4 ms·

Swinging the election toward a hawkish demagogue with no knowledge of foreign policy does not seem like a desirable outcome for the United States either. It's

by s_q_b 10y ago

Swinging the election toward a hawkish demagogue with no knowledge of foreign policy does not seem like a desirable outcome for the United States either. It's worth noting that for now the Saudis still retain a bit of leverage. They could potentially start a kamikaze run on the dollar. They are our largest regional ally, and in very close proximity to Israel. We have very little knowledge of their nuclear program. Finally, they're a vital partner in the ongoing war with Russia and its proxies (Iran et al.) Also, I cannot begin to fathom what would happen if a "Christian" nation invaded the keeper of Mecca and Medina... I never thought I'd say this, but perhaps some secrets are better left untold.

someguydave 10y ago
>hey could potentially start a kamikaze run on the dollar. I'm not so sure. Assuming they had several hundred billion dollars worth of Treasuries, and further assuming that they dumped them all on the market, the demand for USG debt is sufficiently large that I suspect it would be purchased in an orderly fashion without even causing much uptick in interest rates.
- richmarr 10y ago
  > ... I suspect it would be purchased in an orderly fashion "Orderly fashion" and trading (algorithmic or otherwise) are oil and water, surely.
- s_q_b 10y ago
  Assuming a rational market, sure. But market panics aren't governed by the normal rules of supply and demand. They're a behavioral phenomenon caused by the non-rational human agents in the system panicking.
travmatt 10y ago
"It's worth noting that for now the Saudis still retain a bit of leverage. They could potentially start a kamikaze run on the dollar. " Do you have an idea of whether their increased production has affected the fracking production in the US? Would they, in the long-term, have success in making the US more dependent again? "They are our largest regional ally, and in very close proximity to Israel... Finally, they're a vital partner in the ongoing war with Russia and its proxies (Iran et al.)" As I understand it, the Saudi Royal family derives part of its legitimacy through the backing of the religious leaders of their country, and the Sunni world at large - but many of the Saudi family itself are actually more progressive than the conservative country. Is there any chance that they want to or could push back against the Wahhabist ideology that seems to spout from the gulf peninsula? " We have very little knowledge of their nuclear program" How is that possible? It'd seem as though their supplies of nuclear weapons are precisely the types that we want to be aware of at all times? "Also, I cannot begin to fathom what would happen if a "Christian" nation invaded the keeper of Mecca and Medina... I never thought I'd say this, but perhaps some secrets are better left untold." When the cube was seized in 1979 and the Muslim world thought the US was to blame, we got the glimpses of what reactions could be. We'd truly see the Middle East in flames.
- s_q_b 10y ago
  1. Do you have an idea of whether their increased production has affected the fracking production in the US? Would they, in the long-term, have success in making the US more dependent again? The theory that a lot of people had was that the Saudis are attempting to push down oil prices. My family owns some property on which they're conducting hydraulic fracturing (not my call, I campaigned to have the practice banned in the state.) There's still faith that oil prices will rise again, and investment, while reduced, is continuing. To the extend that the Saudis lower production, US facilities are already built now, and most of the mothballed facilities can come back online in a year or so. 2. As I understand it, the Saudi Royal family derives part of its legitimacy through the backing of the religious leaders of their country, and the Sunni world at large - but many of the Saudi family itself are actually more progressive than the conservative country. Is there any chance that they want to or could push back against the Wahhabist ideology that seems to spout from the gulf peninsula? In brief, yes, and the liberalizing push from the royal family is growing stronger with time. Saudi Arabia has gone through great pains to construct a world-class university. Built in an isolated area to avoid the interference with the religious police, KAUST has an endowment of ~$20 Billion, which puts it monetarily on par with each of H/Y/P and is twice the combined endowment of Oxford and Cambridge. KAUST has partnerships with prominent United States universities, including several in the Ivy League, and is headed by the former University President of Caltech. Most instruction is in English, men and women study side-by-side, and freedom of discussion is encouraged. There are also plans to construct a series of model cities along the coastline, following much a similar model. Most recently, Saudi Arabia underwent a fairly silent transition of power to Prince Salman. Prince Salman is a modernizer, who very much understands that Saudi Arabia needs to invest its oil revenues into creating an economy that is not dependent on oil exports. He has the blessing of the King and the Allegiance Council, has consolidated power through as the official head of the defense, economic, and oil ministries. A few months ago, King Salman issued a series of liberalizing decrees widely seen to be the result of Prince Salman's influence. [0] So there is hope for the Kingdom yet. 3. " We have very little knowledge of their nuclear program" How is that possible? It'd seem as though their supplies of nuclear weapons are precisely the types that we want to be aware of at all times? We know they have a nascent capability being developed south of Riyyhad. The reason we have little insight is that American HUMINT in Saudi Arabia is woefully weak. We do not know whether they have already have a weapon, whether they've miniaturized it, or if they don't, what the breakout time for them to develop one is. When the cube was seized in 1979 and the Muslim world thought the US was to blame, we got the glimpses of what reactions could be. We'd truly see the Middle East in flames. Agreed, and unfortunately the only way to douse those flames would be a mobilization effort the Western world can scarcely afford. [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-government-shake-up.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/world/middleeast/saudi-ara...
pjc50 10y ago
Obviously invading KSA would be a total disaster. Even embargoing the place could have chaotic results beyond the massive oil price spike. Not to mention the strategic complications of the US relying on bases there. I find it interesting that you've gone straight for "war with Russia" without bothering with "cold". I really don't like this second cold war because at least the first one was obvious to everyone and publicly discussed. The new one is conducted just like the old one through proxy countries which the players are prepared to burn down to deny them to the enemy, but if the chaos spreads to Turkey then that will be the end of the EU as everyone rolls out the barbed wire and machine guns to stop the tens of millions of potential refugees.
moomin 10y ago
> a hawkish demagogue with no knowledge of foreign policy and a high opinion of Putin enlarged on that for you :)
SixSigma 10y ago
> Swinging the election toward a hawkish demagogue with no knowledge of foreign policy At this point that sounds like either of them.
- travmatt 10y ago
  Hillary is a lot of things, but inexperienced in foreign policy's a something she's not.
  - SixSigma 10y ago
    Gaining experience is another phrase for making mistakes.
    - kevin_thibedeau 10y ago
      Trump has a ton of experience defaulting on business loans. I can't see a better reason for him to take control and use his magic touch to fix everything.
  - wavefunction 10y ago
    Of course one must note that experience in foreign policy may not be as important as the outcomes achieved during that experience.
    - travmatt 10y ago
      The Iranian nuclear deal?
      - wavefunction 10y ago
        That was during Secretary John Kerry's tenure. Hillary has threatened war to enforce the deal, which is something...[0] [0]http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/9/hillary-clinton-threatens-war-enforce-iran-deal/?page=all http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/9/hillary-clint...

