PDA

View Full Version : Is the House of Saud on borrowed time?


piperboy84
2nd Aug 2016, 00:08
Reading more and more that the Saudi Royal family are on the ropes, here are some of the reasons from different stories:

They agreed at John Kerry's request in November 2014 to flood the market with cheap oil to screw the Iranian economy because of the nuke issue and the Russian economy because he was supporting Asad. The Saudis seen the added bonus of crippling the American fracking industry in its infancy. The result a lot of American fracking companies went bust but dramatic improvements in extraction and technology has the remaining frackers with a break even cost to produce that is close to what the Saudis can recover it for. The US dependence on Saudi imports has and will continue to drop dramatically and the frackers reckon one field alone in west Texas is bigger than Saudi largest field with more potential for recovery rates and quantities.

The Saudis executed a Shiite cleric who is now a martyr and an icon to the Saudi Shiites.

The Saudis for the first time are running a deficit and are borrowing money and eating into there sovereign wealth fund to plug funding gaps as 90% of there revenue comes from oil that there selling at about cost right now with no end in sight.

There cutting giveaways and benefits that is making the average citizen unhappy."

They are cozying up to the Israelis ( no doubt to gain influence in the US) probably hedging there bets.

They have watched the US / Iran nuke deal and hostility thaw and the less than stern US rebuke for the Iranian sacking the Saudi embassy for killing the cleric.

They've spent billions bombing a bunch of tribesmen next door with no big effect and no end in sight, plus they look weak because of it.

They appear to be doing a lot of sacking and appointing princelings that are shooting from the hip.


They've hired consultants for advice on how to steer the country financially.

Anyone else think there up shit creek without a paddle?

Terry Dactil
2nd Aug 2016, 00:31
Does anyone know the difference between There, Their, and Theyíre? :E

finfly1
2nd Aug 2016, 00:40
Sorry to say that this was also my first reaction. It is painful (for me) to read, but otherwise interesting.

Loose rivets
2nd Aug 2016, 00:44
Awww, don't be mean. I'm so bewildered by the human race right now I like to hear any analytical opinion even if it seems to be written by Monty Thwat Pernang-Pernang Python.


Oh, sorry. That sounds like more criticism of Mr 84. What I meant to say is . . . with a few mistakes or even by Mr Python.

And I think I've spelled Monty's third name incorrectly.

meadowrun
2nd Aug 2016, 01:40
There are reports of large quantities of migrant workers being laid off (8,000 Indians recently) due to construction downturns and hunger among them now so rampant the Indian gov't is having to send relief supplies and ferry some of those who don't have the airfares home in military aircraft. Kuwait - ditto, but not as bad.

SASless
2nd Aug 2016, 01:56
If the Royal Family put strict fiscal restraint measures into place....how long will it take for them to reach a point that they would actually run into a real problem of not being able to buy off whoever they need to do to survive?

There is a move to do away with the Royal Family's control as it is now...but that means there would have to be some way needed to fund the Social Programs, and other services, programs, and benefits the Royals fund now.

Where would this new Government Staff of effective Bureaucrats come from that would have to replace all the Hired Hands employed to take care of the menial mundane work of governing?

Lonewolf_50
2nd Aug 2016, 01:58
To answer the OP's question: I hope so.

SASless
2nd Aug 2016, 02:02
Unlike other oil producers, like Russia that can hunker down and rely on their own self sufficiency for food and production, Saudi Arabia imports 70 percent of its food and does not produce military hardware, cars, refrigerators, civil airplanes, ships, or most manufactured consumer and industrial goods. Saudi Arabiaís only real domestic industry is petrochemicals.

The Saudi Arabian Kingdom is also not positioned to mandate the kind of severe austerity measures Russia has implemented. The vast majority of Saudis enjoy their standard of living due to government handouts. Saudi citizens tend to lack employable skills and are culturally not inclined to work. Of the 30 million residents, only 5.5 million work and 3 million work directly for the government. The small private sector tends to only employ foreigners.


