|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
I really wonder why Saudi Arabia wasn't made part | by Illiad | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Depending on your Political Views, Illiad... | by bensun | 2005-03-08 18:57:36 |
|
I don't think it has anything to do with my... | by Illiad | 2005-03-08 19:01:17 |
| What's the alternative? |
by Hoth |
2005-03-08 20:17:07 |
It seems to me that if the government of Saudi Arabia were eliminated, they'd only be replaced by even worse extremists. The battle in Saudi Arabia is between the opressive government and the terrorists who find the government too liberal. That's not to say that there aren't reformists in the country, but they don't appear to be a viable political/military force and I see no reason to expect them to become such soon.
Labeling a country as evil is only productive when you don't fear that labeling them such will give a worse evil an upper hand. (Hence why, for example, Iraq wasn't labeled evil while they were fighting Iran.)
If the primary purpose of a country were to try to bring down bad regimes in other countries (as perhaps a lot of neoconservatives feel would be a good idea), then it could make sense to cut ties with Saudi Arabia. (So if you want to call current U.S. foreign policy inconsistent, fine.) Personally though, I consider that to be unrealistic idealism. Sometimes it's better to look after your own interests to an extent and let Saudi citizens deal with their own problems. Clearly it's in U.S. economic interests to support the Saudi regime, and there's no clear evidence that ceasing to support them would bring about a change for the better instead of a change for the worse. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Yep. | by Illiad | 2005-03-08 20:24:39 |
|
Uh, the royals *are* the exremists, in Saudi | by HadEnuf | 2005-03-08 20:45:13 |
|
P.S. Ges I stil kant spel | by HadEnuf | 2005-03-08 20:46:36 |
|
Harsh is relative. | by Hoth | 2005-03-08 23:57:58 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
