dagblog - Comments for "Marco Rubio's Islamic Dreams"

Thank you for answering my

moat — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 23:17:02 +0000

In reply to The people in the region need

Thank you for answering my question regarding where we differ on the matter. It provides a starting place for future discussion.

Rubio seems to believe is a

NCD — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 22:50:02 +0000

In reply to Rubio has a lot of rocks in

Rubio seems to believe is a warrior Prince of Arabia, he commands, they follow and fight to the death.

The people in the region need

NCD — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 22:46:21 +0000

In reply to It sounds like you are

The people in the region need to think the problem is important. I don't think the Saudi state is in danger. They would likely be in danger if they sent their army off to bloody Syrian battlefields where the officers might be radicalized and come back and start a coup, Sadat was of course killed by his own troops for collusion with the west and Israel.

Rubio has a lot of rocks in

trkingmomoe — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 22:33:54 +0000

In reply to You have a very superficial

Rubio has a lot of rocks in his head that roles around. He doesn't think well on his feet but is good at repeating what is said to him. His ideas probably came from his Miami benefactors.

It sounds like you are

moat — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 22:33:23 +0000

In reply to You have a very superficial

It sounds like you are agreeing with the underlined sentence, not debating it. In addition to the political problems you observe standing in the way of Saudi Arabia moving up north with an army, the Kingdom does have its hands full fighting on its borders.

The question we are debating is ultimately about how much the efforts to take down the House of Saud will matter in the next few years. The white/black game won't mean much if one side or other is beneath the sod. I do not think the Saudis are playing 3D chess but are actually in a fight for their lives. You don't think that struggle is important in the long run. Is that a fair statement of the differences of our points of view?

Er, yes. Rubio's idea is not going to happen.

You have a very superficial

NCD — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 22:25:26 +0000

In reply to From Rubio's comment about

You have a very superficial understanding and your link reinforces my point:

In military terms, the Saudi security apparatus is probably capable of suppressing Isis on its own territory, just as it did with al-Qaeda a decade or so ago, but it is in no position to confront Isis at the ideological level. The problem here is that Isis and the Saudis’ Islamic kingdom are ideologically similar, so attempts to challenge Isis on ideological (I would add on military grounds outside of Saudi Arabia too) grounds risk undermining the Saudi state too.

The Islamic State is more 'Islamic' than the Saudi's are, and the Saudi's are afraid the implications for the ruling family inside the infidel/west collaborating Kingdom.

The hypocrisy of fighting with the western infidels against Jihad could send the Saudi ruling family to their penthouses in London or villas in Monaco, exile, like the Shah of Iran when the Shia Mullahs took over Iran.

They have absolutely nothing to gain from helping the west. The Saudi motto is fund Jihad there so they won't Jihad here. If any of those nations Rubio listed had an interest in fighting ISIS they wouldn't need a Rubio invitation to do it. They aren't doing it. They would laugh at anyone who asked them to lead or join a ground campaign.

It's why much Saudi/Wahabbi/Salafi oil money is likely flowing in quantity to ISIS to buy protection for the Gulf states.

The Saudi's want their white ISIS ideological cake to retain power and wealth, and to keep their unIslamic military alliances and financial alliances with the west as well.

Sending the Saudi Army into the field against the most Sunni Islamic outfit on earth, as Rubio suggests as feasible, is the last thing the Saudi's would do.

From Rubio's comment about

moat — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 21:07:22 +0000

In reply to Marco Rubio's Islamic Dreams

From Rubio's comment about "troop strength" and the assessment to accomplish tasks, it seems that he may have Obama and GW Bush mixed up since General Shinseki was the last military figure with balls enough to say how much of that strength would be required to do something in particular. Since that time, work has been planned more on a "time and materials" basis.

NCD, I take your point that getting a jamboree together to denounce ISIS on an ideological basis is not something to hold one's breath for. But the element missing from your account is that ISIS and Al Qaeda are at war with the House of Saud. The fighting in Yemen is the most obvious recent form of the conflict but it is easy enough to research the 15 year house by house search for Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia.

Now I don't claim that this additional element missing from your account (much less Rubio's) makes everything clear about what should be done. But leaving the element out does not add to clarity.