I always advocated we stockpile Trillions of Dollars of Oil and Gas....and at some point flood the market and look at the Saudi's and tell them there would be no more Food Exports to them and suggest they could simply eat their Oil if they got hungry.:p

obgraham
2nd Aug 2016, 02:11
I'm sure that the makers of those luxury goods so dear to residents of Manhattan, Beverly Hills, Hong Kong, and the capitals of Euroland will do what they can to see that the Saudis continue to be among their best customers.

Who else is going to buy a Lamborghini?

Metro man
2nd Aug 2016, 02:23
Similar scenarios apply in most of the oil producing middle eastern countries. Basically the whole economy is based on oil, the revenue from which has been used to buy off the population and allow the ruling elite to live in luxury.

The selling price of oil was previously comfortably above the production price and budgets were drawn up with this assumption. Now the world is practically swimming in oil the price has collapsed. Catch 22 situation, increasing production will simply drive the price lower whilst reducing output will reduce revenue.

Very few of the producers used the income sensibly as a means of diversifying their economies, or planned for the eventuality of the oil running out. Dubai made the best attempt and has something to fall back on as a result. Many of the producers have vast sovereign wealth funds but these are unlikely to last forever with the rulers squandering the money and the rest of the people expecting a secure, highly paid government job for life where they simply have to show up.

Once the money runs out the party's over.

MG23
2nd Aug 2016, 02:44
The Middle East was always going to return to its natural state when the oil money ran out. One argument I read recently was that the Saudis are producing as much oil as possible so they can take the loot and run, but that makes little sense to me if they could make more by selling at higher prices after reducing production.

Maybe they just realized how badly they screwed up with their earlier production increase, and are now stuck where they can't cut enough to raise prices without losing more income than they'd gain.

onetrack
2nd Aug 2016, 03:18
One little thing to keep in mind, is that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was formed entirely as a product of terrorism.
Between 1902 and 1927, the Al Saud leader, Abdulaziz, carried out a series of wars of conquest which resulted in his establishing the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932.

History tells us that states or kingdoms based on, or formed as a result of terror, with their subjects ruled by ruthless dictators, have relatively short lives.

What I find amusing, is that Saudi Arabia, in 2015, initiated and heads, the Islamic Military Alliance to Fight Terrorism (IMAFT). What an oxymoron from a nation founded on Islamic terrorism.

tdracer
2nd Aug 2016, 03:47
Who else is going to buy a Lamborghini?


Me? The wife and I watched a TV show last night on Lamborghini and the development of the Huracan. Now she wants one :rolleyes: (ah, not that I'd mind having one either, but...)
Now if I can just remember where I put that spare quarter million...:confused:

Peter-RB
2nd Aug 2016, 06:29
Today's Terrorist...is normally tomorrows Politician, just look at the IRA, were they not supported by all the "Irish Presidents" as indeed was the House of Saud who were at first treated as false Royalty by the Brits in the 1920's with the US wetting themselves to get in on the act as well, I have a great respect for the Israelis,.. but look at the murder and mayhem they created and went through when creating their own state, plus their bitter fighting with Palestine Arabs and the British at that time..however there was just reason for that IMO.
But the current house of Saud may be drawing in the way of doing things ,... but looking at the antics of "Saudi London retreat months" says things (money) are just as plentiful..!

They are still smashing up said Huracans( farking awful looking things anyway) as well as Gold wrapped Italian jobs, buying up the most expensive of London Mansions, and generally making themselves look very uneducated by their "Bling" approach to anyone else. All the money in the World will buy many things...Respect however, still has to be earned..!!! Arabs sadly dont know how ..!!

IMO they need a stiff dose of reality..it is hopefully approaching ...pretty fast !

Lance Murdoch
2nd Aug 2016, 06:56
I will lose no sleep over the House of Saud but I shudder to think what will replace them. Either total anarchy or a hard line Islamist government probably. Ironically my experience is that the normal Saudis are amongst the friendliest people in the Gulf and it is them that will suffer most. Most of the aristocracy will just run away to their London bolt holes.

Krautwald
2nd Aug 2016, 08:19
The vast majority of Saudis enjoy their standard of living due to government handouts.

I have always wondered how this works in the Gulf states. Could anyone line out this one for me please?

