BravoBravo

Act of war..Saudi Arbia

Recommended Posts

So step up Saudi and defend yourself ,you have the best military equipment in the region, other than Israel ….no need for the USA or a global coalition to respond …...or just take the hit and rebuild the damage.:D:D:D.....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought our president was the elected leader of the strongest nation on earth, with spy networks and surveillance satellites aplenty, so why do we need to wait for Saudi Arabia to tell us where the attack came from and how we are to proceed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Arbia?  Is this pirate week?

:wub:...awwww...a quick post before I went for my morning walk....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, BravoBravo said:

So step up Saudi and defend yourself ,you have the best military equipment in the region, other than Israel ….no need for the USA or a global coalition to respond …...or just take the hit and rebuild the damage.:D:D:D.....

We will align ourselves with Russia and attack a country we are not at war with to bring about regime change.

Oh, wait, that would be stupid.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I really like their roast beef sandwiches and curly fries.

You really should go for their pulled pork.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I really like their roast beef sandwiches and curly fries.

Is that slang for cunnilingus?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if this was done 20 years ago We'd have a problem. As it is US oil needs are largely independent of the Saudis. This is a problem for them. 

No one bombed us, We need to stay out of it unless Saudi Arabia goes to the UN for help.   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

roast beef is easy. curly fries are what? trannys?

Curly?  at the Y?  Granted, the clean shaven look is more in these days.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Movable Ballast said:

Well, if this was done 20 years ago We'd have a problem. As it is US oil needs are largely independent of the Saudis. This is a problem for them. 

No one bombed us, We need to stay out of it unless Saudi Arabia goes to the UN for help.   

Saudis have a demonstrated proficiency for attacking other countries.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

It's not only "IN", it's a showstopper.

I've heard it said that the grass don't grow on a race track. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MakePHRFGreatAgain said:

Trump has already tweeted he will discuss with SA and they will decide  how 'WE' respond 

Enlightenment is coming forth as we speak

2025905486_DAX-J45UMAAJ4101.jpg.064524deab7ca7021c63f7c90f419b4c.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

It's not only "IN", it's a showstopper.

And we all know what the science says about those who are turned off by pubes

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MakePHRFGreatAgain said:

Trump has already tweeted he will discuss with PA and they will decide  how 'WE' respond 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I really like their roast beef sandwiches and curly fries.

Isn't shitstain a condiment at Arby's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Al Paca said:

15 of the 19. Just saying. 

Yeah, but we better attack Iraq just to be sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jules said:

Enlightenment is coming forth as we speak

2025905486_DAX-J45UMAAJ4101.jpg.064524deab7ca7021c63f7c90f419b4c.jpg

Would it be appropriate to let everyone know that the Saudi Arabian government owns the entire 45th floor of Trump Tower? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Would it be appropriate to let everyone know that the Saudi Arabian government owns the entire 45th floor of Trump Tower? 

Who cares. Do you know who owns the rest of it?.. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Movable Ballast said:

Who cares. Do you know who owns the rest of it?.. 

Whom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Movable Ballast said:

Who cares. Do you know who owns the rest of it?.. 

Probably the governments of North Korea, Russia, Turkey, Philippines, Brazil, China, Egypt, and any other country run by tin pot dictators.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Saudi’s just hate spending their money and besides Donnie owes them big time.

I see a US sponsored drone in in someone’s future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who thinks that Iran would decide, right now, to strike S.A. for no apparent reason, is stupid.

It is clearly a false flag attack, probably by the USG, with the nod of approval of S.A.

 Trying to find a reason to attack an (not entirely) innocent civilian population, with the leadership of our muslim enemy.....

 Iran had nothing to gain from this, and a lot to lose.

 Use what's left of the oatmeal that's between your ears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Anyone who thinks that Iran would decide, right now, to strike S.A. for no apparent reason, is stupid.

It is clearly a false flag attack, probably by the USG, with the nod of approval of S.A.

 Trying to find a reason to attack an (not entirely) innocent civilian population, with the leadership of our muslim enemy.....

