posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 06:04 AM
reply to post by Mdv2
The Saudi Royal house is no better
than the Iranian regime,
The Saudi Royal house is far worse than the Iranian regime. Iran is often described in the west as a theocracy, but
this isn't strictly true. In fact the mullahs do not actually rule, but rather, in line with the Iranian constitution, assure that any laws passed by
the democratically elected govt do not contravene Islamic law. Now, I realise that this is a fine distinction, but it is important, because in Iran
there is a degree of democracy. We cannot know for sure just how corrupt the democratic process is (without going & living there ourselves), because
the only info coming out & the MSM contribution is propaganda. However, we can know that there are
elections in Iran that have produced a govt
that is very popular in poor rural regions.
Not so in Saudi Arabia, which is a curious mix of absolute monarchy & a nepotistic pseudo-corporate structure, characterised by personal corruption &
internal struggles for power & influence.
I'd be far more worried about a nuclear armed Saudi autocrat than such weapons in the hands of those who must submit the decision to use them to
strict Islamic law, which would preclude a 1st strike.
Actually, I dont believe this story anyway. It makes no sense for China to arm Saudi Arabia with an independent nuclear deterrent. The fact that they
are dependent on the USA for security suits China just fine, because it means that, in order to guarantee Saudi oil, the USA must maintain a
cripplingly expensive presence in the ME.