They simply receive a fixed amount every month? How much is this? Extra payments for tuition, they get a house when they marry, or what? Given the lifestyle there they must either all be princes or they must receive 5-6 figure handouts for free?

Letīs say a young man (I guess women get nothing?) turns 18 or 21 or whatever. Like all young people around the world, he will want to go to college, travel, as a Saudi he will probably want girlfriends and scorn them as whores at the same time. He will want some position in society, a wife and a house and have a family. And boy toys. Every step on this life ladder will cost him money - I know how this would evolve in the West: parents, loans or scholarship for college, apply for jobs, get unemployed, get hired, work&save, see a bit of the world, apply again, get hired, get laid off, use up all your savings, get hired again, work more -and more -and more. Marriage. Mortgage. Work more still. Save. And so forth.

How would young Saudi do it? All paid for by the government? Mock position with the government? House given/provided by...the government? Is this one big fake or what?

RatherBeFlying
2nd Aug 2016, 17:58
One little thing to keep in mind, is that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was formed entirely as a product of terrorism.
Between 1902 and 1927, the Al Saud leader, Abdulaziz, carried out a series of wars of conquest which resulted in his establishing the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932.The House of Saud and Wahhabism go back at least to the early 18th century. There was a nasty war between the Ottomans and Wahhabis in the early 19th century. Interestingly the Ottomans were lenient with the tribal leaders of the Najd, but singled out religious leaders for execution in Istanbul.

Until oil was discovered, the treasury was kept in a chest under the Treasurer's bed. Most of the contents came from British subsidies, a latter day form of Danegeld ;)

Before oil the Najd was mostly the preserve of tribes engaged in internecine feuds and territorial disputes. Abdul Azziz distinguished himself by his sagacity coupled with magnanimity - underpinned by the military and diplomatic skills required for survival in a treacherous region.

His successors began well, but the latest one and reportedly 25th son of Abdul Azziz seems to be digging the Kingdom into a very deep hole:uhoh:

Cazalet33
2nd Aug 2016, 17:58
Borrowed from which century?

The Eighth?

racedo
2nd Aug 2016, 21:51
To answer the OP's question: I hope so.

Beer time to celebrate.

SASless
2nd Aug 2016, 22:11
How would the Wahabi support of radical Islam make out?

Would the fall of the House of Saud force a Muslim Reformation somehow?

Who would be the caretaker of Mecca if all that Oil Money disappears down the Gopher Hole?

Cazalet33
2nd Aug 2016, 23:58
How would the Wahabi support of radical Islam make out?

Define "radical" in the context of your question. What radix?


Would the fall of the House of Saud force a Muslim Reformation somehow?

Let's rearrange some of those words for the purpose of clarity:

Would a Muslim Reformation somehow force the fall of the House of Saud?


Yes, probably, but certainly not to the satisfaction of the corporatocracy which owns America.



Who would be the caretaker of Mecca if all that Oil Money disappears down the Gopher Hole?

There was no oil money when the caretaker of Mecca became the caretaker of Mecca. It's a self-funding thing. It always was.

The oil money was just frills on the knickers of the Sharif(s) of Mecca and Medina subsequently. Frippery.

porch monkey
3rd Aug 2016, 03:07
How long they been saying the same thing about Bob Mugabe?

meadowrun
3rd Aug 2016, 03:49
Current price of a barrel of crude USD 39.80 - Brent 41.80
One year forecast USD 45.


Saudi reserves - 268b barrels.
Saudi production costs - USD 4-6 bbl
Nigeria - 30 (deep sea)
Nigeria - 15 (inshore)
Algeria, Iran, Libya, Oman, Qatar - 10- 15
Venezuela - 20


Price of a litre at my local pump (petrol/gasoline) $1.13.9 Can.


SA still has a way to go before they are destitute. Tesla still has a way to go before they are in a majority.


Then Saudi can revert to it's immense real estate holdings and stock investments for cash flow.


But not it's internal investments in things that actually produce anything and if there is a depression when they are near to running out of the black, sticky stuff - they can go pound sand. Don't count on emigrating anywhere where there are green pastures.

