Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Government orders flags to be lowered to half mast for Saudi despot Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    The only sole reason the stupid government is doing this has got to be money/economics.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by young_guns)
    Israel is not a member of the NPT. Attempting to "punish" them would be a gross violation of international law
    Ah ok. Didn't know that. I doubt the West would even politely ask their Isreali buddies to maybe give up nukes though, which invalidates any justifications on the basis of keeping Middle Eastern regimes off nukes.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moosferatu)
    Ah ok. Didn't know that. I doubt the West would even politely ask their Isreali buddies to maybe give up nukes though, which invalidates any justifications on the basis of keeping Middle Eastern regimes off nukes.
    I suppose the distinction being the Israel is a democracy, and we're fairly sure they're not just going to set them off just for the sake of it. We can also be fairly sure that they won't allow them to fall into the wrong hands

    On the other hand, I'm not sure I would be so trusting of nukes in the hands of a millenarian regime with apocalyptic religious views and a penchant for holocaust denial

    I also think Europe would be in a difficult position, having slaughtered 6 million Jews in living memory, to tell them what's "appropriate" for their defence.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by young_guns)
    I'm sorry but Saudi Arabia has contravened the NPT, and in fact the most fundamental aspects of the treaty.

    Article I of the treaty prohibits any state to "assist, encourage or induce" any non-nuclear state to manufacture nuclear weapons.

    Saudi Arabia paid a huge amount of money to support Pakistan's development of nuclear weapons on the understanding that warheads would be made available to Saudi Arabia if and when they were required. That is one of the basic pillars of the Pak-Saudi special relationship. Surprised you didn't know that

    Saudi Arabia also acquired Chinese Dongfeng 3 missiles specifically for that purpose, missiles which can only have one plausible purpose

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_S..._Missile_Force

    On the question of Libya suppporting terrorism... really? I mean, really? Do you want to go down that road?

    I mean, if you wanted to say, "Sometimes foreign policy makes hypocrites of us all, and expedience is the only law in pursuing our national interest abroad" I could respect it. But to try and make weak and obviously puerile arguments about punishing Libya for decades old NPT infractions, that just looks confused
    Saudi aren't nuclear.

    The only time they've mentioned going nuckear was a few years ago when they said if Iran goes buckear, so will they.

    DongFeng3 has other uses.

    I often feel that there's countries out there that vocal members of the left hate just because their friends of the U.S.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Saudi aren't nuclear.
    You made contravention of the NPT the test. The Saudis have contravened the NPT.

    I often feel that there's countries out there that vocal members of the left hate just because their friends of the U.S.
    :lol: Wow, you're really struggling now. It's like the internet equivalent of seeing your lip quiver

    If you're going to resort to cheap rhetoric, you should at least be good at it, not proffer something so laughable it's easily batted away
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by young_guns)
    You made contravention of the NPT the test. The Saudis have contravened the NPT.



    :lol: Wow, you're really struggling now. It's like the internet equivalent of seeing your lip quiver

    If you're going to resort to cheap rhetoric, you should at least be good at it, not proffer something so laughable it's easily batted away
    Saudi arabia have never developed an organic nuclear weapons programme.

    You do understand that don't you?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    You do understand that don't you?
    Point to where I said they did, and you might actually have a point
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    As horrid as Saudi Arabia is by western standards, it's still far superior to what would happen were they free to elect to elect a government. Unfortunate though it may be, the people of the Middle East seem to value their religion above prosperity or living peacefully.

    I'd hope for a transition to a constitutional monarchy but at least the current royals serve our interests broadly.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    DongFeng3 has other uses.
    You don't know much about ballistic missiles, do you?

    The DF-3 has a circular error probable (CEP) of 2,000m. That means 50% of shots will fall within 2km of the target. It has a throw-weight of two tonnes, which is the equivalent of two Mk84 HE bombs.

    It's ludicrously improbable as a conventional weapon, and does far less than the Saudis could accomplish with their very well-equipped air force (F-15Es and Typhoons, AWACs, refuellers, decent ECM).

    On the other hand, it's perfectly well-suited to being used if the Saudis invoke their widely-known nuclear pact with Pakistan to have warheads provided to them in a time of crisis.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by young_guns)
    You don't know much about ballistic missiles, do you?