 Iran had nothing to gain from this, and a lot to lose.

 Use what's left of the oatmeal that's between your ears.

Oh my god what a stupid thing to say... A false flag to take out half of SAs oil producing capability? Yeah sure... 

Just when you think the lunatic fringe has an end they surprise you again... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Movable Ballast said:

Who cares. Do you know who owns the rest of it?.. 

We all own a part, I think. Pauly Whoopsies Manafort owned one unit, but had to surrender it as part of his deal to avoid trial. I think that’s in the Mueller report. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Movable Ballast said:

Oh my god what a stupid thing to say... A false flag to take out half of SAs oil producing capability? Yeah sure... 

Just when you think the lunatic fringe has an end they surprise you again... 

Oil at 80 bucks + makes the Saudi Aramco IPO a hell of a lot more valuable. Saudi has already said they will have 1/3 back on line today and the rest by the end of the week.

You’re not very bright.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Anyone who thinks that Iran would decide, right now, to strike S.A. for no apparent reason, is stupid.

It is clearly a false flag attack, probably by the USG, with the nod of approval of S.A.

 Trying to find a reason to attack an (not entirely) innocent civilian population, with the leadership of our muslim enemy.....

 Iran had nothing to gain from this, and a lot to lose.

 Use what's left of the oatmeal that's between your ears.

Seems a bit tinfoil-y

More likely, like the stingers that found themselves on the market post american intervention into Russia/Afghanistan, it was likely one of the client terror cells that had a great idea with the new toy from the Mullahs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Seems a bit tinfoil-y

More likely, like the stingers that found themselves on the market post american intervention into Russia/Afghanistan, it was likely one of the client terror cells that had a great idea with the new toy from the Mullahs.

True there are Shite minority resistant type on the ground. Could have been a shoulder fired missile.  Has anyone actually confirmed there were drones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Movable Ballast said:

Oh my god what a stupid thing to say... A false flag to take out half of SAs oil producing capability? Yeah sure... 

Just when you think the lunatic fringe has an end they surprise you again... 

Have you been drinking the Kool Aid again?

 

Have a look at the "damage".

 

800.jpeg

 

These tanks were empty and clean....no fires or explosion. Perhaps decommissioned?

 

EEiMQymXUAI2RTr.jpg

 

Not much refinery fire here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fakenews said:

True there are Shite minority resistant type on the ground. Could have been a shoulder fired missile.  Has anyone actually confirmed there were drones.

No confirmation of anything.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, dorydude said:

Have you been drinking the Kool Aid again?

 

Have a look at the "damage".

 

800.jpeg

 

These tanks were empty and clean....no fires or explosion. Perhaps decommissioned?

 

EEiMQymXUAI2RTr.jpg

 

Not much refinery fire here.

Kool aid? yeah sure... Even if the tanks were empty and clean as these "pics" reveal, don't you think the warhead would still have exploded? don'tcha? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Movable Ballast said:

Kool aid? yeah sure... Even if the tanks were empty and clean as these "pics" reveal, don't you think the warhead would still have exploded? don'tcha? 

Well....did it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For crap sake. 

I loathe the Gropenfuhrer as thoroughly as anyone but  asking Saudi Arabia what help they want is the right thing to do 

The other tight thing to do is to take that request to Congress and let the Congress decide whether we will declare war 

This unconstitutional Korea, Vietnam, Iran, Libya, Grenada, Iraq, shit has to stop. 

Next thing you know they will ignore the Second Amendment. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

I loathe the Gropenfuhrer as thoroughly as anyone but  asking Saudi Arabia what help they want is the right thing to do

First, the KSA has all of the money and a shit ton of F15s. Tell them to hire Jeff. They're already bombing Yemen which is where the Houthis who admitted to sending the drones live. Moreover there is that whole 9/11 thing where they sent a bunch of Saudi hijackers who rammed some planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and then we retaliated for that by attacking Iraq. Yeah, there is that.

