Saudi oil fields on fire, but who did it?

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Catfish

^ Oh really yes and why not? What has Trump reached applying more and more pressure to make a deal with Iran? Where is it?

Trump has shrunk to a hesitating president, whose foreign political scope further shrinks with the blurring economics.
This escalation in the Middle East is also Trump's crisis. So he aggravated the conflict with Iran getting out of the nuclear deal. He wanted to negotiate a new deal, this was the official doctrine, but never were the USA more far away from negotiating usable results in a dialogue than now. If his plan was to bully, frighten, negotiate and then succeed with a better deal, it has failed completely. As Skybird said the Iranians do not think like that, nor do they let themselves be driven to give in to demands and western ideas by force.

So his options are now limited, apart from the next election which is much more important to him than the US' standing in the world. A war with Iran would further accelerate the oil price development, which is already on the rise. Trump wants to evade a recession in the election year, but it is his own fault causing the economical ruckus, from Europe to China. He has harrasssed international trade so long with threats and taxes that the US economical growth finally gave in. If there will be a wave of lay-offs in the election year …

So he is a bit more reluctant now and sends cautious messages to the german automotive industry, there are suddenly negotiations in China about a new trade treaty "forgetting" taxes, and one of the hawks (Bolton) has been fired. But diplomacy is complicated as the whole world, and destroying it was easy. Generating trust will take decades.

I take it you're a big Trump fan then

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Im a little confused. Is Aunty Merkle speaking on behalf of the EU or Germany? How exactly does the power structure work over there who speaks for whom?

That is precisely the point I was trying to make

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

Take Israel and Russia and other suspicious nations off the list too ...

If Iran didn't do it why don't they help find out who did?

One more clue this is a religeous war about how to serve their God

No, I meant, why does everyone expect the US to take part in retaliation? Iran did not strike the US, it struck SA. Let SA do the fighting.

I anticipate a new bulletin in a few days: Cruise missiles and drones take out vital part of Iranian oil production. Win win.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Why would we do it? It was an attack on Saudi Arabia, let them hit back. Aren't they men? Why does the US have to do the heavy lifting all the time?

Absolutely, I tend to tick the same way. I only add that not reacting to this means that America can in the medium run say goodbye to its credibility in the ME region, which already has suffered due to the 2003 story and then Obama. If America wants to clean ME off its diplomatci list and get untied from it, then you are fine. The vacuum will be filled by China and Russia. If you are fine with that too, fine again.



But if you want to continue playing an influential role in that part of the world, for whatever your reasons are, you cannot afford not to react to this, since you claim SA to be your most important ally in the Arab world.


Whether it should be that, remains a subject for discussion.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Absolutely, I tend to tick the same way. I only add that not reacting to this means that America can in the medium run say goodbye to its credibility in the ME region, which already has suffered due to the 2003 story and then Obama. If America wants to clean ME off its diplomatci list and get untied from it, then you are fine. The vacuum will be filled by China and Russia. If you are fine with that too, fine again.



But if you want to continue playing an influential role in that part of the world, for whatever your reasons are, you cannot afford not to react to this, since you claim SA to be your most important ally in the Arab world.


Whether it should be that, remains a subject for discussion.

Nicely put, I agree with your summary. I vote we the US hand over the ME influential role to Russia, China, or anyone else who wants it.

[Catfish]

@Jim: ^ A Trump fan? Of(f) course

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

That is precisely the point I was trying to make

"Oh really?"

Quote from your link:

"British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and German Chancellor Angela Merkel discussed the attacks during a telephone call, agreeing on "the need to work together, alongside international partners, to agree a collective response," according to Downing Street.
Johnson and Merkel stressed the "importance of avoiding the further escalation of tensions in the region"."

"We believe that the deal to stop Iran from acquiring military nuclear capabilities is a building block we need to get back to," Merkel said, during a news conference with Jordan's King Abdullah.

"But there is also a long list of other burdens coming from Iran like the ballistic missiles programme and its engagement in Syria," she said. "In recent days tensions in the region rose and Germany will always be in favour of de-escalation and long-term solutions are only possible through a political process."

Looks a bit different if not pulled out of context imho
But then it's an Al Jazeera artricle after all.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

No, I meant, why does everyone expect the US to take part in retaliation? Iran did not strike the US, it struck SA. Let SA do the fighting.

I anticipate a new bulletin in a few days: Cruise missiles and drones take out vital part of Iranian oil production. Win win.

Because KSA is a de-facto long term USA ally.
Because USA is the world policeman.
If USA desires to maintain hegemony and the grip on the global affairs, it may consider reacting to maintain it's relevance.

In the other news - apparently that site was covered by US made air defense systems (ie a Patriot SAM).

[Bilge_Rat]

well, anyone who thinks Iran should be rewarded for its naked aggression by going back to the sweetheart 2015 nuclear deal is as naive as Neville Chamberlain at Munich in 1938.

