Military Review

Relationship and strategic alliance between the United States and Saudi Arabia

Relationship and strategic alliance between the United States and Saudi Arabia

Edited by Terra America. History The US Middle East policy since 1970's is a consistent change in various geopolitical doctrines. The Nixon Doctrine emphasized the importance of the balance of power in the region between two US allies - Saudi Arabia and Shah's Iran. The Carter doctrine proposed to limit the prevention of the entry of external forces into the Persian Gulf region. Stanislav Khatuntsev, a regular contributor to Terra America, a historian and publicist, writes about the existence of another unofficial doctrine, the George Bush Sr. a possible bond with iraq Saddam Hussein. Has the Bush doctrine led to a crisis in the US Middle East policy, and can it be revised by the Obama administration, by its representatives who are preparing a political agreement with Tehran? This is the theme of this and a number of subsequent publications on our site.

The relationship and strategic alliance between the United States and Saudi Arabia is one of the most important foundations of the current world order - the world order, the strength of which in recent years raises ever more reasonable doubts. The current administration’s desire to find some kind of strategic counterbalances to the Arab monarchies, which are actually expanding under the guise of fighting dictatorial regimes in the region, is too clearly felt.

Alliance history

The US-Saudi alliance began to take shape in the 30 of the last century, when the Standard Oil Company of California, one of the leading firms in the oil kingdom of Rockefellers, received a concession in Saudi Arabia. This happened in 1933, when Franklin Roosevelt was elected President of the United States, and Adolf Hitler became German Chancellor. The theocratic neoplasm [1] needed sources of income and wanted to distance itself from the British Empire, in close cooperation with which it was formed.

In March, huge oil fields were discovered in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, and in 1938, the most famous scientist and geologist entrepreneur, Everett Lee De Golier, personified the American oil industry and its rapid development in the first half of the last century, speaking in Texas predicted that the Middle East "will become the most important oil region in the world in the coming 1940 years."

February 18 1943 - 1,5 after the year after its reassuring statement for London that Saudi Arabia is "far away" from America, F.D. Roosevelt included King Abdulaziz Ibn Saud in the Lend-Lease program. The following year, a significant shortage of oil caused anxiety of the military in Washington, which gave a strong additional impetus to rapprochement with the owners of the Arabian deserts.

After the Yalta Conference, the US President had a 5-hour meeting with Ibn Saud, who sought to ensure the continued presence of the overseas power in his homeland at the end of the war; for the Wahhabi leader, it had to neutralize and balance the influence of "foggy Albion". The parties signed an agreement on the monopoly of the United States on the development of Saudi deposits - the Quincy Pact. According to this pact, the United States received exclusive rights to explore, develop fields and acquire Saudi oil, guaranteeing the Saudis protection from any external threat.

From the point of view of the US Secretary of the Navy of those years and the first US Secretary of Defense (1947 - 1949) James Forrestal, "al-Saudi", as the country is called by the Arabs themselves, was of "paramount importance". On this topic, freshly baked Secretary of State James Byrnes listened to a whole lecture from him in Potsdam.

Theory of conservation

After the Second World War, a concept emerged in the United States, known as the "theory of conservation." It was that the US government needed to take control and develop foreign oil resources and reduce the production of its own raw materials, mothballing domestic reserves for the future. This guaranteed the national security of America.

These resources were located primarily in the Gulf region. Thus, the States became the successors of the oil policy, which since the end of the First World War, their imperial predecessor, Britain, has adhered to.

"The theory of conservation" immediately began to be implemented in the plane of practical politics. If, before 1947, US oil exports prevailed over imports, then in 1948, imports of crude oil and petroleum products exceeded exports for the first time. The development of oil fields in Saudi was in the hands of Aramco - the Arab-American Oil Company; so in 1944, the name became KASOK, the California-Arab Standard Oil Company, which was owned by the Rockefeller Standard of California and Texaco.

The policy of "crystallization"

The direct involvement of the Washington cabinet in Saudi Arabia’s affairs is known as the policy of "crystallization". Saudi was among the most important areas of foreign interests of America. The states have established a unique relationship with Saudi Arabia. One of the US officials in 1948 said that the wealth of this country "was probably the most valuable economic acquisition in the world in the field of foreign investment", and in October 1950, President Harry Truman confirmed in a letter to Ibn Saud those promises - assurances that the US is interested in preserving the independence and territorial integrity of Saudi. Any threat to this kingdom should be promptly perceived as requiring attention and care from the States [2].

But “good old England” still maintained its military-political positions in the Gulf region, and until the beginning of the 70s, security in the region was maintained by a British-American tandem — a teaming up in the old and new leaders of the Western community. However, in November 1971, the British said “enough”, packed and left the oil-rich shores. Their withdrawal meant the deepest since the Second World Change in this region, which supplied 32% of oil to the non-socialist world and concentrated 58% of proven oil reserves. The security system that existed there almost from the middle of the XIX century collapsed completely.

