Saudi Arabia gives Israel clear skies to attack Iranian nuclear sites

[JohnRM]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7148555.ece

Saudi Arabia has conducted tests to stand down its air defences to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The Times can reveal.

In the week that the UN Security Council imposed a new round of sanctions on Tehran, defence sources in the Gulf say that Riyadh has agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran.

To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defence systems not activated. Once the Israelis are through, the kingdom’s air defences will return to full alert.

(click above link for the rest of the article)

Holy [feces], if this is true. It surely wouldn't entirely surprise me. Saudi Arabia is under serious threat from a nuclear-armed Iran.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Plus Saudi Arabia is one of our allies, so that gives us a little minor leverage.

...that and the King's learning how to be nice to his servants.

Anyway, good news. We may not go to war, but I will fully support Israel beating the living crap out of Iran with everything they've got.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Oooooh, this is rather interesting...

 

[Tani Coyote]

Oooooh, this is rather interesting...

Generally, when you have a common enemy, you'll put aside all your past disputes and work together for the time being.

Meaning that as soon as Iran's nuclear facilities are foetid hellholes and/or wastelands...

It will be back to Six Day War syndrome for the Arab states.

Also, surely a Sunni state doesn't mind dealing a blow to a Shi'ite one...

 

[JollyRoger]

Clear skies returning from such an attack?

 

[Princeps]

Yes, Israel is totally surrounded by hostile powers! Oh wait, that isn't exactly the case.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Clear skies returning from such an attack?

...well damn. Didn't think about that part.

Straight from the pages of RA3: you finish your common enemy, only for your temporary ally to backstab you when your guard is down just afterward.

KSA is clearly run by strategic genii.

Yes, Israel is totally surrounded by hostile powers! Oh wait, that isn't exactly the case.

The enemy of your enemy is still capable of being your enemy too; but since you're both enemies with the third party, you'll put aside your differences to match them. It's why it's argued a tripolar world is more stable than a bipolar one, because there's a third variable ready to switch sides if any of the greater two gets too strong.

Think the USSR, Allies, and Germany. Three-way rivalry, but two had a common enemy and put aside their differences out of convenience and mutual interest in crushing the Reich.

So once Iran's a smoldering crater...

Back to square one: "ISRAEL'S SO EVIL, ARGH ZIONIST IMPERIALISTS"

 

[Elrohir]

Yes, Israel is totally surrounded by hostile powers! Oh wait, that isn't exactly the case.

This doesn't exactly mean Saudi Arabia is Israel's friend. I think they can hate Israel, and still reasonably work with Israel if it's in their best interest. And given that Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades, and hasn't used them yet, I think they can trust that Israel isn't going to nuke anyone anytime soon. Iran is more of a wildcard -- and a heretical Shi'a wildcard, at that.

Note that I'm not suggesting that Israel should attack Iran. Just that it's not that bizarre to suggest that the Saudi's can play both countries for their own benefit. (As can Israel)

 

[asbestos]

This doesn't exactly mean Saudi Arabia is Israel's friend. I think they can hate Israel, and still reasonably work with Israel if it's in their best interest. And given that Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades, and hasn't used them yet, I think they can trust that Israel isn't going to nuke anyone anytime soon. Iran is more of a wildcard -- and a heretical Shi'a wildcard, at that.

o_O
Having weapons stashed for decades is no guarantee you won't use them in the future.

 

[Elrohir]

o_O
Having weapons stashed for decades is no guarantee you won't use them in the future.

There are no guarantees in international politics. But if Israel didn't use them when she was invaded on all sides, then it's unlikely that Israel will do so without an even more extreme situation arising. I find it hard to believe that Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq would attack Israel today, and I can't think of a worse threat...aside from a nuclear attack from Iran. The Israelis really have too much to lose if they use their nuclear weapons in response to anything but a nuclear attack -- which means the best way to make sure that all that delicious Middle Eastern oil doesn't get irradiated is to make sure no nukes go off near Israel. Since Iran is the only other Middle Eastern country with a viable program....well, I'm sure this makes a little sense by now.

(Again, I'm not recommending anything. I'm just saying I can see how, from a certain point of view, this could be reasonable)

 

[Mr. Dictator]

i love when countries fight. it is soooo interesting.

 

[plarq]

What?! Saudi opens to Israel? Jihad against those traitors!

 

[JohnRM]

You can be quite sure that the radicals will, once again, call for the heads of the members of the House of Saud on a platter.

 

[Tee Kay]

An excellent example of Islamic unity

 

[asbestos]

There are no guarantees in international politics. But if Israel didn't use them when she was invaded on all sides, then it's unlikely that Israel will do so without an even more extreme situation arising. I find it hard to believe that Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq would attack Israel today, and I can't think of a worse threat...aside from a nuclear attack from Iran. The Israelis really have too much to lose if they use their nuclear weapons in response to anything but a nuclear attack -- which means the best way to make sure that all that delicious Middle Eastern oil doesn't get irradiated is to make sure no nukes go off near Israel. Since Iran is the only other Middle Eastern country with a viable program....well, I'm sure this makes a little sense by now.

(Again, I'm not recommending anything. I'm just saying I can see how, from a certain point of view, this could be reasonable)

Would you also argue that Iran is a non-threat because it never declared war on anybody?

 

[amadeus]

The article also says they're waiting on the go-ahead from a few other countries, the U.S. included. Obama can't stall forever, and he looks weak in the face of his enemies and his allies by pussyfooting on the Iran issue.

 

[Tani Coyote]

The article also says they're waiting on the go-ahead from a few other countries, the U.S. included. Obama can't stall forever, and he looks weak in the face of his enemies and his allies by pussyfooting on the Iran issue.

As a right-winger, you should be encouraging this. The more his numbers slip, the more likely he'll be out in 2012/the more likely Republicans win big in November.

...by contrast, that also means the more likely Republican voters will get so arrogant as to assume Obama and his team will nose already and not vote, thus allowing the Demmies to win anyway because of a lack of Republican turnout. Human perception sucks.

 

[TheAlamo]

Hopefully it's just a ruse to get the Israelis to come within range of Saudi SAM and interceptor coverage.

Also, still waiting for direct evidence that Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons instead of hearsay and suspicion.

 

[Princeps]

Iran is more of a wildcard -

Iran is not even remotely a threat to any one in the region.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The article also says they're waiting on the go-ahead from a few other countries, the U.S. included. Obama can't stall forever, and he looks weak in the face of his enemies and his allies by pussyfooting on the Iran issue.

Right. After all, everybody knows that unilaterally attacking a sovereign country which has actually not been found to have done anything illegal is "weak" and "pussyfooting".