Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Anyway, back to Iran.

I speculate that a reason why Bolt-on and Pompous are in the administration is because Trump figured they would eagerly back his Iran plans. Which makes Trump backing-down even more unusual. Someone must have made him see the light.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Trump was pretty clear when he was campaigning that Iran was the exception to his non-interventionist policy. (Not that Trump has made much success of troop withdrawal and non-intervention anyway.) Even Michael Flynn was pretty hot against Iran. Flynn was also pro-Erdogan.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

"I never called the strike against Iran “BACK,” as people are incorrectly reporting, I just stopped it from going forward at this time!" Trump tweeted.

The White House did not immediately return a request for clarification on the president's tweet.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

"I never called the strike against Iran “BACK,” as people are incorrectly reporting, I just stopped it from going forward at this time!" Trump tweeted.

The White House did not immediately return a request for clarification on the president's tweet.

---

Seems pretty clear to me. What is to clarify?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Trump was pretty clear when he was campaigning that Iran was the exception to his non-interventionist policy. (Not that Trump has made much success of troop withdrawal and non-intervention anyway.) Even Michael Flynn was pretty hot against Iran. Flynn was also pro-Erdogan.

Russia isn't really keen on a mideast conflagration. I keep reading that Russia and Iran have very different ideas on what they want the Mideast to look like, and Iran has in reality made good progress in completing the Shia Crescent by supporting Iraq, Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. So there is good reason to try and thwart Iran's ambitions, and the current leaders of Iran may be just Trump-like enough to use "maximum pressure" themselves against Trump. Which, again, makes it all the more strange that Trump backed down.

I think what Russia has proposed to Iran is that they'll get around the sanctions by facilitating Iran's oil trade with Russia and with China, in an oil-for-goods deal that will blunt the sanctions worst effects. I don't know if that's good enough for Iran, or if the Iranian leadership really wants to bloody Trump's nose.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Apparently, 6ix, you have never pointed a gun at someone who is also armed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Apparently, 6ix, you have never pointed a gun at someone who is also armed.

---

Nope. Can't say that I have.

Armed or otherwise.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Trump was pretty clear when he was campaigning that Iran was the exception to his non-interventionist policy. (Not that Trump has made much success of troop withdrawal and non-intervention anyway.) Even Michael Flynn was pretty hot against Iran. Flynn was also pro-Erdogan.

Russia isn't really keen on a mideast conflagration. I keep reading that Russia and Iran have very different ideas on what they want the Mideast to look like, and Iran has in reality made good progress in completing the Shia Crescent by supporting Iraq, Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. So there is good reason to try and thwart Iran's ambitions, and the current leaders of Iran may be just Trump-like enough to use "maximum pressure" themselves against Trump. Which, again, makes it all the more strange that Trump backed down.

I think what Russia has proposed to Iran is that they'll get around the sanctions by facilitating Iran's oil trade with Russia and with China, in an oil-for-goods deal that will blunt the sanctions worst effects. I don't know if that's good enough for Iran, or if the Iranian leadership really wants to bloody Trump's nose.- SIGNY

I have yet to hear a single reason for why getting into a war with Iran is a good idea, or necessary. For why? I have not heard a single good idea, not even a bad idea - no motivation for it. Did Bolton have an Iranian neighbor that played their music too loud? "We need the oil." Nothing, not a single reason, not even a decent lie.
Let us know if you have a guess. - CC

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Apparently, 6ix, you have never pointed a gun at someone who is also armed.

---

Nope. Can't say that I have.

Armed or otherwise.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Back in 1988, Ronald Reagan's Navy killed 290 people on Iran Air Flight 655. The Iranians have not forgotten, even if you and Trump never knew it happened. The Iranians have not forgotten that Trump pulled out of a nuclear treaty with Iran, while all the other countries that signed it did not. Today, Sunday, Trump is talking about some kind of economic deal with Iran. Iran can't trust him to keep his word on that or anything else. They aren't going to turn around for him so that he can shoot them in the back. Trump has managed to make it impossible for American diplomats, or the next President, to negotiate with Iran for many more years. And it is all because Trump hates Obama and the Iran nuclear treaty Obama signed. Trump wants his own version of that treaty, but he is not gonna get it now or ever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework
www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-iran-usa/iran-warns-of-risk-of-conf
lict-trump-sees-scope-for-deal-idUSKCN1TO0DX

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
Iran can't trust him to keep his word on that or anything else. They aren't going to turn around for him so that he can shoot them in the back. Trump has managed to make it impossible for American diplomats, or the next President, to negotiate with Iran for many more years.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I have always been glad that hubbs left the service before he would've been sent overseas. Didn't stick it out.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Anyway, the point is that Saudi Arabia needs $80/bbl oil to balance its budget, and Saudi Arabia is THE petrodollar mainstay. And since every nation needs USA (dollars) to buy oil (so far), that holds up the dollar's value, because it's not "just" a fiat currency, it's backed by oil.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
"You can't do a damn thing about war and you know it."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:


When I went to college, local landlords charged EXORBITANT rents because they knew they had a captive market. Which is why there was that truism of college students living in living rooms, porches, and unfinished attics and basements. Do they not do that anymore? There's also that portrayal of starving students eating Raman endlessly. In my day, a crap ton of powdered milk with a little bit of sugar mixed into whole milk was a (fairly) nutritious cheap meal for the whole day. Do students not know how to feed themselves for cheap anymore?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
You can't even quote YOURSELF correctly. How stupid is that?Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
"You can't do a damn thing about war and you know it."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
War with Iran, okay, sure. There's not much else on tv worth watching now except for maybe the ladies' FIFA World Cup which has had a few exciting moments, like the O.T. Penalty Kick win for Norway over Australia yesterday.

