Hey--- how's that licensing of women drivers working in your scummy sand box?

Spoiled-from-birth autocratic overprivileged aristocrats always pick up their marbles and go home when they aren't constantly obeyed and worshipped.

with special rivalry between Saudi-Arabia and Iran.

The Syrian civil War is a proxy-war between an Iran-friendly Assad-regime and rebels who would give the country a new start (for better or for worse).

Saudi-Arabia is simply pissed that the West has failed it on the predictable: Messing around in the Middle-East and weakening Iran.

And Saudi Arabia decides to publicly spank the US for its "inaction?"

Fine then. Fuck off I say. Its long overdue to dial down this "friendship" anyway

They are setting the table to get the US administration who will use our military in accordance with their desires. Bush family and Saudi royals have always been on the same NWO page.

To say nothing of a shitload of other issues.

what can they say ?
they know religion is probably the only thing thatd destroy their monarchy :p



cant be mad when since we re-enforced this notion for 30+ years..

At least women can drive in Iran(probably because they can also vote). And they don't cut your hand off for stealing.

the only God that the monarchy of Saudi Arabia worships is money :p

they put on a show for the male population (who are definitely mostly extreme) to keep an uprising from occurring...

infact, until they got threats from extremists, they had a very loose interpretation of Islamic law that they called 'cultural laws' as a part of their justice system..

the revolution in Iran and and the take over of Mecca and the Grand Mosque by terrorists in 1979 made them change their mind and implement harsher and more strict and complete Islamic law.

they weren't always the nation we see today, but they realized that doing nothing meant their power would always be at risk as Islam was not going to ever decrease in popularity because of the two religious centers being located in their country.

so no, the government of Saudi Arabia is not more religiously extreme than the puppet masters that REALLY control Iran. the people of Saudi Arabia, yes.. probably so


interesting to think how Saudi Arabia would have turned out if we had denied/tried to stop California-Arabian Standard Oil Co (subsidy of an American oil company) being bought out by the regime of Saudi..

This source's numbers are way off from yours. They carry out about the same number of executions respective to their populations so they are about equal in that regard, which is why I did not bring up the death penalty.
http://amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/death-sentences-and-executions-in-2012

I didn't know that they still carried out amputations, but it is still not as bad as Saudi Arabia. They don't cut off your finger for a first offense. That person in the Huffpo article had committed past robberies, and was a gang leader, according to Huffpo's source. That is unconscionable but still way less extreme than cutting someone's entire hand for a first offense.

Nothing you said shows that Saudi Arabia is any less extreme than Iran, and everything points to it being much more so. Yet I still find it comical that this nation is a close ally while Iran is supposed to be on the Axis of Evil.

And compared to the Saudi monarchy, the Iranian government is populist. It was brought into power by a popular uprising and they do have some responsiveness to the people.

The Saudis allow almost no popular input and have used fundamentalist religion instead as a way of propping up their regime.

Nobody on this thread has pointed out that one of the Saudis' beefs with us is that we didn't support their brutal crackdown in Bahrein, but that may be the most telling point of all. They're terrified that dissent could take hold in the Gulf states and spread to them.

because they fear an uprising..
also the reason they don't allow political gatherings of any sort :p

as I told someone above, the only God the Saudi monarchy worships is Money...

they did what they had to do to make sure they stayed in power...

before the 70s, Saudi Arabia had some 'culture laws' that fit with Islamic law.. but I can assure you it was not Islamic law.

the revolution in iran and the take over of Mecca and the grand mosque by Islamic terrorists made the monarchy realize they might wanna jump on board the Islamic law train to prevent an uprising and appease their pretty extreme male population.

and they have a lot of beefs with us right now.. the last 6 years we haven't just don't what they've asked of us.. im sure its making them pretty angry seeing as they sit on a large amount of oil we supposedly need...

I don't know if people saw or not, but they even rejected a seat on the UN security council a couple of days ago ...
that's pretty hardcore protesting on an international political level....

