Saudi Arabian Fantasies?

I read this today. This was published soon after I watched LAWENCE OF ARABIA which provides a dramatic vision of the historical context of the rather arbitray, modern Middle East borders. It certainly validates my own, current opinion of Saidi Arabia. I have viewed SA as a neccessary evil since my late brother worked as an engineer on various oil projects including the pipeline that can divert oil from the oil fields near the Persian Gulf to terminals on the Dead Sea.

In spite of my low opinion of Saudi Arabia, I was very much at odds with the late Jerry Pournelle who advocated energy independance as an alternative to fighting the first Persian Gulf War much less the second. Now that the US has energy independance, there is zero reason to ally with Saudi Arabia which views its exports of oil as a license to export terrorists. This includes the 9-11 terrorists. It is also bypartisan in its criticism of US Presidents.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... bia-290162

IMHO, President Trump is a bit to easily swayed by personal diplomacy and has good reason to distrust any information from the US intelligence community that disagrees with his own sentiments. Fortunately; President Trump seems to be withdrawing from the half century long association with Saudi Arabia. Hopefully; the current oil glut will motivate Trump to abandon Saudi Arabia and leave the kingdom naked to its enemies.

During the first half of the 20th century the UK did have a problem with automatic acceptance that the aristocracy was automatically better at every thing than the "common man". As evidenced in the "lions led by donkeys" quote about British soldiers and their officers in WW1.
Churchill may well have matured into the leader that the UK needed in WW2, but his arbitrary dividing up of the middle east a decade or so before that has led to problems ever since.
Saudi Arabia has been described as ASIS with borders. A country that allows public beheadings of women in the street for behaviour that is normal elsewhere isn't civilised.
If for no other reason we should be looking at alternative energy sources to petroleum, to curtail these barbarians and their influence.

Daryl wrote:During the first half of the 20th century the UK did have a problem with automatic acceptance that the aristocracy was automatically better at every thing than the "common man". As evidenced in the "lions led by donkeys" quote about British soldiers and their officers in WW1.
Churchill may well have matured into the leader that the UK needed in WW2, but his arbitrary dividing up of the middle east a decade or so before that has led to problems ever since.
Saudi Arabia has been described as ASIS with borders. A country that allows public beheadings of women in the street for behaviour that is normal elsewhere isn't civilised.
If for no other reason we should be looking at alternative energy sources to petroleum, to curtail these barbarians and their influence.

I thought that quote came from Rommel in WW2. He at least used it.

Churchill was the political leader Britian needed, the man of the hour, so to speak. But when he meddled in military affairs, he tended to screw up, making things worse rather than better.

Agreed about Saudi.

Don

-

Daryl wrote:During the first half of the 20th century the UK did have a problem with automatic acceptance that the aristocracy was automatically better at every thing than the "common man". As evidenced in the "lions led by donkeys" quote about British soldiers and their officers in WW1.
SNIP .

seems to be true still

Johnson & Rees-Mogg spring to mind for some strange reason