---

Quote:

---

I must have touched a nerve with the "You can't do a damn thing about war and you know it." Really undermines your agenda as fear-mongers, doesn't it??
Take your war crap 'n shove it, it ain't working here no more.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
War with Iran, okay, sure. There's not much else on tv worth watching now except for maybe the ladies' FIFA World Cup which has had a few exciting moments, like the O.T. Penalty Kick win for Norway over Australia yesterday.

---

That was awesome. People who say penalty shootouts are boring or just luck, have no idea what it would be like to have to take that walk from the midfield to the penalty spot with 750 million plus people watching around the world - not to mention your teammates 50 feet away. You only have to see how Aussie's star player totally choked on her penalty kick attempt to know it's more than luck.

---

Quote:

---

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/072915/how-petrodollars-af
fect-us-dollar.asp

After the collapse of the Bretton Woods gold standard in the early 1970s, the United States struck a deal with Saudi Arabia to standardize oil prices in dollar terms. Through this deal, the petrodollar system was born, along with a paradigm shift away from pegged exchanged rates and gold-backed currencies to non-backed, floating rate regimes.

Through this framework of economic cooperation and, more importantly, petrodollar recycling, the U.S. managed to influence Saudi Arabia to persuade the other members of Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to standardize the sale of oil in dollars. In return for invoicing oil in dollar denominations, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states secured U.S. influence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict along with U.S. military assistance during an increasingly worrisome political climate that saw the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the fall of the Iranian Shah and the Iran-Iraq War. Out of this mutually beneficial agreement, the petrodollar system was born.

The petrodollar system elevated the U.S. dollar to the world's reserve currency and, through this status, the United States enjoys persistent trade deficits and is a global economic hegemony. The petrodollar system also provides the United States’ financial markets with a source of liquidity and foreign capital inflows through petrodollar "recycling." However, an explanation of the effects of petrodollars on the U.S. dollar requires a brief synopsis of the history of the petrodollar.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
"You can't do a damn thing about war and you know it."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
You can't even quote YOURSELF correctly. How stupid is that?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
It wasn't SUPPOSED to be a direct quote, you dumb ass.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I don't really look at a candidate's ideas about war because **IF** war happens nothing I say or do will matter a damn.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yanno, secretly prowar but too much of a coward to take a position.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
You mean you can't defend your original argument, so you have to change it? How stupid is that?

Do you not know what 'planning ahead' means?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
we definitely aren't starting wars

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I boiled my position down so that even YOU could get it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I don't really look at a candidate's ideas about war because **IF** war happens nothing I say or do will matter a damn.

---

Quote:

---

I boiled my position down so that even YOU could get it.

---

Quote:

---

You idiots keep thinking you can avoid wars based on candidates positions in PEACETIME???

---

Quote:

---

How stupid do you have to be to not understand that people's reactions to aggressors are incalculable????

---

Quote:

---

NO ONE knows how they will react to ANYTHING, let alone large scale violence and terrorism.

---

Quote:

---

There is not a single candidate who would NOT recommend retaliatory action. Even if they SAY they probably wouldn't- THEY PROBABLY WOULD....Because....PEOPLE.

---

Quote:

---

You two are just pointless harpies, emotionally masturbating to the word WAR so you can feel important.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

What do you call Afghanistan, a place that had nothing to do with 9/11? What do you call Iraq, a place that didn't pose a threat to us at all, let alone attack us 'first'. What do you call Libya? Or Syria?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:


You idiots keep thinking you can avoid wars based on candidates positions in PEACETIME??? Wait! Wha..?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
we definitely aren't starting wars

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Trump was pretty clear when he was campaigning that Iran was the exception to his non-interventionist policy. (Not that Trump has made much success of troop withdrawal and non-intervention anyway.) Even Michael Flynn was pretty hot against Iran. Flynn was also pro-Erdogan.

Russia isn't really keen on a mideast conflagration. I keep reading that Russia and Iran have very different ideas on what they want the Mideast to look like, and Iran has in reality made good progress in completing the Shia Crescent by supporting Iraq, Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. So there is good reason to try and thwart Iran's ambitions, and the current leaders of Iran may be just Trump-like enough to use "maximum pressure" themselves against Trump. Which, again, makes it all the more strange that Trump backed down.

I think what Russia has proposed to Iran is that they'll get around the sanctions by facilitating Iran's oil trade with Russia and with China, in an oil-for-goods deal that will blunt the sanctions worst effects. I don't know if that's good enough for Iran, or if the Iranian leadership really wants to bloody Trump's nose.