Fuck the KSA. Let them sort this out.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Olsonist said:

First, KSA has all of the money and a shit ton of F15s. They're already bombing Yemen which is where the Houthis who admitted to sending the drones live. Moreover there is that whole 9/11 thing where they sent a bunch of hijackers who rammed some planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and then we retaliated by attacking Iraq. Yeah, there is that.

Fuck the KSA. Let them sort this out.

Thing is SA is the biggest paper tiger on the planet.  Sure they have tons of our weaponty but there’s little personnel behind them.  The only reason that country functions is a/migrant workforce.  They’re terrified of Iran and will do what ever they can to get us involved on their behalf.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the “drone” was a truck with a bunch of fertilizer and diesel in the back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fakenews said:

Thing is SA is the biggest paper tiger on the planet.  Sure they have tons of our weaponty but there’s little personnel behind them.  The only reason that country functions is a/migrant workforce.  They’re terrified of Iran and will do what ever they can to get us involved on their behalf.

US drone attacks and smart weapons fired from afar.  $1.5 million for each cruise missile and $115,000 for each hellfire fired from a drone,   That ignores the cost of the drones and ships of course.   We’ll obviously pay the Saudi’s to take the lead in any fighting on the ground, to minimize US casualties.    A perfect war for all to profit from.    Better cut social security to pay for Saudi defense.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta find a cause the American sheeple can get behind. No blood for oil, they won’t believe WMD again, will they?

I know, we are fighting for Iranian women’s right to drive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mexico will pay for it.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

So..... being serious for a moment here.  I'm of mixed feelings on this issue.  Don't take any of the following as advocacy for a particular COA (although of course the usual cunts will do that anyway).

From a purely selfish perspective, I hope there is no shootin' war with Iran - for at least another week anyway.  The first race of the season is next weekend and then I'm back in the US for a month.  Dubai is a nice juicy target for cruise missiles and I don't have a ton of confidence in the local guys manning the patriot missile batteries.  They were the bottom of the class at the academy who couldn't make it as pilots.  If they want to blow each other up, at least wait until Oct.  But I digress....

I tend to believe the Houthis when they say they are responsible for the attacks.  However, no way in flipping hell did they do this w/o Iran's technical help and specific greenlight/direction.  And.... For the very reason that the Houthis claimed responsibility tells me it was absolutely NOT a false flag op.  Why would they do that otherwise?

This is IMHO a continuation of Iran's growing desperation about being squeezed on sanctions, particularly on their inability to sell oil on the world market.  This post is not about the right or wrong of those sanctions.  It is what it is at this point.  I think Iran is making a calculus that they can stick their toe over the line and poke the bear hoping to be just annoying enough that we have to talk to them.  They are certainly walking a tightrope.  

And this is a pattern of attempts to walk that tightrope with the theme of disrupting the global oil supply as a tit for tat that their ability to sell oil themselves has been cut off.  For the sake of this discussion, let's stipulate that it IS the Iranians doing this latest attack and the previous attacks on the oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.  If we accept that, then what?

I, like most of you, think that we should not get involved in a war or even a skirmish at the behest of KSA or MBS.  Fuck them, let them fight their own war if they want to smack down Iran.  The reality is that, despite all the good hardware they have, I believe Iran would put a good thump on them if they went toe to toe and they had no help from us.  BUT...... let's look at the bigger picture of what a conflict like that might look like.  Do we really want Iran and KSA/UAE and the other gulfies going at it like children lobbing missiles across a narrow stretch of waterway that transports 21% of the global oil supply??  If you want a global economic meltdown, this would be the way to do it.  

Given that the US is much more energy independant and self-sufficient than we were the last time these shenanigans were occuring - our dog in the fight is considerably less now.  BUT.... a spike in world oil prices would most absolutely affect us and the west very hard.  The flip side of that coin of shutting down the Straight of Whore-mooze is that it would affect asia even more, especially the Chinese.  <shrug>  Maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing after all.  

So anyway, the point of this admittedly long-winded post is that maybe it is in the US and the West best interests to make a statement to the Iranians to knock this shit off.  Or Not.  As I said before, I have zero love for the saudis.  Probably negative Love if that's possible.  