Metro man
3rd Aug 2016, 06:56
The problem is that national budgets were prepared assuming oil would be around $100 a barrel and now there is a shortfall of nearly 60% in actual income. This is unsustainable in the long term unless the interest on the financial reserves covers the difference otherwise they need to start selling off the silverware and when both are gone the problems will really start.

Either income goes up or expenses go down until they are in equilibrium.

"For my father a camel, for me a car, for my son an airplane, for his son a camel."

Fareastdriver
3rd Aug 2016, 10:42
around $100 a barrel and now there is a shortfall of nearly 60% in actual income

You try telling Sturgeon that.

MTOW
3rd Aug 2016, 11:02
Someone mentioned Dangeld. The House of Saud's bankrolling of Islamic terrorist groups is a form of Danegeld. The Saudi Royals, and the opulent, in many ways, very Unislamic lives they lead thanks to their oil wealth, are loathed by many Muslims who see themselves as 'pure' Muslims.

But, so long as they funnel sufficient funds to those 'pure' Muslims, they are tolerated. But much like as we accuse appeaser Western politicians who hope to be eaten last by the fundamentalist crocodile, the Saudis could be said to be playing almost exactly the same game.

...and in the long run, it will end for them just as it will end for the appeasers in the West. Badly. Very badly.

Pontius Navigator
3rd Aug 2016, 11:04
Sorry to say that this was also my first reaction. It is painful (for me) to read, but otherwise interesting.
Mine too :(

vapilot2004
3rd Aug 2016, 11:27
How would the Wahabi support of radical Islam make out?


Wahabi is one of the foundational pillars of radical Islam, if not The. I want to fairly engage but your question eludes me, SAS.

the frackers reckon one field alone in west Texas is bigger than Saudi largest field with more potential for recovery rates and quantities.

I'm not an oil man, but I'm thinking them frackers best be reckonin' agin.

Lonewolf_50
3rd Aug 2016, 17:27
I'm not an oil man, but I'm thinking them frackers best be reckonin' agin. There's a lot there, but the stuff in Saudi is easier to get to. (Heck, so is a lot of stuff in the Gulf what the idiot in the White House put a ban on getting to).


I'll also mention that there are considerable reserves in Iraq that are also easier to get to, but have not yet been developed. Those reserves coming onto the market in the next decade or two do nothing for folks who are sitting on higher cost per barrel extraction.

Fairdealfrank
3rd Aug 2016, 23:19
Wahabi is one of the foundational pillars of radical Islam, if not The. I want to fairly engage but your question eludes me, SAS.

....and Salafiism is the other?

parabellum
4th Aug 2016, 01:36
When the House of Saud became the ruling tribe in Saudi they instituted an internal security system that, in all but the most unbelievable way, would preclude the possibility of any kind of coup, I believe it is still there in it's up to date and improved form.

vapilot2004
4th Aug 2016, 03:29
....and Salafiism is the other?

Aren't the two terms referring to the same movement? One is named for a cleric connected to the House of Saud and the other an Arab word for ancestor.

vapilot2004
4th Aug 2016, 03:36
There's a lot there, but the stuff in Saudi is easier to get to.

And said stuff flows at rates and quantities far above what any fracked wells in West Texas could manage, which was my point.

(Heck, so is a lot of stuff in the Gulf what the idiot in the White House put a ban on getting to)

Care to expound on your statement? Whatever you are referring to it would surely pale in comparison to what the idiot prior to Obama did to the region's stability?

Lonewolf_50
4th Aug 2016, 04:27
VAP, I am referring to the Gulf of Mexico, which is what the current idiot in the White House put a ban on with his greenie moron friends after the Deep Water Horizon incident.

Try to take off your GWB deranged hatred blinders, please. He's been out of office since 2008.

vapilot2004
4th Aug 2016, 04:56
Try to take off your GWB deranged hatred blinders, please. He's been out of office since 2008.

True, but the cancers of his administration's legacy lives on.

VAP, I am referring to the Gulf of Mexico, which is what the current idiot in the White House put a ban on with his greenie moron friends after the Deep Water Horizon incident.

DWH was not an incident, it was a disaster. 11 people died and the environment was seriously damaged. BP paid nearly $19 Billion alone in fines and some tens of thousands of square miles of the gulf were affected. We still don't know the full impact. Yet offshore drilling remains, using safety technologies that haven't changed much since the 1960s. Shameful. Thanks for the clarification on which gulf, though. Appreciated.

