Saudi Arabia's economy is crashing down hard, and its all their fault..

[Pelicans78]

Holy , coherent and accurate. A rarity here., and thanks.

I would add though, that Pakistans problems with extremism will only really be solved when they can improve public education. Hard to wean populations from religious extremism when those religious extremists are doing all the educating.

Yes that is correct. The Saudis funded the religious schools in the 1980s which bred the Taliban and further extremists. Rooting out extremists will improve the public education long-term where now private schools are the way to go to become successful. Pakistan like other developing countries has problems with establishing a middle class (Unlike our country where politicians pretend that the middle class is in trouble. Give me a ing break).

[FuzzyLumpkins]

With water.

Please tell me your scheme. They are always so awesome!

[boutons_deux]

"politicians pretend that the middle class is in trouble. Give me a ing break"

which measure(s) tell you the middle class, even the lower 75%, isn't in trouble?

[hater]

Good truth bombs by Pelican

Regarding Paki vs India. India has a vastly superior army so Pakistan is concentrating on tactical nuclear weapons. That is small scale nuclear weapons that would.degrade a possible Indian invasion. As I said before if there is a major war these two will most likely go at it.

[pgardn]

Yes that is correct. The Saudis funded the religious schools in the 1980s which bred the Taliban and further extremists. Rooting out extremists will improve the public education long-term where now private schools are the way to go to become successful. Pakistan like other developing countries has problems with establishing a middle class (Unlike our country where politicians pretend that the middle class is in trouble. Give me a ing break).

Relatively speaking our middle class is more distressed. We don't look to countries who are trying to establish a middle class for comparison of our current state.

Pakistan still supports Muslim terrorists in disputed regions with India as well, not a one way street here.

And agreed on Turkey as being a possible democratic leader of the ME. That looks very difficult right now with their current leadership. Indonesia should be dealing with its internal own internal problems (overpopulation). given this, and their proximity, not major players in the ME.

BTW

I am perplexed by your very rational posts. I must have confused you with another poster.

[pgardn]

Good truth bombs by Pelican

Regarding Paki vs India. India has a vastly superior army so Pakistan is concentrating on tactical nuclear weapons. That is small scale nuclear weapons that would.degrade a possible Indian invasion. As I said before if there is a major war these two will most likely go at it.

Dont ever type TRUTH in any of your posts.

[RandomGuy]

Please tell me your scheme. They are always so awesome!

Wild Cobra is referring to the massive underground waterway that Libya built to sell water to the subsaharans. It was a rather obvious ploy to win influence by Ghaddafi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man-Made_River

[RandomGuy]

Well OPEC didn't move to curb production. They must really be intent on killing shale/sand producers, but it seems those guys invested so much initially that they can't stop now.

Well a lot of the stuff has already been drilled so continuing production is fairly cheap, and the shale producers have managed to keep their costs down below the price point where the Saudi's thought possible.

The Saudis are also pinched by their own budget deficits, so the rest of OPEC will have to suck it up, despite how much they wish the Saudis would subsidize them.

OPEC is not only on the ropes... it appears to be down for the count as a cartel, IMO.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Wild Cobra is referring to the massive underground waterway that Libya built to sell water to the subsaharans. It was a rather obvious ploy to win influence by Ghaddafi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man-Made_River

The point is to get him to do it. I was aware, I just also know that he's been using similar bribing policies in the AU for 30 years and they keep rejecting him.

[RandomGuy]

Relatively speaking our middle class is more distressed. We don't look to countries who are trying to establish a middle class for comparison of our current state.

Pakistan still supports Muslim terrorists in disputed regions with India as well, not a one way street here.

And agreed on Turkey as being a possible democratic leader of the ME. That looks very difficult right now with their current leadership. Indonesia should be dealing with its internal own internal problems (overpopulation). given this, and their proximity, not major players in the ME.

BTW

I am perplexed by your very rational posts. I must have confused you with another poster.

I merely note that the only thing that has made Turkey modern, economically viable, and democratic has been a strong secular streak in their society that has always tempered the worst excesses of those that would impose theocracy.

Hopefully the theocrats will experience enough of a backlash when they inevitably mis-handle the economy.

[RandomGuy]

The point is to get him to do it. I was aware, I just also know that he's been using similar bribing policies in the AU for 30 years and they keep rejecting him.

heh, sorry. If you want WC to not be lazy, you have to work hard to goad him. I was merely trying to help a bit. Carry on.