---

I have yet to hear a single reason for why getting into a war with Iran is a good idea, or necessary. For why? I have not heard a single good idea, not even a bad idea - no motivation for it. Did Bolton have an Iranian neighbor that played their music too loud? "We need the oil." Nothing, not a single reason, not even a decent lie.
Let us know if you have a guess.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Second. You are rich. YOU are the enemy of the people.

You had better start building that panic room and digging that moat for your castle.

Things aren't getting any better and there are no indicators that show the only way for everybody to go is down.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

I am opposed to Trump's Iran War schemes because he is cowardly, ridiculous, and dithering.

6ix, I know all about the poor getting poorer and the Trumps getting richer, and I oppose everything Trump and the GOP are:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

---

Quote:

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
College in America for a majority of the kids who go there is just a way to enslave them to the system for the rest of their lives.

Funny how college debt is one of the few debts that don't get erased in a bankruptcy, innit?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

I for one am glad I went to college. But my degree(s) were in something useful which got me a good job, and I lived like a pauper rather than take on debt.

I've read that roughly a third of college students are food and housing insecure.

When I went to college, local landlords charged EXORBITANT rents because they knew they had a captive market. Which is why there was that truism of college students living in living rooms, porches, and unfinished attics and basements. Do they not do that anymore? There's also that portrayal of starving students eating Raman endlessly. In my day, a crap ton of powdered milk with a little bit of sugar mixed into whole milk was a (fairly) nutritious cheap meal for the whole day. Do students not know how to feed themselves for cheap anymore?

I'd very much like to look into the nit-picky specific details of student poverty today, and student debt today. I wonder how much is due to assumptions being made about luxuries being treated as necessities. Because people I've seen who go to college seem to expect a lifestyle that includes single-bedroom apartments, nice cars, I-phones, and a good supply of new clothes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I have always been glad that hubbs left the service before he would've been sent overseas.

---

Didn't stick it out.

Quote:

---

He tried to go for a degree in Criminal Justice and hated it

---

It was too hard.

Quote:

---

and there was some weird snafu with paperwork

---

He got disorganized and confused.

Quote:

---

so he ended up going for a tech degree.

---

He spent money on something he didn't pursue.

Quote:

---

I think he would have washed out of police work after a while

---

They would have kicked him out.

Quote:

---

He wanted to drive trains, but you don't make enough to support a family on that here, and with the "sitting down narcolepsy" ( can no longer drive for more than an hour at a time without passing out) he has we are ALL much better off that he didn't...

---

They might not have accepted him.

Quote:

---

I wanted to be a surgical tech

---

I never even tried because I was too much of a slacker and probably would have failed..

Quote:

---

That, and the focusing that hard for hours on end. I could have in high school, but these days I drift too much...

---

Because I have no discipline.

Quote:

---

I'm really glad that I didn't go for college

---

I probably would have failed.

Quote:

---

and change careers three times like the rest of my family...

---

I have no career at all. Or even a job.

Quote:

---

that are in debt up to their eyeballs and will be until the day they die...

---

As are we, but at least I don't have a job to go with the debt.

Quote:

---

Nice how you really have no control how your life ends up where it does, isn't it?

---

Yes, that's how I explain to myself how I ended up here.

And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?
tic tac

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Fired For Effect. All on target.

---

Quote:

---

https://www.facebook.com/NationandStatedotcom/posts/2390674057645599 (original source - multiple websites reprinted the article)

As We Face Armageddon, Paul Craig Roberts Warns The Western World Is Leaderless

According to news reports, the validity of which cannot be ascertained by the general public, a crazed US government came within 10 minutes of igniting a general conflagration in the Middle East, the consequences of which could have been catastrophic for all.

The moronic warmongers in high office - Bolton, Pompeo, and Pence - and their Israel Lobby masters are determined, and they have not abandoned their campaign for war with Iran.

---

Quote:

---

Of course, the liars say that Iran will just accept its punishment for defending its territory and there will be no war. But this is not what Iran says. I believe Iran.

Some of the tiny percentage of people in the Western World who are still capable of thought regret that Trump called off the insane plan. They think the consequences would have been the destruction of the Saudi and Israeli governments—two of the most evil in history—and the cut-off of oil to the US and Europe, with the resulting depression causing the overthrow of the Western warmonger governments. They believe that catastrophic American defeat is the only way peace can be restored to the world.

In other words, it is not clear whether Trump calling off the attack saved us or doomed us. The Israel Lobby and their neoconservative agents have not been taught a lesson. Trump has not fired Bolton and Pompeo for almost igniting a conflagration, and he has not dressed down his moronic vice president. So, it can all happen again.

And likely will. The lesson that Bolton and Israel have learned is that the fake news about an Iranian attack on a Japanese freighter, denied by the Japanese ...

---

Quote:

---

... was not sufficient to lock Trump into “saving face” by attacking Iran. So be prepared for a larger orchestrated provocation. Bolton and Israel know that the Western presstitutes will lie for them. Watch for a provocation that allows Trump no alternative to an attack.