They think it's only a good idea if we do their dirty work for them. I think it's a good idea for them to put up or shut up.

please try to refrain from posting articles by Pat Buchanan

nobody cares what the racist idiot has to say ... let alone what he had to say in 1991.

just unofficially...
just like the soviet war in Afghanistan :p

which was also a battleground between Saudi Arabia and Iran for control of a nation.
both of which flooded tons of money and militants to differing opposing factions that normally wouldn't get a long, but did to rid the country of those darn godless commies :p|
they knew afterwards thered be a fight for control amongst the groups :p

That's no empty threat, they could easily buy one or more from Pakistan.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2012/07/25/Saudis-mull-buying-nukes-from-Pakistan/UPI-94601343239152/

They are responsible for directly or indirectly funding radical islamic movements around the world through their proxies Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan and now Somalia.

oh to bad,to bad.

"their" friends in the Middle East.

as far away from us as possible. They're pissed because we won't engage in yet another regime-change/manufactured war for them? What nerve! There's a new sheriff in town, assholes.

Your patch of grit has been a client state since your grandaddy tapped his first oil well. oh, I'm sure you can ditch the US - China or Russia or even India would be happy to bend you over in the way you like... but you're going to be bent, no matter what, because Saudi Arabia is one of those states that just can't exist without a greater nation empowering pudgy little shits like you.

Good riddance. Don't forget to kiss Dubya goodbye (hell, take him with you!)

Now go piss off.

We are becoming less and less dependent on Saudi crude anyway.

Wasn't he the ambassador to us for like, 20 years?

Here is a paper on the situation in Saudi Arabia, my comments follow but my comments do NOT relate to this paper, I am posting it here for informational purposes only

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/uploads/Documents/pubs/PolicyFocus96.pdf


One of the rules of Dictators is that Dictatorships span three generations, unless something outside the power of the Dictators leads to the collapse of their dictatorship. Example of such outside powers are at the bottom of this paper. The three generation of dictatorships that survive outside pressure are roughly the following:

First Generation: The founder of the Dictatorship (often called "kingdoms" and "Empires&quot . After a good bit of struggle, the Founder takes over a country and makes himself (generally a him, sometimes a her) absolute ruler of the country. He rules with an iron hand.

Now, one of the characteristics of the first generation is the elimination of all potential enemies (real or imaged), often in the climb to the top, but more often after the dictator is in full charge. For example Lenin was never an absolute Dictator, he was a leader of a collective group, known as the Bolsheviks. Subsequent to his death the rest of the leadership fought for control, Stalin came out on top. Once on top he not only eliminated any anti-Communist opposition, but also his former allies who may have had claims to ruling with him. The Show Trials of the Late 1930s was Stalin making himself supreme.

Genghis Khan did something similar, he slowly built up support among the Mongols and once he was in charge he conquered anyone who opposed him. Like Stalin and King Saud I, Genghis Khan died in bed. Thus is typical of such first generation dictators.

Second Generation: These are the heirs to the founder of the Dictatorship. In some cases these are the sons of the first dictator (Saudi Arabia, and the Mongol Empire are examples of this), but can also be people who had been the immediate lieutenants of the founder (the members of the Politburo at the death of Stalin are examples of this). There may be some infighting among these heirs but it tends to be very brief and bloodless when compared to what the founder had done (for example when Khrushchev took over the Soviet Union, Stalin's secret police chief was the only man killed). The second generation came to power together, and have learned to depend on each other when the founder was alive. This continues after his death, some infighting over who is in control and how much control that person has, but when push comes to shove, everyone backs down if violence may result.

When Stalin died in 1953, the second generation of Soviet Leaders took over, and ruled till Gorbachev was elected Head of the Communist Party in the 1980s. Do to the stress the second generation went through under the founder, they tend to act like brothers who are very close. Arguments, yes, non-violent fights yes, anything that may rock the boat NO. This was the Soviet Union from 1954 to the 1980s. Sometime dogma would step in and they would do something stupid (like invade Afghanistan, something Stalin had refused to do), but they concern was conscience among the ruling second generation of leaders (even if that means long term harm to the Country, thus the Communists tendency to not only tolerate but participate in the corruption that slowly destroyed the Soviet Union, for to attack the corruption, other then in words, meant going after fellow leaders of the Second Generation and that meant rocking the boat and that is something the second generation of any dictatorship will not permit.

