We seem to have two impulses: - Hold up a higher standard to nations and feel somehow entitled/obligated to "enforce" it. - Attribute such deviations from thos

We seem to have two impulses: - Hold up a higher standard to nations and feel somehow entitled/obligated to "enforce" it. - Attribute such deviations from those standards to "culture". I'm not sure which is worse. Nation-states sort of don't judge other nation-states in that way. The US has been ... innovative in that, and it's been no end of trouble. Why Pearl Harbor? Because the US embargoed Japan after the Rape of Nanking. And that ended well... Maybe its changed since '73 but the "access to the kingdom's oil reserves" seems hollow, since my understanding is that there is a small army of engineers and workers who rotate in and out of Saudi to maintain the fields and other infrastructure. Second, there is that Dilbert cartoon about the meaning of "fungible" w.r.t oil. The '73 embargo was at least in part a reaction to the Six-Day War in '67 so it seems typically Kissingerian to pursue a balance of power rapprochement with one of the the seats of opposition to our friendly relations with Israel. The US also ... sort of "inherited" the British Empire after WWII, and Saudi was very much a part of the actions of those within the Empire. Again, I can't recommend "A Peace To End All Peace" enoughly.