Washington’s use of fake news and false flag attacks to launch military attacks goes back a long way.

---

Quote:

---

In the 21st century we have had a concentrated dose — Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Assad’s use of chemical weapons, Iranian nukes, Russian invasions, Maduro starving his own people, the endless lies about Gaddafi. Yes, I know there are more. I am writing an article, not an encyclopedia.

Washington has grown accustomed to attacking countries on false pretenses and getting away with it.

---

Quote:

---

Therefore, there is nothing to discourage the Israel Lobby and its Washington puppets from continuing to set-up Iran for an attack. Success breeds incaution. The attack on Iraq was stage-managed by a credible US Secretary of State before the UN. The attack on Libya was stage-managed by a UN resolution that a deceived Russia and China failed to block. In situations such as these, Washington arranged a green light for its war crimes. However, Washington has failed to stage-manage a green light for an attack on Iran.

---

Quote:

---

Moreover, Iran is a more powerful military force than Iraq and Libya, and the extent of the depth of Russian and Chinese support for Iran is unknown to Washington.

If Israel succeeds in having its Washington puppet attack Iran, Israel and its neoconservative agents will not welcome failure of their objective. They will fight against failure with more dangerous moves. I can easily imagine the fanatics having Trump “save face” by destroying the world and issuing some kind of ultimatums to Russia and China or resorting to the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.

---

Quote:

---

The insouciant American - indeed, Western - people are kept unaware by design. It is the function of the presstitutes to control the explanations given to the people.

---

Quote:

---

The US Congress is bought and paid for by the Israel Lobby, as are most important politicians in the UK and Europe. What I am telling you is that it is very easy for fanatics to produce Armageddon.

---

Quote:

---

Stephen Cohen and I, and a few surviving others, lived through the 20th century Cold War. In recent years we both have reported on numerous occasions that the threat of nuclear war today is far higher than during the Cold War. One reason is that during the Cold War US and Soviet leaders worked to defuse tensions and to build trust. In contrast, since the Clinton regime the US has worked consistently to build tensions. Both Cohen and I have listed on many occasions the tension-building activities pursued by all post-Reagan/George H.W. Bush administrations.

The Russians no longer trust Washington, and neither do the Chinese.

---

Quote:

---

Washington has lied to, and about, Russia so often in the 21st century that Russian trust of Washington is exhausted. No matter how earnestly the Russian government wants to trust Washington, it dare not do so.

Therefore, it takes very little miscalculation for the morons in Washington to cause a threat-ending response from Russia as Washington has convinced the Russian government that the US intends to destroy them.

The orchestration of Russiagate by the Democratic Party, military/security complex, and their media whores has, as Stephen Cohen has emphasized, forced President Trump in an act of self-preservation to adopt the neoconservative attitude toward Russia and other “non-compliant” governments. This attitude is dangerous enough in the best of times. It is extremely dangerous after trust has been destroyed by YEARS of lies and false accusations.

Perhaps there is someone in the Trump administration who has the intelligence to understand the dangerous situation and who has Trump’s confidence. But I do not know who that person is.

We have to face the fact that as we face Armageddon the Western World is leaderless.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Fired For Effect. All on target.

---

I can't imagine you were ever ACTUALLY in the military...You are a fucking coward.
Don't mind coming in and reposting other people's shit because you are too stupid to come up with anything on your own.
You would have been shot by your own platoon

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

b) O'Bama sent a ship with $150 Billion in cash loaded on pallets to them.

In contrast to all of the above, Trump has been transparent about his strategy. He put the sanctions back on Iran. He hasn't given them one damn penny. And he's made it clear that although he doesn't want armed conflict, he's willing to do just that if necessary. That's what a President should do... be a strong leader. What O'Bama did was typical libtard limp-wristed appeasement.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Compared to Bronk O'Bama, Trump's handling of Iran is magnificent.

a) O'Bama lifted the sanctions that were effectively isolating and strangling Iran.

b) O'Bama sent a ship with $150 Billion in cash loaded on pallets to them.

---

Quote:

---

d) O'Bama tried to keep the details of his disastrous Iran deal a secret.


In contrast to all of the above, Trump has been transparent about his strategy. He put the sanctions back on Iran. He hasn't given them one damn penny. And he's made it clear that although he doesn't want armed conflict, he's willing to do just that if necessary. That's what a President should do... be a strong leader. What O'Bama did was typical libtard limp-wristed appeasement.

---

Quote:

---

The stabilization process is a form of partial distillation which sweetens "sour" crude oil (removes the hydrogen sulfide) and reduces vapor pressure, thereby making the crude oil safe for shipment in tankers. Stabilizers maximize production of valuable hydrocarbon liquids, while making the liquids safe for storage and transport, as well as reduce the atmospheric emissions of volatile hydrocarbons. Stabilizer plants are used to reduce the volatility of stored crude oil and condensate.

