In the news today 7/23, Al Jazeera runs story that says 'Trump says Saudi nuclear pact hinges on kingdom joining Abraham Accords'.

What are some of the components that lead up to feelings of a mixed vibe?

Here are a few, ones that are historical facts:

Nuclear as a science now is becoming a smaller and smaller component of the larger picture of energy related technology. Today, there are for instance nanotechnologies, laser and light technologies, AI (artificial intelligence), huge arrays of solar technologies, to name a few. So why (today) harp on a simplistic fulcrum of nuclear related subject, whereat it may have become a go-to mainstay in policy and defense arenas?

That nuclear technology has many different areas, is already in consideration in this discussion.

Saudi Arabia is about as far as one can go in meeting the criteria of being the cradle of the cradle of civilization in certain aspects. In Saudi are 2 of 3 holiest sites of the Muslim World. In older days, when protection strategies involved a lot of horizontal plane defense, such as keeping makes of distance from potential attackers, inherently the strategies proved for the most part viable, as attack methodologies were often based on ground movements, soldiers marching, maybe with some archery involved.
When airplanes came along, the strategy of distance for defense still had some impact, but obviously with the potentiality of airspace being violated, vulnerability can be about as wide as the vulnerable air space will let it.

Long range missiles and drones that can change course during flight and pinpoint targets the size of an eye of a needle, has changed the defense dynamic.

It just so happens that there have been a number of who-thought-it-would-ever-happen, a break from the 'pacts of expectation', the hearts and minds of the Arab people, moreover, psychology of the Arab World, a number aerial weapons being deployed all over the Middle East in about the last year.

Meanwhile is tension between Saudi and Yemen Houthis at whatever degree at whatever moment.

Altogether, numerous weaponry has been in the skies in the past several years, moreso the past year,  at a very uncomfortable distance to the said 2 holy sites.

The second point, is historically, Iran and Iraq got into some tensions, just a few seasons after Ayatollah Khomeini took power, which was a 'shocker' in some ways to many, especially in the aspect of 2 'Muslim countries' combatting one another.
In the timeline, Israel's Menachem Begin proposed to the US the idea of supplementing nuclear arms, in brief words, to Iran,  respective the Iran-Iraq situation.

There have been a number of it was once on the up, then went down, relations, between nations in the Middle East and the US.
The US was once a proponent of Iraq, reference Baath Party, Saddam Hussein, etc, then later war broke out, post 'invasion of Kuwait' for reference frame.
Syria, he US was once a proponent of the Asad regime, towards the waning of it, just several years ago, many voices in US government weren't raving about it. There may have been reasons for that, however, this discussion is to illustrate the roller coaster ride of relations.

There are high policy seats in the US that are and or were proponents of dismantling nuclear capabilities of Iran, markedly over the last year.

At this time, it's pretty clear that basically the final geo-political border that surrounds the 2 holy sites, working outward to inward, is the one the sites sit in.

The idea of potentiality of ups and downs in relations, is already present, already illustrated, and amplified with intensified relations along with concerns about it, with the advent of subjects nuclear.


The old saying, you see where this conversation is going.

Another historical ray, is the normalisation of relations concept. The relations respective Egypt, to all nations in the Middle East, since Anwar Sadat. What was normal and to who? Tensions over Sinai Peninsula, peace accords, resumption of ties yo other consortiums in the Middle East post Sadat.

Abraham Accords, may be thorny subject matter, if that's the caveat to nuclear relations, programs and development.

Brief recap of unverified reports, it's estimated the US has lost several servicemen and women since the recent military involvement in Iran*; in the past 10 days thereabout, it appears Iran has lost about 50, and 500 wounded. Locations vary.

Islamabad MOU (..memorandum of understanding), looks like it got kicked to the side.

Straits, which are main points of oil shipping, culled as a main matter of contention.

