It also helps if his b***s are in a bear enforced vice-like grip to help him along the way. Ofcourse in the end, it's peace that matters, if it comes by hook or crook.
Here is a very pertinent article from Syrian Perspective blog author on the Saudi-Iran conundrum, Iranians offer intellect .. Saudis fear it more than anything else or so it suggests.
FIRST POST - NOVEMBER 23, 2013 - WHY SAUDI ARABIA FEARS IRAN; WHY SAUDI ARABIA CANNOT AFFECT IRAN; WHY DO WAHHABISM AND ZIONISM GO HAND IN HAND
WHY SAUDI ARABIA FEARS IRAN
If we look back before Arabians knew they had marketable, profitable petroleum with massive reserves, we would be looking at a race of mostly wandering Bedouins with no axe to grind and no grievances. After all, living the life of a vagabond inevitably erases wrongs and offenses by the mere fact of leaving them behind in the sand. To be sure, Arabians are fond of their poetry and will vilify an offender in rhyme....sometimes with trenchant sarcasm that resonates - reverberates back to the perpetrator of the offense with stinging effect. But, having a gripe against another people outside the blinding glass of the desert would be unthinkable. It is very likely that Arabians didn't even know that Iranians existed. They might have heard of Persians, but that is in the old poesy.
In the late 18th Century, the heretical beliefs of Muhammad Ibn 'Abdul-Wahhaab, a Najdi cleric heavily influenced by the crackpot theologian Ibn Taymiyya, had succeeded in allying himself to the rising Ibn Saud tribe with obvious results. When 'Abdul-'Aziz Ibn 'Abdul-Rahman Ibn Sa'ud, a cat burglar, highwayman, terrorist, polygamist and pederast, became King of Arabia, Wahhabism was a part of the package.
The Saudis under the influence of Wahhabism, already had a history of attacking Shi'ites in Karbala and Al-Najaf where sites holy to them were barbarously destroyed in acts of callousness typical of the ignorant, obnoxious, black-and-white simplism that would become emblematic of the Wahhabist style of seeing the world. But, Iran was still not a part of their Weltanschauung because Arabians had not yet absorbed the way oil would transform them from a worthless, shiftless, shallow, shoddy, shabby Bedouin people into a worthless, shiftless, shallow, shoddy, shabby but inordinately rich Bedouin people. It was like "The Beverly Hillbillies Go to Mecca". Or, maybe, "Ma and Pa Kettle Dock at the U.N". Or even more telling: "Tarzan's Cheetah Loves Geneva".
It was all so nice during the Cold War. Saudis, who have the perspicacity of an old divan, were satisfied with the Manichaeism of the time. Everybody knew where they stood. Even the Iranians, who would become a bete noir for the Arabian simpletons later in the 20th Century, were subject to American skulduggery as when the beacon of democracy, America, overthrew the legitimate government Mossadegh.
They were to do the same thing, of course, with the unlucky Chilean president, Salvador Allende, a few decades later. But that was okay to the narrow-minded Wahhabists because it was in pure hypocrisy that they found their niche. No diplomatic finesse here; just hypocrisy, the oldest method to a successful enterprise.
Because they rarely, if ever, read history, Arabians are the people most likely to repeat it. And as ignorant savages, they could never have figured out that the Iranian culture was starkly different from their own as far as intellectual accomplishments went. Whereas, on the one hand, the Arabians have contributed a solid zero in the areas of science, medicine, philosophy - only having excelled in generating ludicrous, draconian, empty-headed, constipated fire-and-brimstone religious cults, Iranian culture, on the other hand, is so filled with a thematic adoration for the intellect that it is hard to imagine they could have accomplished so much throughout the millennia being so close geographically to the pathogenetically stultifying gravitational pull of the Peninsular Arabians. (I make an exception here for the founder of Islam, the Messenger Muhammad, although I do it grudgingly.) It is not as though Iran and the Arabians are separated by a mere Gulf, greedily referred to by the latter as "Arabian", they are more accurately separated by the Andromeda Galaxy.
As decades of prodigal and dissolute spending continued unabated with anecdotes of Saudi Arabian idiocy reaching mythic levels, Iranian oil wealth was spent on domestic institutional development. Whereas the Arabians imported Filipino nurses for their hospitals, Iranians trained Iranians to do the same. Whereas Saudi Arabians were sent off to study in America as a welcome therapeutic break from the asphyxiating tedium of Wahhabist life, Iranians were studying abroad in order to return and teach in their own country. Where Saudi Arabia had to buy Pakistani mercenaries to fly their jets, Iran was training Iranians to build jets ............and fly them.