Take shitstain out of the equation for a moment (if your TDS will allow).  Pretend Obama was still Preznit.   Or Hillary or Warren or Biden or whoever is the new king.  I wonder...... what would you then advocate for if the same stuff was going on and you had proof the Iranians were behind this and other attacks?  Shrug and say "not our job"?  Dunno.  I'm certainly not strongly for or against any possible COA.  It's an interesting thought exercise in what could happen either way.  

@Mark K, what's your take on this?

 

If the guys manning the batteries are losers from the academy, what do they say about the guy who manages the video-game players?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Movable Ballast said:

Oh my god what a stupid thing to say... A false flag to take out half of SAs oil producing capability? Yeah sure... 

Just when you think the lunatic fringe has an end they surprise you again... 

Would not surprise me, but for sure those who had advanced knowledge will be making a ton of dough by betting against the Saudi stock market and oil prices going through the roof and of course US weapons manufacturers will be dancing on the rooftops! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

It's always a messenger attack with you, isn't it?  If the subject matter is too difficult for you to handle, please feel free to just let the adults talk and you just sit back and watch and try to learn something.  

Just saying.

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ishmael said:

I won't come in your mouth.

 

 

Oops, wrong thread.

But I will just put the head in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dorydude said:

Have you been drinking the Kool Aid again?

 

Have a look at the "damage".

 

800.jpeg

 

These tanks were empty and clean....no fires or explosion. Perhaps decommissioned?

 

EEiMQymXUAI2RTr.jpg

 

Not much refinery fire here.

So you think the same people who would trash the WTC buildings would hesitate to do this?

Do you remember where all the 9/11 hijackers came from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump appears to be walking back the "locked and loaded" tweet, and Pompous appears to have been told to STFU.

I suspect that Trump's bolshie attitude did not survive the first JCOS briefing :

"Yes, Mr. President, we can bomb Iranian refineries.

No Sir, we can not stop Iran from obliterating the Saudi refineries in retaliation.

That's correct, Mr. President, the total cessation of all ME oil supply into the foreseeable future.

Yes, Mr. President, the world's economy would indeed be, as you say, f**ked."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

So..... being serious for a moment here.  I'm of mixed feelings on this issue.  Don't take any of the following as advocacy for a particular COA (although of course the usual cunts will do that anyway).

From a purely selfish perspective, I hope there is no shootin' war with Iran - for at least another week anyway.  The first race of the season is next weekend and then I'm back in the US for a month.  Dubai is a nice juicy target for cruise missiles and I don't have a ton of confidence in the local guys manning the patriot missile batteries.  They were the bottom of the class at the academy who couldn't make it as pilots.  If they want to blow each other up, at least wait until Oct.  But I digress....

I tend to believe the Houthis when they say they are responsible for the attacks.  However, no way in flipping hell did they do this w/o Iran's technical help and specific greenlight/direction.  And.... For the very reason that the Houthis claimed responsibility tells me it was absolutely NOT a false flag op.  Why would they do that otherwise?

This is IMHO a continuation of Iran's growing desperation about being squeezed on sanctions, particularly on their inability to sell oil on the world market.  This post is not about the right or wrong of those sanctions.  It is what it is at this point.  I think Iran is making a calculus that they can stick their toe over the line and poke the bear hoping to be just annoying enough that we have to talk to them.  They are certainly walking a tightrope.  

And this is a pattern of attempts to walk that tightrope with the theme of disrupting the global oil supply as a tit for tat that their ability to sell oil themselves has been cut off.  For the sake of this discussion, let's stipulate that it IS the Iranians doing this latest attack and the previous attacks on the oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.  If we accept that, then what?

I, like most of you, think that we should not get involved in a war or even a skirmish at the behest of KSA or MBS.  Fuck them, let them fight their own war if they want to smack down Iran.  The reality is that, despite all the good hardware they have, I believe Iran would put a good thump on them if they went toe to toe and they had no help from us.  BUT...... let's look at the bigger picture of what a conflict like that might look like.  Do we really want Iran and KSA/UAE and the other gulfies going at it like children lobbing missiles across a narrow stretch of waterway that transports 21% of the global oil supply??  If you want a global economic meltdown, this would be the way to do it.  

