Saudi King Abdullah has died

[RogueBeaver]

Just breaking.

[Insula Dei]

Quite an evening on the Arab peninsula.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Big news for sure.

[Murica!]

YES!!!!!! CIA OVERTHROW THEM NOW!!!!!!!!!!

[RogueBeaver]

WaPo obit.

[Panda Express]

So now what happens?

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I don't celebrate the death of anyone, but this man was evil and the world isn't losing anything by him not being around.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

So now what happens?

The new king is a man named Salman, yet another son of Ibn Saud. The (vast) royal family will elect a new Crown Prince from amongst themselves.

[NewYorkExpress]

YES!!!!!! CIA OVERTHROW THEM NOW!!!!!!!!!!

One of the rare times, where the CIA would have blood on its hands for not doing something....and for doing something. It's a no-win situation for them.

For me, saying RIP to this man, literally means Rest in Pieces. He could have destroyed Osama Bin Laden (and his family), and the views he believed in long before 9/11/2001, and he failed to do so. Hell, you could arguably make a case he believed in them himself. He deserves as much eternal damnnation as Bin Laden or their ilk.

[BaconBacon96]

So now what happens?

The new king is a man named Salman, yet another son of Ibn Saud. The (vast) royal family will elect a new Crown Prince from amongst themselves.

Thing is, Salman is 79 himself and in incredibly poor health, believed to be suffering from among other things dementia. I doubt he can be an effective ruler.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So now what happens?

The new king is a man named Salman, yet another son of Ibn Saud. The (vast) royal family will elect a new Crown Prince from amongst themselves.

Muqrin is the Crown Prince. He's the youngest son of Ibn Saud, so the next Crown Prince will presumably be a grandson.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Wow, didn't know he was ill.

[Famous Mortimer]

He was ill since he took power.

[All Along The Watchtower]

He was ill since he took power.

Ah, somehow I didn't realize that. I mean, I'm not totally surprised, but considering how incapacitated Fahd was toward the end of his reign....

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Wow. I never thought his reign would last that (relatively) long, given his age and heath at the time he took the throne.

So now what happens?

The new king is a man named Salman, yet another son of Ibn Saud. The (vast) royal family will elect a new Crown Prince from amongst themselves.

Interestingly, two of Abdullah's Crown Princes predeceased him (Sultan and Nayef).

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I don't celebrate the death of anyone, but this man was evil and the world isn't losing anything by him not being around.

As much as I dislike the Saudi Royal Family, Abdullah was probably the most competent King since Faisal.

He was ill since he took power.

Ah, somehow I didn't realize that. I mean, I'm not totally surprised, but considering how incapacitated Fahd was toward the end of his reign....

That's why Abdullah had been a de facto Regent for ten years (1995-2005) before formally becoming the King, thus making him effectively rule for 20 years.

[Indy Texas]

CIA should have found and groomed a general in the Saudi military and then enabled him to stage a coup when Abdullah finally croaked: someone who would let us keep our bases there but also crack down ruthlessly on Saudis funding radical Wahabism and terrorist groups and initiate a campaign to do away with the Sharia and codify rights for women, non-Muslims and other marginalized groups.

[Famous Mortimer]

CIA should have found and groomed a general in the Saudi military and then enabled him to stage a coup when Abdullah finally croaked: someone who would let us keep our bases there but also crack down ruthlessly on Saudis funding radical Wahabism and terrorist groups and initiate a campaign to do away with the Sharia and codify rights for women, non-Muslims and other marginalized groups.

1 We don't have any bases anymore.

2 No such person exists

3 We can't get rid of "In God We Trust" on our coins, there's no chance of getting rid of Sharia in Saudi Arabia. Only of a more moderate interpretation.

[ag]

CIA should have found and groomed a general in the Saudi military and then enabled him to stage a coup when Abdullah finally croaked: someone who would let us keep our bases there but also crack down ruthlessly on Saudis funding radical Wahabism and terrorist groups and initiate a campaign to do away with the Sharia and codify rights for women, non-Muslims and other marginalized groups.

This is about as realistic a scenario as imposing a Saudi prince as Texas governor,  to ensure oil dominance of the Saudi Texas for generations to come.

[ag]

Interestingly, two of Abdullah's Crown Princes predeceased him (Sultan and Nayef).

The more appropriate word than "interestingly" would be "naturally".

[ag]

3 We can't get rid of "In God We Trust" on our coins, there's no chance of getting rid of Sharia in Saudi Arabia. Only of a more moderate interpretation.

Anybody, who is talking about "getting rid of sharia in Saudi Arabia" demonstrates such complete lack of understanding of the words "sharia", "Saudi" and "Arabia" - as well as of every single word possibly relating to those - that a serious discussion is simply impossible.

[Rockefeller GOP]

I don't celebrate the death of anyone, but this man was evil and the world isn't losing anything by him not being around.

Tell that to our leaders. :/

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

But really the only poster whose take on this we should be all that interested in getting is Hashemite's.

[Simfan34]

I was a little earlier reading an article in the Washington Post that pointed out that Salman is himself not in the best of health:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I am not by any means a fan of the House of Saud and the state they helm. Indeed I'd say it's one of my least favourite regimes if not right at the top (behind the terrorist Italian colonial entity, of course) for a number of reasons; their fanatical Wahhabist sect of Islam which they've spread around the world to catastrophic effect, destablising literally dozens of countries, including most of those I feel attached to; the repressive and regressive rules that sect imposes; their racist treatment of Africans and meddling in our affairs. I could go on and on.

But the fact is that Abdullah was a leader who made positive changes, while from all appearances facing serious resistance from fundamentalist clerics in even the most inoffensive changes. I'm not going to praise him as some progressive reformist, but considering the catastrophic effect Saudi-backed Wahhabism has had on our world, they were positive steps all the same.

I'd honestly admit to believing that I'd have a decided sense of schadenfreude if Saudi Arabia were to fall to pieces, but for the very same Wahhabism that so menaces us. When one of the "better" outcomes in such a scenario is the total implosion of the country and the formation of an Iranian-backed Gulf Shia state (as opposed to the emergence of a more conservative regime that would make the present one seem as liberal as the Shah's by comparison, which would be a very real possibility in such a scenario), one is sort of obligated to wish them well.

[All Along The Watchtower]

I was a little earlier reading an article in the Washington Post that pointed out that Salman is himself not in the best of health:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I am not by any means a fan of the House of Saud and the state they helm. Indeed I'd say it's one of my least favourite regimes if not right at the top (behind the terrorist Italian colonial entity, of course) for a number of reasons; their fanatical Wahhabist sect of Islam which they've spread around the world to catastrophic effect, destablising literally dozens of countries, including most of those I feel attached to; the repressive and regressive rules that sect imposes; their racist treatment of Africans and meddling in our affairs. I could go on and on.

But the fact is that Abdullah was a leader who made positive changes, while from all appearances facing serious resistance from fundamentalist clerics in even the most inoffensive changes. I'm not going to praise him as some progressive reformist, but considering the catastrophic effect Saudi-backed Wahhabism has had on our world, they were positive steps all the same.

I'd honestly admit to believing that I'd have a decided sense of schadenfreude if Saudi Arabia were to fall to pieces, but for the very same Wahhabism that so menaces us. When one of the "better" outcomes in such a scenario is the total implosion of the country and the formation of an Iranian-backed Gulf Shia state (as opposed to the emergence of a more conservative regime that would make the present one seem as liberal as the Shah's by comparison, which would be a very real possibility in such a scenario), one is sort of obligated to wish them well.

Thoughtful, well-considered post, Simfan. Thanks!