So the obvious question is why have we played ball with them for 85 years? Oil is the obvious answer, and certainly a piece of the puzzle, but what other incentives are there that statesmen know about and the average public don’t?https://twitter.com/thewargarurumon/status/1027561920017182721 …
-
-
I think that’s the most plausible state of affairs, but I have super low confidence in any of the reporting about it. Standoff with Israel is almost def the concern, confident in that at least, but how concerned need we actually be is my biggest question there.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
from their perspective they have a nuclear Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads greatly limiting their military engagement capabilities so they have pursued clandestine interventions instead. Nuclear asymmetry drives terrorism in the Middle East.
-
but there are religious fanatics all around so who can say what would happen if there were even more nukes on the loose. tbh I find the Saudis to be more likely to use nukes for religious fanatical reasons than anyone else involved there, so maybe the current status quo is good.
-
er, well, least bad? none of it is good.
-
Definitely agree that I’m more worried about Saudi fanaticism turning nuclear. Part of it for me is that their state bureaucracy is so nebulous, dense, and wealthy it seems like a rogue prince could possibly acquire/deploy a nuke without the Crown’s approval
-
Basing that on the fact that lower princes fund literal terror groups and wahhabi/salafist groups with seemingly little repercussions or recourse from the crown. May just be plausible deniability for them though which is even scarier
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.