Lonewolf_50
4th Aug 2016, 05:06
... haven't changed much since the 1960s.
Sorry, you are misinformed. As I noticed yet another knee jerk reaction, Good night.
(Given that we were talking about Sauds, I should have specified which Gulf.)

vapilot2004
4th Aug 2016, 05:10
No, I am not. A friend's father was working as an engineer for BP at the time of the accident and confirmed in conversations about the disaster that safety tech down at the bottom of the sea at the well head is fairly unchanged since the 1960s. Specifically, while on deck, there are panels bristling with computer readouts, the safety hardware at the well head is old school, with a few electronic bits added - bits that in the case of Horizon, failed miserably I might add.

Good night to you too, LW.

SASless
4th Aug 2016, 12:44
Even when Dubya is long gone and dead....the Loons will continue to blame him for everything from Sun Spots to broken Toasters.:rolleyes:

Martin the Martian
4th Aug 2016, 14:41
Oh look, we've gone from talking about the House of Saud to another Democrat v. Republican willy waving fest in about three posts.

Take it somewhere else, FFS, maybe to a topic already up and running.

Lonewolf_50
4th Aug 2016, 14:58
Martin, you sentiment is appreciated. One of the things about the house of Saud is not only its influence on the ME oil situation, but also on the global situation due to their past and current throw weight. (If you haven't read "The Prize" it has some nice treatment of just how much throw weight they have). As they raise or fall the global energy markets may be influenced.


I'll mea culpa my part in the digression.

MG23
4th Aug 2016, 19:08
Seems to me the big problem is that the oil price the Saudi leaders need in order to keep paying off the population so they don't end up swinging from lamp-posts is much higher than the cost of producing shale oil. Every time the price rises toward that level, it's going to hit a wall where more shale oil production comes online.

Last I read, they were going to run out of money in about five years with their current deficits.

piperboy84
5th Aug 2016, 01:50
Seems to me the big problem is that the oil price the Saudi leaders need in order to keep paying off the population so they don't end up swinging from lamp-posts is much higher than the cost of producing shale oil. Every time the price rises toward that level, it's going to hit a wall where more shale oil production comes online.


That about sums it up.

sitigeltfel
5th Aug 2016, 07:36
Seems to me the big problem is that the oil price the Saudi leaders need in order to keep paying off the population so they don't end up swinging from lamp-posts is much higher than the cost of producing shale oil. Every time the price rises toward that level, it's going to hit a wall where more shale oil production comes online.

Last I read, they were going to run out of money in about five years with their current deficits.

They will be safely tucked away in their estates on the cote d'Azure, or London mansions, long before that happens.

mini
5th Aug 2016, 23:27
And that's when the powder keg ignites.

One whole region of the globe without the dictators of means to control the rabble.

Some removed, some dried up, same result, utter chaos.

ORAC
6th Aug 2016, 17:27
Oil Prices Plummet....... With No End in Sight (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/06/oil-prices-plummet-oversupply-global-markets)

G-CPTN
6th Aug 2016, 17:41
Oil Prices Plummet....... With No End in Sight (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/06/oil-prices-plummet-oversupply-global-markets)
As opposed to:- Saudi Arabia cannot pump enough oil to keep a lid on prices (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2011/feb/08/saudi-oil-reserves-overstated-wikileaks).

(From 2011)

Fareastdriver
7th Aug 2016, 10:30
(From 2011)

That was five years ago. Everything has changed since then. What Saudi hasn't got the rest of the World has.

ORAC
2nd Jan 2017, 21:46
U.S. discovers vast oil, gas field in Permian that's three times larger than the Bakken | Energy | Dallas News (http://www.dallasnews.com/business/energy/2016/11/16/us-discovers-vast-oil-gas-field-permian-three-times-larger-bakken)

The U.S. Geological Survey says it has discovered in West Texas one of the largest reserves of recoverable oil in the agency's history.

The agency said Tuesday that the Wolfcamp Shale geologic formation in the Midland area contains an estimated 20 billion barrels of oil. It's also estimated to hold 16 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 1.6 billion barrels of natural gas liquids. Officials say the discovery is nearly three times larger than the recoverable oil found in 2013 in the Bakken and Three Forks formations in the Dakotas and Montana.

More advanced drilling, such as hydraulic fracturing, would be needed to reach the oil. The shale is within the Permian Basin, one of the most productive regions for oil and gas in the U.S.

https://dallasnews.imgix.net/1479311918-Midland-Basin-Map.jpg?auto=format&q=50&or=0&w=800

India Four Two
3rd Jan 2017, 04:26
ORAC,

The USGS has NEVER discovered any oil or gas. They make resource estimates, which in my experience, are often wildly optimistic.

Having said that, it is certainly an interesting announcement. Here's the link to the USGS document:

https://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-estimates-20-billion-barrels-oil-texas-wolfcamp-shale-formation

and here are the first two lines:

USGS Estimates 20 Billion Barrels of Oil in Texas’ Wolfcamp Shale Formation

This is the largest estimate of continuous oil that USGS has ever assessed in the United States.Note that the comments further down, about horizontal wells and fracking, are just a reminder of the routine technology that is already being applied in the oil-shale basins in the US.

MungoP
3rd Jan 2017, 09:55
Before anyone uneducated in Saudi internal politics begins crowing at the thought of a Saud family downfall it might pay you to look at the very volatile and finely balanced history of the Saud rise to power. The status quo is dependent on an understanding with the very fundamentalist Wahabi sect which is dominant in their Islamic faith. The Saud approach is to limit the influence of western culture into the country to appease the Mullahs while in return the Mullah's don't preach against the Saud rulers.. it's a pact that dates back to the 18th Century. In the event of the Saud family losing power there would be nothing to prevent the country becoming another volatile fundamentalist state ruled by retards...
Just what we all need in the Middle East.

ORAC
3rd Jan 2017, 09:59
In the event of the Saud family losing power there would be nothing to prevent the country becoming another volatile fundamentalist state ruled by retards... How would you notice the difference?

racedo
3rd Jan 2017, 10:36
How would you notice the difference?

And would we care ?

Lets face it SA funded Taliban, Insurgency in Iraq, Libyan adventure, Syrian adventure, Yemen genocide and yet West runs to them as if they are a nice country.
West needs to stop prostituting themselves in front of them and any Saudi bitching remove the military help.

Fliegenmong
3rd Jan 2017, 10:58
Yep Racedo! Said for many years now, when last in Seattle, and our (RAAF wedgetails) were lined up on the flightline alongside examples going to SA.....atrocious stuff...

ramble on
3rd Jan 2017, 12:39
My first and last overall impression from a stint there almost 20 years ago was that they had ulimited money to make their country a true paradise on earth and yet were raping and destroying it, the general population ruled by poverty, greed, fear and ignorance.

IIRC - at the time there were over 20,000 members of the royal family - princes and princesses - on stipend handouts.

Just another modern society out of balance with little hope of longevity.

MungoP
3rd Jan 2017, 14:13
How would you notice the difference?

You'd notice it soon enough. The Saud family has always been pro-western politically and control the largest single oil reserves on the planet..

ORAC
3rd Jan 2017, 14:43
Firstly they don't - that honour now belongs to Venezuela.

Secondly, oil producers sell to whoever pays most - to keep the money tap running.

Ohh! Who's Venezuela's major customer? The USA......

bcgallacher
3rd Jan 2017, 18:48
I have recently seen figures that appear to show that for expenditure to be maintained at present levels by Saudi would require an oil price of $200 per barrel. The Saudi finance minister has stated that if expenditure is not rapidly reduced the country will be bankrupt in 3 to 4 years.

piperboy84
3rd Jan 2017, 19:09
I wonder who they are borrowing from to fund the deficit right now, are they going to the markets or selling equity or properties or plundering the sovereign wealth funds?

racedo
3rd Jan 2017, 19:30
I have recently seen figures that appear to show that for expenditure to be maintained at present levels by Saudi would require an oil price of $200 per barrel. The Saudi finance minister has stated that if expenditure is not rapidly reduced the country will be bankrupt in 3 to 4 years.

