Once again, National Review jumps the shark. This is the editorial board that believed Iraqis would welcome us with open arms. The reality is that Sunni Arabs in Iraq opposed us because a future without Saddam was a future without the perks of minority rule by one of their own. And that was enough, because of an America unwilling to impose Saddam-like repressive measures (i.e. large-scale massacres of the friends and family of identified insurgents), to put 5,000 GI’s in body bags. Saddam held it together because Iraqi Shiites and Kurds feared rather than loved him.
The problem with Saudi Arabia isn’t the royals or even the mullahs. It’s the population. National Review keeps telling us about the importance of assigning blame to people for their actions. It has somehow skipped over the reality that the people of Saudi Arabia are descended from generation after generation of deeply-religious bandits barely held in check by the Saudi royal family. If the al-Sauds fall and are replaced by the Muslim Brotherhood, I’m sure National Review will disown responsibility for its moronic policy recommendations.
I agree. I originally supported the Iraq war because I believed the Iraqis were an ancient and cultured people and only needed the opportunity that freedom would offer in order to excel.
I’ve never been more wrong about anything in my life and regret that thinking to this day.
The problem with the Saudis, or Iraqis or Syrians, etc. isn’t repressive government. Their problem is islam.