GCC troops arrive to Bahrain following weeks of protests

[News_Editor]

GCC troops arrive to Bahrain following weeks of protests

2011-03-14 23:57:26 GMT+7 (ICT)

MANAMA, BAHRAIN (BNO NEWS) -- Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) troops on Monday arrived to Bahrain to help protecting the country following weeks of violent protests, the Bahrain News Agency (BNA) reported.

Troops from the GCC Peninsula Shield Force, most of them Saudi soldiers, arrived to the troubled Bahrain with the main mandate of safeguarding government buildings in light of the situation the kingdom is currently undergoing.

The move is in line with the principle of common destiny bonding GCC states, which indicates that safeguarding security and stability across the GCC region is a collective responsibility.

Bahrain requested help from its Gulf Arab neighbors for weeks. However, GCC troops were deployed after Sunday's clashes in which police and Shia demonstrators engaged in violent confrontations.

Last month, police killed seven protesters during clashes. Wefaq, Bahrain's largest Shia movement, condemned the arrival of GCC troops and labeled it as a 'blatant occupation'.

Also on Sunday, Bahrain's crown prince and opposition groups agreed to hold a national dialogue to address the main demands including giving parliament more power and reforming government and electoral districts.

Last month, King Hamad made several changes in the cabinet, including the health, housing, affairs, and labor cabinets. Protesters had demanded the resignation of the entire cabinet, in order to be replaced by ones elected by citizens.

The United States said that they supported the national dialogue initiative led by Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa and called for the process to include all people of Bahrain.

Furthermore, U.S. President Barack Obama said that the dialogue offers an opportunity for meaningful reform and for all Bahrainis to forge a more just future together.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2011-03-14

[EnSvenskTiger]

Hmm... Mr BO calls for dialogue here and air strikes in Libya. How many contracts of oil for arms does a despot need in order to be regarded as a "friend" of the US?

Tiger

[Ulysses G.]

Has "BO" called for "air strikes" in Libya? This is about as accurate as the rest of your political posts.

[chuckd]

Hmm... Mr BO calls for dialogue here and air strikes in Libya. How many contracts of oil for arms does a despot need in order to be regarded as a "friend" of the US?

Tiger

Where's the link proving the allegation you just made?

Arms sales to the Middle East are called Foreign Military Sales and are not exchangeable for oil. It's cash on the barrel head. You need to check Google a little more often.

[hammered]

Messy. Foreign forces being potentially used to resist the wishes of the majority of the people. No way this Saudi move has anything to do with democracy

[beechguy]

Hmm... Mr BO calls for dialogue here and air strikes in Libya. How many contracts of oil for arms does a despot need in order to be regarded as a "friend" of the US?

Tiger

I'm not sure that's an accurate take on the situation, but considering how many acts of international terrorism Libya has been involved in, versus the Bahraini's(0 that I know of), it would make sense to treat the matters differently.

[chuckd]

Messy. Foreign forces being potentially used to resist the wishes of the majority of the people. No way this Saudi move has anything to do with democracy

Assistance was requested by Bahrain from the Gulf Cooperation Council, of which both Bahrain and Saudi Arabia are members.

Saudi responded, as has at least one other member country.

"The United Arab Emirates also sent around 500 police officers to calm the protests, according to the foreign minister."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/bahrain/8381034/Saudi-Arabian-troops-sent-to-Bahrain-as-protests-escalate.html

[bangkokeddy]

Hmm... Mr BO calls for dialogue here and air strikes in Libya. How many contracts of oil for arms does a despot need in order to be regarded as a "friend" of the US?

Tiger

I'm not sure that's an accurate take on the situation, but considering how many acts of international terrorism Libya has been involved in, versus the Bahraini's(0 that I know of), it would make sense to treat the matters differently.

Any current actions against Libya and Gadaffi have nothing to do with his alleged involvement in international terrorism.

The argument goes that he fights his own people and is a dictator. And now here we see the same, with the difference that the west seems to have some problems to call these dictators dictator too.

[Steely Dan]

If you scratch below the surface on this one you can get a better picture of what's happening - Bahrain has a sizeable Shiite population, Iran has been instrumental in inciting unrest in Bahrain hoping it will set a precedent and spread to Saudi Arabia and the Emirate states. Meanwhile contrary to an Iranian claim there is talk that it is Syria not Israel supplying arms to help prop up the Libyan regime.

http://disasteremergencysupplies.com/snafu/2011/03/drumbeats-of-war-libya-and-syria/

Cheer for consistency if you like but be very aware that in comparing Bahrain with Libya may apply on one level, but if Libya persists and Bahrain then other Emirate states and Saudi Arabia succumb to chaos then it impacts us all including naive liberals or internet jihadists.