Now, throughout all this, the U.S., U.K., France and all the other pasty-faced white people in Europe had to put on a big smile as atrocity after atrocity emanated from the "magical" kingdom of Arabia. Hypocrisy is not easy to maintain with the right pallor of the skin- it's like a British motor vehicle - you have to keep a record of it else you'll find yourself sticking the old proverbial foot in your mouth. So, with Arabia, when women are not permitted to drive based on nothing more than some shaman's opinion, American diplomats have to be prepared to mouth expressions like this: "Oh, we're working on this with our Saudi friends". When the Saudis execute a woman for sorcery, the British ambassador, his mouth all full of rabbit marbles, has to utter his most Oxonian response: "Oh, well, deeeya. Really? Hmmmm. Are there sorcerers in Arabia still? Anybody up for a nice round of tennis?" When the Saudis arrest a man for offering "free hugs", the French must be prepared to shrug and say: "Bien. When in Mecca, you must do as the Meccan's do. Let him do it in Paris." And the hypocrisy goes on and on.
The Saudis were evidently very happy with the Shah of Iran. He was trusted by the U.S. He was a monarch; actually, the Shah of Shahs. He bought American military products and used them to police the Gulf, a form of free protection for the otherwise useless race of prosimian derelicts who populated the "Peninsula" ("Al-Jazeera"). When he was overthrown, the Saudis began to detect a change in the atmosphere. Imam Khomeini's extermination of the communists (Tudeh) might have made them feel somewhat comfortable, but his Marg bar Amreekaa (Death to America) and anti-Zionism mantras seemed over the top. In fact, the entire episode smacked of a resurgent Iranian regional assertion of power that necessarily challenged the status quo.
Saddam Hussayn had a huge army ornamented with the required equipment to undo Khomeini's revolution. Since the Arabians were, are and always will be incapable of doing anything proactively, they hired Saddam to do their dirty work. It is hard to tell if the U.S.'s own support for Saddam at this time was motivated by either a desire to antagonize the Iranians or not antagonize the Arabians. Whatever the case, the U.S. threw its full weight behind the Bad Boy of Baghdad, giving him technology to develop his own WMDs, SatInt and even sage advice on how to defeat the hundreds of thousands of Iranians who kept hectoring him with massive human waves across the marshes of southern Mesopotamia.
The Saddam gambit cost the Arabians, all of them, including the Kuwaitis, a bundle of cash and it resulted in a typical Arabian "ZERO". Saddam did not overthrow the Khomeini government. What happened instead was his own invasion of Kuwait! Well! As the feckless, useless, malodorous Kuwaiti Sabaah family headed for the dunes of Arabia to avoid Saddam's well-known tender mercies, so to speak, the U.S., ever mindful of its obligations to the etiquette of hypocrisy, took up the cause of - No! not destroying Iran - but, instead, attacking Saddam! (All these sentences are punctuated with exclamation marks to emphasize the surreal nature of this particular history.) But, then, when the U.S. could have decapitated the government in Baghdad, the Old Bush and his coterie of brainiacs decided that it was nice, after all, to have Saddam there as a cushion against the Iranians who are the cause of all this trouble anyways!
Nobody said American foreign policy was "neat". It's actually quite messy. Saddam was now the enemy of the Arabians. And so were the Iranians, but for different reasons. The Arabians, who "think" in the way that baboons have sensory input, maneuvered themselves into a genuine SNAFU for it was only a few years later that "Teeny-Weeny Bush" would be elected by the sagacious citizenry of America to finish the job. He had a real chip on his shoulder - bearing in mind Saddam - ever, the assassin - had plotted revenge against his "Pappy" during a visit to Teeny-Weeny Kuwait. Saddam never forgave the Elder Bush for April Glaspie's slip of the tongue. But, the Saudis would pay a heavier price for Saddam's fall and the U.S. failure in Iraq that would bring to power a Shi'i government under Noor Al-Maaliki.!!
As all of you probably know, hypocrisy makes strange bedfellows. Neoconservative-Zionist popinjays, largely Jewish Zionists and paid agents of the Khazar Settler State, had started to infest Washington with their ideology of using "military force" to bring about democratic change in the world. The truth is that Michael Ledeen couldn't give a rat's derriere about democratic change in the world. His only commitment was to the longevity of the counterfeit Zionist Settler State in historic Southern Syria (Palestine). Oh, but didn't they inveigle their way into the White House, cajoling intellectual powder-puffs like Cheney whose evil lies more in his ignorance than in any perfervid lust for lucre? They snookered Zionist Christians like Bush and his "base" of ranting, snorting, sniveling, cupiditous Televangelists. They even suckered Fouad Ajami, their resident satrap, into believing their paeans to democratic change were sincere, not meant to abase the Arabs but to release "their profound energies" in a world so Utopian it's amazing Ajami fell for it in the first place.