Given that the US is much more energy independant and self-sufficient than we were the last time these shenanigans were occuring - our dog in the fight is considerably less now.  BUT.... a spike in world oil prices would most absolutely affect us and the west very hard.  The flip side of that coin of shutting down the Straight of Whore-mooze is that it would affect asia even more, especially the Chinese.  <shrug>  Maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing after all.  

So anyway, the point of this admittedly long-winded post is that maybe it is in the US and the West best interests to make a statement to the Iranians to knock this shit off.  Or Not.  As I said before, I have zero love for the saudis.  Probably negative Love if that's possible.  

Take shitstain out of the equation for a moment (if your TDS will allow).  Pretend Obama was still Preznit.   Or Hillary or Warren or Biden or whoever is the new king.  I wonder...... what would you then advocate for if the same stuff was going on and you had proof the Iranians were behind this and other attacks?  Shrug and say "not our job"?  Dunno.  I'm certainly not strongly for or against any possible COA.  It's an interesting thought exercise in what could happen either way.  

@Mark K, what's your take on this?

 

In all honesty Senator Clinton would have avoided the situation by not destroying the Iranian nuclear deal.   If she faced this scenario she would have enjoyed the manly feeling of  her new war.   President Obama never could say no to a good drone attack but he did avoid this mess with his deal.     Trump, the great student of history, decided sanctions worked so well to hobble Japanese aggression that we should make sure Iran is similarly desperate.    Unlike August 1941, Iran was willing to agree to a period of good behavior and hadn’t invaded anybody for decades.    They were no more aggressive then the US with our drone attacks and Iraqi invasion,    How would Trump react if Iran invaded his hated Mexico and tried to stop the drug dealers?    Obviously the US military dominance over the rest of the gulf is much greater then our relative military strength of 1941.    In 1941 a war could be expected to last long enough for us to completely outbuild Japan with new ships.   Japan took the gamble knowing their military would be unable to act in such a manner after a year of sanctions.   It was was December or never.   This time America ruined Iran’s economy and yanked hope away at the moment of peace.   Trump forced Iran onto the edge of the cliff.   Will they jump off, or jump at their enemy even knowing they will be shot?   They have proven they can scratch and claw and we cannot shoot fast enough to stop them all.  We have proven they are screwed either way.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Is that slang for cunnilingus?  

No but "Pulled Pork" is slang for........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so who did it?

Iran probably not, too much to lose nothing to gain

Yemen , probably not ,don't have the tech

Isreal maybe , some to gain if US goes after Iran

Saudi's lots to gain , price of oil goes up, US spents trillions fighting another fake war

Trump another distraction on his bid to win 2020, he's buddies make lots of money,

where's Bolton Now? he probably planned it then got canned

Exxon , we have a winner, they benefit the most , high oil prices, more greed, Trumps runs to their side , throwing tax ( petro ) dollars at them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Take shitstain out of the equation for a moment (if your TDS will allow).  Pretend Obama was still Preznit.   Or Hillary or Warren or Biden or whoever is the new king.  I wonder...... what would you then advocate for if the same stuff was going on and you had proof the Iranians were behind this and other attacks?  Shrug and say "not our job"?  Dunno.  I'm certainly not strongly for or against any possible COA.  It's an interesting thought exercise in what could happen either way.  

Take Shitsain out of the equation?

So we wouldn't have been sucking MBS dick for 2+ years?

Wouldn't have been sabre rattling against Iran?

Wouldn't have trashed the Iran deal?

 

"today in Jeffreaux's adult world we play pretend".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take Shitstain out of the equation and you just try and disprove my Obama counterfactual. As I thought, a bunch of liberal TDS. Just sayin'.

Seriously Jeff, just stick to the facts on the ground.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, garuda3 said:

ok so who did it?