[RandomGuy]

I meant historically it's been overstated. Hasn't been extremely bloody since the divide 1400 years ago especially compared to the Protestant Reformation and even recent history in Northern Ireland. Obviously the Sunni/Shia divide has grown due to two extremist governments in Saudia Arabia and Iran have tried to spread their extreme brand across the region. There is a proxy war going on between both countries which is currently causing wars in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. The civil war in Iraq started with Iranian backed Shias and Sunni Al-Qaeda with the moderate Sunni Kurds sucked in. And ironically this proxy war has sucked in major powers compared to the Cold War where every other country was being sucked in. But I still maintain before these two extremist governments were formed, the Sunni/Shia struggle was not much of struggle throughout history.



Now where did I say I was fine with dictators ruling the Middle East. I mentioned countries like Turkey, Pakistan, and Indonesia as potential stabilizing forces in the Muslim world since these are the largest Muslim countries who happen to have democratic principles in this day and age compared to the Arab dictators/monarchies and Iranian clerics. These large democratic countries have the potential to bring stability for one effectively tackling extremism and also providing inspiration to Muslims in other countries who aspire to having their own representative government. However these countries have major powers in their backyard who could cause destabilization.



Yes, Pakistan obtained nuclear weapons because of the threat from India, but they've dealt with extremist factions for over 20+ years mostly from Saudi influence spreading their extreme brand from the 1980s while supplying money to help fight the Soviets and later creating the Taliban. Yes, Pakistan has sympathized and provided support with the terrorists especially during Musharraf's rule, but that is not the norm since they've had elections since 2008, especially since their recent Prime Minister was elected in 2013. They've had a major military operation against the Taliban which has effectively crippled their operation and forced them to run back into Afghanistan. Also, the economy has improved since the government has given more control to private enterprises, as well as having strong ties with China who has heavily invested into Pakistan. Not only is China investing into Pakistan, but former Cold War enemy Russia has lifted the ban on dealing with Pakistan and have reached oil/natural gas and military agreements. I know the Western media wants to maintain that Pakistan is a dangerous Muslim country with nuclear weapons that invests in terrorism, but that narrative has become false with Pakistan rooting out extremism and maintaining a democratically elected government.

By the way, Pakistan launched their first nuclear missiles in the late 1990s. Recently, the government is having to deal with increased recent Hindu fundamentalism from India who have actively tried to destabilize Pakistan by funding anti-government political parties and expressing views on punishing Muslims in India who eat beef.

Again, props. About what I would write, had I the time to do, pretty much a good assessment all around that I agree with.

Work for the State Dept? or just a foreign policy nerd?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

heh, sorry. If you want WC to not be lazy, you have to work hard to goad him. I was merely trying to help a bit. Carry on.

Oh I know. He'd already been told about the Kaddafi and his history with the AU. I was going to walk him through comparing and contrasting the takes.

Now worries.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I meant historically it's been overstated. Hasn't been extremely bloody since the divide 1400 years ago especially compared to the Protestant Reformation and even recent history in Northern Ireland. Obviously the Sunni/Shia divide has grown due to two extremist governments in Saudia Arabia and Iran have tried to spread their extreme brand across the region. There is a proxy war going on between both countries which is currently causing wars in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria. The civil war in Iraq started with Iranian backed Shias and Sunni Al-Qaeda with the moderate Sunni Kurds sucked in. And ironically this proxy war has sucked in major powers compared to the Cold War where every other country was being sucked in. But I still maintain before these two extremist governments were formed, the Sunni/Shia struggle was not much of struggle throughout history.



Now where did I say I was fine with dictators ruling the Middle East. I mentioned countries like Turkey, Pakistan, and Indonesia as potential stabilizing forces in the Muslim world since these are the largest Muslim countries who happen to have democratic principles in this day and age compared to the Arab dictators/monarchies and Iranian clerics. These large democratic countries have the potential to bring stability for one effectively tackling extremism and also providing inspiration to Muslims in other countries who aspire to having their own representative government. However these countries have major powers in their backyard who could cause destabilization.