Doctrine of nixon

The vacuum of power in the region filled Shah Iran - a close partner of America. So in the Middle East, the era of the Nixon Doctrine, which consisted in relying on strong and friendly local regimes of the United States as regional police officers, began. In the Persian Gulf, in contrast to South Vietnam, this doctrine worked. The Saudis had to “swallow” the US-supported strengthening of Iran, their main rival in the region, since the fundamental elevation of the Pahlavi dynasty was not threatened.

The danger for the balance of power in the region and for the US-Saudi alliance was not Baghdad, but Tehran. Iraq had its own long-cherished ambitions to establish dominance over the region rich in oil. Back in 1961, when Kuwait became completely independent of the British Empire, Baghdad put forward claims to the territory of this country and threatened to invade it, abandoning its intentions only after England allocated a military contingent to protect its former subjects. In protest, Iraq suspended its membership in OPEC, but this did not help it at all.

After the Baathist coup in the country, a regime aimed at building "Arab socialism" was established, and Baghdad began to purchase large quantities of Soviet weapons. However, Iraq has a purely technical approach to the Persian Gulf, and the chances of changing the balance of forces in the region, even taking into account geopolitical support from the USSR, were also very modest in confrontation with the new, US-Iranian tandem.

Carter's doctrine

Meanwhile, an Islamic revolution occurred in Iran, and the "Nixon Doctrine" gave way to the "Carter Doctrine". In January 1980, the American president spoke directly and frankly: "Any attempt by external forces to gain control over the Persian Gulf region will be viewed as an encroachment on the vital interests of the States, and such an attempt will be reflected by all necessary means, including the military."

The Carter Doctrine was in many ways similar to the declaration of British Foreign Minister G. Lansdun, who in 1903 year demanded that Kaiser Germany and the future ally in the World War Russia stay away from the shores of the same “wet place”.

In this situation, the chances of Baghdad to expand "a place in the sun" have increased significantly. The harsh confrontation of the new regime in Tehran with America made the latter not only turn a blind eye to the plans of the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to snatch everything that is possible from Iran, plunged into the confusion and chaos, but also to provide him with very significant help. The Arab countries of the Gulf also seriously helped Iraq, fearing “exports of the Islamic revolution” - not to mention the USSR and the countries of the Soviet bloc as a whole.

The Iran-Iraq war ultimately led to the implementation of the Carter Doctrine: in July, 1987, US Navy, launched Operation Earnest Will to escort tankers, which were fired on by both sides during the conflict. Thus, the US military-political presence in the Persian Gulf became a tangible reality, and that was the beginning of the course, the implementation of which is fully connected with the name of George Herbert Walker Bush.

What do we know about the elder Bush?

This president, who came out of the oil and gas industry, is one of the best experts in the modern world. It's no secret that the Bush family belongs to the aristocracy of the Northeast coast; his ancestors arrived on the American land almost aboard the Mayflower. True, there are allegations that the ancestors of the president on both the paternal and maternal lines appeared in the States only in the second half of the 19th century.

It is authentically known that Bush Sr., a WWII veteran known as the youngest marine pilot aviation USA, graduated from Yale University, where he was initiated into the secret society of Scull and Bones. It is generally accepted that only representatives of the highest overseas elite, immigrants from the most influential and wealthy families of the United States, become members of this lodge. So, in addition to several generations of Bushes, this lodge included representatives of the Rockefeller family, known for its close ties to the oil business. Leaving university walls and holding important posts, Scull and Bones members tend to keep in touch with each other for the rest of their lives.

Bush Sr. began his work in the oil business as an intern, then “grew up” to a traveling salesman, then he formed an independent oil company - Zapata. Senior Bush became a professional politician only in 1966, leaving the post of chairman of the board of hydrocarbon corporations. As a congressman from the state of Texas (Houston), Bush vigorously defended the interests of the Texas petroleum industry.

Back in 1964, when the future 41 President of the United States ran for the Senate from Texas, his opponent, Democrat Ralph Yarborough, called George Bush a hiring Kuwaiti sheikhs: it was believed that Bush had shares in various Kuwaiti oil drilling companies. As director of the CIA (1976 – 1977), Bush did some business with BCCI (Bank of Credit and Commerce International), headquartered in Abu Dhabi, the UAE capital. The American special services this bank aroused suspicion of involvement in the financing of armed groups of Islamic extremists. It later emerged that BCCI directly sponsored the creator of al-Qaida, Osama bin Laden.

Interestingly, the Panamanian dictator, General Manuel Noriega, whom the elder Bush as the director of the CIA financed, received money (110 thousand dollars monthly) along the chain, one of the links of which was the same bank in the UAE [3]. Kevin Phillips, author of the book American Dynasty, claims that as the head of the CIA, Bush attached particular importance to the activities of this organization in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Gulf countries, doing everything possible so that America would legitimately supply these countries weapons.

Arab Sheikhs Partner

In the 1986 year, as vice president, George Herbert Walker Bush made a visit to the Middle East. In the Reagan administration, he was the most prepared person for this mission. While in Riyadh, Bush negotiated on oil issues with Saudi ministers, including the famous Ahmed Zaki Yamani, one of the creators of OPEC and the 1973 Arab oil embargo. He now heads the Center for Global Energy Studies in London, founded by him in 1990.