by s_q_b 10y ago

someguydave 10y ago

>hey could potentially start a kamikaze run on the dollar. I'm not so sure. Assuming they had several hundred billion dollars worth of Treasuries, and further assuming that they dumped them all on the market, the demand for USG debt is sufficiently large that I suspect it would be purchased in an orderly fashion without even causing much uptick in interest rates.

richmarr 10y ago
> ... I suspect it would be purchased in an orderly fashion "Orderly fashion" and trading (algorithmic or otherwise) are oil and water, surely.
s_q_b 10y ago
Assuming a rational market, sure. But market panics aren't governed by the normal rules of supply and demand. They're a behavioral phenomenon caused by the non-rational human agents in the system panicking.

travmatt 10y ago

"It's worth noting that for now the Saudis still retain a bit of leverage. They could potentially start a kamikaze run on the dollar. " Do you have an idea of whether their increased production has affected the fracking production in the US? Would they, in the long-term, have success in making the US more dependent again? "They are our largest regional ally, and in very close proximity to Israel... Finally, they're a vital partner in the ongoing war with Russia and its proxies (Iran et al.)" As I understand it, the Saudi Royal family derives part of its legitimacy through the backing of the religious leaders of their country, and the Sunni world at large - but many of the Saudi family itself are actually more progressive than the conservative country. Is there any chance that they want to or could push back against the Wahhabist ideology that seems to spout from the gulf peninsula? " We have very little knowledge of their nuclear program" How is that possible? It'd seem as though their supplies of nuclear weapons are precisely the types that we want to be aware of at all times? "Also, I cannot begin to fathom what would happen if a "Christian" nation invaded the keeper of Mecca and Medina... I never thought I'd say this, but perhaps some secrets are better left untold." When the cube was seized in 1979 and the Muslim world thought the US was to blame, we got the glimpses of what reactions could be. We'd truly see the Middle East in flames.

