

Never have said that radical islam is not a threat. That is some fantasy you have come up with. I believe there are better ways to reduce it (education, charity, goodwill, statesmanship, regional participation...etc). Conflict is about the least effective way to win someone's trust.

I don't believe what Bush & Cheney have done in Iraq does anything to reduce it. Even Bush said you can't win the war on terrorism you can only reduce it's appeal to those who are attracted to it. Which by George he's finally right. Iraq is a debacle and serves as a recruiting tool for jihadists. That was predictable.

I understand your point about IDEAOLOGY. But you are wrong to say this article is not accurate in using the words fuels idealogy which for the authors sake means intensifies it. The article doesn't say the war in Iraq creates the ideaology. I don't care if you want to make your point about IDEAOLOGY but technically you are wrong about english.

I don't think you understand humans very well. What you call desperation can be called determination by the other side.

No one is even coming close to address the backgrounds of the IDEAOLOGY. To do that we have to go back to World War I and cover the ground of the dividing up the spoils of war under the Sykes-Picot agreement. Than you dump on that the whole Israeli-Arab conflict and the Zionist movement. Then you mix in overthrowing democratically elected governments over oil revenues.

Basically we have treated that region as our playground for our own designs without much respect for the individuals living there. It doesn't take genius to figure out why they would be mistrustful.

I think Jimmy Carter is 110% correct that you won't begin to solve anything in the region until you solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

It would be refreshing if you came up with something besides everyone who remotely disagrees with you is full of hate. Yawn.

Okay let's get past your English nitpicking that you so delight in. If you can look past grammer let's get back to the thrust of the article. The war in Iraq serves as a recruiting tool for jihadists. The war in Iraq has not been helpful it exacerbates the situation.

George Tenet pointed out the White Houses failure to think through what they were doing in invading Iraq. They weren't really thinking they were plotting and had been for a long time.

He points out that many senior Bush administration officials, including Paul D. Wolfowitz and Douglas J. Feith, ...

It would be refreshing if you came up with something besides everyone who remotely disagrees with you is full of hate. Yawn.

Okay let's get past your English nitpicking that you so delight in. If you can look past grammer let's get back to the thrust of the article. The war in Iraq serves as a recruiting tool for jihadists. The war in Iraq has not been helpful it exacerbates the situation.

George Tenet pointed out the White Houses failure to think through what they were doing in invading Iraq. They weren't really thinking they were plotting and had been for a long time.

He points out that many senior Bush administration officials, including Paul D. Wolfowitz and Douglas J. Feith, were focused on Iraq long before 9/11, and that Mr. Cheney asked Bill Clinton’s then-departing secretary of defense, William Cohen, before the 2001 inauguration to give the incoming president a comprehensive briefing on Iraq and detail possible future actions.

On the day after 9/11, he adds, he ran into Richard Perle, a leading neoconservative and the head of the Defense Policy Board, coming out of the White House. He says Mr. Perle turned to him and said: “Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility.” This, despite the fact, Mr. Tenet writes, that “the intelligence then and now” showed “no evidence of Iraqi complicity” in the 9/11 attacks.

“There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat,” nor, he adds, was there “a significant discussion regarding enhanced containment or the costs and benefits of such an approach versus full-out planning for overt and covert regime change.”

Well BR once again you prove ignorance because you apparently do not read many of my comments where I spell out many of the afflictions the left suffer from. I for example used to suffer from the liberal affliction of materialist ideology just like JK . Your affliction happens to be hate, similar to our old long lost pals, Merican and Ameruca. There is also feel good naturalism which I regularly confront which is all over the place here. I probably confront Post-Modernist ideas the most, which are also ubiquitous here at CM and spouted regularly be many leftists. Then there is pure ignorance and blind-faith feelgoodism. There is also Humanism and racism, which I confront.
All the left consi...

Well BR once again you prove ignorance because you apparently do not read many of my comments where I spell out many of the afflictions the left suffer from. I for example used to suffer from the liberal affliction of materialist ideology just like JK . Your affliction happens to be hate, similar to our old long lost pals, Merican and Ameruca. There is also feel good naturalism which I regularly confront which is all over the place here. I probably confront Post-Modernist ideas the most, which are also ubiquitous here at CM and spouted regularly be many leftists. Then there is pure ignorance and blind-faith feelgoodism. There is also Humanism and racism, which I confront.
All the left consist of some combination or all the categories above. My experience as a liberal taught me a lot. So all is not lost for you.

From what I can tell you are the ultimate materialist on CM.

This from the person that says slavery was common sense. Yes, I have a very good memory.

Perhaps you would like to explain what materialist philosophy is so I can demonstrate the bufoonery of your comment. I think we both know that you do not know what you are talking about, as is usually the case. If I wasn't so alarmed by the utter ignorance in America, I would be laughing hysterically at your comment. I guess I will just have to assume your knowledege of materialist ideology is equal to your knowledge about global warming, Christianity, and common sense.

You are simply a pest. You are acting like the skinny , e...

From what I can tell you are the ultimate materialist on CM.

This from the person that says slavery was common sense. Yes, I have a very good memory.

Perhaps you would like to explain what materialist philosophy is so I can demonstrate the bufoonery of your comment. I think we both know that you do not know what you are talking about, as is usually the case. If I wasn't so alarmed by the utter ignorance in America, I would be laughing hysterically at your comment. I guess I will just have to assume your knowledege of materialist ideology is equal to your knowledge about global warming, Christianity, and common sense.

You are simply a pest. You are acting like the skinny , embicilic, loner on the playground that acts big and taunts the more intellectual, athletic, good-looking, rich kids, then runs when they respond. I must have really damaged your illusions of yourself. Your remarks are purely gratuitous. It's quite funny to see you go around popping out your bs at me. Have fun.

By the way, The only full-blown materilaists I am aware of at CM are JK and TPQ. However, all leftists have some measure of materialist ideology. So make a quick study and let me know what you find out, or just admit you are a clueless pest.