Iran probably not, too much to lose nothing to gain

Yemen , probably not ,don't have the tech

Isreal maybe , some to gain if US goes after Iran

Saudi's lots to gain , price of oil goes up, US spents trillions fighting another fake war

Trump another distraction on his bid to win 2020, he's buddies make lots of money,

where's Bolton Now? he probably planned it then got canned

Exxon , we have a winner, they benefit the most , high oil prices, more greed, Trumps runs to their side , throwing tax ( petro ) dollars at them

The Yemeni Houthi's admitted to doing it and they get their tech from Iran. Yemen is a proxy war which started as a 3 sided civil war, the govmint, the rebels and AQ. Iran backs the rebels and the USA subsidiary of KSA backs the govmint. KSA also backs AQ but you're not supposed to know that. You following this? Anyways, Iran is bad because they overthrew our nabob and then beat the crap out of our good friend (at the time) Saddam when he invaded. Seriously, Iran is that bad. They're actually worse than that. There was that civilian airliner we shot down in their airspace which was totally their fault. Really bad hombres.

If you question our defending the homeland of the 9/11 hijackers, it is because you lack patriotism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/16/2019 at 8:44 AM, MakePHRFGreatAgain said:

Trump has already tweeted he will discuss with SA and they will decide  how 'WE' respond 

That bastard's been hanging around in here?   Who let him in???? 
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two different issues:

1. Anyone other than Trump would not have made this mess.

2. If you disagree with #1, you still have to admit SA has a gigantic problem. The 9-11-01 actual facts have permeated America slowly but surely and that, combined with the bone saw thing, have convinced pretty much everyone in the USA other than those with business interests in Saudi that the Kingdom can rot in hell and get blown up daily and twice on Sundays for all anyone cares. The ONLY thing the average American would care about if the entire place blew up is high gas prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Two different issues:

1. Anyone other than Trump would not have made this mess.

Did trump bomb the SA refinery?

What about the war in Yemen, when did that start anyways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

1. Anyone other than Trump would not have made this mess.

W's boss Cheney would have made such a mess in a heartbeat. In fact, he made worse messes. I can't think of anything W didn't mess up under Cheney's adult supervision. W was the Major Major Major Major of foreign policy. If any elk are reading, floor's yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Olsonist said:

First, the KSA has all of the money and a shit ton of F15s. Tell them to hire Jeff. They're already bombing Yemen which is where the Houthis who admitted to sending the drones live. Moreover there is that whole 9/11 thing where they sent a bunch of Saudi hijackers who rammed some planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and then we retaliated for that by attacking Iraq. Yeah, there is that.

Fuck the KSA. Let them sort this out.

It's rare - but I enjoy it when it happens.We agree completely on this O.

If the KSA isn't leading the response to this?  It's because they don't *want* to - not because they aren't capable.  The House of Saud isn't a "friend" to the rest of the world - they behave like Trump and his type: Saying whatever they think their immediate audience wants to hear to get them the quick "win", with no compunction whatsoever about screwing that audience once they've gotten what they wanted.   Fuck 'em indeed. 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Take Shitstain out of the equation and you just try and disprove my Obama counterfactual. As I thought, a bunch of liberal TDS. Just sayin'.

Seriously Jeff, just stick to the facts on the ground.

So - "sticking to the facts on the ground" implies going back to the formation of the Iranian oil industry.   Any consideration of an appropriate response now must be made in consideration of that history, not just recent events.  That all said - I haven't heard anyone offer what they'd consider to be a rational response, and what they project the outcome of that response to be.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

So - "sticking to the facts on the ground" implies going back to the formation of the Iranian oil industry.   Any consideration of an appropriate response now must be made in consideration of that history, not just recent events.  That all said - I haven't heard anyone offer what they'd consider to be a rational response, and what they project the outcome of that response to be.   

There is no rational response from the US... 

KSA needs to drive the response not us... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, garuda3 said:

ok so who did it?

Iran probably not, too much to lose nothing to gain

Yemen...

