Saudi Arabia, an ISIS That Has Made It

[eridani]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/21/opinion/saudi-arabia-an-isis-that-has-made-it.html

Black Daesh, white Daesh. The former slits throats, kills, stones, cuts off hands, destroys humanity’s common heritage and despises archaeology, women and non-Muslims. The latter is better dressed and neater but does the same things. The Islamic State; Saudi Arabia. In its struggle against terrorism, the West wages war on one, but shakes hands with the other. This is a mechanism of denial, and denial has a price: preserving the famous strategic alliance with Saudi Arabia at the risk of forgetting that the kingdom also relies on an alliance with a religious clergy that produces, legitimizes, spreads, preaches and defends Wahhabism, the ultra-puritanical form of Islam that Daesh feeds on.

Wahhabism, a messianic radicalism that arose in the 18th century, hopes to restore a fantasized caliphate centered on a desert, a sacred book, and two holy sites, Mecca and Medina. Born in massacre and blood, it manifests itself in a surreal relationship with women, a prohibition against non-Muslims treading on sacred territory, and ferocious religious laws. That translates into an obsessive hatred of imagery and representation and therefore art, but also of the body, nakedness and freedom. Saudi Arabia is a Daesh that has made it.

The West’s denial regarding Saudi Arabia is striking: It salutes the theocracy as its ally but pretends not to notice that it is the world’s chief ideological sponsor of Islamist culture. The younger generations of radicals in the so-called Arab world were not born jihadists. They were suckled in the bosom of Fatwa Valley, a kind of Islamist Vatican with a vast industry that produces theologians, religious laws, books, and aggressive editorial policies and media campaigns.

One might counter: Isn’t Saudi Arabia itself a possible target of Daesh? Yes, but to focus on that would be to overlook the strength of the ties between the reigning family and the clergy that accounts for its stability — and also, increasingly, for its precariousness. The Saudi royals are caught in a perfect trap: Weakened by succession laws that encourage turnover, they cling to ancestral ties between king and preacher. The Saudi clergy produces Islamism, which both threatens the country and gives legitimacy to the regime.

[joshcryer]

1. An ISIS with vast oil wealth, mind you.

If Saudi Arabia didn't have vast oil wealth it'd look like the worst most violent areas inhabited by ISIS. But because the people are well paid and generally there is decent welfare, they endure the totalitarian aspects of the monarchy.

This is what happened when Salman gave away free money this year:

As far as the US is concerned as long as the oil flows we couldn't care less. Oh, and it helps that the MIC loves selling shit to Saudi Arabia.

[jamzrockz]

2. But wait

I thought the US cared about bringing democracy to those all those Arab countries? You are the one who is always talking about how Libya and Syria deserves democracy so bad that we had to force the majority of the population to accept it now and how we had to bomb those countries to smitterings to achieve it.

Saudi is one country that deserves democracy more than any country in the whole world, it is Saudi Arabia where women and religious minorities are treated like second class citizens, the sponsor terrorism through their Wahhabi schools all over Europe, Asia and Africa. But when it comes to democracy from the barrel of a gun, only non compliant Arab nations gets it.

Weird isn't it?

Captured ISIS-terrorist: 'Turkey, NATO and Saudis give us money and weapons'
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=15e_1448104442

[joshcryer]

3. The US would like democracy.

Because it's historically neutral, but
Saudi Arabia never had the Arab spring, almost every middle eastern country did (Yemen and Bahrain suppressed it to a great extent)

The Saudis get away almost solely due to free money.

BTW, are you one of those lackeys who think I'm a piece of shit? Just to get that out of the way here.

[jamzrockz]

4. The double standard is what I have a problem with

Why not remain neutral when it comes to Syria, Libya and Iraq? They support democracy when it is advances their interest and they are against it when it goes against it. It has nothing to do with bringin about democratic rule, it is just the excuse they use to inject themselves where they are not needed.

Yemen without nary foreign help deposed a corrupt puppet leader and the US and Saudi sent their guns to fight them, the Ukraine did the same and the US supported them. This makes no sense

And btw, there was an Arab spring in Saudi Arabia, but the govt quickly shut it down.