You see the same thing with the death of Genghis Khan, his sons ruled collectively, but also refuse to address the problem of communication and such a large empire produced. The sons of Genghis Khan continued they war of conquest, but those wars actually made the problem of central control ever worse.

In the case of Saudi Arabia, the Second Generations is the Sons of King Saud I. He had 36 sons and unknown number of daughters. While the sons technically rule Saudi Arabia, the daughter (mostly through their husbands) also have a say. Furthermore it is a long Arab Tribal Tradition that the men of a Tribe select their leader at the death of the previous leader (This is how the First Caliph was selected by the followers of Mohammad at his death). Thus since the death of King Saud I, the sons have collectively ruled and at the death of each son who was elected King by King Saud I's sons, the surviving sons have elected the next king. Till now, all of the kings have been sons of King Saud I.

Third Generation: Sooner or later, the second generation of the Dictatorship dies out and the third generation takes over. You saw this in the Soviet Union at the death of Brezhnev, He was followed in quick secession by other Second Generation Soviet leaders. People born before the revolution of 1917 and who came to power in the vacuum left when Stalin killed off their predecessors during the Show Trials of the late 1930s. Unlike actual sons, the Second Generations of Stalin's dictatorship were already in their 20s in the 1930s, unlike the natural sons of King Saud, many were born in the 1930s. Thus in the case of the Soviet Union, the Second generation died out about 20 years ago. In Arabia that is only occurring now.

Gorbachev and his fellow third generation communists did not know Stalin except by stories told by others. They ties to the collective leadership of the second generation was weak and thus willing, ready and able to risk internal conflict in the fight for power. Gorbachev lost that fight, Yeltsin won that fight, but then lost it to Putin. This is typical of third generations of dictatorship, it is when the knives come out. Thus you had the attempted coup against Gorbachev (that ended up with Yeltsin in power), one addition coup attempt (put down by the Army) and finally an internal coup that put Putin in charge. The infighting took ten years to resolve itself, but it did. Putin is NOT the dictator Stalin was, and has less power then Gorbachev did but he is typical of what happen to the third generation, a new system is adopted the the remains of the dictatorship is sweep away.

When the Sons of Genghis Khan died, the third generation took over. While technically the Mongol Empire survived, the grandsons divided up the Empire among themselves, thus you ended up with several Mongol Empires. These empires fought each other till the MIng Dynasty of China overthrow the Mongols in China, and the the Golden Horde of the Steeps of Russia was slowly absorbed by the expanding Russian Empire after 1600.

Dividing Saudi Arabia up is NOT an option for the third generation in Saudi Arabia but who will rule? The most powerful group of sons are the sons of King Saud I Eight Wife, Sudairi:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudairi_Seven

They have produced one King (King Fahd II, 1982-2005) and the present "Crown Prince" Salman.

The present King is King Abdullah, His sons is head of the Saudi Arabia National Guard, an independent military force from the Saudi Arabian Army:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_of_Saudi_Arabia

Another son is governor of the provence just north of Yemen:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishaal_bin_Abdullah_Al_Saud

Another son is Deputy for Foreign Affairs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul-Aziz_bin_Abdullah

Asbul-Aziz bin Adbullah was married to the daughter of Turk bin Nasser, son of Nasser bin Abdulaziz. i.e the great grand daughter of King Saud I (also called King Abdulaziz)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turki_bin_Nasser
King Abdullah is considered one of the most conservative members of the house of Saud when it comes to religion, but his daughter is an out spoken advocate for the right of women to drive:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adila_bint_Abdulla_Al-Saud

The Saudi National Guard is NOT a reserve unit like the US National Guard. It contain reserve elements, but also has full time personal. It is more a combination of State Police force, National Guard, personal army of Abdullah, special forces, SWAT and internal Security force. The Web Site says it has not tanks, but someone ordered German Leopard II Tanks for them last year. At the time I wondered why, for the Saudi Regular Army uses American M1 Tanks. Any military tries to minimize the number of different weapons they carry, more to reduce supply issues then any other reason. Thus if this was part of a General upgrading of the National Guard, M1 tanks would have been ordered, just to keep the supply line as simple as possible (The M1 and German Leopard uses the same weapons, but different engines and transmission, both can run on diesel, so some overlap between the two weapons but why two different types of tanks? Both usable in the dessert, but both also not design for the desert, the M1 tanks can float, this was a US requirement do to US experiences in the swamps of Vietnam, the Leopard was heavily influence by German Research on German Armor use in Russia during WWII, including use on ice, frozen ground, frozen rivers etc).