Edit: Just to add Syria have form when it comes to violently crushing their own insurrections with Assad Senior killing up to 40,000 in 1982.

Edited March 15, 2011 by Steely Dan

[Ulysses G.]

but if Libya persists and Bahrain then other Emirate states and Saudi Arabia succumb to chaos then it impacts us all including naive liberals or internet jihadists.

No more SSI.

[beechguy]

Hmm... Mr BO calls for dialogue here and air strikes in Libya. How many contracts of oil for arms does a despot need in order to be regarded as a "friend" of the US?

Tiger

I'm not sure that's an accurate take on the situation, but considering how many acts of international terrorism Libya has been involved in, versus the Bahraini's(0 that I know of), it would make sense to treat the matters differently.

Any current actions against Libya and Gadaffi have nothing to do with his alleged involvement in international terrorism.

The argument goes that he fights his own people and is a dictator. And now here we see the same, with the difference that the west seems to have some problems to call these dictators dictator too.

As long as Gadaffi is in power then everything should be considered, past, present, and future. There is no comparison as to how Bahrain has treated it's citizens, versus Libya and the treatment of it's citizens. So fairly ignorant to compare Obama's policies from one country to the next, and say they should be the same.

[bangkokeddy]

If you scratch below the surface on this one you can get a better picture of what's happening - Bahrain has a sizeable Shiite population, Iran has been instrumental in inciting unrest in Bahrain hoping it will set a precedent and spread to Saudi Arabia and the Emirate states. Meanwhile contrary to an Iranian claim there is talk that it is Syria not Israel supplying arms to help prop up the Libyan regime.

http://disasteremergencysupplies.com/snafu/2011/03/drumbeats-of-war-libya-and-syria/

Cheer for consistency if you like but be very aware that in comparing Bahrain with Libya may apply on one level, but if Libya persists and Bahrain then other Emirate states and Saudi Arabia succumb to chaos then it impacts us all including naive liberals or internet jihadists.

Edit: Just to add Syria have form when it comes to violently crushing their own insurrections with Assad Senior killing up to 40,000 in 1982.

The majority of people in Bahrein is a Shiite population oppressed by a sunni King.

In Iran the people chased off their Shah, ended his autocratic rule. And that is exactly what the monarchs in Bahrein and Saudi Arabia fear.

EDIT:

and what are the jihadists up too atm?

Al Qaeda urges rebels to fight Gadaffi

Posted on » Monday, March 14, 2011

CAIRO: Senior Al Qaeda militant Abu Yahya Al Libi has urged rebels to fight Libyan strongman Muammar Gadaffi and warned of the heavy price of defeat, in a videotape posted on jihadist websites yesterday.

...

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/NewsDetails.aspx?storyid=301798

Edited March 15, 2011 by bangkokeddy

[beechguy]

If you scratch below the surface on this one you can get a better picture of what's happening - Bahrain has a sizeable Shiite population, Iran has been instrumental in inciting unrest in Bahrain hoping it will set a precedent and spread to Saudi Arabia and the Emirate states. Meanwhile contrary to an Iranian claim there is talk that it is Syria not Israel supplying arms to help prop up the Libyan regime.

http://disasteremerg...ibya-and-syria/

Cheer for consistency if you like but be very aware that in comparing Bahrain with Libya may apply on one level, but if Libya persists and Bahrain then other Emirate states and Saudi Arabia succumb to chaos then it impacts us all including naive liberals or internet jihadists.

Edit: Just to add Syria have form when it comes to violently crushing their own insurrections with Assad Senior killing up to 40,000 in 1982.

The majority of people in Bahrein is a Shiite population oppressed by a sunni King.

In Iran the people chased off their Shah, ended his autocratic rule. And that is exactly what the monarchs in Bahrein and Saudi Arabia fear.

EDIT:

and what are the jihadists up too atm?

Al Qaeda urges rebels to fight Gadaffi

Posted on » Monday, March 14, 2011

CAIRO: Senior Al Qaeda militant Abu Yahya Al Libi has urged rebels to fight Libyan strongman Muammar Gadaffi and warned of the heavy price of defeat, in a videotape posted on jihadist websites yesterday.

