 |
| |
|
|
EPW
|
 |
California, USA
Jan 2004
time: 21:37
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/
quote:
(CNN) -- Saudi Arabia's King Fahd -- whose reign was marked by unprecedented prosperity, but whose close ties with the United States stirred the passions of Islamic militants -- has died, Saudi officials announced Monday. He was 82.
The Saudi monarch had been in and out of the hospital in recent months, most recently suffering from pneumonia-like symptoms. Fahd yielded day-to-day control of the kingdom a decade ago after suffering a stroke, with Crown Prince Abdullah serving as the de facto ruler since then.
Fahd assumed the throne on June 13, 1982, becoming the fifth king of Saudi Arabia. He was the son of King Abdul Aziz Bin Abdul Rahman Al-Saud, the founder of the modern Saudi Arabia.
"I will be father to the young, brother to the elderly," he once said. "I am but one of you; whatever troubles you, troubles me; whatever pleases you, pleases me."
The Saudi monarch was held in high esteem across the Arab and Muslim worlds because of his role as the custodian of the two holy mosques -- the major shrines of Islam in Mecca and Medina.
As king, he supervised projects to facilitate the hajj for the more than 2 million pilgrims from around the world who visit each year. Under his rule, Mecca was expanded to 3.5 million square feet to accommodate 1 million worshippers; Medina has grown to nearly 1.8 million square feet to accommodate 500,000 people, according to his official biography.
He was also an ardent supporter of the mujahedeen in the 1980s in their fight against the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan -- where Saudi-born terror leader Osama bin Laden first gained a following.
But it was Fahd's decision to allow U.S. forces to be based out of Saudi Arabia during the 1991 Gulf War against Iraq that outraged Islamic fundamentalists, including bin Laden who criticized his homeland for allowing "infidels" to attack another Arab country from its soil.
The United States also used a highly secret base in the kingdom to conduct special operations from during the early days of the Iraq invasion in 2003.
Al Qaeda terrorists have launched several attacks inside the kingdom in recent years. And 15 of the 19 hijackers in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States were from Saudi Arabia -- a fact that did not sit well with many in Washington who have been skeptical of the kingdom.
But the Bush administration has remained staunchly behind the kingdom since 9/11, calling Riyadh a key ally in the war on terror.
"The Saudis have been very aggressive in hunting down the terrorist cells that are in Saudi Arabia and we've had a good deal of success also on the terrorist financing front," U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said during a foreign policy speech in May 2005.
Born in 1923, Fahd attended one of the kingdom's first educational institutions during his youth, and in 1953 he became Saudi's first minister of education.
For the next two decades, he served increasingly important roles, including interior minister, deputy prime minister and crown prince. In 1977, he met with U.S. President Jimmy Carter and U.S. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance about the importance of American involvement in trying to forge a lasting settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
"I believe the U.S. can play an important part in solving the problem if we take into account not only American influence worldwide, but also the strong relationship between America and Israel," he said at the time.
He continued to try to work for Mideast peace over the years, including on his first visit to the United States as king in 1985 when met with President Ronald Reagan about the need for a renewed American role in the Mideast peace process.
During Fahd's tenure, the kingdom saw an economic, agricultural and educational transformation, building on its oil wealth to become an international and regional power.
"With the blessing and grace of Almighty God and with the assistance of the faithful Saudi people, we shall continue the welfare march of construction and development and maintain the gains which are reflected by comprehensive achievements in various fields," he recently said. |
Last edited by EPW on 01-08-2005 at 12:52
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Thue
|
|
Copenhagen, Denmark
Jan 1970
time: 06:37
|
|
As the article says, the guy who is the new king has de facto ruled the country for 10 years. So whatever there is to be scared about has been there for the last 10 years.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zevico
|
|
Melbourne
Apr 2002
time: 15:37
|
|
Glowing praise for an authoritarian dictator...is this what you found disturbing? It ranks right up there for me at least.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark Not clear if Abdullah will be the same. |
Of course he'll be the same as he has been for the past 10 years.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by snoopy369
Judging others based on your own cultural and personal beliefs 
Fahd did many great things for his nation, and was a friend to the U.S. and to Freedom everywhere. Saudi Arabia does not wish to become a democracy; only an egotistical, selfish idiot believes that everyone must follow their personal opinion on what is 'right'. Or a religious person ... Che, which are you 
Tyranny is when a leader terrorizes his people and loots and pillages his nation for his own personal gain. Tyrants are not beloved by their people, but reviled and feared. Fahd was neither - he was a beloved leader, and most Saudis would choose the Monarchy of King Fahd over a democracy any day of the week.
If you believe in "democracy" in theory - i.e., that the will of the people should be followed - then consider that the will of the Saudis is monarchy.
I only hope that Abdullah is as good a friend to the U.S., and as beloved a leader, as Fahd... |
Its not at all clear that all Saudis liked fahd - IIUC the Shia dont like the regime much. Theres also a considerable body of dissidents. Its hard to tell how many there really are in KSA, cause, er, KSA isnt an open society.
In any case, our principle concern is with KSA's behavior in supporting imams who support the demonization of non-muslims, and who are alleged to provide support for terrorist groups, including Al Qaeeda. Now of course KSA has cracked down on AQ these last 3 years or so, but theres plenty of questioning about how tough or effective they have been, much of it relating to the question of maneuvering among different members of the royal family.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by snoopy369
Because until you provide me with proof otherwise, I see no reason why I should support enforcing change on the Saudi people simply because you or I or anyone else thinks it's what they WOULD or SHOULD want. Iraq I was only very vaguely in support of taking on - and that was entirely due to the realpolitik implications of Saddam remaining in power, combined with the things he did to the Kurds.
Honestly I see it as no different than from telling Israel that they need to be Christian, because their souls are at risk, and they clearly don't know any better.
I'd never say that - because I don't believe I have any more reason to be right religiously than you, or any other person.
That philosophy leads to might-makes-right realities - which is just plain horrible to imagine. |
No one here is saying we should invade Saudi Arabia to make them a democracy, or that they should cease to be muslim, so stop inventing strawmen.
We are judging, in WORDS, the Saudi regime. And we have every right to do that. And to the extent that the Saudi govt values cooperation with the govts of our countries (sorry, Az ) our govts have the right to consider Saudi domestic policies in our relationships. And indeed, to the extent that Saudi domestic policy, whether in its oppression, or its conservatism, feeds terrorism, we have an OBLIGATION to ourselves to consider it.
and lets remember, KSA itself funds mosques and islamic schools around the world, trying to sway them to its own brand of Islam. What, I ask, gives THEM the right to influence other societies, including other muslim societies, yet ban all outside influences on their own society?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:37
|
|
Originally posted by snoopy369
"Putting out education and funding to schools and mosques is perfectly reasonable. You're not forcing anyone to change, just offering them incentive and education about such change. No worse than Jehovah's Witnesses going door to door - you can always close the door."
Ok, so can we fund churches and synagues in Saudi Arabia? Hell, i dont even need that. Can we fund mosques and islamic schools in Saudi Arabia that teach a different kind of Islam? No we cant. You do know that KSA not only oppresses christianity and judaism, but oppresses forms of Islam other than Wahabism?
"Considering domestic policies is different than condemning a lifestyle (in this case a country's lifestyle - ie form of government). "
A form of govt isnt a "lifestyle".
" Until it damages others around it, or damages the people in some tangible way, condemning it is egotistical and selfish."
Its certainly harmed the Saudi political dissidents sitting in prison, the Shiites who are discriminated against, etc.
" I still hold that until and unless the Saudi people desire a change, we should not condemn their form of government."
how the hell does anyone know what they would desire if they dont live in an open society.
"I do want to be clear that I don't intend to imply you would overthrow the Saudi government by force. Simply that the attitude that their goverment is 'wrong' bothers me. "
Why? Some things are wrong. I have a brain, I can judge. If someone wants to argue why their form is better, let them.
"We ought no more condemn their actions than their beliefs, anyway. Sure, if their goverment is slaughtering minority groups, or if they are attacking other countries ... but funding mosques and rooting out terrorism in their country, albeit not as fast or thoroughly as we would like? What exactly are they *doing* wrong ..."
Theyre funding a form of Islam that holds back muslim modernization and reform. Theyre failing to crack down as fast or thoroughly as necessary on a force that murdered thousands of americans, that is murdering thousands of muslims, and that is very dangerous to us all. I think thats what they are doing wrong.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-08-2005 12:25
Now let's do something about the new one
|