Iran nuclear deal: Saudi Arabia warns it will strike out on its own

[happyslug]

19. No, the reason is the same reason the Russians went into Afghanistan in 1979

Last edited Tue Nov 26, 2013, 03:30 AM - Edit history (1)

The generation that ran the Soviet Union from the death of Stalin till Gorbachev, was the generation raised to do so by Stalin from 1938-1952. Earlier communists were all killed off in the Purges. The one thing this "Second Generation" had was unity do to a common fear, Stalin. That unity overcame ANY dogmatic differences in how the Soviet Union was to be run (unity was more important then Dogma to this Second Generation after Stalin). Most Second Generation had been in their 30s when promoted, some in their 20s. By the 1970s, they were in their 50s and 60s, 1980s 60s and 70s. It was time for a generational change.

Now, in the years before any generational change, the third generation, the children of the second generation, also adopt a very strict interpretation of what ever is the dogma of the Second Generation (to a degree unheard of except in speeches from Second Generation members) In the Case of the Soviet Union the Dogma was Communism, as interpreted by Stalin, but NOT attributed to Stalin for he had been a butcher (one of the differences between the Soviet Union's Second generation and most Second generation dictators, through most of that difference was lost when Brezhnev took over from Khrushchev).

One of the differences between the Second and Third generation is reflected in the practical parts of Stalinism which were followed by the Second Generation, but ignored by the third generation (and dismissed by the third Generation as some sort of corruption adopted by members of the Second Generation), On the other hand the underlying dogma was viewed as "perfect". Among these third generation members becoming better communists (without the purges of the 1930s) was the key to improving the Soviet Union, This rule not only applied to the Soviet Union but all of its Allies AND other countries in its sphere of influence.

Afghanistan was the lone country in the Soviet Sphere of Influence that was NOT Communist, in fact it was a Kingdom. That Stalin was the person who had selected the King and set up how Afghanistan was ruled was dismissed by the Third Generation as a mistake by Stalin that continued under the rule of the Second Generation.

Thus the third generation saw Afghanistan as something that had to be "Reformed" along "Communist Lines". Since Afghanistan was NOT a up front country (Like the Warsaw Pact countries were viewed), Afghanistan was one aspect of the countries in the Soviet Sphere of Influence that came under control of these Third Generation members first (The second generation stayed in controlled of the Military and the Warsaw Pact). This level of control by the third generation increased, as the Second generation slowly lost control in the 1970s as the members of the Second Generation died of old age.

In many ways this change of generation was the main internal problems within the Soviet Union in the 1970s. Among the Third Generation to get promoted members of the Third Generation had to know and cite Marxism, as it was dogma among the Second Generation. The problem was such citations without also having the restrictions on applying that dogma the hard experiences of living under Stalin had taught the Second Generation. Thus Afghanistan to the Third Generation, was NOT Communist, but had to become Communist. Thus reforms were introduced into Afghanistan, including after several years the removal of the King of Afghanistan. A Communist Government was declared in Afghanistan, but it refused to do ALL of the dogmatic change the Third Generation had been taught was required. The reason the Government of Afghanistan refused to implement all of the programs was do to opposition within Afghanistan (Stalin's reality and the reason Stalin had set up Afghanistan was ignored it had worked from 1950-1975, but it had to change). The problem was enough reforms had been introduced to get the citizens of Afghanistan to revolt. Do to that revolt something had to be done to suppress it for the Afghan Army could not do it, so the Soviet Union Invaded. Note it was the remaining members of the Second Generation who ordered the invasion, but the reason for the invasion had been the work of the third generation (including members of the Third Generation who thought it was a mistake). The invasion of Afghanistan was more to preserve the country within the Soviet Sphere of Influence than to impose Communist Dogma (But further implementation of Communists had to occur after the invasion for that was the Dogma of the Soviet Union).

Notice the 1970s saw the growing participation and thus power of the Third Generation as the Second Generation slowly died of old age. Final decisions was still in the hands of the Second Generation, but the Third Generation were moving up and making more and more of the decisions (both good and bad). Finally in the 1980s the Third Generation took over in the form of Gorbachev and the real infighting among the third generation started. Gorbachev was one wing of the third generation, Yeltsin another wing, the hard liners a third (with the KGB and its connections, including Putin a Fourth, please note Putin was to young to be a member of the Third Generation, he was a post generation figure that took over as the third generation broke up as the Soviet Union broke up and ended up picking up the pieces. Putin is NO STALIN but may be the first of a new group of rulers of Russia, a new first generation).

I go into the above for this is typical of dictatorships that do not dissolve within the life of the first dictator or break up right after his death Some dictators have been called Presidents, others Kings, Emperors, Emirs, or minor tiles like Chairmen (title of both Stalin and Mao), but you see this generational change over time. In the case of Saudi Arabia it is actual descendants of King Saud I, who died in 1952. Being a traditional kingdom with rulers being picked by blood, the pool of actual potential rulers are much smaller then it had been in the Soviet Union, It was clear the son of Stalin was NOT going to succeed Stalin (Through that fear ran in the minds of the Politburo till Stalin's only surviving son died in the early 1960s, thus the understanding of Stalin's son as a drunk, where there is hard evidence he drank no more then was typical of him or a person of his position within the Soviet Military).

King Saud I had united what we call Saudi Arabia from 1920 till his death in 1952. King Saud I ruled through religious dogma, but also military might. King Saud I, like Stalin tolerated no competitors so at his death the only people who could succeed him was the entourage around him. In the case of Stalin the other members of the Politburo, in the case of King Saud I his sons.

Thus Saudi Arabia is presently ruled by the Second Generation, but with most of that generation gone, most of the underlying power is in the hands of the Third Generation. The Third Generation is becoming more and more powerful as they take over more and more positions within Arabia. This movement has accelerated since 2000, as the deaths among the Second generation has accelerated.

