Except not that long ago the Iranians DID revolt, following a sham election where the reformists/progressives should have won. They got into the streets. And then they got shot.

You seem to be living in a phantasy world where subjects of a dictature are just "asking for it", and a 50%-or-more majority should magically change everything. That's not how power works. Money and bullets, you see, matter more than ballots.

The US did the same, revolted against a well armed adversary.

The people are the power, paper money is no match.

The revolting side was well armed as well. It's not the case in Saudi Arabia.

Can you cite something for this? Everything I read is to the contrary, that they are well armed.

I find it surprising, but indeed, firearms per capita amount is pretty high for Saudi Arabia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per_c... .

How well is that working out for Syria and Libya at the moment?

The whole concept of a dictatorship is that the ruling party has more power and can keep the people subjugated. The civilian populace don't have tanks and helicopters.

Guerrilla warfare is an extremely effective form of revolt. A bunch of people taking on a tank head on, a death sentence. But that's where sabotage should come into play.