    The DF-3 has a circular error probable (CEP) of 2,000m. That means 50% of shots will fall within 2km of the target. It has a throw-weight of two tonnes, which is the equivalent of two Mk84 HE bombs.

    It's ludicrously improbable as a conventional weapon, and does far less than the Saudis could accomplish with their very well-equipped air force (F-15Es and Typhoons, AWACs, refuellers, decent ECM).

    On the other hand, it's perfectly well-suited to being used if the Saudis invoke their widely-known nuclear pact with Pakistan to have warheads provided to them in a time of crisis.
    They need nuclear weapons first to bolt on. Which they don't have.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    I disagree with flags being lowered to half mast for a Saudi Arabian monarch, but we all know the West sucks up to the Middle East for its oil. If this was any other country with such a terrible human rights record that couldn't provide us with oil, this kind of response would not be happening.

    With that said, King Abdullah was meant to actually be decent, considering the ultra-conservative nature of Saudi Arabia. He seemed to be reforming women's rights, even if only minorly.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Britain is a Dhimmi so this should be no surprise.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    in the real world we have to deal with people with blood on their hands. not all world leaders are as squeaky clean as ours.
    tbh the robust way the Saudis deal with criminals is quite sensible.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    A (big) mistake in my opinion. I don't think we owe them anything of that nature.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    They need nuclear weapons first to bolt on. Which they don't have.
    They have them in an effective sense. Saudi Arabia covered most of the expense Pakistan incurred developing nuclear weapons in exchange for the facility of being able to withdraw warheads from Pakistan's pool of devices if and when Saudi Arabia requires them.

    In many ways, the present arrangement is a strong deterrent in that they don't have to hold onto the warheads themselves; the mere fact of the Pak-Saudi agreement and Saudi's possession of DF-3 missiles deployed in underground bases with a hardened, survivable C3 system supporting them holds a range of potential adversary targets at risk in a virtual sense. Saudi Arabia possesses them in the sense of being able to use them if and when necessary, and nations in the region act on the assumption Saudi Arabia could.

    And the question of whether they have them is irrelevant. They don't need to possess the warheads to have contravened the NPT; paying for their development is sufficient to breach Article I of the treaty.

    And that's game, set and match, my dear boy. You said contravention of the NPT was the test, which Libya failed and therefore had to be invaded. So logically you have to accept that is not the test, or you must call for the invasion of Saudi Arabia.

    Of course, you could just say, "Well, expedience is the highest law in foreign policy, and inconsistent treatment is acceptable where it suits our national interest". But for some reason, you appear constitutionally incapable of (1) admitting you were wrong, and accepting you've been shown to be wrong in the eyes of all neutral observers, (2) That sometimes the West is inconsistent, and that's okay. You seem to need​ to believe we're also morally pure. It's a child's luxury to cling to such an infantile belief
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by young_guns)
    They have them in an effective sense. Saudi Arabia covered most of the expense Pakistan incurred developing nuclear weapons in exchange for the facility of being able to withdraw warheads from Pakistan's pool of devices if and when Saudi Arabia requires them.

    In many ways, the present arrangement is a strong deterrent in that they don't have to hold onto the warheads themselves; the mere fact of the Pak-Saudi agreement and Saudi's possession of DF-3 missiles deployed in underground bases with a hardened, survivable C3 system supporting them holds a range of potential adversary targets at risk in a virtual sense. Saudi Arabia possesses them in the sense of being able to use them if and when necessary, and nations in the region act on the assumption Saudi Arabia could.

    And the question of whether they have them is irrelevant. They don't need to possess the warheads to have contravened the NPT; paying for their development is sufficient to breach Article I of the treaty.

    And that's game, set and match, my dear boy. You said contravention of the NPT was the test, which Libya failed and therefore had to be invaded. So logically you have to accept that is not the test, or you must call for the invasion of Saudi Arabia.

    Of course, you could just say, "Well, expedience is the highest law in foreign policy, and inconsistent treatment is acceptable where it suits our national interest". But for some reason, you appear constitutionally incapable of (1) admitting you were wrong, and accepting you've been shown to be wrong in the eyes of all neutral observers, (2) That sometimes the West is inconsistent, and that's okay. You seem to need​ to believe we're also morally pure. It's a child's luxury to cling to such an infantile belief
    Saudi arabia hasn't tried to develop nuclear war heads yet.

    We know libya and Iraq have/did.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 25, 2015
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.