Soon after the attack U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo went into full 'blame Iran' mode:

Secretary Pompeo @SecPompeo - 21:59 UTC · Sep 14, 2019
Tehran is behind nearly 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia while Rouhani and Zarif pretend to engage in diplomacy. Amid all the calls for de-escalation, Iran has now launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply. There is no evidence the attacks came from Yemen.
We call on all nations to publicly and unequivocally condemn Iran’s attacks. The United States will work with our partners and allies to ensure that energy markets remain well supplied and Iran is held accountable for its aggression

Abqaiq lies at the heart of the Saudi oil infrastructure. It processes more than half of the Saudi oil output.

bigger

The U.S. government published two detailed pictures of the attack's result.

bigger

bigger

The pictures show some 17 points of impact. There are cars visible in the second more detailed picture that demonstrate the gigantic size of the place. The targets were carefully selected. At least 11 of those were egg shaped tanks with a diameter of some 30 meter (100 foot). These are likely tanks for pressurized (liquidized) gas that receive the condensate vapor from the stabilization process. They all have now quite neat holes in their upper shells.

The piping to and from the egg shaped tanks shows that these were configured in groups with double redundancy. Two tanks beside each other share one piping system. Two of such twin tanks are next to each other with lines to their processing train. There are a total of three such groups. Damage to any one tank or group would not stop the production process. The products would be routed to another similar tank or group. But with all tanks of this one special type taken out the production chain is now interrupted.

Two processing areas were hit and show fire damage. At least the control equipment of both was likely completely destroyed:

Consultancy Rapidan Energy Group said images of the Abqaiq facility after the attack showed about five of its stabilization towers appeared to have been destroyed, and would take months to rebuild - something that could curtail output for a prolonged period.

“However Saudi Aramco keeps some redundancy in the system to maintain production during maintenance,” Rapidan added, meaning operations could return to pre-attack levels sooner.

The targeting for this attack was done with detailed knowledge of the process and its dependencies.

The north arrow in those pictures points to the left. The visible shadows confirm the direction. The holes in the tanks are on the western side. They were attacked from the west.

The hits were extremely precise. The Yemeni armed forces claimed it attacked the facility with 10 drones (or cruise missiles). But the hits on these targets look like neither. A total of 17 hits with such precise targeting lets me assume that these were some kind of drones or missiles with man-in-the-loop control. They may have been launched from within Saudi Arabia.

There is no information yet on the damage in Khurais, the second target of the attacks.

The U.S. and Israel are able to commit such attacks. Iran probably too. Yemen seems unlikely to have this capability without drawing on extensive support from elsewhere. The planing for this operation must have taken months.

A Middle-East BBC producer remarks:

Riam Dalati @Dalatrm - 22:44 UTC · Sep 15, 2019
17 points of impact. No Drones or missiles were detected/intercepted. Saudis & Americans still at loss as to where the attack was launched from. #KSA seriously needs to shop elsewhere & replace the Patriot or reinforce it with a web of radar operated AA guns like the Oerlikon.
A source familiar with #Aramco situation told us earlier today that it was a “swarm attack”, a mix of > 20 drones and missiles, at least half of which were "suicide" drones. #USA & #KSA, he said, are 'certain' that attack was launched from #Iraq but 'smoking gun still missing'
They are also 'fairly certain' that #IRGC was behind the operation because, even though the missiles used were identical to those of the #Houthis, an inspection of the debris found in the desert revealed a 'couple of new updates' and a 'distinctly better craftsmanship'

The Wall Street Journal reports of the damage:

The strikes knocked out 5.7 million barrels of daily production, and the officials said they still believe they can fully replace it in coming days. That would require tapping oil inventories and using other facilities to process crude. One of the main targets of the attack was a large crude-processing plant in Abqaiq.
...
“It is definitely worse than what we expected in the early hours after the attack, but we are making sure that the market won’t experience any shortages until we’re fully back online,” said a Saudi official.
...
Even if Saudi officials were successful in restoring all or most of the lost production, the attack demonstrates a new vulnerability to supply lines across the oil-rich Gulf.

Tankers have been paying sharply higher insurance premiums, while shipping rates have soared in the region after a series of maritime attacks on oil-laden vessels, which the U.S. has blamed on Iran.
...
Khurais produces about 1.5 million barrels a day and Abqaiq, the world’s biggest crude-stabilization facility, processes seven million barrels of Saudi oil a day, turning crude into specific grades, such as Arabian Extra Light.

The repairs at Abqaiq will likely take weeks, not days. Brent crude futures rose by 19.5 percent to $71.95 per barrel, the biggest jump since 14 January, 1991:

Aramco gave no timeline for output resumption. A source close to the matter told Reuters the return to full oil capacity could take “weeks, not days”.

Riyadh said it would compensate for the damage at its facilities by drawing on its stocks, which stood at 188 million barrels in June, according to official data.

U.S. President Donald Trump was way more careful in attributing the strike than his Secretary of State.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump - 0:50 UTC · Sep 16, 2019
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!

Any direct attack on Iran would result in swarms of missiles hitting U.S. military installations in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Saudi water desalination plants, refineries and ports would also be targets.

It is doubtful that Trump or the Saudis are ready to risk such a response.

The attack on Abqaiq was not the last one and all Saudi installations are extremely vulnerable:

Yemen’s Houthi rebels said oil installations in Saudi Arabia remain among their targets after attacks against two major sites slashed the kingdom’s output by half and triggered a surge in crude prices.

The Iranian-backed rebel group, cited by the Houthi’s television station, said its weapons can reach anywhere in Saudi Arabia. Saturday’s attacks were carried out by “planes” using new engines, the group said, likely referring to drones.

Middle East Eye, a Qatari financed outlet, reported yesterday that the attack was launched from Iraq by Iran aligned forces in revenge for Israeli attacks in Syria. The author, David Hearst, is known for slandered reporting. The report is based on a single anonymous Iraqi intelligence source. Qatar, which is struggling with Saudi Arabia and the UAE over its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, would like to see a larger conflict involving its rivals east and west of the Persian Gulf. The report should therefore be disregarded.

Saudi Arabia has no defenses against this kind of attacks. The U.S. has no system that could be used for that purpose. Russia is the only country that can provide the necessary equipment. It would be extremely costly, and still insufficient, to protect all of the Saudi's vital facilities from similar swarm attacks.

Attacks of this kind will only end when Saudi Arabia makes peace with Yemen and when the U.S. ends its sanctions of oil exports from Iran. As Iran's President Rouhani said:

“If one day they want to prevent the export of Iran’s oil, then no oil will be exported from the Persian Gulf”

It is high time for hawks like Pompeo to recognize that Iran means what it says and has the tools to fulfill that promise.

---

Quote:

---

No where near an expert, but taking a look on Google Maps, the orientation of the holes on the tanks looks like an attack from the wrong side (ie it looks more likely it came from inside Saudi Arabia). A drone attack from the Iraq or Bahrain side would have travelled further and hit on the other side.

Given the level of precision, I wonder if the attack was launched much more locally - some short distance home-made drone that would fly over the fence with a maximum distance of about a mile from waste land outside the plant. The specific targeting on focused targets instead of indiscriminate scattered destruction would also suggest someone familiar with the plant, and a shorter distance attack flown by hand from nearby would require much less sophisticated equipment.

The photos of the plumes of smoke are also confusing. One is from somewhere outside the plant. And a second at the Haradh gas plant that is appearing in the media, is some 140 miles away from Abqaiq.

---

Quote:

---

Questions, Not Answers, Surround U.S. Push To War With Iran
Authored by Tom Luongo [NOT TYLER DURDEN],

When President Trump fired National Security Adviser John Bolton last week rational people the world over cheered.

When there was news that Trump would meet on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly in a few weeks there were sighs of relief.

When Benjamin Netanyahu goes to Moscow to get Vladimir Putin’s blessing to continue airstrikes in Syria was told no, the world said, “Finally! Enough is enough.”

The problem is that there were also very powerful people who were not happy about these things.

Moreover, there are a lot of nervous people out there worried that Tuesday’s election in Israel will not go the way they want it.

A lot of people have invested a lot of time and money in ensuring Netanyahu stays in power. And I don’t just mean Bibi himself, who will likely go to jail on corruption charges if he doesn’t win.

I mean a lot of people in the U.S., Saudi Arabia, the U.K. and in Europe, all of the places where anti-Russian, anti-Iranian and pro-Israeli sentiments abound.

And this brings up the main question I always have in the wake of one of these major escalations of tensions with the country currently catching the Twin Eyes of Sauron in D.C. and Tel Aviv.

Why do they always seem to occur right after moments of de-escalation and there’s the threat of peace breaking out somewhere?

Why is it that every time President Trump tries to push the U.S. and the world away from war within a few days there’s an incident which pushes us right back to the brink of it?

Trump visits Kim Jong-un in North Korea, making history, there are attacks on UAE oil tankers. Trump refuses to attack Iran over them shooting down a Global Hawk drone in Iranian airspace escorted by a fully-crewed Poseiden P-8.

Britain seizes the Grace 1 oil tanker. Israel attacks Shi’ite Militia targets outside of Baghdad.

Go back to President Trump first, and biggest, geopolitical blunder. The Syrian Army wins a major battle and is on the verge of victory, and a chemical weapons attack happens deep in Al-Qaeda controlled territory blamed on the SAA.

Trump then launches 57 tomahawks at the Al-Shairat airbase.

Trump declares we’re pulling out of Syria, Israel openly bombs targets deep in Syria. His staff, including John Bolton, freak out and walk it back.

The Houthis send a couple of drones at an Aramco facility far beyond their known capabilities and the UAE pulls out of the Saudi coalition in Yemen.

Moscow has had its fill of Netanyahu. He’s openly mocking Trump at international forums, first offering to sell the U.S. Russia’s hypersonic missiles at the G-20 and then offering to sell S-400 missile defense systems to the Saudis to protect their people from outside actors.

All with tongue firmly implanted in cheek.

Things look bad for the alliance between the U.S., Israel and Saudi Arabia, when your opponents are laughing at you openly. In that moment Putin exposed that the emperor truly was standing naked in front of the world.

And yet, after all of these coincidences I’m supposed to believe, without evidence again, that Iran would jeopardize its future at the very moment when everything is beginning to break their way and the U.S. maximum pressure campaign is failing?

The very fact that we have been shown zero proof of what happened more than 48 hours after the event which has every neocon in the U.S. clamoring for war is your biggest tell that there is something very off about this incident.

Even President Trump doesn’t believe this as he is taking the same tack rhetorically now that he did after the U.S. Global Hawk drone was shot down.

We’ve gone from:

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!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2019

To

“I don’t want to have war with anybody” but our military is prepared, Trump says at the White House, where he was meeting with Bahrain Crown Prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa. Furthermore, the president said the US is not looking at retaliatory options until he has “definitive proof” that Iran was responsible for attacks on Saudi Arabian oil facilities.

Still, Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that the US “is prepared” if the attacks warrant a response.

Also notably, when asked if he has promised to protect the Saudis, the president responded “No, I haven’t promised the Saudis that… We have to sit down with the Saudis and work something out.”

Moreover, the stunning lack of support from Europe and the rest of the world makes it incredibly suspect that the story that we’ve been told to date, just like with the Global Hawk drone, is anything close to the real one.

And it seems Trump may believe that as well.

In the end, as always, we should be asking the most salient question surrounding this attack.

Cui Bono? (Who Benefits?)

Because it certainly isn’t Iran.

But we know who. The bombs had barely hit their targets when AIPAC’s favorite son, Lindsay Graham, was out in full throat for war. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the world Iran was behind 100 strikes of this kind.

Not a shred of evidence. And Trump’s first response was to subordinate U.S. troops sworn to uphold the Constitution and defend the U.S. to the terrorist-funding, repressive regime in Saudi Arabia to do what, exactly?

The Saudis needs $80+ per barrel oil.

The U.S. frackers need $60+ and zero-bound interest rates to keep the red ink flowing just slow enough to get yield-starved pension funds to bite on the next round of unpayable loans.

Israel needs a strong alliance and U.S. presence in the Middle East lest it have to act like a normal country by respecting its borders and making nice with its neighbors now that it has been exposed as one of the chief architects and supporters of the project to turn Syria into a failed state run by Takfiri crazies and anyone else no one wants in their back yard.

But the biggest question of all in this is simple. How dumb do these people think we are?

We can read licence plates from space but we can’t tell where a swarm of missiles that hits one of the most strategically important piece of real estate in the entire world came from?

Seriously?

Whenever a major incident like this happens there’s always this ridiculous fog of war over what happened to obfuscate reality and blame the current enemy of the empire.

The truth is that the Houthis could have pulled this off with help from Iran and there’s little to stop it from happening again and again. They proved their point a few weeks ago.

The Saudis have lost in Yemen. They are now losing a helluva lot more than that.

Iran is serious about taking everyone’s ability to sell oil off the table if they are denied.

Why should anyone be surprised that the Houthis want to cripple Saudi Arabia for its disastrous war and Iran wouldn’t want to assist them in doing so?

Moreover, why isn’t their response justified given the blatant aggression against both?

When is someone in D.C. going to finally realize there is no winning play with Iran anymore?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Here is an exceptionally good article about the attack on the Saudi's main crude stabilization facility, I especially appreciated the detailed photos. You will have to go the article itself to get higher resolution.





Saturday's attack on the Saudi oil and gas processing station in Abqaiq hit its stabilization facility:

Quote:

---

The stabilization process is a form of partial distillation which sweetens "sour" crude oil (removes the hydrogen sulfide) and reduces vapor pressure, thereby making the crude oil safe for shipment in tankers. Stabilizers maximize production of valuable hydrocarbon liquids, while making the liquids safe for storage and transport, as well as reduce the atmospheric emissions of volatile hydrocarbons. Stabilizer plants are used to reduce the volatility of stored crude oil and condensate.

Soon after the attack U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo went into full 'blame Iran' mode:

Secretary Pompeo @SecPompeo - 21:59 UTC · Sep 14, 2019
Tehran is behind nearly 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia while Rouhani and Zarif pretend to engage in diplomacy. Amid all the calls for de-escalation, Iran has now launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply. There is no evidence the attacks came from Yemen.
We call on all nations to publicly and unequivocally condemn Iran’s attacks. The United States will work with our partners and allies to ensure that energy markets remain well supplied and Iran is held accountable for its aggression

Abqaiq lies at the heart of the Saudi oil infrastructure. It processes more than half of the Saudi oil output.

bigger

The U.S. government published two detailed pictures of the attack's result.

bigger

bigger

The pictures show some 17 points of impact. There are cars visible in the second more detailed picture that demonstrate the gigantic size of the place. The targets were carefully selected. At least 11 of those were egg shaped tanks with a diameter of some 30 meter (100 foot). These are likely tanks for pressurized (liquidized) gas that receive the condensate vapor from the stabilization process. They all have now quite neat holes in their upper shells.

The piping to and from the egg shaped tanks shows that these were configured in groups with double redundancy. Two tanks beside each other share one piping system. Two of such twin tanks are next to each other with lines to their processing train. There are a total of three such groups. Damage to any one tank or group would not stop the production process. The products would be routed to another similar tank or group. But with all tanks of this one special type taken out the production chain is now interrupted.