The neo-cons infiltrated the White House with personalities like Douglas Feith, Elliott Abrams and Paul Wolfowitz. These neo-Trotskyites, in reality, were agents of the Zionist Entity. Whatever the cause, it had to be seen through the prism of Zionism and the overarching impetus to extend the life of the Neo-Colonial Eastern European Jewish Ghetto State. Here, the bedfellows are the Saudi Arabians, who suddenly had a friend in Washington - (not the ineffectual, effete Arab lobbyists) - and the Neo-Cons who sniffed a rich old dowager slag (desperate for their affections) to finance their perverse world view. Bandar Bin Sultan, the "hawkish" but mentally sterile Saudi intelligence chief, is a neo-con in the meaning of "tolerated WOG". He languishes in the aura of acceptance by individuals he deems "vastly superior" to the Arab detritus among whom he must wallow. The neocons, for all their sufferance, withhold criticism of Saudi Wahhabist culture. After all, the Saudis bought their jingle, hook-line-and-sinker and were committed to "Israel's" durability.
So, what does Iran have to do with this? Very simple. What the Saudis have only lately realized is that the Iranians are smarter than the neocons. What the Saudis perceived as "Israeli" genius has turned out to be a canard, even a red herring. When in July 2006, Hizbollah, a paramilitary militia, beat the stuffing out of the Zionist army in South Lebanon with Iranian/Syrian planning, arms and finance, the Saudis knew something was amiss. All of you remember George Bush's public confidence in the Zionist army's ability to annihilate Hizbollah. Hmm. Didn't turn out that way.
The Saudis knew, as of July 2006, that Syria was a part of this Hizbollah-Iranian military axis. That Syria's president hailed from the Alawi sect was not an issue as long as he affirmed Syria's "Sunni" character and kept the Iranian beast far hence. But, Dr. Assad, like his father, saw something in Iran that he did not find in Arabia: raw internal power that can translate into tangible assets to fight the war to liberate Arab lands. As Syria was building up its missile manufacturing capabilities with the help of Iran and North Korea, the Saudis were aghast at Iran's massive, domestic nuclear program which outstripped the Zionist one by light years. Unlike Saddam and his Osirak Reactor which was destroyed by "Israel" in one fell swoop on June 7, 1981 with the help of the Saudi government, the Iranian project was much more complex, more protected, more well-thought-out, more impenetrable. Now, it was clear that the U.S. had to do the job for Saudi Arabia's fear of the Fatimid Crescent is embedded in Iran's Shi'ite character linked to the weaponization of its nuclear program. But, what if the U.S. saw it as too dangerous?
Sanctions upon sanctions were imposed on both Iran and Syria. No two nations in recent memory - not even North Korea - had suffered so much deprivation due to the confluence of Euro-American Zionist hegemonics. Yet, the Saudis watched in horror as General Vaheedi of Iran pooh-poohed the sanctions and praised them as having given Iran the impetus to develop internal capabilities far beyond what they would have been otherwise if Iran were still a part of the interlocking technological world run by the West. The Iranians had, in essence, thumbed their noses at the Arabians who, themselves, could not last 24 hours without the help of their Pakistani manservants, Filipina nurses or Ethiopian gardeners. Iran was on its way, inexorably, to regional superpower status - and all that at the expense of the Wahhabist heresy.
To break Iran, Saudia took it upon itself to make it clear that this was an "existential" matter which the Americans had better understand. Like the Zionist Entity, the Saudis positioned themselves in a square defined as "threatened minority reactionary unit committed to survival to protect the interests of a minority". It is the same logic as Zionism which is why Saudia and "Israel" are in the same bed for it is hypocrisy, not politics, that makes the strangest bedfellows.
The reader should note that the U.S., while publicly trying to assuage the hurt feelings of the Wahhabist monkeys, has also embarked on a new track, perhaps motivated by the same epiphany which persuaded Hafez Al-Assad to sign on with Iran against Saddam. Very courageous back then. Maybe, Obama has gotten the impression that Saudi Arabia is a relic of a pre-Iron Age society with no future and that the Iranian model could be the linchpin for a new American-Islamic engagement. It is precisely this volte-face that terrifies the Saudis as much as the Zionists for they are both in the same bed, sharing the same blanket and pillow. Their interests are one and the same. If any of you wonder if the Saudi regime cares a whit about the Palestinians, think of their relationship as no different from that of Zionism. When the Palestinians finally figure that out, they will know who their allies really are.
Iran has analyzed all of this. The evolution of their missile industry capable now of manufacturing anti-missile, anti-aircraft, anti-ship......anti-Saudi weapons is a sign of Armageddon for Riyadh and its noisome ideology of cultural suffocation. Iran knows why it is feared by the Saudis. The Saudi persophobia is not fear of Iranian Shi'is, it is fear of the intellect - what the Saudis cannot have for all their money and all the tea in China. ZAF