Forum Thread

Will King Abdullah's Death Bring About Change or More of the Same in Saudi Arabia?

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 5 Posts
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia passed away today at the age of 90. His brother, Salman, will be the king, but he is also 79 years old and supposedly not in the best of health.

    We have plenty of threads going on about Middle-Eastern politics, but let's try to keep this thread focused specifically on the Saudi Royal Family and whether or not their days are numbered. I personally feel that they aren't and for one glaring reason: the United States military and government back them fully. It's one thing to have a revolution in Tunisia, but it's another thing entirely to have a revolution in Saudi Arabia.

    Don't get me wrong--I would love to see our government stop supporting the country who is almost single-handily responsible for 9/11. We are in bed with some very strange bedfellows in the world, but the American-Saudi relationship is one that has always irked me. In the name of getting as much cheap oil as we possibly can, we have compromised our national values and allowed this family to rule this country with an iron fist. How can we justify having a close diplomatic relationship with a country that publicly beheads people for the most minor of offences, but recoil at the thought of having diplomatic relations with Cuba? It really does baffle the mind if you think about it.

    What does everyone else think? Will King Abdullah's death mean a change is coming in the country or will everything pretty much stay the same, but with a different person at the helm?
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote: King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia passed away today at the age of 90. His brother, Salman, will be the king, but he is also 79 years old and supposedly not in the best of health.

    We have plenty of threads going on about Middle-Eastern politics, but let's try to keep this thread focused specifically on the Saudi Royal Family and whether or not their days are numbered. I personally feel that they aren't and for one glaring reason: the United States military and government back them fully. It's one thing to have a revolution in Tunisia, but it's another thing entirely to have a revolution in Saudi Arabia.

    Don't get me wrong--I would love to see our government stop supporting the country who is almost single-handily responsible for 9/11. We are in bed with some very strange bedfellows in the world, but the American-Saudi relationship is one that has always irked me. In the name of getting as much cheap oil as we possibly can, we have compromised our national values and allowed this family to rule this country with an iron fist. How can we justify having a close diplomatic relationship with a country that publicly beheads people for the most minor of offences, but recoil at the thought of having diplomatic relations with Cuba? It really does baffle the mind if you think about it.

    What does everyone else think? Will King Abdullah's death mean a change is coming in the country or will everything pretty much stay the same, but with a different person at the helm?
    To answer you in one word: "MONEY" for the one percent.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:To answer you in one word: "MONEY" for the one percent.
    I wholly agree that it's about money, but I would venture to say it's far more about maintaining the American empire and being able to shape the politics of Middle-East Asia. Money is just one of many components of that overarching goal.
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    Dutch Wrote:To answer you in one word: "MONEY" for the one percent.
    I wholly agree that it's about money, but I would venture to say it's far more about maintaining the American empire and being able to shape the politics of Middle-East Asia. Money is just one of many components of that overarching goal.
    Obama is on its way to Saudia; I guess just to make sure relations stay the same; the stockmarkets were affected so the one percent worries. Everything is so predictable.
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch --- Yes it's a shame President Obama is having to cut short his trip to India. He's going to miss out on a visit to the Taj Mahal, a must-see. I've been there.

    Anyway, I suppose diplomatic protocal dictates that he go to Saudi Arabia, especially after "ducking" the Paris demonstration. We all know why the USA acquiesces to one of the most repressive governments on the planet. The form of Wahhabism practiced in Saudi Arabia with beheadings and lashings for minor offenses predates the discovery of oil in that country and is deeply rooted. It is how the Saudi royal family is able to retain power. In a sense Kim Jung-Un in Korea does much the same thing, but the difference is that the North Koreans treat Kim Jung-Un as their "god"...or another "royal"...whatever.