...

http://www.gulf-dail...?storyid=301798

I'm well aware of Bahrain and what is going on there, I lived there almost 10 years. How about you?

[EnSvenskTiger]

I have been awaiting the arrival of the rest of the US apologetic crew but I guess they are AWOL or don't want to play today so here we goo!

As for the airstrikes;

“Gates: Enforcing A No Fly Zone Would Mean Air Strikes in Libya” from http://defensetech.org/2011/03/02/gates-enforcing-a-no-fly-zone-would-mean-air-strikes-on-libya/ many more sites to quote from if necessary. So unless Mr OB and Gates never talks to each other this is common knowledge to Mr OB. No-fly-zone=airstrikes, period!

And for the “arms for oil” just Google what arms Saudi have bought in recent years from US with a HUGH load just recently! The Saudis are in the pocket of USA that gives them order to increase or decrease production as they see fit in order to control the prize. The US in return promisess to keep the heads on the king and family.

Robert Gates was in Bahrain, the home of the US 5^th fleet, last Friday and yesterday the American tanks from Saudi started rolling. What a coincident!

Tiger

Edited March 15, 2011 by metisdead
Font resized to normal size. There is NO need for abnormally large fonts!

[chuckd]

I have been awaiting the arrival of the rest of the US apologetic crew but I guess they are AWOL or don't want to play today so here we goo!

As for the airstrikes;

“Gates: Enforcing A No Fly Zone Would Mean Air Strikes in Libya” from http://defensetech.org/2011/03/02/gates-enforcing-a-no-fly-zone-would-mean-air-strikes-on-libya/ many more sites to quote from if necessary. So unless Mr OB and Gates never talks to each other this is common knowledge to Mr OB. No-fly-zone=airstrikes, period!

And for the “arms for oil” just Google what arms Saudi have bought in recent years from US with a HUGH load just recently! The Saudis are in the pocket of USA that gives them order to increase or decrease production as they see fit in order to control the prize. The US in return promisess to keep the heads on the king and family.

Robert Gates was in Bahrain, the home of the US 5^th fleet, last Friday and yesterday the American tanks from Saudi started rolling. What a coincident!

Tiger

OK, I'll come out and play for a few minutes, simply to show that you have no clue what you are talking about.

This was your original claim...

"Hmm... Mr BO calls for dialogue here and air strikes in Libya. How many contracts of oil for arms does a despot need in order to be regarded as a "friend" of the US?

Tiger"

You posted two comments which drew my attention.

1. Your claim that "Mr BO (Barack Obama?) calls for dialog here (Bahrain?) and air strikes in Libya is patently false. He has steadfastly declined to make any form of commitment in Libya, particularly as it relates to a no-fly zone and has most certainly not advocated air strikes on Libya.

Please show where Obama has called for air strikes in Libya.

2. Next you ask how many contracts of "oil for arms" does it take to become friends with the US. This is also patently false. As I explained earlier, all Saudi arms purchases with the US for the past 30 years have been FMS contracts, which call for cash payment. The US government has never swapped arms for oil. The British government has, but not the US government.

Now I am through playing. Please get your facts straight

PS: One more little thing. The "American" tanks crossing the causeway yesterday from Saudi Arabia into Bahrain are likely the Oto Velara VCC-1 Armored Personnel Carrier. They are ITALIAN made. The Saudi Land Forces also use a FRENCH Light Armored Vehicle, an AMX-10P. I just caught a brief glimpse of them on the telly so I am not certain which they were using. The Glimpse was enough to tell me the Land Forces were NOT using the Bradley, proudly made in the USA.

[bangkokeddy]

I'm well aware of Bahrain and what is going on there, I lived there almost 10 years. How about you?

Bahrain is ruled by a King and despite that you lived there for almost 10 years people are out in the street to protest and want greater political freedom, equality, want to chance the system and questioning the monarchy ruling. Its the god old theory of the domino effect and the rulers at the gulf fear that they could lose their power. (Using the term 'domino theory' in its loosest sense, just to illustrate that the protests in one country gave obviously the people in some other country an impulse to protest as well.)

Yes, its probably less dramatic than that whats going on in Libya atm. Overall the situations and conflicts in both countries are pretty different and cannot easily be equated with each other.

Steely Dan dropped a key word chaos. That is another fear. What everyone wants is stability, its needed for peace and prosperity. One could argue that autocratic and dictatorial rulers can ensure stability and prevent that everything "succumb to chaos". Compare the post Saddam Iraq with the time when he was in power or look at Titos Yugoslavia. Stability was/is also one of Gadaffis goals. The design flaw of dictatorships is that for this stability suppression and iron rule is needed. Things under heavy pressure are prone to erupt violently.