Iran, because they have much old infrastructure they would like bombed to rubble and then rebuilt like Iraq and Afghanistan got from Bush/Cheney. No?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Movable Ballast said:

There is no rational response from the US... 

KSA needs to drive the response not us... 

I won't disagree, sir - but, "if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice" ( done a few octaves below Geddy Lee, of course).   So - if that's the course you espouse, what do you see as the logical/probably outcome of that course?  What's the worst case that you can imagine as well? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

That bastard's been hanging around in here?   Who let him in???? 
 

he wouldn;t last 5 minutes n here 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, garuda3 said:

ok so who did it?

Iran probably not, too much to lose nothing to gain

Yemen , probably not ,don't have the tech

Isreal maybe , some to gain if US goes after Iran

Saudi's lots to gain , price of oil goes up, US spents trillions fighting another fake war

Trump another distraction on his bid to win 2020, he's buddies make lots of money,

where's Bolton Now? he probably planned it then got canned

Exxon , we have a winner, they benefit the most , high oil prices, more greed, Trumps runs to their side , throwing tax ( petro ) dollars at them

If yer gonna list false flag motives, then Qatar would be right up there. I don't know the status of the blockade, but it was ugly for Qatar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I won't disagree, sir - but, "if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice" ( done a few octaves below Geddy Lee, of course).   So - if that's the course you espouse, what do you see as the logical/probably outcome of that course?  What's the worst case that you can imagine as well? 

 

Awesome reference!

If left to the KSA they will may respond in a huge loss of life to the Iranian people (bomb a city perhaps). Something like this could get really ugly really fast. 

At this stage neither of these guys are our friends and we don't buy (or don't need to buy) much oil from them. Europe on the other hand buys a shit load of it. Maybe they they should be the ones doing the hard lifting on this one and we stay out of it. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Movable Ballast said:

Awesome reference!

If left to the KSA they will may respond in a huge loss of life to the Iranian people (bomb a city perhaps). Something like this could get really ugly really fast. 

At this stage neither of these guys are our friends and we don't buy (or don't need to buy) much oil from them. Europe on the other hand buys a shit load of it. Maybe they they should be the ones doing the hard lifting on this one and we stay out of it. 

I really think that MOST of the non-gulf states oughta stay out of it - this has been coming for a long while.  IMHO - if the Supreme Leader's influence in Iran were substantially diminished, and the influence of the KSA were normalized, the combination of those two things might be the best thing to happen in the region and in the world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I really think that MOST of the non-gulf states oughta stay out of it - this has been coming for a long while.  IMHO - if the Supreme Leader's influence in Iran were substantially diminished, and the influence of the KSA were normalized, the combination of those two things might be the best thing to happen in the region and in the world. 

The loss of life would be staggering... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Movable Ballast said:

Awesome reference!

If left to the KSA they will may respond in a huge loss of life to the Iranian people (bomb a city perhaps). Something like this could get really ugly really fast. 

At this stage neither of these guys are our friends and we don't buy (or don't need to buy) much oil from them. Europe on the other hand buys a shit load of it. Maybe they they should be the ones doing the hard lifting on this one and we stay out of it. 

 

 

Maybe the main Europian countries, UK not included, are lead by functioning adults and realize that this is  SA's problem and are quite happy to stay out of, unlike Trump who is so clueless he has no idea what day it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

The Saudi’s just hate spending their money and besides Donnie owes them big time.

I see a US sponsored drone in in someone’s future.

 

7913B0AA-F686-4F65-9520-91B200BEA0C9.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Movable Ballast said:

The loss of life would be staggering... 