Downside ??

racedo
3rd Jan 2017, 19:31
I wonder who they are borrowing from to fund the deficit right now, are they going to the markets or selling equity or properties or plundering the sovereign wealth funds?

Flogging shares in Aramco etc

Andy_S
3rd Jan 2017, 20:24
Downside ??

For someone who's taken a pop at Libya being destabilised, you seem remarkably sanguine about Saudi Arabia becoming a failed state.

parabellum
4th Jan 2017, 02:05
When I last lived in Bahrain around 1991 I remember talking to a visiting Saudi, over for the usual R&R on a Thursday night. He wasn't himself a Saud but went on to explain that although all members of the Saud tribe considered themselves royalty and titled themselves as Prince etc. the real royalty was reserved for the top five or six layers only. Although any Saudi in London who falls foul of the Met. will try and claim Diplomatic Immunity it is, in fact, reserved for just a very few registered people.

WhatsaLizad?
4th Jan 2017, 02:48
My first and last overall impression from a stint there almost 20 years ago was that they had ulimited money to make their country a true paradise on earth and yet were raping and destroying it, the general population ruled by poverty, greed, fear and ignorance.

IIRC - at the time there were over 20,000 members of the royal family - princes and princesses - on stipend handouts.

Just another modern society out of balance with little hope of longevity
If one is really bored, cruise the west coast of SA north and south of Jedda on Google Earth or Maps. Look for green waterfront places the size of super resorts that appear to be palace type shacks.


The size of a few are beyond comprehension.

30/30 Green Light
4th Jan 2017, 04:10
Racedo,that would explain a totally unsolicited call from a HKG stockbroker offering me a great deal on ARAMCO shares about a month ago. "Unfortunately" resources didn't allow me to participate in this solid gold offering :) Cheers 30/30

ORAC
4th Jan 2017, 11:38
"Allah cannot see across the causeway".....

racedo
4th Jan 2017, 12:09
For someone who's taken a pop at Libya being destabilised, you seem remarkably sanguine about Saudi Arabia becoming a failed state.

Yup I am.
As previously put Saudi's funded Taliban / Al Qaeda /IS.
If hijackers on 9/11 had been Iranian then bombing would have been done quickly, they were Saudi and Saudi's got a pass on it.
The Saudi export of Wahabism and Terror over last 30 years has gone unchecked because US/UK has prostituted themselves for arms deals.
Saudi's carrying out genocide in Yemen and its barely reported.
Will raise a glass when it falls.

Andy_S
4th Jan 2017, 13:10
As usual, you are somewhat partial and selective in your worldview.

Yes, the perps who flew the aircraft into the twin towers were Saudis. But the operation was planned and financed by Al-Qaida, then based in Afghanistan and sheltered by the Taliban regime. And they did not get a “pass” on it.

To say that Saudis export terror is a gross over simplification. Saudi Arabia has experienced terror attacks on its own soil by the very organisations you mention. They are guilty of complacency and a rather too tolerant attitude towards the more conservative elements in Saudi society who are wedded to the Wahabbi doctrine. In that respect they are the architects of their own misfortune, but to suggest that the Saudi Government and Royal Family are sponsoring terror attacks is going too far.

I’m no fan of the Magic Kingdom or it’s rulers, but you have to ask yourself the question what would happen if they fell? Libya and Iraq haven’t exactly prospered since their dictators were deposed. One thing I’ve learned in recent years is that no matter how bad the bad guys are, the alternative can be even worse.

As to Yemen, yes, what’s going on there is dreadful. Comparable in many ways to the tragedy in Syria. Of course, when it’s the Russians intervening and turning cities into rubble you don’t seem to regard it as an issue. But then again, you never did have a problem with double standards, did you?

racedo
4th Jan 2017, 13:38
Yes, the perps who flew the aircraft into the twin towers were Saudis. But the operation was planned and financed by Al-Qaida, then based in Afghanistan and sheltered by the Taliban regime. And they did not get a ďpassĒ on it.

Yup Saudi's did get a complete pass .

They funded it and had fully recognised it as Govt of Afghanistan.


To say that Saudis export terror is a gross over simplification. Saudi Arabia has experienced terror attacks on its own soil by the very organisations you mention. They are guilty of complacency and a rather too tolerant attitude towards the more conservative elements in Saudi society who are wedded to the Wahabbi doctrine. In that respect they are the architects of their own misfortune, but to suggest that the Saudi Government and Royal Family are sponsoring terror attacks is going too far.


So is this the idea of a "benevolent or peace loving" Saudi Govt............. who is still funding Al Qaeda and IS now and supplying them with weapons ?
Just like they supplied the weapons in Iraq against US/UK.
Its no surpise than Anbar province was the worst area (outside of Bagdad) and its no surprise that Saudi's are still funnelling more weapons in now to break Anbar from Iraq.



Iím no fan of the Magic Kingdom or itís rulers, but you have to ask yourself the question what would happen if they fell? Libya and Iraq havenít exactly prospered since their dictators were deposed. One thing Iíve learned in recent years is that no matter how bad the bad guys are, the alternative can be even worse.

And who supplied the weapons and supported the deposing of secular Gadaffi ? Oh it was the Saudi's / Qatari's.
Democracy could of course break out it in Saudi.
After all is the West demanding it for everywhere else so why should Saudi's not experience the joy of a move towards it like Iraq, Libya, Syria.


As to Yemen, yes, whatís going on there is dreadful. Comparable in many ways to the tragedy in Syria. Of course, when itís the Russians intervening and turning cities into rubble you donít seem to regard it as an issue. But then again, you never did have a problem with double standards, did you?

Not in the slightest bit comparable to Syria.
Russians invited in by Legal Government of Syria to counter terrorist operations funded by Saudi's / Qataris / West.
A list of moderate rebels who support Democracy seems always missing from those supporting the terrorists.
Its funny reading how the Western media call them "Rebels" in Aleppo and as soon as they go to Mosul they are "Terrorists".

Andy_S
4th Jan 2017, 14:42
The Saudi’s intervened in Yemen on behalf of their allies, just as the Russians did in Syria. The Saudi’s then proceeded to do some pretty terrible things including indiscriminate bombing of innocent civilians in Yemen. Just as the Russians did in Syria.

The difference between a “rebel” and a “terrorist” is very much in the eye of the beholder. Or more specifically which side you support………. And since you’ve nailed your colours (as usual) very firmly to the Russian cause it’s probably futile to expect any objectivity.

HighAndFlighty
4th Jan 2017, 15:40
Yup Saudi's did get a complete pass .
Its funny reading how the Western media call them "Rebels" in Aleppo and as soon as they go to Mosul they are "Terrorists".

This is so true.

racedo
4th Jan 2017, 17:15
The Saudi’s intervened in Yemen on behalf of their allies, just as the Russians did in Syria. The Saudi’s then proceeded to do some pretty terrible things including indiscriminate bombing of innocent civilians in Yemen. Just as the Russians did in Syria.

The difference between a “rebel” and a “terrorist” is very much in the eye of the beholder. Or more specifically which side you support………. And since you’ve nailed your colours (as usual) very firmly to the Russian cause it’s probably futile to expect any objectivity.

Saudi's intervened in Yemen to reinstall a President whom was opposed by everybody in Yemen and ran to Saudi Arabia. Hadi and his Govt resigned and were replaced then changed his mind. He was only elected for 2 years in 2012 so is out of term.
Saudi's have bombed everybody and allowed Al Qaeda and IS a free. hand to do as they wish.

Syria has had election where exitsing President was voted for inspite of attempts to disrupt it. He has continued support of the majority of the population across all religions. Russians intervened at the request of the existing Government of Syria after externally funded terrorists were destroying the country.

As for supporting Russia.
I want countrys to stop interfering, supplying and supporting terrorists, it is quite simple, otoh you seem to be shilling for the Saudi's on the basis they our "allies and buy weapons from us".
Its like feeding a rabid dog hoping it will look kindly on you.

Andy_S
4th Jan 2017, 17:21
you seem to be shilling for the Saudi's on the basis they our "allies and buy weapons from us".

You clearly didn't read the bit where I said I have no particular affection for them, their country or their rulers.