If the Gulf Kings losing power will it end in chaos as well? Is there no chance of a transition to a stable society based on peoples rule?

Is to prevent chaosor support 'democracy' the matter here, when we look at the reaction of the 'west'?

Or is it simply a friend or foe issue, like EnSvenskTiger suggest. Probably that.

In case of Gadaffi its payback time for 40 years of being not our friend. But Bahrain and so also Saudi Arabia are regarded as friends and we have a common enemy. The monarchist angst of the republic makes them to US allies.

The USA wants friends. They had a friend in Iran once. A dictator who came to and stayed in power only with foreign help. That made him so 'friendly'.

[geriatrickid]

Once again a basic thread gets hijacked by those with an agenda of hate. Here's a dose of reality. The entry of Saudi forces was legal and occurred at the request of an internationally recognized and accepted government. One may not approve and one may not like it, but it is a legal action.

It is interesting that none of the people going off on a tangent had any concerns as to the legitimacy of the Bahraini government prior to the recent protests. All of a sudden, the friendly entry of security forces to protect infrastructure is condemned. Where were these people when Pakistanis were pouring over the Afghanistan border to cause trouble? Or how about when Libya sent its troops into Chad and illegally occupied large parts of the country.

The USA is one of the few western countries that has shown diplomatic tact and restraint in the entire mess, but don'tlet that stop the hate speech. I sense another thread closure since some people can't be civil

[chuckd]

Stratfor's current take on the situation...

Special Report: Iran and the Saudis' Countermove on Bahrain

March 14, 2011 | 1521 GMT

By George Friedman

Saudi Arabia is leading a coalition force into Bahrain to help the government calm the unrest there. This move puts Iran in a difficult position, as Tehran had hoped to use the uprising in Bahrain to promote instability in the Persian Gulf region. Iran could refrain from acting and lose an opportunity to destabilize the region, or it could choose from several other options that do not seem particularly effective.

The Bahrain uprising consists of two parts, as all revolutions do. The first is genuine grievances by the majority Shiite population — the local issues and divisions. The second is the interests of foreign powers in Bahrain. It is not one or the other. It is both.

The Iranians clearly benefit from an uprising in Bahrain. It places the U.S. 5th Fleet’s basing in jeopardy, puts the United States in a difficult position and threatens the stability of other Persian Gulf Arab states. For the Iranians, the uprisings in North Africa and their spread to the Arabian Peninsula represent a golden opportunity for pursuing their long-standing interest (going back to the Shah and beyond) of dominating the Gulf.

Read more here: http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20110314-iran-saudis-countermove-bahrain?utm_source=redalert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=110314%281%29&utm_content=readmore&elq=2249dba18304420883c59dc69624f4b3

PS: The closing paragraph reads thusly...

"As we move into the evening, we expect the Iranians are in intense discussions of their next move. Domestic politics are affecting regional strategy, as would be the case in any country. But the clear roadmap the Iranians were working from has now collapsed. The Saudis have called their hand, and they are trying to find out if they have a real or a busted flush. They will have to act quickly before the Saudi action simply becomes a solid reality. But it is not clear what they can do quickly. For the moment, the Saudis have the upper hand. But the Iranians are clever and tenacious. There are no predictions possible. We doubt even the Iranians know what they will do."

[beechguy]

I'm well aware of Bahrain and what is going on there, I lived there almost 10 years. How about you?

Bahrain is ruled by a King and despite that you lived there for almost 10 years people are out in the street to protest and want greater political freedom, equality, want to chance the system and questioning the monarchy ruling. Its the god old theory of the domino effect and the rulers at the gulf fear that they could lose their power. (Using the term 'domino theory' in its loosest sense, just to illustrate that the protests in one country gave obviously the people in some other country an impulse to protest as well.)

Yes, its probably less dramatic than that whats going on in Libya atm. Overall the situations and conflicts in both countries are pretty different and cannot easily be equated with each other.

Steely Dan dropped a key word chaos. That is another fear. What everyone wants is stability, its needed for peace and prosperity. One could argue that autocratic and dictatorial rulers can ensure stability and prevent that everything "succumb to chaos". Compare the post Saddam Iraq with the time when he was in power or look at Titos Yugoslavia. Stability was/is also one of Gadaffis goals. The design flaw of dictatorships is that for this stability suppression and iron rule is needed. Things under heavy pressure are prone to erupt violently.