Yes, the U.S. has to respond, but it has to be the right response.

Just blindly carrying out military strikes just plays into Iran's hands.

Iran attacking saudi Arabia is a major escalation.

Why would they do it? Iran seems to be goading the U.S. into a military response. It strikes me that the situation in Iran must be getting desparate and either the regime is losing control of certain factions or wants to provoke a war to shore up its internal support.

What the U.S. should be doing is following the Bush sr. model from 1990 and trying to build an international coalition with a common plan of action.

If the regime in Tehran is tottering, now is the time to ratchet up sanctions even more.

[Mr Quatro]

There is a story in the Old Testament of the Holy Bible about a city that was besieged by it's enemies and the city was running out of food and water when an old woman came to the gate and yelled at the captain of the army against them, "What is it that you want"?

The captain said the head of your leader .. She said, "You shall have it by morning" She threw the head over the gate the next morning and the army left off destroying the village.

The people of Iran are tired of the 10% of Iran telling them what to do They could stop all of this by throwing someone's head over the wall.

President Trump's hands are tied without Congressional approval which would take weeks in this country, but what a great opportunity we are wasting not to try and put together a way to take out Iran's nuclear ambitions, long range missile programs, navy, air force by surrounding them and threatening just that till they give in or start a war first.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Nicely put, I agree with your summary. I vote we the US hand over the ME influential role to Russia, China, or anyone else who wants it.

I could understand that. And if I were you/the US, I would probably decide to go that direction, too.
Which as a consequence means I would untie the US from NATO, too.

[Jimbuna]

Saudi Arabia's defence ministry has shown off what is says is wreckage of drones and cruise missiles that prove Iranian involvement in weekend attacks on two oil facilities.

It said 18 drones and seven cruise missiles struck from a direction that ruled out Yemen as a source.

Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi rebels had said they were behind the attacks.

Iran has denied any involvement and warned it would retaliate against any military response.

The Saudi defence ministry briefing said the wreckage showed the attacks were “unquestionably sponsored by Iran”.

A spokesman showed off what was said to be a delta wing of an Iranian UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) along with other weapons debris.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-49746645

Interesting and hopefully some filmed/photographic evidence will be shown later today.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Why would we do it? It was an attack on Saudi Arabia, let them hit back. Aren't they men? Why does the US have to do the heavy lifting all the time?

I understand you and millions of other Americans who is tired, every time a politicians from the rest of the world phone you when they are in trouble.

I can only say or put forward what they have said in our news channel/program

If the attack came from Iran, USA can not just sit there on its back and do nothing, Trump have to show he mean business.

Markus

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by mapuc

I understand you and millions of other Americans who is tired, every time a politicians from the rest of the world phone you when they are in trouble.

I can only say or put forward what they have said in our news channel/program

If the attack came from Iran, USA can not just sit there on its back and do nothing, Trump have to show he mean business.

Markus

I dont think we are doing nothing. I think the sanctions are having the desired effect. I think these attacks may be sign Rouhani is struggling to stay in power by supporting acts of aggression to cover his political weakness. Kinda like a cornered rat. A shooting war could be used by Rouhani politically to unite internal opposition against outside agression. The last thing on any western powers list of things to do, is to return fire. I suggest we just sit back and watch him squirm.

[mapuc]

We get our information from our national tv-channels or some international news channel.

I get mine from the public tv channels in Denmark, Sweden and a Danish News channel TV2 News they have a man in USA his name is Jesper Steinmetz

About 60 minutes ago I saw him on this channel saying(from my memory and only taking some important part of it)

The Minister of foreign affairs Mike Pompeo, said before he landed in Saudi-Arabia

This attack is a declaration of war(He didn't say if this declaration of war was against USA or Saudi-Arabia)

Later on he said something like:

Saudi-Arabia is expecting the US to do the hard and dirty job for them.

Secondly Rockstars comment above made me remember an expert on another Danish tv-channel.

Who said he understood why Trump would hesitate any attack on Iran, it could set the whole region on fire.

Markus

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

I dont think we are doing nothing. I think the sanctions are having the desired effect. I think these attacks may be sign Rouhani is struggling to stay in power by supporting acts of aggression to cover his political weakness. Kinda like a cornered rat. A shooting war could be used by Rouhani politically to unite internal opposition against outside agression. The last thing on any western powers list of things to do, is to return fire. I suggest we just sit back and watch him squirm.

Do not take it for granted Rouhani controls the RG - neither he nor any other Iranian president does. The RG play their own game, and are a state within the state, corrupt, controlling signfiicant parts of key economy and industries in Iran. Their top commander have their own financial interests. Its a gang. The scenario that the RG attacked without Rouhani authorizing it, or even just knowing of it, is absolutely realistic. I seem to recall that the RG and Rouhani are anything but close friends. The RG are hardliners. The president is more or less hardliner as well, but hides it more or less politely on the diplomatic stage. The nuclear armament of Iran they all want, and their top cleric as well.