0
2

[–] LexOrandiLexCredendi 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

So....

Canada (British Empire) is trying to get the MB (created and supported by British intelligence) to destabilize the Saudis (who were put in place by the Brits, who funded and supported their Wahabi schools)?

This shit is confusing.

0
1

[–] Pluviou5 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The Saudis have been dumping Canadian assets. They have also been saying that they may go bankrupt. Is there a connection?

0
4

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

You know you've fucked up when your government is more jihadi than saudi arabia.

0
3

[–] 1Iron_Curtain 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Bad move by the Canadians. This is turning a soft form of Jihadism that can more easily spread throughout the West because of its attachment to progressivism and education against a faction that will only embrace progressivism and education when it makes them look friendly and "open" towards the West.

This testifies that the West needs to stay out of the Middle-East, except when it concerns oil(find alternative energy that is reliable as soon as possible and diversify investment in oil by looking toward other markets), and as long as they advocate the empowerment of Westernized Wahhabism(that is essentially what the Muslim Brotherhood is). Its already created a mess in Egypt and Syria and the same does not need to happen in Saudi Arabia. It was probably better when the Hashemites ruled Saudi Arabia. Of course I have not read too much about the origins of Wahhabism but I started somewhere in Central Saudi Arabia and was due to the presence of the British in Saudi Arabia for oil.

I guess I can see how they funded and supported Wahhabism as an effort to target the dying Ottoman Empire. That was probably a bad move too to be honest. The French had a far better approach. Turn ethnic minorities and Christians on the Ottomans. As you start funding these quasi-expansionist movements or people that fund such movements and turn them against each other you get some massive problems. Of course something has to give in the Middle-East and if anything has to go its the Sunni power structure, but there are complications with that. The positive thing about weakening the power of Sunnism is that it cuts them off from supporting Jihadist bases in Africa and South Asia which could cause significant problems for North America and Europe in the future.

That is sort of not a good enough to reason to bring the Sauds down to size. Of course, the British originally believed the Middle-East should be dominated by the Hashemites, but this would not be a good idea currently, because the Hashemites are in my opinion just a more secularized and less Wahhabized version of the Muslim Brotherhood. Ideally, there needs to be balance between Sunni and Shia powers in the Middle-East(part of why the Iraq war was bad). I think the neocons thought they would just march into Iran after the Iraq war(remember how Bush was threatening bunker bombs on Iran? Yeah, its bad). They never even tried to create a buffer against the Shias into power(Kurdish state and cut Iraq down to size?) and instead tried to empower the Sunni foreign fighters and Saudis getting in on the ruckus in Iraq. We have had a completely abortive approach to the Middle-East and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood is part of that project.

If we support the Muslim Brotherhood in the region so much what we are essentially saying is to hell with the Saudis, to Iran, and to Israel. There has got to be some positive alternative to the Muslim Brotherhood in balancing out the Middle-East. Egypt is outside that sphere of the Middle-East but they are a good diplomatic medium(the West backed the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt after a while; it was that bad). Of course if the Muslim Brotherhood got a hold of Saudi oil they would be spreading Salafism throughout Europe and Turkey would not even have to become part of the E.U. to spread its influence in Europe.

I think that essentially this as dumb an idea as the CIA backing the Muslim Brotherhood and Communists in Syria. There just appears to be no healthy counter-balance to the Sunni faction in the Middle-East. Hezbollah? Assad? Its hard to say. Its complex and there is so much infighting and one faction overthrowing another that it is hard to keep track of everything and develop a cohesive and consistent approach to the Middle-East. I personally think supporting ethnic minorities and Christians in the Middle-East might and just might be our middle ground and they have been hit the hardest by the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates. Its worth a try because nothing else will work. That means siding with Hezbollah and Assad especially(Assad at the least).

The Assads are the only people that seem likely to keep the Muslim Brotherhood at bay, Assad is surprisingly somewhat cynical towards Iran, even though he allies with them, Assad and his father always had a solid approach to Israel(take back Golan and avoid war with Israel by supporting the PLO) and the Assads could potentially "secularize" Sunnis in a more positive way and turn them away from the influences of the Saudis. This is difficult.

0
2

[–] GumbyTM 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I heard NPR today trying to spin this as a dispute over a 'tweet' and kept thinking WTF is this really about, thanks.

https://archive.is/kCGvl

(I listen in the car because they make me laugh and it's always nice to know what talking points sheeple will regurgitate later.)

0
1

[–] juicedidwtc 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

that dirty hippy is right, BEHEAD THE BANKERS!!!

0
1

[–] GorNos 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Wild war

0
1

[–] cthulian_axioms 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I'm genuinely torn on this one.

On the one hand, we have a brutal theocracy that should be destabilized, torn down, and its rubble burned. Fuck Saudi Arabia with an unlubricated 10' pole.

On the other hand, we have a country full of inveterate cucks who claim to be welcoming to everyone, yet banned my Italian ass for life over some stupid bullshit that happened over a decade ago. Fuck Canada with an unlubricated 10' pole.

If there's an outcome here which wrecks both countries' shit, I'm all for it.