If the Gulf Kings losing power will it end in chaos as well? Is there no chance of a transition to a stable society based on peoples rule?

Is to prevent chaosor support 'democracy' the matter here, when we look at the reaction of the 'west'?

Or is it simply a friend or foe issue, like EnSvenskTiger suggest. Probably that.

In case of Gadaffi its payback time for 40 years of being not our friend. But Bahrain and so also Saudi Arabia are regarded as friends and we have a common enemy. The monarchist angst of the republic makes them to US allies.

The USA wants friends. They had a friend in Iran once. A dictator who came to and stayed in power only with foreign help. That made him so 'friendly'.

I'm well aware there is a KIng, I was there when the Emir(his Father) died in 1999. Since then, they have implemented a lot of reforms, to include the right to vote for women, a parliment consisting of elected officials, and public works projects to include housing and other benefits for the lower income. Do there need to be further improvements, sure. But, they also, to my knowledge have not been involved in any serious acts of international terrorism. I can't say the same about Libya, so to have the same policy toward Bahrain as Libya would be fairly ignorant.

[Steely Dan]

http://disasteremergencysupplies.com/snafu/2011/03/drumbeats-of-war-saudi-arabia-invades-bahrain/#more-1051

Whether the Saudis intervened unilaterally or with tacit U.S backing I approve if it pisses on Iran's bonfire for a while.

[bangkokeddy]

The Iranians clearly benefit from an uprising in Bahrain. It places the U.S. 5th Fleet’s basing in jeopardy, puts the United States in a difficult position and threatens the stability of other Persian Gulf Arab states. For the Iranians, the uprisings in North Africa and their spread to the Arabian Peninsula represent a golden opportunity for pursuing their long-standing interest (going back to the Shah and beyond) of dominating the Gulf.

Read more here: http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20110314-iran-saudis-countermove-bahrain?utm_source=redalert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=110314%281%29&utm_content=readmore&elq=2249dba18304420883c59dc69624f4b3

...

Its about Iranians and their interests from the Gulf to North Africa and beyond? Like in the movie? 300? Saw it? THIS IS SPARTA!!!! 5555.

What started in North Africa and is now at the Persian Gulf causes worries for a couple despotic and undemocratic rulers. So are the leaders in Tehran not really happy about it, because it inspires the Iranians go on the streets as well.

An end of the monarchy and transition to democracy in Bahrain puts other Kingdoms in the Persian Gulf at risk to the extent that people there could demand the same. There are demonstrations in Saudi Arabia.

For the USA its about that military base and their long-standing interest (going back to the Shah and beyond) of patrolling the Gulf and having friends everywhere.

[bangkokeddy]

Hundreds shot in Bahrain protest

Ali Khalil

March 16, 2011 - 5:24AM

At least 200 people have been shot and wounded in a Shi'ite village south of the Bahraini capital, a medic says, as the king imposed a state of emergency after bringing in Saudi and Emirati troops to help quell anti-regime protests.

As violence escalated, close ally the United States warned that there was "no military solution" to political upheaval in Bahrain and that any violence against peacefully expressed political demands "should be stopped."

"More than 200 people we received today had been shot with buckshot," a hospital doctor in the village of Sitra, south of the capital, told AFP by telephone.

The doctor, who asked that his name not be used, said the hospital was under siege by armed gangs and security forces targeting Shi'ites - the backbone of anti-regime protests that have raged for a month.

...

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/hundreds-shot-in-bahrain-protest-20110316-1bw4u.html

[bangkokeddy]

Iran against foreign military intervention in Bahrain

English.news.cn 2011-03-15 15:33:30

TEHRAN, March 15 (Xinhua) -- Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman said Tuesday that the foreign military intervention in Bahrain to confront the protests is "unacceptable."

The Persian Gulf states' military intervention in Bahrain will further complicate the situation, Ramin Mehmanparast said in his weekly press briefing on Tuesday after the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) reportedly sent forces to Bahrain to maintain order and security.

The Baraini people have "legitimate demands that are expressed peacefully." Violence should be avoided in the face of the Bahrainis' demands and it is expected that they would be met in " correct ways," said Mehmanparast.

...

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-03/15/c_13779749.htm

Italy says G8 worried over Gulf troops in Bahrain

PARIS | Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:29pm EDT

(Reuters) - Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said on Tuesday Group of Eight powers were greatly concerned about the sending of armed forces into Bahrain, which is struggling to quell weeks of unrest.