Then the vice-president of the United States met with King Fadh. The main subject of the conversation was the military successes and threats of Iran, which caused the Saudis great concern, the issue of security in the Gulf and the supply of American weapons to Riyadh.

This visit intensified the Bush clan’s relations with politicians and businessmen of the Persian Gulf zone, primarily from Saudi Arabia. Later, moving away from big politics, Bush Sr. returned to business and ended up in The Carlyle Group (Carlyle Corporation) - a community of associates, including the family of Saudi magnates Bin Laden, who formally broke up after the September 11 attack. Bush at Carlyle Corporation was in charge of the Asian sector. Until October 2003, he was a senior adviser to the company, then became one of the major shareholders and was repeatedly spotted at sumptuous receptions, business lunches, dinners and entertainment events involving businessmen from Saudi.

The Carlyle Group is the official economic advisor to the Saudi government and the clan bin Laden. At the same time, it was not the holy family Carlyle who was involved in the investigation into the circumstances surrounding the preparation of the 9-11 attacks. On this basis, Larry Kleiman, president of the law firm of Judicial Watch, publicly advised Bush Sr. to "immediately withdraw from the Carlyle Group."

Bush’s eldest son, George Walker, is known for his close ties with Crown Prince and current Saudi King Abdullah, as well as with the country's ambassador Bandar bin Sultan. 43 is the American president who gave him the nickname “Bandar Bush” [4].

According to a number of researchers from the United States, although the Arabian monarchies in the field of security are largely dependent on American support and arms supplies, we can talk about the subordination of certain areas of US foreign policy - mainly in the areas of energy, security, arms exports - developing relations with the countries of the region the interests of the Gulf states, first of all, Saudi. On accounts in American banks is about a trillion dollars of Saudi origin. Approximately the same amount of Arab funds rotates on the US securities market. If it is decided to withdraw this money from a weakened US economy, this measure will have a catastrophic effect on it [5].

Iraq starts and loses

But back to the end of 80's. Iraq, which had not achieved its geopolitical goals in the war with Iran, turned out to be a large debtor of the rich Arab world, including its closest neighbor - Kuwait. And although the latter was a product of the imperial policy of London, which, by creating and supporting this coastal principality, cut off the Ottoman Empire from the Persian Gulf, weakening the potential threat from Constantinople to its possessions in India, the “rights” imposed on Kuwait by Iraq looked more than doubtful.

The occupation of this country could solve many problems of the dictatorial regime in Baghdad - if the United States had closed its eyes to its disappearance from the map of the world. In this situation, Iraq received a very decent “door” to enter the Persian Gulf, liquidated a lender who owed many billions of dollars, and established control over 20% of oil production by OPEC and 25% of world oil reserves.

But even without the Kuwaiti “anabasis,” Baghdad, which had intensified under Hussein, simply hanging its military potential over oil Riyadh, strongly upset the balance of power in the region and was a powerful threat to the US Xioma’s Middle Eastern Saudi policy. From the foregoing, it can be seen that the possible leadership of Iraq in the Gulf sharply contradicted the fundamental foundations of American policy that had been forming since the 6s of the last century.

However, to “besiege” the dictator without a serious reason in the conditions of the end of the Cold War was fraught with the risk of making accusations of hegemonism and dragging over blankets of geopolitical interests. In addition, there was, albeit a purely hypothetical, thanks to MS Gorbachev, but still not a zero possibility of a negative reaction from the USSR to the "oppression" of Saddam Hussein by the States. Therefore, the seizure of Kuwait by Iraq did not contradict their tactical interests, understood with regard to further political measures. Apparently, there was a subtle provocation: during a conversation with the American ambassador in Baghdad, the dictator, who sounded the US attitude towards the possible seizure of Kuwait, received an ambiguous answer from the latter and played all-in.

However, even after that, Iraq could go to the “peace”, clearing the occupied country, but such a move threatened the Baathist regime with serious internal difficulties, primarily with the discontent of the army that ruled in Kuwait.

Unipole End

The "Storm in the Desert", conducted by Bush Sr., not only eliminated the "Iraqi threat", but also established the sole US hegemony in the Gulf, and also initiated the trend of "unipolarity" in American foreign policy. However, in recent years, the situation in this area is definitely changing. The time of the “unipol” seems to be over, which demonstrates the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and the reduction of the US contingent in Afghanistan.

Otherwise, we would have long witnessed the hostilities between Washington and Tehran, whose military-political power has increased significantly in recent 10 years, and its regional positions have noticeably strengthened.

Does the tail twirl the dog?

At the same time, Saudi, together with the smaller Arabian monarchies, can hardly be considered a reliable pillar of the States. As a result of the policy initiated by Bush-father, but the most articulated by Bush-son, the United States themselves were dependent on partners in the Gulf zone.

It should be noted that these partners, despite the mountains of the newest weapons, are militarily weak and doubtful. At the same time, America, which in recent years has been successfully developing hydrocarbon production on its own territory, in the foreseeable future can almost completely abandon their imports, today, in order to support its "allies", it has to buy energy supplies worth tens of billions of dollars from them annually.