Yes, Pakistan obtained nuclear weapons because of the threat from India, but they've dealt with extremist factions for over 20+ years mostly from Saudi influence spreading their extreme brand from the 1980s while supplying money to help fight the Soviets and later creating the Taliban. Yes, Pakistan has sympathized and provided support with the terrorists especially during Musharraf's rule, but that is not the norm since they've had elections since 2008, especially since their recent Prime Minister was elected in 2013. They've had a major military operation against the Taliban which has effectively crippled their operation and forced them to run back into Afghanistan. Also, the economy has improved since the government has given more control to private enterprises, as well as having strong ties with China who has heavily invested into Pakistan. Not only is China investing into Pakistan, but former Cold War enemy Russia has lifted the ban on dealing with Pakistan and have reached oil/natural gas and military agreements. I know the Western media wants to maintain that Pakistan is a dangerous Muslim country with nuclear weapons that invests in terrorism, but that narrative has become false with Pakistan rooting out extremism and maintaining a democratically elected government.

By the way, Pakistan launched their first nuclear missiles in the late 1990s. Recently, the government is having to deal with increased recent Hindu fundamentalism from India who have actively tried to destabilize Pakistan by funding anti-government political parties and expressing views on punishing Muslims in India who eat beef.

It being historically insignificant is wrong. The followers of Ali were pushed back and slaughtered by the Ayyubid as well as the Ottoman's since muhammed died. It's only been since the fall of the Ottoman's that they have been able to consolidate and form a local hegemony. Nonetheless, the Turks in particular throughout their centuries long caliphates were especially well known for their pogrom and purges. They were also known for rewriting history. We only care about the christian armenian but the sunni ottoman's were prolific slavers and slaughterers. Heresy laws are what they are and the hadith is very clear what you do to those that lose the faith.

As for Pakistan, it's been a few years since OBL got gibbed but that entire scenario belies your narrative of a monolithic Pakistan. The dictator is ostensibly the power however hoe does not have control of his allegiances in his cabinet. I have a friend in the merchant marine and every time he disboards at Kirachi the scene he describes isn't one where the antiwestern sentiment is pushed back.

The Taliban mullah movement is now Saudi's issue too? Is this some inverted logic because of AQ ties? I disagree as those Mullah's have shown all indication to be able to think and operate autonomously. Disturbingly so frankly. Pakistan has been having 'offenses' against them for 20 years and if you mean 'pushed back into Afghanistan' to mean somewhere in the mountains because they cannot be sure then I agree with you. They've been up in the hills to the west for the most part since the fall of Kandahar as well.

No one is going to argue that the Pakistani military isn't better equipped that the Afghans.

[pgardn]

I merely note that the only thing that has made Turkey modern, economically viable, and democratic has been a strong secular streak in their society that has always tempered the worst excesses of those that would impose theocracy.

Hopefully the theocrats will experience enough of a backlash when they inevitably mis-handle the economy.

It was secular because a secular military had great power. That military is now loaded with more theocratic leaning generals. So it's going to be tough. And the secular military present before was somewhat of an enigma as far as democracy goes.

Turkey is a nation going through some very big changes. Very tough to predict imo. One thing is clear, they have made more enemies than friends compared to when the Big E first gained power. This was a country that was suppose to play a big role in bridging the gap between the West and Islam and economic prosperity. Friends with Israelis and could also talk Israels enemies...

This hope has turned 180... They are now causing problems instead of solving them.

[Pelicans78]

Again, props. About what I would write, had I the time to do, pretty much a good assessment all around that I agree with.

Work for the State Dept? or just a foreign policy nerd?

Nerd.

[Pelicans78]

It being historically insignificant is wrong. The followers of Ali were pushed back and slaughtered by the Ayyubid as well as the Ottoman's since muhammed died. It's only been since the fall of the Ottoman's that they have been able to consolidate and form a local hegemony. Nonetheless, the Turks in particular throughout their centuries long caliphates were especially well known for their pogrom and purges. They were also known for rewriting history. We only care about the christian armenian but the sunni ottoman's were prolific slavers and slaughterers. Heresy laws are what they are and the hadith is very clear what you do to those that lose the faith.

As for Pakistan, it's been a few years since OBL got gibbed but that entire scenario belies your narrative of a monolithic Pakistan. The dictator is ostensibly the power however hoe does not have control of his allegiances in his cabinet. I have a friend in the merchant marine and every time he disboards at Kirachi the scene he describes isn't one where the antiwestern sentiment is pushed back.

