[Tokhtamish]

The difference between Bush Senior and Bush Junior policy is that under Bush Senior the Saudis could still be pumped for lots of contracts for his pals. Now, the rot has set in and the situtation is so obviously pre-revolutionary (this looks so much like France, 1789) that the old rules just don't apply any more. A foreign policy based largely upon a strategic-economic relationship with Saudi Arabia just doesn't fit the facts anymore because...

1. The Saudis can't afford to provide lush construction projects for our high tech sector or buy armaments and as a result they have no more John Connally-style American apologists. The cozy days of the Houston-Riyadh partnership are over.

2. They are insolvent and primed to be the next big debt crisis. They don't have the money to buy their way out of pursuing contradictory policies. It is in the interest of American financial interests to step back from this ticking time bomb.

3. Their ruling elite is like the French aristocracy of 1789. Venal, gutless, morally degenerate, incompetent, parasitic, loathed by its people, self-loathing, incapable of reform. The only way out of this mess is a revolution and the more distance we put between ourselves and the Saudi princes the better.

[Shermy]

Right on. I hope the "bankers" don't ask for "bail-outs" (our money) to support the Saudis. They own, I heard, $100 billion in US and other bonds. They should pay up those. Probably it's considered property of the rulers rather than the country, though.