At the same time, that Third Generation is fighting among themselves as to who will rule Saudi Arabia, using Islamic Dogma as a test (as Stalinism was used in the Soviet Union in the 1970s). The less dogmatic you are, the less chances of promotion. Blood is big in Saudi Arabia (it was less of a factor in the Soviet Union, one side affect is the death of the Soviet Union died in 1989, while Saudi Arabia is just entering its death spiral).

I bring Blood up, for the in fighting among the Third Generation is NOT Dogmatic as it had been in the Soviet Union, but by Blood. KIng Saud I had sons, but by many wives. The number of sons is believed to be above 50 at the time of the death of KIng Saud I. When the sons were running Saudi Arabia, they worked together for they learned to do so when their Father, King Saud I was alive (Like the people Stalin Installed in the period 1938-1952 period). The problem is the grandsons are moving up in the ranks and those grandsons are now at each other throats, trying to show other grandsons of KIng Saud I, that they can lead the country against its enemies. The main enemy are the Shiites who make most of the people who live in the richest oil producing area of Arabia. These Shiites are the enemy the House of Saud most fears much more then their fellow Shiites in Iran.

I have NOT seen any actual moves by Iran to expand its control. I have seen them support they fellow Shiites in the Persian Gulf States, but nothing more. I have seen Iran support Syria, who they view as an ally AND Gaza (And this is strange for Gaza is noted to be a Sunni dominated area, and the Syrians rulers, the House of Assad, as heretics by BOTH Sunni and Shiites).

Thus the War in Syria is NOT a move by Iran to take over Syria, but Saudi Arabia to take over Syria. The bombings in Iraq is similar, it is bombing of Shiites not Sunnis, again to expand Sunni (and Saudi Arabian) control. Thus it appears to Saudi Arabia is on the March into Shiite lands, just like the Soviet Union moved into Afghanistan in the 1970s. More a demand that such countries become more loyal to the country whose sphere of influence they are in, then anything external i.e. Iran itself.

Libya is another Sunni Country taken over by Forces funded by Saudi Arabia, to strengthen Saudi Arabian power among OPEC nations AND fellow Sunni and Arab nations.

Side Note on Syria: During the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and ever after 2000, Syria was funded by Saudi Arabia and the Rulers of Syria moved their branch of Islam more and more into orthodox Sunni dogma. On the other hand that religion not only had strong Shiite roots, it had even stronger Christian Roots (They celebrate several Christian Holidays in addition to Traditional Islamic Holidays). Thus The religion of the House of Assad was NOT of the same Islamic branch that is practiced in Saudi Arabia.

Like Afghanistan to the Soviet Union, this difference in dogma was not a problem till dogma over came Political reality as the Third Generation replaced the Second Generation, Thus the Civil War in Syria appears to be a plan by people within the Third generation rulers of Arabia to make Syria more in line with their branch of Islam, just like the third generation of Stalinist did the same with Afghanistan in the 1970s.

Remember, when reality over came dogma, the Third generations of Stalinist forced the Second Generation (who were still in control at the top in the 1970s) to invade to save Afghanistan from the mistakes the Third g=Generation had done in Afghanistan by ignoring reality. I suspect the same with the recent movement in the Middle East. The Third Generation are flexing their wings as they position themselves as the best defender of Islam among their fellow Third Generation. Remember it is NOT the actual defense of Islam that is important, but the appearance that one can defend Islam (Remember Defense of Islam AND preserving the Wealth of the family of King Said I is viewed as one and the same, by defending Islam, you defend the wealth of the House of Saud).

Thus this level of infighting within Saudi Arabia, right now not at the drawing blood level, but we are getting close.

This is typical. If you read history you see it time after time. A Great Leader takes over a country, makes it strong, his sons take over at his death and it remains strong, then as the grandsons take over, not being raised together, they fight over the empire, weaken the Empire and it collapses (Or someone else takes over the Empire or a part of the Empire and the cycle re-starts). Thus Genghis Khan took over half of Asia, his sons expanded it, and then his grandsons fought over it and divided among themselves. In turn those grandsons became the founder of new countries and we see the grandsons of those grandsons fighting over what remains (in the Case of the Khan of the Golden Horde, being taken over by Russia, in the case of Kublai Khan his Grandsons losing China to the Ming Dynasty).

What I fear is something similar is happening in Saudi Arabia, the Grandsons of KIng Saud I are fighting among themselves over who will rule when the time comes to replace the last Second Generation king with a Third Generation King. From 1952 onward, whenever a King of Saudi Arabia died, he was replaced by one of his brothers, but the number of such brothers is running out, thus soon we will see a Third Generation King of Saudi Arabia. The issue is WHO (and remember Gorbachev, his election to be ruler of the Soviet Union did NOT end the infighting, in 1991 you had the coup attempt that lead to the dissolution of the Soviet Union and that failed coup put Yeltsin on top. Then ten years later Yeltsin was replaced by Putin).

This is the fear driving the actions of Saudi Arabia, they will have oil for the next 30 years at present rate of extraction, With the drop in oil production in Russia, Mexico, the North Sea and Alaska's North Slope, the price will remain high (Fracking has NOT come near to what these oil fields produced and is NOT expected to do so). The issue is NOT drop in income do to drop in oil production (The expected increase in oil prices will more then compensate for the expected drop in production), the fear is WHO in Saudi Arabia gets to decide WHO gets what money in Saudi Arabia. Right now that is up to the remaining Second Generation, the problem is the Third Generation are maneuvering for position to decided which one of them will get to decide who gets how much. That is the real problem in Saudi Arabia and why the current conflict. It is NOT oil, per se, but who gets the money from that oil.