 

I could see that as a possible outcome - but, I think that the more likely outcome is that neither nation would want to engage w/out a "western devil" advocate upon whom they could blame all the ills their population would endure.   I'm not an expert on feelings in the region, but, I've spent enough time there to have a passing understanding of how the various folks generally think, and think that the *people* are aware of and are tired of being used as pawns by their clerical and national "leaders".   That said, most regular folks see no way beyond that - but, are smart enough and self-aware enough to recognize and embrace such an opportunity should it present itself.  That opportunity would *have* to come from within - and not from well meaning interlopers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Saudis always want to fight Iran down to the last American" - SecDef Robert Gates, 2010

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

I could see that as a possible outcome - but, I think that the more likely outcome is that neither nation would want to engage w/out a "western devil" advocate upon whom they could blame all the ills their population would endure.   I'm not an expert on feelings in the region, but, I've spent enough time there to have a passing understanding of how the various folks generally think, and think that the *people* are aware of and are tired of being used as pawns by their clerical and national "leaders".   That said, most regular folks see no way beyond that - but, are smart enough and self-aware enough to recognize and embrace such an opportunity should it present itself.  That opportunity would *have* to come from within - and not from well meaning interlopers. 

Then we should not engage. 

This will be interesting to see how Trump responds. I don't think he wants anything to do with it. His tone has been very measured in the passed few days. Kinda glad Bolton's gone...  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those 2 have been waging a pretty hot proxy war since Saddam invaded Iran. The tide has turned against the Arabs with a hot war right next door. Now it’s on SA proper. Will SA retaliate on Iran proper? Maybe smack a terminal? The US getting involved would be Bush-league folly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Movable Ballast said:

Then we should not engage. 

This will be interesting to see how Trump responds. I don't think he wants anything to do with it. His tone has been very measured in the passed few days. Kinda glad Bolton's gone...  

Bolton’s out, but what does Hannity say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

So - "sticking to the facts on the ground" implies going back to the formation of the Iranian oil industry.   Any consideration of an appropriate response now must be made in consideration of that history, not just recent events.  That all said - I haven't heard anyone offer what they'd consider to be a rational response, and what they project the outcome of that response to be.   

Iran nationalized their oil. Egypt nationalized their oil. Venezuela nationalized their oil. Mexico nationalized their oil. Saudi Arabia nationalized their oil. Russia nationalized their oil. Indonesia nationalized their oil.

Still, I see your point and Britain should really do something about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Movable Ballast said:

no idea. don't watch the guy.

I think we should. He seems to be Trump's last remaining advisor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Raz'r said:

I think we should. He seems to be Trump's last remaining advisor.

maybe...

Of the conservative commentators I do listen to/read, nooobody wants anything to do with this. Look at this forum, for the first time in a long time all the conservatives and liberals on this page are in total agreement. Doesn't happen often... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Iran nationalized their oil. Egypt nationalized their oil. Venezuela nationalized their oil. Mexico nationalized their oil. Saudi Arabia nationalized their oil. Russia nationalized their oil. Indonesia nationalized their oil.

Still, I see your point and Britain should really do something about that.

Color me dense, but, I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting, beyond that Churchill and the Anglo-Iranian oil company should've honored the agreements they made w/Iran starting in the 19-teens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I give it a day until the new Republican talking points come out, then you'll be all aboard the war train. It's how the Trump admins gone down. The initial reaction from conservatives is "this is a dumb fucking idea" and then y'all get back aboard the Trump Train.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Color me dense, but, I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting, beyond that Churchill and the Anglo-Iranian oil company should've honored the agreements they made w/Iran starting in the 19-teens. 

I'm suggesting we just leave Iran be. I could give you a litany of things we've done wrong to Iran, I have before, and still Iran wants respectful relations. Instead, we're a low subsidiary to KSA. That just sucks.

When I lived in VA, I'd go over the Teddy Roosevelt Bridge (?) past the Watergate Hotel into DC proper. Now you drive past the Saudi Embassy reminding you just who runs Bartertown. That just sucks.

image.png.e9365488a1a469c7e9f25a18761b3d4c.png

Saudis financed and flew the planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. And for that and for them, we invaded Iraq. Fuck the KSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O - thanks for the explanation.  We agree on this - but, I'm still interested in hearing what folks who seem to care think the appropriate response to all this would be, and how they see that playing out.  "Appropriate Response isn't constrained in my question to be only the  "appropriate US response".  

As to "Iran wanting respectful relations" - I would argue that that perspective is situational, and also dependent upon which part of the Iranian leadership we're discussing.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites