Saudi Arabia - Time to Evolve?

[Sukerkin]

I knew in a general sort of way that the conditions of life for Saudi women were hardly stellar when it comes to freedom. But I had no idea that it was as bad as this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9436095.stm

How this has not been made more of can only be laid at the door of pragmatism and wealth. For women in a supposedly 'modern' country to be treated this way should be roundly and publicly criticised at the least (I know it self-evidently isn't 'modern' in any other way than infrastructure but we must be polite) .

It can be strongly argued that it's not 'our place' to intervene or speak out and it is true that there is no short-term economic advantage in doing so. But that doesn't make it right for the Western media to stay so silent on this issue.

 

[Big Don]

The West Wing covered this:

Outraged? I’m barely surprised. This is a country where women aren’t allowed to drive a car. They’re not allowed to be in the company of any man other than a close relative. They’re required to adhere to a dress code that would make a Maryknoll nun look like Malibu Barbie. They beheaded a hundred and twenty-one people last year for robbery, rape, and drug trafficking. They have no free press, no elected government, no political parties. And the Royal Family allows the Religious Police to travel in groups of six carrying nightsticks and they freely and publicly beat women. But ‘Brutus is an honorable man.’ Seventeen schoolgirls were forced to burn alive because they weren’t wearing the proper clothing. Am I outraged? No… That is Saudi Arabia, our partners in peace.

In other words, you cannot honestly portray a so called "Moderate Islamic" nation as free, just, or anything but, barbaric.

 

[Empty Hands]

The United States seems to find this difficult...

 

[Touch Of Death]

Are you suggesting we sever any ties to this nation?
Sean

 

[Big Don]

The United States seems to find this difficult...

 

[Big Don]

Are you suggesting we sever any ties to this nation?
Sean

• I would suggest that we tell them there are things we will NOT allow.
• Funding international terrorism.
• Tacit approval of international terrorism.
• The wholesale subjugation of women.

• The murder of anyone who chooses to leave a religion.

 

[Touch Of Death]

• I would suggest that we tell them there are things we will NOT allow.
• Funding international terrorism.
• Tacit approval of international terrorism.
• The wholesale subjugation of women.

• The murder of anyone who chooses to leave a religion.

Suppose they don't take that seriously, then what?
Sean

 

[Empty Hands]

Obama Pics

If you thought that post was only about Bush, then you are sadly mistaken. The United States has been colluding with the House of Saud continuously for decades now without pause or interruption. It's a relationship that will never end as long as our energy infrastructure lives or dies by what the Saudis pump out of their ground.

Besides, Obama never made out with any of them.

 

[Big Don]

I don't know. Because the US government has let the environmentalists cripple and, for all intents and purposes, outlaw the use of our own oil, it isn't as if we can say FU, we aren't buying from you anymore.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Exactly; so, the plight of those women take a back seat to our SUVs, and until that changes, the US isn't going to do or say anything against Saudi Arabia. Case closed.
Sean

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Exactly; so, the plight of those women take a back seat to our SUVs, and until that changes, the US isn't going to do or say anything against Saudi Arabia. Case closed.
Sean

One might also consider that Saudi Arabia is the most difficult of the Muslim nations we are currently on good terms with. Their ruling elite are our friends; but they are hated by their own people and rule with an iron fist. The people of Saudi Arabia are much less moderate and more tolerant if not supporting of terrorism and Islamist belief than most other Muslim nations. The 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, as did OBL himself. They did not spring up in a vacuum.

As bad as the government of Saudi Arabia is, the fear is that if it falls, there will be no democracy, no moderate replacement for the current regime. It will be a hard-core Islamist nation and the export of terrorism won't be suppressed by their own government anymore.

The people of Iraq do not tend towards Islamist extremism, nor do the people of Afghanistan - their extremists are indeed extremists. The people of Saudi Arabia are much more likely to turn violent, IMHO.

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

By the way, most of the Middle East is scared spitless of the concept of a Wahabist Saudi Arabia. They prefer a strong dictatorship to keep the lid on those goons, regardless of what else happens along the way. Their interests are very much in line with the US's interests in this case.

Like the fact that Pakistan is ruled by thugs and is despotic yet their people would gladly cut our throats if not held down by an iron fist.

Yeah, I'm sorry we end up palsy-walsy with nasty people. Sometimes there are good reasons, and if we have to toady up to tinpot dictators, I may wish it were otherwise, but there you have it.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

• I would suggest that we tell them there are things we will NOT allow.
• Funding international terrorism.
• Tacit approval of international terrorism.
• The wholesale subjugation of women.

• The murder of anyone who chooses to leave a religion.

We're in no position to dictate anything to anyone with oil. And they know it. We've shot our bolt. We're overextended in two (perhaps now three) wars that are destroying our economy, we can't even begin to think about mounting another. We have zero credibility when it comes to saber-rattling these days. We can't even shut up Chavez or Iran, those pipsqueaks.

 

[Big Don]

15/19 of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi.

 

[Xue Sheng]

When our house is in shambles (economically, politically and socially) why on earth does this matter. Sorry but that is how I feel, if the rest of the western world is upset or offended by this then by all means do something about it but if it were up to me you can do it on your own the USA has enough internal issues to deal with and more than enough external without making more. We need to straighten our own mess out right now and not worry about straightening out others messes.

And when you are talking the Middle East and look at it historically all you do by getting rid of one tyrant is create a power vacuum that is generally filled by another tyrant… so what do we do keep killing them until they get one we all approve of… give me a friggen break

 

[Bill Mattocks]

15/19 of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi.

I believe I stated that. Means what, exactly? That the people of Saudi Arabia are not our friends? So we topple their autocratic leadership which keeps them more-or-less suppressed, and guess what?

Either we support their nasty dictatorship or we go in with guns blazing and prepare for a very long stay. Using men, weapons, and money we don't have, and watching the price of gasoline go to $15 a gallon in the meantime. Yeah, that's gonna happen.

The people of Saudi Arabia mostly hate us. They also hate their government, who likes us. So dictating terms to their leadership seems to be a no-win to me.

 

[Xue Sheng]

15/19 of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi.

They were Al-Qaeda terrorists trained in Afghanistan and not all Saudi's are Al-Qaeda terrorists trained in Afghanistan and we attacked Afghanistan for that because that is where the terroriosts, who happened to be from Saudi Arabia, were trained by the Al-Qaeda.

Richard Reid was a British citizen and Al-Qaeda so should we then attack England?

Adam Yahiye Gadahn was from Oregon and Al-Qaeda...so should we now send the Military to attack Oregon?

The first panacea for a mismanaged nation is inflation of the currency; the second is war. Both bring a temporary prosperity; both bring a permanent ruin. But both are the refuge of political and economic opportunists. - Ernest Hemingway

 

[cdunn]

I don't know. Because the US government has let the environmentalists cripple and, for all intents and purposes, outlaw the use of our own oil, it isn't as if we can say FU, we aren't buying from you anymore.

The United States is already the world's third largest producer of oil. We produce as much as Iran, Iraq, and Venezuela put together. And we use as much as China, India, Germany, Japan and Russia put together. So, I don't see the environmentalists crippling us -too- much. Of course, a lot of the unproven reserves will have startup costs of over $90/bbl for a decade or two, and the industry has gotten burned by OPEC opening the pipes in the past. And, when a deepwater well has an error cost of $40 billion, plus unknowable economic damage to the regions tourism and fishery industries... Another inch and a half of preventative measures might have made BP a much happier country.

We're up to our noses in the Middle East because we were too dumb to learn our lesson in '73 when OPEC demonstrated it's power and in '79 when the Iranians revolted. Until we make a full stop effort to stop using gasoline, we are going to be beholden to them.

 

[Sukerkin]

There are less severe ways to encourage change in a country, with which you do business, than invading them.

I was thinking much more along the lines of reporting more incisvely and more broadly on the conditions within Saudi Arabia. Now, aye, diplomatic observations have to be backed up by the strength to execute them and that is likely the only way to get that iron-bound society to evolve.

But the first steps can be achieved with words - altering the global cimate of opinion can mean more than you might think when you're a big-wig sitting on a pile of oil dollars.

True, they have, to coin a phrase, gotten the West, particularly America, over a barrel when it comes to oil. But there are other sources to draw on and even alternate life-styles to be considered that does not involve setting fire to one of the most useful materials on the planet.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

There are less severe ways to encourage change in a country, with which you do business, than invading them.

I was thinking much more along the lines of reporting more incisvely and more broadly on the conditions within Saudi Arabia. Now, aye, diplomatic observations have to be backed up by the strength to execute them and that is likely the only way to get that iron-bound society to evolve.

But the first steps can be achieved with words - altering the global cimate of opinion can mean more than you might think when you're a big-wig sitting on a pile of oil dollars.

True, they have, to coin a phrase, gotten the West, particularly America, over a barrel when it comes to oil. But there are other sources to draw on and even alternate life-styles to be considered that does not involve setting fire to one of the most useful materials on the planet.

I suspect that this is done at many levels in US and probably UK government diplomacy. Just because it is not discussed openly does not mean it is not done. Might even be found in the Wikileaks cables; but perhaps not widely reported because it does not contribute to the overall level of hatred of the USA so enjoyed elsewhere.

 

[granfire]

you guys are delusional if you think that the people with pull (usually still men) don't admire, deep down in the most private thoughts how them thar Ay-rabs managed to keep them dames in their place.