In addition, the regimes of the Arabian opponents of Hussein, Gaddafi and Assad are not only not democratic, but very often surpass the dictators of the Islamic world in the scale of the violation of civil rights and freedoms; therefore, the "Arab Spring" hung over the kings and emirs with the sword of Nemesis.

In an effort to diversify the states of the Middle East, the neocons tried to make democratized Baghdad a counterweight to the floodplains and the "reference platform" of Washington. But this idea turned out to be untenable. Today in Iraq, more and more competing with each other are those who focus not so much on America, but on regional centers of power.

Relying on "awakened" Egypt, the United States in the coming years, too, can not.

These facts cause dissatisfaction with many American politicians, and above all - the so-called "realists."

Therefore, more and more closely, the White House is eyeing Iran. We cannot exclude the emergence of a new foreign policy doctrine - the “Obama doctrine”, designed to end the legacy of the “Bush doctrine” and providing for other than now relations with Tehran. The question is - will this doctrine work?

-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------

[1] In September 1932, the territories of Nejd and Hejaz were merged into one state called Saudi Arabia.
[2] Yergin D. Extraction. World history of the struggle for oil, money and power. M .: Alpina Publisher, 2011.
[3] It’s not out of place here to recall that Samuel Prescott Bush, the father of the elder Bush and the future senator, was convincingly accused of financing the Nazi regime in Germany, and before 1917, Sam Baky headed the Ohio railway company Bacai Steel Castings, belonging to the Rockefeller family.
[4] "He is reportedly close to Bush, who calls him" Bandar Bush "."
[5] D.M. Levner Saudi lobby in the United States. Http://
[6] "Sacred Cow".

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. avensis
    avensis 3 March 2013 07: 48
    Article +. Good review
  2. ruslan7608
    ruslan7608 3 March 2013 08: 09
    Where there is oil. There is immediately not a democratic or vice versa the most democratic regime. Everything depends on America’s share in this oil flow !!!
  3. valokordin
    valokordin 3 March 2013 09: 11
    I wonder how Israel relates to this cooperation, and how Wahhabi Saudi relates to Israel?
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 3 March 2013 12: 42
      American documents published on WikiLeaks become the backdrop of current events in Iran and around Iran. Saudi Arabia, which has now become apparently the main victim of revealing publications on the WikiLeaks website, faced the need to decide: does it intend to continue its consultations with the Israeli special services in the previous format?
      Earlier it was reported that these consultations have been held for more than a year, and, as a rule, in Jordan, with the participation of the director of the Mossad Meir Dagan and the head of Saudi intelligence, Prince Mukrin bin Abdel-Aziz. The parties naturally focused on the issue of Iran’s nuclear weapons. Western media reports on Israeli-Saudi consultations indicated that Saudi Arabia agreed to allow Israeli aircraft to fly over its territory in the event that Israel conducts a military operation to destroy Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Some reports even said that Israeli aircraft would be able to land and refuel on specially designed runways for this purpose in Saudi Arabia.
      Publications of this kind have put Riyadh in a difficult position, but the awkwardness associated with them cannot be compared to the problems that Riyadh caused the recent publication of Saudi King Abdullah documented by American diplomats. Thanks to the WikiLeaks website in Tehran, they learned that Abdullah, more than anyone else, demanded that the United States take tough military measures to prevent Iran’s nuclear weapons -v-ir
      anskom-voprose / unrest and protests in Syria are not the result of popular discontent, but this is a project planned by Saudi Arabia and the Zionist regime to change the legitimate government of Bashar al-Assad or to force Syria to break its alliance with Iran and Lebanese Hizbullah and sign a peace treaty with the Zionist regime.
      "During the first demonstration, which took place in the Syrian city of Dar'a, slogans were chanted" neither Iran, not Hezbullah! "And there was nothing that would resemble the demand for reforms, which indicates that the enemies of Syria are trying to incite the Syrian people against Iran and Hezbullah," - says this message.
      Norwegian information sources said that the Syrian government had warned before the protests that thousands of SMS messages were sent to Syrian mobile phone users calling for participation in anti-government demonstrations, and these messages were sent by the Zionist regime of Israel.
      1. TUMAN
        TUMAN 3 March 2013 13: 25
        Quote: Thunderbolt
        and these messages were sent by the Zionist regime of Israel.

        Not for nothing that the site Zionist fascists frolic here, rolled a barrel on Assad. They have everything thoughtfully and paid.
    2. Ascetic
      Ascetic 3 March 2013 13: 23
      Quote: valokordin
      I wonder how Israel relates to this cooperation, and how Wahhabi Saudi relates to Israel?

      First, Saudi Arabia never considered Israel a rival in the region. Both Israel and the Saudis consider Iran the main threat to themselves, and the presence of a common enemy unites more than strongly. That is why the Saudis are so careless in words about the Zionist nuclear weapons and the nuclear manners of the Shiite Ayatollahs of Iran react so nervously. And Bahrain can be practically occupied referring to the threats of its seizure by Iranian "commandos"
      Secondly, the contradictions between the Salafism of the Saudis and Shiism are more serious and fundamental (in the opinion of a number of Saudi theologians) than the contradictions between the Salafis and the Jews.
      Thirdly, the confrontation between Israel and the Saudis is declarative in nature and not real Israel and the Kingdom have one strategic partner and one source of survival - the United States. Namely, Iran is today a consistent opponent of the expansion of the American (and generally Western) presence in the region. , from the confrontation with Iran, the Saudi monarchy gets much more "sweet cakes" than it could get from the confrontation with Israel, and for the royal dynasty, profit has always been more important than ideals.
      And the main thing in relations with the United States and Israel is to preserve their status as the only and unique "girl's greatest friend" and to protect themselves from the risk of the Americans looking for a partner on the side in the face of Qatar, for example, and what the hell is not joking about Iran. But "Iranophobia" is simply necessary for a successful fight against the Shiite opposition within the country and for the consolidation of society against the main ideological enemy of Iran.
    3. Kaa
      Kaa 3 March 2013 14: 14
      Quote: valokordin
      How Wahhabi Saudi Relates to Israel

      And what about the homeland of their ancestors?
      "In 851 AH, a group of people from the al-Masalikh clan, who are a clan of the Anza tribe, equip a caravan. The leader of the caravan was a man named Sahmi bin Haslul. The caravan arrived in Basra, where the caravan men went to a grain merchant, a Jew named Mordahay bin Ibrahim bin Moshe. During the negotiations, the Jew asked them: "Where are you from?" They replied: "From the Anza tribe of the al-Masaleh clan." Hearing this, the Jew began to fiercely fool each of those who came, saying that he was also from the al-Masaleh clan, but that he lived in Basra. When the caravan was ready to set off, a Jew asked to take him with him, because he really wants to visit his homeland Nedzh. A Jew (the true ancestor of the ibn Saud family) preached in the territories of Najd, Yemen and Hijaz, traveling from al-Qasim to al-Isha, on the road to al-Qatif he changed his name from Mordovai to Marwan bin Diriya. In less than a month, a Jew killed all the members of the farm’s owner’s family, hiding the traces of his crimes and showing as if the thieves who had entered here destroyed the family. This Jewish ancestor (Mordakhai) of the ibn Saud dynasty built a guest yard on the lands of his victims under the name “Madafa” and gathered around him a group of his minions, hypocritical people who began to stubbornly say that he was a prominent Arab leader. After that, he felt safe and made adiriya his permanent residence. He had a lot of wives who gave him a huge number of children. He gave Arabic names to all his children. Since that time, the number of his descendants has increased, which allowed the creation of a large Saudi clan, following his path, controlling the Arab tribes and clans. One of the sons of Mordovai, whose name was al-Marakan, had an Arabized form of the Hebrew name Makren, the eldest son was called Muhammad, and the other was called Saud, whose name now bears the Saudi dynasty. This disgusting Jewish dynasty strongly protects the sect Wahhabisthat allow violence in cities and villages under the guise of Islam. This Jewish dynasty has been lawless since Hijra since 1163, since they named the Arabian Peninsula after themselves (Saudi Arabia) and consider the whole region their property, and its population - servants and slaves of the dynasty, who should work for the benefit of their owners (dynasties Saudis). King Faisal al-Saud at that time could not deny the close relationship of his family with the Jewswhen he stated in an interview with the Washington Post on September 17, 1969:We, the Saudi dynasty, are relatives (cousins) of the Jews: we do not share the point of view of Arabs or Muslims in general on the Jewish question ... we must live in peace and harmony. ” This was and remains the basis of this regime of the Jewish family (Saudi dynasty) .. Everything is done in accordance with their religious conviction - a fictitious Wahhabi sect that legalizes all these atrocities and has absolutely nothing to do with Islam.
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 3 March 2013 18: 14

        Hence the conclusion. Wahhabism and Zionism, as well as fascism and other misanthropic movements, be they religious or nationalist, or social, are all equally harmful to any nation, including the Russian one. Struggling with one, in no case should one join the ranks of other fanatics. Since ancient times, Russia has been distinguished by the fact that brutally suppressed manifestations of any fanaticism, and reconciled the moderate and sane representatives of any warring camps. And therefore, nothing is trying on the Zionist fifth column and the Wahhabi Salafists as joint work in the fresh and frosty Kolyma air or joint friendly gatherings in Mordovian reconciliation and tolerance camps.
        1. Kaa
          Kaa 3 March 2013 18: 38
          Quote: Ascetic
          nothing is trying on the Zionist fifth column and Wahhabi Salafists as a joint work in the fresh and frosty Kolyma air

          I'm afraid the residents of Magadan will be offended by you for such a "clogging" of the region laughing
          And for such a drawing I am in the fall, whoever I was .... from the mouths of the then "Germans". And about fanatics and Russia, there is one parallel with the Wahhabis in our history.
          "("Heresy of the living .. those present"), the Jewish heretical movement in Ancient Russia of the last third of the XNUMXth century. XVII century Tried to plant Judaism in the Russian Church. It got its name from the word "living". Continuing the thousand-year-old traditions of secret Jewish sects, the living ... those who opposed the Christian doctrine, denied the Holy Trinity, blasphemed the Son of God and the Holy Spirit. They rejected the Deity of the Savior and His Incarnation, did not accept the saving Passion of Christ, did not believe His glorious Resurrection, they did not recognize the general resurrection of the dead, and denied the Second Glorious Coming of Christ and His Last Judgment. They did not recognize the Holy Spirit as the Divine Hypostasis. The living ... rejected the apostolic and patristic writings and all Christian dogmas, taught to keep the law of Moses, keep the Sabbath and celebrate the Passover. They denied church ordinances: sacraments, hierarchy, fasts, holidays, temples, The continuation of this mockery of all saints was fornication and debauchery. The living priests performed the Divine Liturgy, having eaten and drunk after fornication, blasphemously cursed over the Holy Body and the Honest Blood of Christ and made other desecrations, about which, according to pr. Joseph Volotsky, "you can’t even write." Those living ... aroused doubt in the faint-hearted and unbelieving in some places of the Holy Scripture, and above all the New Testament; seduced and with the help of the renounced, distributed by them, i.e. condemned by the Church books - manuals on the secret sciences - and distorted lists of scripture; used and all available to them an arsenal of the Jewish Black Book and witchcraft.In the organization of the sect of the living ... those who live much resembled future Freemasonry: strict conspiracy, penetration into the upper strata of government and the clergy; a ritual that includes the "rite" of desecration of the shrine; the formation of a “teacher-student” system outside of traditional Orthodox beliefs. The first outward manifestation of the heresy of those living ... already in the 1470s was iconoclastic demonstrations. Heretics, referring to the Pentateuch of Moses, began to call for the destruction of icons. The sect was exposed in 1487 by the archbishop. Gennady, who informed the Tsar and Metropolitan Gerontius about it. At the direction of the tsar, several heretics called by Gennady were arrested and subjected to “city execution” (punishment with a whip at the auction) for abuse of icons.After the Council in 1490, which condemned the heresy of the living ... those who were in power, the struggle against them continued for almost 15 years. Only in 1504, Tsar Ivan III decided to convene a new Council. Heretics here once again were strongly condemned and their leader, and executed after the trial.Source: Encyclopedia "Russian Civilization" O. Platonov MUCH REMINDERS, INCLUDING AND AT OUR TIME, DOESN'T IT?
          1. Ascetic
            Ascetic 3 March 2013 19: 05

            Do not consider unclean what God has cleaned up - this is a truly Christian attitude. There is nothing unworthy in the world - not a single culture, not a single nation, not a single living being - everything is presented to the Christian as if on a wide canvas. The world of open roads, diverse in its variety and valuable in this diversity ... For the Jewish consciousness, there is too much impure in the world. There is only one road to follow - your ancestors followed it, and you do not have the right to step aside. After all, everything else around the edges is evil and impurity. Hence, traditionalism, the desire to withdraw into the imaginary exclusivity of one’s culture, the cautious and sometimes even embittered attitude towards everyone who is different from us, not ours (goyim, uncircumcised).
            Locality and universality - this is how Judaism and Christianity can be characterized. Only the one who observes this and this is saved, only this people is elected, only this food can be eaten. The setting of law is the setting of limitation. Christianity liberates man, makes the whole world accessible to his action, all food and every man clean. Judaism kept a man in the room. Christianity puts him into the light of God. And if, until a certain point, the limitation of the law was necessary, then, after the coming of Christ, it became unnecessary and directly harmful. “Judaizers” can be called those who are trying to limit Christianity to certain legalistic principles, to make something clean for the Christian, and something (almost all) to be unclean, trying to reanimate the spirit of Old Testament, archaic limitation in Christianity.
            “It was Jewry that cared for the purity of the race, resisted mixed marriages, did not allow any confusion, wanted to remain a closed world. Jewishness attached religious significance to blood, inextricably linked the religious moment with the national moment. The messianic consciousness of the people is always a manifestation of the Jewish spirit. Jewishness was characterized by exclusivity, an exceptional commitment to their own and their own. Anti-Semites could be called "Judaizing" "
            (Nikolai Berdyaev).
            The same can be said about the Wahhabis sect who are trying to create some kind of pure Islam and revive the attributes of the cave Middle Ages. They act according to the same scheme as the Jews .. therefore they can also be called to some extent "Judaizing" Islamist sectarian anti-Semites. winked
            1. Ascetic
              Ascetic 3 March 2013 19: 49
              Quote: Kaa
              Only in 1504, Tsar Ivan III decided to convene a new Council. Heretics again were strongly condemned and their leader, and executed after the trial

              Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary

              At the beginning of the XIX century in our legislative language, the Sabbath heretics, adhering to some Jewish dogmas and rites (circumcision, the Sabbath, etc.), were called Judaizers.... The first official news about them dates back to 1811 and came almost simultaneously from the provinces of Tula, Voronezh and Tambov. The Right Reverend Voronezh reported that this sect "arose between Orthodox Christians around 1796 from natural Jews who lived among Christians, and spread in 6 villages of Bobrovsky and Pavlovsky districts." To combat this sect, ranked among the most harmful, severe measures were taken in 1825 (sending the chiefs of the sect to military service, if they are suitable for it, exile of those unfit to Siberia, prohibiting sectarians from leaving their place of residence, etc.), and in the form of "mockery of delusions" and excitement among the people of "disgust" for them, it was commanded to "call Subbotniks a Jewish sect and declare that they are truly Jews." At the same time, it was decided "from the counties in which the Jewish heresy is located, to expel Jews without exception and under no pretext to allow them to stay there" (this rule was canceled in 1884). Later, the Judaizers were called Judaic

              1. Kaa
                Kaa 3 March 2013 20: 03
                Quote: Ascetic
                Later, the Judaizers were called Judaic

                And what about "political correctness"? wassat
            2. Kaa
              Kaa 3 March 2013 20: 11
              Quote: Ascetic
              what God cleansed is a truly Christian attitude

              "From the Bible (New Testament). The Apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Colossians (Ch. 3) speaks about the moral character of a true Christian, who must abandon the" old man "in himself, that is, from human vices (anger, anger, lies, slander , covetousness, etc.) and spiritually renewed (vv. 10-11) - "In the image of His Creator, where there is neither Greek nor Judea, nor circumcision, nor uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free, but everything is Christ in everything."
              The same idea is contained in another Epistle of the Apostle Paul - to the Galatians (chap. 3, vv. 27-28) expressed in a different form: “All of you who were baptized into Christ, clothed in Christ. There is no longer Judea, nor a Gentile; no slave, nor free; there is no male or female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus. "
              It is usually interpreted in the sense of declaring the equality of all people among themselves. But the New Testament speaks of equality only between Christians - they are equal in their faith before God.http: //
      2. valokordin
        valokordin 3 March 2013 19: 14
        The wisest of the wisest, what you told me was just a discovery, if so, then my negative attitude towards Wahhabis should be transferred to the God-chosen people of the Middle East. So those Wahhabi terrorists in Russia are blood relatives to Jews, and the genetic connection is very stable. This is the number. So maybe the right name of the Saudi terrorist is not Bin Laden, but Benya Lad.
        1. Kaa
          Kaa 3 March 2013 20: 07
          Quote: valokordin
          my negative attitude towards Wahhabis is to be transferred to the God-chosen people of the Middle East.

          If I say yes! - now the "Mediterranean" will run up with accusations, if not, we will not be able to understand who is driving whom, a dog with a tail, or a tail with a dog ... recourse
    4. Ruswolf
      Ruswolf 3 March 2013 16: 13

      valokordin I wonder how Israel relates to this cooperation, and how Wahhabi Saudi relates to Israel?

      And how does a chain dog behave when an unwanted guest comes to you?
      You give the command FU the dog fulfills it at the same time grumbles, goes back and forth there and constantly looks into your eyes with the hope that you will say FAS or just leave.
      And here is dog happiness for him! He is ready to break the chain of love, just to get to the ass of the guest!
      The same thing happens when two “staffords” are kept on leashes and in muzzles.
      They are ready to endure everything, carry out all commands, wag their tail ........ Just to let go of the leash and take off the muzzle (although for them the muzzles are not a problem). And the longer they are held, the hotter the blood.
      So probably amers, like good trainers, regulate relations in the Middle East.
      After all, there is always the opportunity to give Fas a command and lower it from the leash.
  4. Fodaorugel
    Fodaorugel 3 March 2013 09: 33
    Very detailed. To be continued, no?
  5. VNM
    VNM 3 March 2013 09: 53
    That's the mess that happened because imperial England arbitrarily and shortsighted drew borders for new states after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
    Based only on your interests, drawing borders as you wish, not taking into account the religious views of local residents, tribal affiliation - this can serve as a time bomb, which can serve as the beginning for the 3rd World War :-(
    APASUS 3 March 2013 09: 56
    Saudi Arabia is a kind of country of black deeds that the USA themselves abhor !!! And they can’t do under the banner of democracy advocates!
    And the sheikhs, to please the ambitions of the United States, provide gangs with weapons and money to overthrow unnecessary regimes !! The same Syria!
  7. taseka
    taseka 3 March 2013 10: 01
    An interesting look, but I think our oligarchs have not gone far from this policy of "making" money to the detriment of the country's policy - "As Congressman from Texas, Houston, Bush has been a zealous advocate for the Texas oil industry." - so they, our "darlings" work in the State Duma and in the Federation Council. They spoiled their eyes and soul:
    1. SSR
      SSR 3 March 2013 16: 42
      Quote: taseka
      Like them, our "darlings" work both in the State Duma and in the Federation Council.

      yeah Americans back then
      The United States has developed a concept known as the "conservation theory". It consisted in the fact that The US government needs to take control and develop foreign oil resources and reduce the production of its own raw materials, preserving internal reserves for the future. This guaranteed the state security of America.

      And they consistently brought it to life ...
      I am glad that they have now re-opened their wells.
      I hope that when our thread will pursue a reasonable resource policy.
  8. Serg_Y
    Serg_Y 3 March 2013 10: 26
    (+) Thanks for the article "Nothing Personal is a Family Business."
  9. DeerIvanovich
    DeerIvanovich 3 March 2013 10: 41
    Therefore, more and more closely, the White House is eyeing Iran. We cannot exclude the emergence of a new foreign policy doctrine - the “Obama doctrine”, designed to end the legacy of the “Bush doctrine” and providing for other than now relations with Tehran. The question is - will this doctrine work?
    will work, even how.
  10. DDR
    DDR 3 March 2013 10: 43
    Again, the "striped whales" want to get in without soap. You can't let them near Iran!
    1. old rocket man
      old rocket man 3 March 2013 13: 25
      This, of course, is true, but what do you suggest? Send an expeditionary force to Iran?
      Like, do you have it? hi
  11. 120352
    120352 3 March 2013 12: 00
    Since our politicians missed and did not tame Saudi Arabia in their time, today there is one way: to destroy it, otherwise it will destroy us. And she's already doing it! Millions of Muslims who have flooded Russia - their handiwork! Everyone who comes here receives material support from the King of the SA both for moving and for living in Russia. The purpose of their stay is to create, at least, the appearance of their numerical superiority in certain regions (Perm, St. Petersburg, Moscow) in order to create their autonomy in these territories through the so-called. "the Kosovo option", and then - the seizure of power throughout Russia and the establishment of medieval order in the form of Sharia law. This is the caliphate. But this is not the end of matters, they strive for world domination. Fascism can take various forms, including the simplest one - Islamic. Read the Quran. It says everything about it!
    1. Olegovi4
      Olegovi4 3 March 2013 13: 28
      I think the "Kosovo" scenario will not work with us. I am firmly convinced that if only a mess starts, the guys will screw them back to their mountains. They are the crowd, brave, but brave. Until they really start to get snot.
  12. Alikovo
    Alikovo 3 March 2013 12: 03
    amers get their share from the oil production in saudas and they are not touched.
  13. Nevsky
    Nevsky 3 March 2013 12: 38
    And why in this thread there are no comments with the Israeli flag !? fellow

    It’s much more interesting to mud the Russian military-industrial complex and the secular Syrian regime. Although the root of the problems of Israel in this thread. hi
    1. Ruswolf
      Ruswolf 3 March 2013 19: 08

      And why in this thread there are no comments with the Israeli flag !?

      And Obama didn’t decide for them!
  14. Kaa
    Kaa 3 March 2013 14: 24
    You can laugh about the "conspiracy theory", but the Bushev family still can do it.
    "John F. Kennedy died because he opposed himself to a group of Texas oligarchs. This version is not discussed today, as she compromises Bush. John Kennedy died because he contrasted himself with a group of Texas oligarchs. This was told by "Pravda.Ru" Valentin Zorin, political observer of the USSR State Radio and Television, now professor at the Institute USA and Canada. "Washington, which so arrogantly teaches us the lessons of democracy, should not forget - the Kennedy assassination, called the crime of the century, has not been solved, and moreover, no possible efforts are being made to solve it. By the way, Serhan Serhan - the man who was directly involved in this story is alive and in a Los Angeles prison. He was imprisoned for the murder of Robert F. Kennedy, but he could tell something about the murder of John. The conspiracy in Dallas was organized by a group of Texas billionaires led by Harold Hunt .. The Texas entrepreneur was very active in politics, nominated Senator Lyndon Johnson from Texas in the elections of the sixtieth year as a presidential candidate.On the first attempt to promote Johnson failed, but Hunt finished his game in Dallas, Kennedy was killed, and Johnson was in By the way, if we are talking about Texans in connection with the Kennedy assassination and the strange passivity in the investigation today, then I want to remind the readers of your ha zetas what Bush's father and son are Texas-based oil producers from the same group. The Bush family is not going to take steps that can even cast a shadow over this group at least retroactively. Therefore, I believe that the opportunities that remain today to investigate these two murders are not used.Kennedy opposed himself to a group of oligarchs who claimed power. Therefore, Hunt and the Texas billionaires conspired against Kennedy. My American colleagues avoid talking about it, but six months before the tragedy, Kennedy initiated a bill to increase taxes on recoverable oil. The current Texas leadership of Washington is not profitable to recall this
  15. kukuruzo
    kukuruzo 3 March 2013 16: 40
    when I see the words of the USA and Saudi Arabia .. I have certain associations in my head .. as I think of many
    1. Serg_Y
      Serg_Y 3 March 2013 18: 24
      Freebie united at all times, the main thing is to determine the place of the common fund, in this place it should be relatively quiet and calm. And then they reached Rome, they reached Paris, they reached Berlin, and New York is far away.
  16. Ruswolf
    Ruswolf 3 March 2013 19: 07
    In general, if you do not tell me, US policy corresponds to the policy of the Reich!
    "Ein Volk ein Reich ein Führe" One people! One empire! One Fuhrer!
    That is, one dominant power is all, and all the rest are appendages of raw materials, consumers of products, borrowers!
    In my opinion, it was in Himmler's program "On the creation of one large agrarian state in the conquered territories"
  17. Army1
    Army1 3 March 2013 19: 54
    How enraged by their hypocritical smiles