Unlikely, they can plan, but how did that work out with Kuwait OTL?
As far as I know the Kuwaiti fields incurred no serious damage until Iraq, with little to lose, fired them after the start of the '91 war. I seem to recall something else which may have a bearing on this question. In '91, coalition aircraft targeted Iraqi oil and other infrastructure but the Iraqis were able to repair them without foreign assistance.
Really I don't know, but I don't think it worked out well, foreign technical specialists tend to bug out at the first sign of trouble and you have to worry about scorched earth, or just troops making mistakes
I think a key difference between OTL and this scenario is that the industrial nations could manage without Iraqi and Kuwaiti oil, but probably couldn't if saudi oil were taken--and denied--too. The oil companies and various nations would be more likely to tell their employees to stay in KSA or return there--provided Iraq kept its word not to hurt them--since they just couldn't manage with that much oil taken off the market for any appreciable length of time.
The Soviet Premier also said "It is not reasonable to become engaged in a war with the United States because of Egypt and Syria,". The Soviets wanted to keep their proxies from collapsing, they figured the Arabs would take huge losses and might collapse, and they were right, their proxies collapsing was not what they wanted, and they were willing to take some risks and directly intervene to prevent that, however they knew that their proxies only had a limited war in mind even before it started
I think the USSR, even in its waning days in the 1980s, probably would've stood up for Iraq, in view of what was at stake--geopolitically far more important than who controlled Sinai or Golan. If Iraq could get away with its seizure of gulf oil, that, plus the fact it was Soviet armed, might give the USSR considerable indirect leverage over the West. Or, at least, a very lucrative new market for its arms, once the big bucks started rolling into Iraq's coffers. Saddam would've bought even more arms. Conceivably, a lot more hard currency would've alleviated Soviet economic woes or at least postponed collapse.
Iraq wanted to displace Egypt as the head of the Arab states, they aren't going to help Iraq with this.I imagine the Arabs would be more worried about Saddam coming for them next,
I don't think the danger of that was very great. Syria for example, may not have been on great terms with Saddam but it was hardly the pushover that gulf monarchies were. Jordan was no wimp either and attacking it might've led to war with Israel.
unlike OTL with Iran, which had border disputes with Iraq OTL in the 70's that included fighting at a decent scale, Iraq has no grudges with KSA absent debt from a war with Iran, any attack on them is just naked Imperialism
Sure but Saddam had no problem with that and, had it been preplanned so it worked out OK the Soviets might've been tempted to go along.