U.S. DISCUSSES INVASION OF SAUDI ARABIA

This is the only article I've seen discussing this topic so take it for what it's worth.

Now, what we have here ostensibly is a policy wonk talking about a "what if" scenario where an "Osama bin Laden-type" were to overthrow the Saudi royal family and take over the country. I'm not getting a really strong vibe that we're on the road to war in Saudi Arabia of all places. If anything the wonks at the Pentagon are singularly focused on Syria these days and then Iran and I've stated many times in the past month or so, I doubt a serious military incursion is in the actionable works.

So why should you or I care about this story? Well, for one I find it fascinating that Congress is even entertaining the thought of a military response to a Arabian coup. I also find it fascinating that the "oil economy" seems to be the major impetus to action if this scenario should come to pass. Don't get me wrong, I'm not surprised we'd actually "war for oil." I'm just flabbergasted that somebody in Washington said it out loud in the prescence of reporters.

Here's the story:

WASHINGTON [MENL] -- The United States has raised the prospect of a military invasion of Saudi Arabia.
The response could include the deployment of three U.S. Army divisions backed by fighter-jets and airborne early-warning and alert aircraft. In all, the U.S.-led mission could include up to 300,000 troops.

The House Armed Services Committee was briefed on the prospect of a Saudi coup and U.S. response during a hearing on Oct. 26. The scenario was outlined by Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow of the Brookings Institution, who cited a Saudi coup as one of several threats to the United States.

"How should the United States respond if a coup, presumably fundamentalist in nature, overthrows the royal family in Saudi Arabia?" O'Hanlon asked. "Such a result would raise the specter of major disruption to the oil economy."