So I've always been intrigued at the idea of an armed conflict between the west and Saudi Arabia, as I find the cultural implications to be incredibly fascinating. It's an Old Guard vs. New Wave battle if one ever existed. The Saudis arw, of course, devoutly Muslim and a theocratic absolute monarchy, complete with a religious police force, tribal fuedalism and the whole shabang. The West, on the other hand, is intensly secular and generally hostile towards ideas like monarchy, suppresion of female sexuality, religious laws and etc. Combine that with our (the wests) own struggle with the secular left vs. the Christian right and the secular lefts historic political alliances with Muslims, I find the discussions that would arise from such a conflict to be incredibly interesting and complex.
So far, I've narrowed down to two possible PODs. #1 being the a US or joint US-UK invasion of the Saudi kingdom over the 1973 oil embargo (which, allegedly, was actually highly considered by Nixon) and #2 being a US or joint US-NATO invasion in the aftermath of 9/11. So I have a few queations.
1.) Which POD is more likely?
2.) Which POD would be the most culturally signifigant? 73 would be right at the end pf the Counterculture, by 01 would be at the beginning of the modern millenial and generation z "counterculture". Which would have more effect on cultural dialogue?
3.) What exactly are thesw cultural dialogues?
4.) What is the reaction of the western Christian or Israel? Do any Islamic states come to the aid of the Saudis? Any non-Islamic states? Does anyone join the west?
5.) What is the chances of the monarchy surviving?
Discuss.