Who Did The Deed?

[AAAintheBeltway]

Half of Saudi Arabia's oil exporting capacity was shut in after a devastating attack over the weekend. The initial claims by so-called Houthi rebels in Yemen that they had carried out the attacks via drones never seemed very credible. The drones, ten of them it was claimed, would have had to fly halfway across Saudi Arabia to reach the target in the Eastern Province. Billions of dollars may not buy what it used to, but one would hope it would buy an air defense system hat would have detected such an attack.

Now there are claims or suggestions that the attack was carried out by a missile strike launched from inside Iran. Another theory is that Iranian proxies in Iraq carried out the attack. Darker conspiracy theories are running rampant, suggesting everything from an Israeli false flag op to perhaps some sort of Big Oil ruse to gin up the price of oil to a rogue Deep State op, perhaps left to be carried out by ousted National Security chief and notorious neo-con John Bolton. Some have suggested the Saudis did it themselves, to sucker the US into a war with Iran.

It seems obvious to me that the US intell agencies know exactly where the attack originated from. After all, we have AWACs, etc all over the area. The silence is deafening however, as Trump waits confirmation before the likely retaliatory strike on Iran.

Who do you think did it and what should Trump do?

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Donald J. Trump✔ @realDonaldTrump


Saudi Arabia oil supply was attacked. There is reason to believe that we know the culprit, are locked and loaded depending on verification, but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed


Tulsi Gabbard

✔ @TulsiGabbard




.@realDonaldTrump

Trump awaits instructions from his Saudi masters. Having our country act as Saudi Arabia's bitch is not "America First." https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1173368423381962752 …

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

As usual, Tulsi has a point. If Iran did attack Saudi Arabia, why shouldn't the response come from them, not the US? Let's not forget, the Saudi's and their OPEC buddies have been robbing us and the rest of the developed world for decades. At least some elements of the SA regime sponsored the 9/11 attackers. Are we so deep into Stockholm Syndrome that we regard an attack on them as equivalent to an attack on us?

Don't get me wrong. I would like to see the Iranian regime toppled. This whole episode has Bush ver 2.0 all over it however. The Saudis are prepared to fight to the last drop of American blood. After that, they will buy off the Iranians or work it out.

 

[smallfil]

Saudis have to secure its air space first! If the Iranians are able to easily penetrate their air space with drones, they have a lot to worry about! US personnel stationed at Saudi Arabia air bases, the US should help secure the Saudis air space. Of course, the Saudis have to pay for any equipment need to do so! If fighter jets electronics could be jammed, why cannot low level drones? Then, they have to add missiles like Israel's iron dome defense missiles to shoot down incoming threats. And since, they have fighter jets, why don't they patrol their own skies? Price of oil matters because stable oil supplies mean stable prices. US consumers will be hurt by higher oil prices.

 

[UsualName]

It was Corn Pop.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Saudis need oil at 80+ to sustain their don't have shit other than oil economy. Iran is going bust due to sanctions, is hoping for a limited war and Uncle Sugar coming in with big money for a rebuild as we all sing kumbaya in the aftermath. It's 1939/40 all over again. Shit never changes. Different players, same game. Will Trump get sucked in? Better question, is it even up to him?

 

[maximumpossiblesuffering]

Half of Saudi Arabia's oil exporting capacity was shut in after a devastating attack over the weekend. The initial claims by so-called Houthi rebels in Yemen that they had carried out the attacks via drones never seemed very credible. The drones, ten of them it was claimed, would have had to fly halfway across Saudi Arabia to reach the target in the Eastern Province. Billions of dollars may not buy what it used to, but one would hope it would buy an air defense system hat would have detected such an attack.

Now there are claims or suggestions that the attack was carried out by a missile strike launched from inside Iran. Another theory is that Iranian proxies in Iraq carried out the attack. Darker conspiracy theories are running rampant, suggesting everything from an Israeli false flag op to perhaps some sort of Big Oil ruse to gin up the price of oil to a rogue Deep State op, perhaps left to be carried out by ousted National Security chief and notorious neo-con John Bolton. Some have suggested the Saudis did it themselves, to sucker the US into a war with Iran.

It seems obvious to me that the US intell agencies know exactly where the attack originated from. After all, we have AWACs, etc all over the area. The silence is deafening however, as Trump waits confirmation before the likely retaliatory strike on Iran.

Who do you think did it and what should Trump do?

Another question I’m trying to answer is why they did it. Oil prices have been weak and it seems to me there is correlation between crude price drops and various attacks. Remember the apparent false flag with the oil tankers a while back? Even whether the oil tanker attacks or a false flag are not may not be a real issue. Although I understand there are serious religious differences between the various interests, most of them share a common interest of high oil prices. It would not surprise me if there was an understanding that product (Crude oil infrastructure) between the parties is never to be touched except as may be specifically agreed upon in advance. Another possibility is that certain powerful and well connected former US politician with interests the oil industry, defense contracting, and logistics are involved as well. Arms dealers love nothing more than a war to spice up sales. They also have the arms and technology to make things happen while maybe maintaining “Plausible deniability”.

I hope we don’t end up in yet another war so some industry tyrants and or certain Middle East countries can make a few more billion dollars. The key in my opinion is for Trump to meet the alleged attackers so he can use his world class ability in reading people and thus being in a better position to make an informed decision on whether some rebels in a civil war were able to pay for, target, and successfully attack multiple locations against a country with world class intelligence, detection, and military capabilities.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Another question I’m trying to answer is why they did it.

Yes, me too. I see the risk/reward ration skewed heavily against the Iranians. They may be terrorists but they're not fools. Did they think we would just say, ok, you win, build your nukes? They have to know that we don't fool around when some uppity small to midsize country thumbs its nose at us. Regime change time baby. To protect our freedoms.

Maybe they did it. We have a bad record of predicting just how crazy they will be. Anyway, I am expecting bombing by the end of the Wednesday Fed meeting. And I doubt it will be targeted response type stuff. Full all out effort to decimate their Air Force and Navy, missile bases, infrastructure, etc. It's basically about defending our freedoms.

 

[El OchoCinco]

Bush planted yellow cake to invade Iraq

I expect this attack to be pinned squarely on Iran whether they did it or not, backed those who did or not. Nothing drums up support for a President better than a military action against a common enemy.

Back up Plan B in case economy continues to slow down and Trump gets blamed.

 

[maximumpossiblesuffering]

I suppose Trump will lose only 1 vote, my own, if he attacks Iran. However, a attack on Iran is not without risk both militarily for the US and politically for Trump. Iran, all alone, can make our lives miserable by going asymmetric. If our lives become miserable, I suspect Trump’s life will become miserable after election night. Now let’s consider the possibility Russia or some other countries go stupid as well. Do we really want to be in a situation where we have to tip toe on various battlefields so we don’t risk really pissing someone off who happens to have WMDs?

All things considered, I believe we should not attack Iran unless we really mean it and are willing to follow through after we get hurt. And continue to follow through when we get hurt badly. And continue to follow through when infrastructure inside the United States or soft targets get hit. I do not believe the American people or our politicians are ready to deal with the negative consequences of a war with Iran could bring. It seems like a high risk, low reward venture to me. According to my Iranian roommate in a conversation of a few years ago, Iran’s leaders have become more tolerant of social change. The internet is a major part of that. Culture is changing in Iran and in a few generations, probably less, we will be all much more alike.

War is so 20th century. We are in the information age and need to learn to communicate and resolve our differences without resorting to warfare.