The Taliban mullah movement is now Saudi's issue too? Is this some inverted logic because of AQ ties? I disagree as those Mullah's have shown all indication to be able to think and operate autonomously. Disturbingly so frankly. Pakistan has been having 'offenses' against them for 20 years and if you mean 'pushed back into Afghanistan' to mean somewhere in the mountains because they cannot be sure then I agree with you. They've been up in the hills to the west for the most part since the fall of Kandahar as well.

No one is going to argue that the Pakistani military isn't better equipped that the Afghans.

Not saying most of this is false, but there are some incomplete stuff here. The Ottomans weren't perfect, but they weren't as bad as the Wahabbis who took over the Arab land. The Ottoman empire executed the founder of Wahabbism because he was a heretic and very extreme in his beliefs. His followers are the guys who took over Arabia and have been the ruling leaders since.

There is no dictator in Pakistan. Since Musharraf stepped down in 2008, they've had two presidential elections and Prime Ministers from two different ruling parties have won. So the dictator does not exist. Sure Pakistan has a long way to go, but it's in a better state than it was back in 2008. The real struggle has been and always will be between the civilian government and military leaders.

The Saudis were instrumental in creating the Taliban. Their money and ideology was behind the creation of that group. Pakistan's dictator in the 80s was a Wahabbi and took money from the Saudis to build the religious schools which trained the future members of the Taliban. The Taliban has always been a Saudi. The Pakis have been inconsistent in their fight against the Mullahs because they helped create them and they didn't like Karzai at all since he was an Indian sympathizer. But they finally launched a major operation (operation ‘Zarb-e-Azb) last year which has done tremendous damage to the Taliban.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Not saying most of this is false, but there are some incomplete stuff here. The Ottomans weren't perfect, but they weren't as bad as the Wahabbis who took over the Arab land. The Ottoman empire executed the founder of Wahabbism because he was a heretic and very extreme in his beliefs. His followers are the guys who took over Arabia and have been the ruling leaders since.

There is no dictator in Pakistan. Since Musharraf stepped down in 2008, they've had two presidential elections and Prime Ministers from two different ruling parties have won. So the dictator does not exist. Sure Pakistan has a long way to go, but it's in a better state than it was back in 2008. The real struggle has been and always will be between the civilian government and military leaders.

The Saudis were instrumental in creating the Taliban. Their money and ideology was behind the creation of that group. Pakistan's dictator in the 80s was a Wahabbi and took money from the Saudis to build the religious schools which trained the future members of the Taliban. The Taliban has always been a Saudi. The Pakis have been inconsistent in their fight against the Mullahs because they helped create them and they didn't like Karzai at all since he was an Indian sympathizer. But they finally launched a major operation (operation ‘Zarb-e-Azb) last year which has done tremendous damage to the Taliban.

The Ottoman's used to enslave their conquered people's using the Hadith and longstanding tradition as justification. They too used Sharia but had more extracurriculars. They are world famous for their genocides and enslavements. They took Constantinople in the 16th century. Over 300 years of that .

al-Wahabbi was not killed by the Ottomans. Which one is better would be a matter of Islamic law as the Wahabbists rejected many of the 'innovations' of both caliphates. Those go both ways. They both justified heinous . It's a longstanding tradition.

Pakistan no longer having a dictator only underscores my point. It's a pluralism and while the post colonials elites and some other groups don't hate us, hte vast majority does. The military is obviously of divided loyalties.

Mullah Omar was trained in Pakistan and is from the Kandahar region. The rejection of the caliphate's traditions and going back to the traditions of the first muslims was not exclusive to Arabia. The mullah's were not Arabs. Saudis and other arabs became involved in the 1980s as jihadis. Many stayed. Their alliance made what happened possible but it was not the same thing.

The Paki's have been having major operations against the Taliban intermittently for near 20 years. It's typically after they bomb something.

[cheguevara]

Yemeni Houthies have crossed into Saudi and destroyed military base. Killed a few commanders as well.

Last night they also killed scores of Blackwater Mercenaries in Yemen

http://www.theguardian.com/australia...-yemen-clashes

Australian mercenary reportedly killed in Yemen clashes
Media reports say the man was fighting with Colombians on behalf of the United Arab Emirates in the brutal civil conflict in Yemen

An Australian mercenary colonel has reportedly been killed in clashes in Yemen, alongside six Colombian troops.

The mercenaries, including the Australian, were fighting with the private military contractor Blackwater, the reports said.

Last month the New York Times reported the UAE had sent hundreds of Colombian mercenaries to fight in the conflict.