...

"We discussed this and expressed great concern about the fact that for the first time probably in the recent history of that region, neighbors have decided to send armed forces to sustain the king of Bahrain," Frattini told reporters following a G8 foreign ministers meeting in Paris.

...

French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said that the G8 powers hoped to see a democratic transition in Bahrain. "Obviously we think that a democratic transition is just as important there as anywhere else," he told a news conference.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/us-g8-bahrain-italy-idUSTRE72E54X20110315

U.S. Department of State

Just as #Bahrain gov't must show restraint and respect universal rights, members of opposition also must refrain from instigating violence.

UK "extremely concerned" by Bahrain state of emergency

(Reuters) - Britain is extremely concerned about the escalation of the situation in Bahrain and the declaration of a state of emergency, Foreign Secretary William Hague said on Tuesday

"We're extremely concerned about the escalation of the situation in Bahrain, in particular the decision by the government of Bahrain to declare a state of emergency. We call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint and to avoid violence," Hague told parliament.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/us-bahrain-britain-idUSTRE72E5K820110315

UN Chief Calls for "Maximum Restraint" in Bahrain

2011-03-15 10:38:09 Xinhua

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Monday called on all parties in Bahrain "to exercise maximum restraint and to do everything possible" to prevent further violence, and urged all stakeholders to begin "a meaningful and broad-based national dialogue" at an early date.

...

http://english.cri.cn/6966/2011/03/15/2681s626307.htm

UAE joins Gulf forces to restore Bahrain's stability

15 March 2011,

UAE has decided to join the Gulf contingent being sent to neighbouring Bahrain to help restore security, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Dr Anwar Mohammed Gargash said.

“The UAE has decided to send a security force ... in response to a request by the sisterly kingdom of Bahrain to help and participate in strengthening security and internal stability,” Gargash said.

“The United Arab Emirates affirms that this step represents a lively embodiment of its commitment to brothers in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). The regional security and stability at this time requires us all to unite our ranks to protect achievements, keep sectarian strife away as well as to lay foundations for the future,” Gargash added.

...

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle08.asp?xfile=data/theuae/2011/March/theuae_March420.xml&section=theuae

Saudi sends troops, Bahrain Shi'ites call it "war"

MANAMA | Tue Mar 15, 2011 3:13am EDT

(Reuters) - Saudi Arabia sent troops into Bahrain on Monday to help calm weeks of protests by the Shi'ite Muslim majority, a move opponents of the Sunni ruling family on the island called a declaration of war.

...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/us-bahrain-protests-forces-idUSLDE72D0KH20110315

We won't trouble Saudi's tyrants with calls to reform while we crave their oil

Unrest will be seen as destabilising for western governments too until our dependency on Riyadh's tap is curbed

The Guardian, Tuesday 15 March 2011

Did you hear it? The clamour from western governments for democracy in Saudi Arabia? The howls of outrage from the White House and No 10 about the shootings on Thursday, the suppression of protests on Friday, the arrival of Saudi troops in Bahrain on Monday? No? Nor did I.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/mar/15/no-call-for-reform-saudi-oil

House of Saud 'liberates' Bahrain

By Pepe Escobar ASIA TIMES online

United States Defense Secretary Robert Gates visits Bahrain to meet King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa on Saturday. Saudi Arabia invades Bahrain on Monday. This has got to be just a coincidence; Gates and the king were obviously discussing the fortunes of Ferrari and MacLaren in the (postponed) Formula 1 Grand Prix in Bahrain.

...

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MC16Ak03.html

Arab youth march towards a bright future

Uprisings have made them more liberal, but they still respect traditional values

Gulf News Editorial Published: 00:00 March 16, 2011

The results of the third Arab Youth Survey were published yesterday, and show that young Arabs want more democracy as a major priority, but they also find their traditional values extremely important.

http://gulfnews.com/opinions/editorials/arab-youth-march-towards-a-bright-future-1.777607

King Abdullah hails ‘peak of loyalty’

By ARAB NEWS

Published: Mar 14, 2011 23:49 Updated: Mar 15, 2011 01:02

RIYADH: Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah on Monday highlighted the security and stability in the Kingdom and the cohesive relationship between Saudis and their leadership.

Addressing the weekly Cabinet meeting at Al-Yamamah Palace in Riyadh, King Abdullah also noted Saudi Arabia’s strong relations with other countries based on mutual respect and non-interference in internal affairs.