Iran says the US will be penalized, whereat the sequence of fire, retaliate, fire, statement that retaliation will occur, is familiar to the press. What might be more abstract to grasp, is just what are the potential timelines involved, a week, a month, a year, 5 years, a decade, ahead? Are plans being drawn up to attempt to architect terror attacks of huge magnitudes?

Peace is important.


Notes July 21, 2026: The number of US servicemen and women since the start of Operation Epic Fury that have been victims of the furthest degree the rest, is more like at least a dozen. Official statistics might be a few more than that, whereat, things change, developments occur, every day.

What is known for sure, is that innocent persons, markedly children, have felt the brunt on too many occasions, of aerial strikes in the Middle East.
The era today is one with large prevailing atmosphere, similar to a 'zeitgeist', of aerial projectiles used as tools of war; those weapons take very little physical effort to operate and fire, and it only takes a second to put them in motion. Missiles, drones, anti-rocket rockets, and much more. For this conversation, specific names of the weaponry does not matter much.

 Like what is sometimes the slogan in appointment setting call center, 'set it, and forget it's; shoot a missile off, potentially kill about a 1,000 persons at a time, and then hop off the button like a video game, and go have a seat in front of some video games or entertainment, lives lost do not matter, the button was pushed and now onto the next task.

Over the past couple of years, purposeful strategies to make materialization with a new twist some of the conditions in the Middle East in the early 1980s, a suspenseful, violence filled, gratuitous themed, continuum of back and forth exchanges of aggression and attacks, while ensuring the media provides minimum coverage, leaving murkiness and opaqueness the perceptions of many people about what is going on.

What happened, what is happening, what might happen?, really?, in Middle East, might come to mind by people trying to keep up with the news in the region.

The bottom line, it's about the calculated playing, with people's lives, emotions, and economies; it is coming from a number of facets involved in the turbulence in the Middle East at least of current; leaving a lingering cloud of unanswered questions when justice is right, for adding and stopping evil is right, those clouds that have many people hooked, but left in despair, because they don't know exactly is or isn't going on, is form of oppression, which is not right.

Afterwords
How are precision and effective missile strikes still leaving room for an opponent to persist, plan, and announce that there will be more of the essential activities of the sort that was the very reason they were just attacked?

Is the level of what happened 'war'?, has it crossed over the threshold of international condemnation, UN sanctions, war crimes taken to court in the Hague? Or is it not quite enough yet?

Well in order to stretch it (turbulence/conflict) out, so that the price can keep rising enough to make wealthier wealthy but not enough for a complete boycott and desertion of the commodity, a very keenly calculated tolerance level is being abused,  such as on thousands of computers working together to strategize how to make the most without the big crash and bust of the silly system.

Generally, if a bomb is dropped like the magnitude of tests at Lop Nur, or Nagasaki, all at once, there will be an uproar to the scale that whatever is going on must stop and never happen again. But if broken down into smaller chunks, maybe not enough masses will catch the totality of what happened, to coalesce the level of uproar that will bring about half and change. 

Be itas it really may, there are people with the knowledge of how to keep account, that are keeping and have kept account.

The straddling, the leaving the people in the dark, is making too many indignant.

News today, July 16, 2026, is rife with 'the Iranians' are asking 'the Houthis (of Yemen)' to ready controlling areas of the Red Sea.
Now wait a minute, sure, there may be a logically conjectured axis of some sort having to do with Shia 'philosophy' in Iran, whereas even today, Iran in the main appears to have a Shia government ruling them, and then we 'Iran' is synonymous in the press with the 'regime', the Shia regime, - an axis or allegiance formed with, Houthis of Yemen; but, let's circle back a second, and look at the original philosophy of Shia, and Houthis. Is blockading straits over oil the function?

