Let me put it this way: If I were a Saudi ruler, I would be just a tiny bit apprehesious.

I think the Saudis have many things to be aprehensive about

Yes f.i. the social deroute involved in having to make do with golden fawcets in the bathroom instead of platinium. Not to mention the risk of getting the towel on the head caught in fan.

Well US have thoose four nice new bases in Iraq to fill now. and SA was never a strong ally. not that the iraq war was in anyway motivated by it... oh no.

If I were the ruler of SA, I would be sweating bullets right now. Of all different versions of "Why did US attack Iraq", my favourite is: ---They wanted a base from where to take care of Saudi Arabia. Iraq has an added advantage of keeping world oil supplies intact while Saudi Arabia is under "maintenance". Handing over Prince Sultan Air Base is necessary, so that no US servicemen get wet when that base is "washed and dried" as a part of American "Wash, dry and and oil change" maintenance plan for Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia IS the sponsor of global terrorism, and will be made to pay.

Iraq is a better point to hold bases. It's a spearpoint to strike almost anywhere in the Middle East in combination with our Russian allies, the Med sea and its Fleet/Marines, plus Israel and Afghanistan. There's that little base in Djibouti...limited containment of southern Arabian penninsula. "Among those executed was the compound manager, who was the son of the Deputy governor of Riyadh..." and "The executions at the Al-Hambra compound and the killing of a National Guard soldier at the other compound demonstrated a willingness to kill Saudis. One was even a member of the Royal Family." Got these off of: [http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/qndguide/default.asp?target=urbang.htm] If it was a conspiracy, how did they chose the sacrifical lamb member of the royal family to die? Dice? Straws? But it is strange that the plastique was from SANG. News articles are floating around about corrupt officials selling it...