“Saudi Arabia rejects any form of interference in its internal affairs, affecting the interests of the nation and its people as well as its systems and laws that are based on the Qur’an and Sunnah,” the king said.

...

http://arabnews.com/saudiarabia/article317149.ece

[LaoPo]

Here's a dose of reality. The entry of Saudi forces was legal and occurred at the request of an internationally recognized and accepted government. One may not approve and one may not like it, but it is a legal action.

Legal....?

If a country like Bahrain, with a population of 1.2 Million of which 235.000 thousand are non-nationals, and ruled by an oppressive minority ruled government, is asking (or was it "forced" upon by SA...?) for help by another neighbour country with another minority ruled oppressive government...

you are correct.

If their own laws, installed by those 2 minority oppressive governments (read: some Sheiks), allow to play down on the majority in both countries, of course you're correct and the Sheiks are also correct...

Don't tell me it's about oil and money.and...internationally recognized and accepted government...

Wasn't Egypt also ? The difference between Egypt and Bahrain and Saudi Arabia is between the first being important for the Peace Process in the Middle East and the 2 other countries important because of their oil, oh so important to the West....it isn't the sand in those countries being so important, is it?

Opportunism rules, as always, and fc_k the majority.

LaoPo

[hammered]

The people of Bahrain ie the majority should be allowed to determine their own future without interference from outside. Simple really. You either believe in freedom and democracy or you dont. It seems very hard to find a state in this world that actually does believe in such notions. Good luck to the people of Bahrain in fighting their oppressors in whatever way they need to achieve self determinism. Good luck to those fighting for the same in other countries too.

[geriatrickid]

Interesting that so many people are condemning Bahrain. Where were they last year, or the year before? Not a peep on the subject. All of a sudden, some shiites protest and the Baharain government is condemned.iran has been trying to absorb Bahrain since the turn of the last century, and again, not a peep from those condemning the Arabs of Bahrain. I find it odd that the main government opponents are led by clerics that wish to institute strict sharia law. I also find it odd that those who claim to believe in freedom are opposed to a government that has brought modernization and an attempt at civil rights. Here they are backing religious groups that wish to roll back those freedoms, and to put women back in their perceived position as chattel.

This thread is a demonstration of the hypocrisy and ignorance of the usual gang of sh*t disturbers spewing hate. It is incredible that for a group that bleats on about the need to respect Arabs sees fit to stab them in the back because the their Farsi led darlings want to create a nasty sharia run state and snuggle with the despotic nation of Iran.

The Arabs in the surrounding regions are going to give you a lesson on what happens when Iranians try to bully Arabs.

[hammered]

Interesting that so many people are condemning Bahrain. Where were they last year, or the year before? Not a peep on the subject. All of a sudden, some shiites protest and the Baharain government is condemned.iran has been trying to absorb Bahrain since the turn of the last century, and again, not a peep from those condemning the Arabs of Bahrain. I find it odd that the main government opponents are led by clerics that wish to institute strict sharia law. I also find it odd that those who claim to believe in freedom are opposed to a government that has brought modernization and an attempt at civil rights. Here they are backing religious groups that wish to roll back those freedoms, and to put women back in their perceived position as chattel.

This thread is a demonstration of the hypocrisy and ignorance of the usual gang of sh*t disturbers spewing hate. It is incredible that for a group that bleats on about the need to respect Arabs sees fit to stab them in the back because the their Farsi led darlings want to create a nasty sharia run state and snuggle with the despotic nation of Iran.

The Arabs in the surrounding regions are going to give you a lesson on what happens when Iranians try to bully Arabs.

So you dont believe in the right to self determinism for the people of Bahrain and come out with some vile xenophobic attack wishing for people of a certain religion to get a shit kicking. It is irrelevent what religion they are of what language they speak. They are human being demonstrating for democracy. Could you please stick to honest debate. The people of Bahrain surely have the right to fight for their own self detmination as was done in establishing the states which many of us hail from. It isnt the business of other countries unless you are the proponent of imperialism or neo-colonialism. Please also keep the personal attacks on posters to yourself

[Steely Dan]

Interesting that so many people are condemning Bahrain. Where were they last year, or the year before? Not a peep on the subject. All of a sudden, some shiites protest and the Baharain government is condemned.iran has been trying to absorb Bahrain since the turn of the last century, and again, not a peep from those condemning the Arabs of Bahrain. I find it odd that the main government opponents are led by clerics that wish to institute strict sharia law. I also find it odd that those who claim to believe in freedom are opposed to a government that has brought modernization and an attempt at civil rights. Here they are backing religious groups that wish to roll back those freedoms, and to put women back in their perceived position as chattel.

