You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Arabia
Yemeni army captured over '2000 troops', inflicted heavy casualties on Saudi army
2019-09-30
[TWITTER]

Posted by:Fred

#8  Close enough to the border for governments work... ;)

Posted by: DarthVader   2019-09-30 14:51  

#7  #6 a) Saudia is not against our border.
b) IMO, Saudia is a lot more dangerous than Iran
c) There will be costs to Iran conqueering Saudia
Posted by: g(r)omgoru PB   2019-09-30 12:47  

#6  So, suppose Iran conqueers Saudia - is it really a bad thing, with fracking and all?

Would Israel really want an Iranian controlled country right up against their border?
Posted by: DarthVader   2019-09-30 11:47  

#5  Those are troops? Look more like day laborers
Posted by: Slash Jones1934   2019-09-30 09:40  

#4  Saudi have led a life of 'fat, dumb and happy' for a half-century. Thus the Wahabbi warrior is a distant memory. Now, the Saudis use Europeans, slaves and imported servants to do everything but wipe... Saudi Arabia, like the Catholic Church, is finished.
Posted by: Chereting Pelosi1889   2019-09-30 09:24  

#3  So, just imagine: AOC & friends call for war and
Republican president saying "No way. No national interest."
Posted by: g(r)omgoru PB   2019-09-30 03:17  

#2  The left in the US has always been anti fracking. The fact its a pro muzz position just makes it even more tasty for them.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2019-09-30 02:48  

#1  So, suppose Iran conqueers Saudia - is it really a bad thing, with fracking and all?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru PB   2019-09-30 02:10  

00:00