s_q_b 10y ago
1. Do you have an idea of whether their increased production has affected the fracking production in the US? Would they, in the long-term, have success in making the US more dependent again? The theory that a lot of people had was that the Saudis are attempting to push down oil prices. My family owns some property on which they're conducting hydraulic fracturing (not my call, I campaigned to have the practice banned in the state.) There's still faith that oil prices will rise again, and investment, while reduced, is continuing. To the extend that the Saudis lower production, US facilities are already built now, and most of the mothballed facilities can come back online in a year or so. 2. As I understand it, the Saudi Royal family derives part of its legitimacy through the backing of the religious leaders of their country, and the Sunni world at large - but many of the Saudi family itself are actually more progressive than the conservative country. Is there any chance that they want to or could push back against the Wahhabist ideology that seems to spout from the gulf peninsula? In brief, yes, and the liberalizing push from the royal family is growing stronger with time. Saudi Arabia has gone through great pains to construct a world-class university. Built in an isolated area to avoid the interference with the religious police, KAUST has an endowment of ~$20 Billion, which puts it monetarily on par with each of H/Y/P and is twice the combined endowment of Oxford and Cambridge. KAUST has partnerships with prominent United States universities, including several in the Ivy League, and is headed by the former University President of Caltech. Most instruction is in English, men and women study side-by-side, and freedom of discussion is encouraged. There are also plans to construct a series of model cities along the coastline, following much a similar model. Most recently, Saudi Arabia underwent a fairly silent transition of power to Prince Salman. Prince Salman is a modernizer, who very much understands that Saudi Arabia needs to invest its oil revenues into creating an economy that is not dependent on oil exports. He has the blessing of the King and the Allegiance Council, has consolidated power through as the official head of the defense, economic, and oil ministries. A few months ago, King Salman issued a series of liberalizing decrees widely seen to be the result of Prince Salman's influence. [0] So there is hope for the Kingdom yet. 3. " We have very little knowledge of their nuclear program" How is that possible? It'd seem as though their supplies of nuclear weapons are precisely the types that we want to be aware of at all times? We know they have a nascent capability being developed south of Riyyhad. The reason we have little insight is that American HUMINT in Saudi Arabia is woefully weak. We do not know whether they have already have a weapon, whether they've miniaturized it, or if they don't, what the breakout time for them to develop one is. When the cube was seized in 1979 and the Muslim world thought the US was to blame, we got the glimpses of what reactions could be. We'd truly see the Middle East in flames. Agreed, and unfortunately the only way to douse those flames would be a mobilization effort the Western world can scarcely afford. [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-government-shake-up.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/world/middleeast/saudi-ara...

pjc50 10y ago

Obviously invading KSA would be a total disaster. Even embargoing the place could have chaotic results beyond the massive oil price spike. Not to mention the strategic complications of the US relying on bases there. I find it interesting that you've gone straight for "war with Russia" without bothering with "cold". I really don't like this second cold war because at least the first one was obvious to everyone and publicly discussed. The new one is conducted just like the old one through proxy countries which the players are prepared to burn down to deny them to the enemy, but if the chaos spreads to Turkey then that will be the end of the EU as everyone rolls out the barbed wire and machine guns to stop the tens of millions of potential refugees.

moomin 10y ago

> a hawkish demagogue with no knowledge of foreign policy and a high opinion of Putin enlarged on that for you :)

SixSigma 10y ago

> Swinging the election toward a hawkish demagogue with no knowledge of foreign policy At this point that sounds like either of them.

travmatt 10y ago
Hillary is a lot of things, but inexperienced in foreign policy's a something she's not.
- SixSigma 10y ago
  Gaining experience is another phrase for making mistakes.
  - kevin_thibedeau 10y ago
    Trump has a ton of experience defaulting on business loans. I can't see a better reason for him to take control and use his magic touch to fix everything.
- wavefunction 10y ago
  Of course one must note that experience in foreign policy may not be as important as the outcomes achieved during that experience.
  - travmatt 10y ago
    The Iranian nuclear deal?
    - wavefunction 10y ago
      That was during Secretary John Kerry's tenure. Hillary has threatened war to enforce the deal, which is something...[0] [0]http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/9/hillary-clinton-threatens-war-enforce-iran-deal/?page=all http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/9/hillary-clint...