This thread is a demonstration of the hypocrisy and ignorance of the usual gang of sh*t disturbers spewing hate. It is incredible that for a group that bleats on about the need to respect Arabs sees fit to stab them in the back because the their Farsi led darlings want to create a nasty sharia run state and snuggle with the despotic nation of Iran.

The Arabs in the surrounding regions are going to give you a lesson on what happens when Iranians try to bully Arabs.

Well yes hypocrisy and ignorance about covers it. I would add that it is ironic that those up in arms over Israeli settlement building or who cry blue murder whenever Israel retaliates claiming human rights abuses are all to happy to cry colonialism when it's suggested by some that a no fly zone should be enforced over Libya, which could save literally thousands of lives. But this is an example of the hypocrisy of some posters. As for ignorance it is worth bearing in mind the likely ramifications of middle eastern regimes being toppled. Most are dictatorships true enough, but the left wing naively think democracy can supplant these despotic regimes, however as with the Shah of Iran's overthrow the odds are high that we get Islamic fundamentalist theocracies in their place. Both scenarios are a disaster for the human rights of a Country's populace, but at least a despot can be managed more effectively from outside and terrorism is less likely to spill over borders.

The above does contain elements of hindsight and the trouble is that after the mess that is Afghanistan and Iraq the U.S seems to be loath to intervene, however the domino theory applied to communism may have been replaced by a new domino theory of fundamental Islam and due to past experience the U.S may stand aside and in doing so embolden the fundamentalists.

Just for fun (and from an atheist) this is one view.

http://disasteremergencysupplies.com/snafu/category/armageddon/

[hammered]

Interesting that so many people are condemning Bahrain. Where were they last year, or the year before? Not a peep on the subject. All of a sudden, some shiites protest and the Baharain government is condemned.iran has been trying to absorb Bahrain since the turn of the last century, and again, not a peep from those condemning the Arabs of Bahrain. I find it odd that the main government opponents are led by clerics that wish to institute strict sharia law. I also find it odd that those who claim to believe in freedom are opposed to a government that has brought modernization and an attempt at civil rights. Here they are backing religious groups that wish to roll back those freedoms, and to put women back in their perceived position as chattel.

This thread is a demonstration of the hypocrisy and ignorance of the usual gang of sh*t disturbers spewing hate. It is incredible that for a group that bleats on about the need to respect Arabs sees fit to stab them in the back because the their Farsi led darlings want to create a nasty sharia run state and snuggle with the despotic nation of Iran.

The Arabs in the surrounding regions are going to give you a lesson on what happens when Iranians try to bully Arabs.

Well yes hypocrisy and ignorance about covers it. I would add that it is ironic that those up in arms over Israeli settlement building or who cry blue murder whenever Israel retaliates claiming human rights abuses are all to happy to cry colonialism when it's suggested by some that a no fly zone should be enforced over Libya, which could save literally thousands of lives. But this is an example of the hypocrisy of some posters. As for ignorance it is worth bearing in mind the likely ramifications of middle eastern regimes being toppled. Most are dictatorships true enough, but the left wing naively think democracy can supplant these despotic regimes, however as with the Shah of Iran's overthrow the odds are high that we get Islamic fundamentalist theocracies in their place. Both scenarios are a disaster for the human rights of a Country's populace, but at least a despot can be managed more effectively from outside and terrorism is less likely to spill over borders.

The above does contain elements of hindsight and the trouble is that after the mess that is Afghanistan and Iraq the U.S seems to be loath to intervene, however the domino theory applied to communism may have been replaced by a new domino theory of fundamental Islam and due to past experience the U.S may stand aside and in doing so embolden the fundamentalists.

Just for fun (and from an atheist) this is one view.

http://disasteremergencysupplies.com/snafu/category/armageddon/

Nice to know imperialism is alive and well and values we take for granted are to be denied others just because what they chose may not be to our liking.

[Steely Dan]

Nice to know imperialism is alive and well and values we take for granted are to be denied others just because what they chose may not be to our liking.

Values You really don't have a clue do you. Values such as amputation of hands for theft, stoning to death for adultery, death for apostacy, no education for women, if the Islamo-fascist values are to be denied the people of Bahrain then so be it, you are welcome to go and live in Somalia or Iran if you want to have a love in with fundamentalist Islam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEDimxCPEAQ