Talk:Buraimi dispute
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Citations[edit]
user:Leo1pard Hi. You added two citations - Al Hosani and Liwa Journal. I wondered why? Neither has a page number and I wondered what either had to do with the Buraimi dispute? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:18, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
- There's info there you could add to the article - the cites don't really belong where they are - IMHO! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 16:46, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Maps[edit]
I'm not familiar with how to do this, but it would be helpful to put maps in the article, or at least one, to demonstrate the general area where this dispute occurred. NoamB (talk) 00:48, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
US role in Buraimi Dispute[edit]
I added context highlighting the role of the CIA and the US Department of State in fuelling the Buraimi dispute in order to get control of oil reserves. This is documented by multiple reputable sources - and of course it doesn't mean it was not a complex, pre-existing issues with many other facets 2A01:E34:ECB9:690:7029:FBB7:BD92:372F (talk) 05:27, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
- You really need to remove the addition you made to the lede. The Buraimi dispute was NOT "a series of covert attempts by the Central Intelligence Agency to influence the loyalties..." - Whatever CIA involvement there was, the dispute involved US oil interests, the Saudi and Omani governments and British interests. Saying in the first line of the article that the dispute (a highly complex series of actions, including the involvement of international arbitration, military action, land seizures, political jostling and the confluence of tribal interests) was purely a series of covert CIA actions mischaracterises the entire series of events. If this material belongs anywhere, it is further down the article - likely as an addition to the 'background' section. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
- I take your point and will rework it.
- However I invite you to read the recent various sources about this, if you haven't already.
- What's visible of most international crisis is only what the belligerants and their handlers allows you to see and this one is no exception. Exemple: it's now well-documented that the US attempted to bribe the judges in the arbitration you are referring to 2A01:E34:ECB9:690:7029:FBB7:BD92:372F (talk) 06:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
- You may take into account that it's well documented that Al Saud was very much in the pay of the US at that time and that Saudi oil revenues were very limited 2A01:E34:ECB9:690:7029:FBB7:BD92:372F (talk) 06:33, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
- You really need to remove the addition you made to the lede. The Buraimi dispute was NOT "a series of covert attempts by the Central Intelligence Agency to influence the loyalties..." - Whatever CIA involvement there was, the dispute involved US oil interests, the Saudi and Omani governments and British interests. Saying in the first line of the article that the dispute (a highly complex series of actions, including the involvement of international arbitration, military action, land seizures, political jostling and the confluence of tribal interests) was purely a series of covert CIA actions mischaracterises the entire series of events. If this material belongs anywhere, it is further down the article - likely as an addition to the 'background' section. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)