What kind of strike? Employees on strike?
Let the URL address be purposely obfuscated. Years down the line, reminders of a missile strike coming from Saudi onto Yemen, isn't pleasant.
Over the past few days, Sanaa International Airport was struck according to reports, by Saudi.
There are news reports that claim to cover the reason why, however, this article won't try to go into that.
What we see is more complexity to an already complex topography of aggression and dangerous weapons being fired from nations upon nations in the Middle East. The Arab World, the Muslim World, major oil producers, historically central locations.
The simple man's version of what's going on in the Middle East right now, which might take a learned man to go through history channels to arrive at it, is, there remains a pro and anti Israel dynamic that has been around since about the mid 1940s. At this time, Iran expressed through weapons, Israel may have crossed over the boundary of 'too much' aggression in response to the October 7th situation and its ramifications. Israel responded back, and from there the kitchen started heating up. And there were concerns voiced about nuclear capacities. The US made a presence in the region, participating in military action upon Iran. And there were concerns about the 'regime' of Iran. The prices of oil volatile. 

Lebanon and Syria became embroiled, as they too weren't exactly happy about the idea of the magnitude of post October 7th activities, death toll of Palestinians, etc. Hezbollah was culled in the who, what, and where process, enmeshed in the statement of- potential threats against aspects of Israel or a stronghold within it.

A huge number of casualties has occurred since October 7th.

Flotillas and other strategies to help the hungry.

Meanwhile, Houthis and Saudis have been in tensions for some years now.

Houthis didn't exactly express a comfort with the amount of destruction upon Palestinians either.

Somehow the Strait of Hormuz and oil ships became the center of concerns in the Middle East several or more months ago.

Back and forth activities thereunto.

Houthis and Shia aspects of Iran seem to mesh, there might be some logic behind that on paper, coming from a historic standpoint.

The US is said to have targeted about 140 targets this past weekend in Iran, post a vessel being attacked by Iran, then Iran responded by targeting several Arab World countries, some of whom have long-time allegiances to the US, and some of whom have been on borderline over the past couple of decades. Then comes a strike from Saudi onto Sanaa Airport, having something to do with Iran.

Perhaps these are prima facie political goings on.

Whatever they are, the amount of heat figuratively and literally is dangerously volatile.

When some think of Arab unity, what do they think of?
News developing this weekend is that Iran has targeted several nations, per AP news earlier this morning, Sunday 7/12, including Kuwait, Oman, Jordan, Qatar, and Bahrain, in response to being struck by the USA.
It might be putting the sequence of events in reverse order, however, looking into layers of the future, right now that equation (a member of the Arab World attacking another) is about as all time dismal and low as the Arab World can get (opinion). There could be worse, but anything worst than that, might as well be the end of time here on earth.

Evidently, the chicken before the egg sequence of strikes is in occurrence right through here. The US struck Iran, thus far in about 140 spots roughly speaking, in the sequence after Iran struck a vessel in the Strait of Hormuz.
Going back, Iran got involved after onslaught of a ticket that was an outgrowth of ramifications of the October 7th situation. Plus the cry of Iran being a nuclear presence in the region. Perhaps with the illustrated potentiality of Iran's willingness to perform missile strikes on targets in Israel, whereas Iran's rationale may be considered aside, such as acceptable or unacceptable, who promotes, condones, or condemns, it has increased discomfort with Iran by powers in Middle East or those with an interest or presence in the region.

But again, how ever was the series of events that led everything to be where things are now, right now is a shattered peace, a fabric of the sort that many would rather not pick up to examine whether to wear it or function on it.

It could be that man was bound to fight from the start, or that contentions stemming from 'horse's post' in the region from times of antiquity on, continues.

All said, the present situation isn't the kind of world order that's should exist. The US performing strikes, Israel performing strikes, Strait of Hormuz in the leveraging center over oil, -what if economics of oil was obsolete?-, who's got nuclear power, who feels who shouldn't be a safe place to live because they can't be trusted with their nuclear capability, so some perish while others do no not, meanwhile, on the individual level, everybody is cousins spanning the globe.

Digging a little deeper into building the peace process, and acting on it, might be the calling.