At the time of the order, is suspected something was up internally in Arabia, but what it was no one knows.

Prince Bandar, is a third generation member of the Family:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandar_bin_Sultan

His father was Crown Prince from 2005 to 2011 (2005 is when Abdullah moved up from Crown Prince to King). He was replaced by Prince Nayef, one of the Sudairi Seven (who died in 2012 and was replaced by Prince Salman, another of the Sudairi seven):

Prince Bandar's Father, Sultan bin Abdulaziz (Sultan son of Abdulaziz)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultan_bin_Abdulaziz

Bandar's brother, Khalid
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_bin_Sultan

Khalid lead the Saudi Arabian Army till April 2013, when he was removed allegedly for not being able to push back Yemeni tribesmen who had taken over Arabia territory, but was replaced by the Present King's son. Who in turn was replaced in August 2013 by a son of Prince Sultan, thus the army returned to the control of the sons of Sultan.

Salman bin Sultan (Salman son of Sultan):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_bin_Sultan

Crown Prince Naylef:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayef,_Crown_Prince_of_Saudi_Arabia

Naylef son, Mohammad is the Secretary of the Interior, Saudi Arabia follows the French Pattern as to that office, i.e. it is more Homeland Security and the FBI then the US department of the Interior, along

More on that son:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_bin_Nayef

Another son is Governor of the "Eastern Provence" i.e. the area with large Shiite population and thus must be watched carefully. Saud bid Nayef (Saud son of Nayef) is often mentioned as being the first third generation king if and when that occurs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saud_bin_Nayef

Crown Prince Salman:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_bin_Abdulaziz

One of Salman's son runs the oil ministry, another tourism (which means he controls Mecca, very important in Arabia).

If you read up on the family tree, you have to understand that outside the "Christian west". most people marry their cousins. The US ran across this problem in Iraq and Afghanistan. It was hard to get people to inform for most people did things with family members, thus if you inform all your support group would turn against you. Thus you see a lot of third generation daughters marrying third generation sons in the house of Saud. This further adds to the confusion as who will support who in the present and coming infighting among the third generation over who will rule Arabia.

Just some comments, the House of Saud looks more and more getting ready for an all out Civil War among themselves. One way to get supporters is to act like you are the most aggressive against enemies of the State (Which is one of the reason the Soviet Union went into Afghanistan in 1979, to show the world Afghanistan was part of the Soviet area of control and the Soviet Union will do all that is needed to make its area of control pure). Thus the massive support for the coup in Egypt and the opposition in Syria. Some of this may be to off set the success the sons of Abdullah had in putting down the protests in the various Persian Gulf States last year.

I suspect the second generation is still keeping the lead on any internal fighting, but King Abdullah is 89 years old. Crown Prince Salman is 76 years old. One of the Youngest of the remaining sons of King Saud is Muqrin bin Abdul al saud who is only 68 years old:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muqrin_bin_Abdul-Aziz_Al_Saud

Two of the Sudairi seven are still alive, the present crown prince and:

Abd al-Rahman bin Abdul Aziz age 82
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abd_al-Rahman_bin_Abdul_Aziz

And Crown Prince Salman:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_bin_Abdulaziz

A list of other sons of King Saud who are still alive:

