Maybe their military is better now than when I worked with them. Maybe they no longer rely completely on foreign labor for all of the technical or manual aspects of a modern military. I somehow doubt that has happend though.

In the Gulf war they drove their tanks up to the border, put them behind "MILES" berms (small mounds of dirt only capable of stopping a kill from a training laser), and didn't pull a minute of PMCS or even run the engines on occasion. Afterall, that was beneath them, something they hired lesser beings to do. Problem was, those "lesser" beings had pulled out, as this wasn't their war. Guns not zerored, engines that wouldn't start, etc.

These guys couldn't defend themselves for two days against any of the top 30-40 militaries in the world. Hell, I'd bet a month's pay that the 20 largest US State National Guard's could take them down as well. Individually.

But that is not my point, this thread is not about how artificial the Saudi state is; against both internal and external threats. My point work here is to explore how to expand what has been an effective scheme of state vs state deterrence to a refreshed model that works for non-states as well; and that will require new approaches, as state models simply do not apply.