Bandar bin Abdulaziz (born 1923)
Talal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud (born 1931) Former minister of communications.
Abdul Rahman bin Abdulaziz (born 1931), Former deputy minister of defense and aviation, Sudairi Seven.
Mutaib bin Abdulaziz (born 1931), Minister of municipal and rural affairs (1980-2009).[
Turki bin Abdulaziz (born 1932), Former deputy minister of defense and aviation, Sudairi Seven.
Nawwaf bin Abdulaziz (born 1932), Former director general of Saudi intelligence (2001-2005)
Abdul Ilah bin Abdulaziz (born 1935), Adviser to King Abdullah with the rank of minister since 2008.
Mamdouh bin Abdulaziz (born 1940), Former governor of Tabuk Province, and former director of Saudi Center of Strategic Studies
Ahmed bin Abdulaziz (born 1942), Former interior minister (June 2012 - 5 November 2012)
Mashhur bin Abdulaziz (born 1942), Member of the Allegiance Council.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_of_Succession_to_Saudi_Arabian_throne

You still have enough of the Second generation to keep the lead on things, but with the youngest being 68 years of age, now long will that last? Thus I suspect the unrest in the Middle East involved members of the House of Saud trying to show who is the better advocate of the House of Saud and their version of Islam. I can see the Persian Gulf being done by the sons of Naylef one of the Sudairi Seven, but with help from the Saudi National Guard, which is controlled by a son of King Abdullah. Yemen being handled by another son of Abdullah. Egypt being done by another son of Abdullah as Deputy for Foreign affairs. With Syria being done by the sons of the Sudairi Seven, for they control the Army (and being done to off set what Abdullah's sons have done in Egypt, Yemen and the Persian Gulf. The Persian Gulf was probably seen as a draw between these two factors, the Governor a son of one of the Sudairi Seven needed help from the sons of Abdullah who control the Saudi Arabian National Guard).




Side note: I use the term "Christian West" for the western tendency is NOT to marry cousin and that is the result of the Middle Age Catholic doctrine that forbade marrying cousins. The Catholic Church adopted this policy more to spread out the wealth then anything else but has become the norm in the west, but not elsewhere. Thus outside of areas that had some sort of Christian influence over the last 1000 years, marrying cousin is the norm,

King Saud I (also called King Abdulaziz I):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Saud_of_Saudi_Arabia

Second Side note: Why many dictatorships do NOT last to the third generation:
Now, not all dictatorships follow this pattern, some fall for other reasons such as:

1. Invaders (Thus Hitler lost his dictatorship do to losing WWII), now you have to be careful, sometimes an invasion occurs BECAUSE the dictatorship is in its third generation and the third generation is so busy fighting among themselves that they ignore or even ally with the invaders hoping to take power in the resulting confusion. This is what happened when Saladin took over Egypt just before the third Crusades. Crusaders had attack Egypt and found that had they planned for anything more then a raid they could have conquered Egypt do to the extensive infighting among the Moslem's in Egypt at that time period. A Kurd, Saladin then invaded Egypt via Lebanon and the Mediterranean and took over Egypt from its previous rulers. In many ways the revolt against the Mongols lead by the future Ming Dynasty was similar, the Mongols third generation from Kublai Khan (The Third Generation from Genghis Khan), who had set up the Yuan (Mongol) dynasty of China, but the third generation from Kublai prefer to fight over who was to rule the capital instead of stopping the growing and later successful peasant revolt lead by the Ming's.

2. Deteriorating economic situation that forces change: This is what happened in Brazil Greece, Chile and Argentina when their Dictatorships gave up power (and why the Ming replaced the Mongols in China). The economy of these nations had become so bad that drastic actions were needed. The Dictators dare not do it, for it would have lead to a massive revolt. Thus the Dictators gave up power so the leaders of the opposition could impose the harsh treatment the economy needed (and to get the blame for doing so).

3. Franco of Spain also gave up power at the end of his life, instead of giving it to the second generation, again do to pressure within the country that require that another option other then continued dictatorship be fellowed (Through you can say the King of Spain is Franco's second generation, for he was picked by Franco to succeed Franco, but both of them knew the King could NOT rule as a Dictator so the Dictatorship died with Franco).

Last edited Wed Oct 23, 2013, 08:09 AM - Edit history (1)

When Obama said "No" to bombing Syria, that was a watershed.

The Saudis are not worried about restive Shi'ia for no reason either. That "supplying arms to freedom fighters" stuff can work both ways.