Two processing areas were hit and show fire damage. At least the control equipment of both was likely completely destroyed:

Consultancy Rapidan Energy Group said images of the Abqaiq facility after the attack showed about five of its stabilization towers appeared to have been destroyed, and would take months to rebuild - something that could curtail output for a prolonged period.

“However Saudi Aramco keeps some redundancy in the system to maintain production during maintenance,” Rapidan added, meaning operations could return to pre-attack levels sooner.

The targeting for this attack was done with detailed knowledge of the process and its dependencies.

The north arrow in those pictures points to the left. The visible shadows confirm the direction. The holes in the tanks are on the western side. They were attacked from the west.

The hits were extremely precise. The Yemeni armed forces claimed it attacked the facility with 10 drones (or cruise missiles). But the hits on these targets look like neither. A total of 17 hits with such precise targeting lets me assume that these were some kind of drones or missiles with man-in-the-loop control. They may have been launched from within Saudi Arabia.

There is no information yet on the damage in Khurais, the second target of the attacks.

The U.S. and Israel are able to commit such attacks. Iran probably too. Yemen seems unlikely to have this capability without drawing on extensive support from elsewhere. The planing for this operation must have taken months.

A Middle-East BBC producer remarks:

Riam Dalati @Dalatrm - 22:44 UTC · Sep 15, 2019
17 points of impact. No Drones or missiles were detected/intercepted. Saudis & Americans still at loss as to where the attack was launched from. #KSA seriously needs to shop elsewhere & replace the Patriot or reinforce it with a web of radar operated AA guns like the Oerlikon.
A source familiar with #Aramco situation told us earlier today that it was a “swarm attack”, a mix of > 20 drones and missiles, at least half of which were "suicide" drones. #USA & #KSA, he said, are 'certain' that attack was launched from #Iraq but 'smoking gun still missing'
They are also 'fairly certain' that #IRGC was behind the operation because, even though the missiles used were identical to those of the #Houthis, an inspection of the debris found in the desert revealed a 'couple of new updates' and a 'distinctly better craftsmanship'

The Wall Street Journal reports of the damage:

The strikes knocked out 5.7 million barrels of daily production, and the officials said they still believe they can fully replace it in coming days. That would require tapping oil inventories and using other facilities to process crude. One of the main targets of the attack was a large crude-processing plant in Abqaiq.
...
“It is definitely worse than what we expected in the early hours after the attack, but we are making sure that the market won’t experience any shortages until we’re fully back online,” said a Saudi official.
...
Even if Saudi officials were successful in restoring all or most of the lost production, the attack demonstrates a new vulnerability to supply lines across the oil-rich Gulf.

Tankers have been paying sharply higher insurance premiums, while shipping rates have soared in the region after a series of maritime attacks on oil-laden vessels, which the U.S. has blamed on Iran.
...
Khurais produces about 1.5 million barrels a day and Abqaiq, the world’s biggest crude-stabilization facility, processes seven million barrels of Saudi oil a day, turning crude into specific grades, such as Arabian Extra Light.

The repairs at Abqaiq will likely take weeks, not days. Brent crude futures rose by 19.5 percent to $71.95 per barrel, the biggest jump since 14 January, 1991:

Aramco gave no timeline for output resumption. A source close to the matter told Reuters the return to full oil capacity could take “weeks, not days”.

Riyadh said it would compensate for the damage at its facilities by drawing on its stocks, which stood at 188 million barrels in June, according to official data.

U.S. President Donald Trump was way more careful in attributing the strike than his Secretary of State.

Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump - 0:50 UTC · Sep 16, 2019
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!

Any direct attack on Iran would result in swarms of missiles hitting U.S. military installations in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Saudi water desalination plants, refineries and ports would also be targets.

It is doubtful that Trump or the Saudis are ready to risk such a response.

The attack on Abqaiq was not the last one and all Saudi installations are extremely vulnerable:

Yemen’s Houthi rebels said oil installations in Saudi Arabia remain among their targets after attacks against two major sites slashed the kingdom’s output by half and triggered a surge in crude prices.

The Iranian-backed rebel group, cited by the Houthi’s television station, said its weapons can reach anywhere in Saudi Arabia. Saturday’s attacks were carried out by “planes” using new engines, the group said, likely referring to drones.

Middle East Eye, a Qatari financed outlet, reported yesterday that the attack was launched from Iraq by Iran aligned forces in revenge for Israeli attacks in Syria. The author, David Hearst, is known for slandered reporting. The report is based on a single anonymous Iraqi intelligence source. Qatar, which is struggling with Saudi Arabia and the UAE over its support for the Muslim Brotherhood, would like to see a larger conflict involving its rivals east and west of the Persian Gulf. The report should therefore be disregarded.

Saudi Arabia has no defenses against this kind of attacks. The U.S. has no system that could be used for that purpose. Russia is the only country that can provide the necessary equipment. It would be extremely costly, and still insufficient, to protect all of the Saudi's vital facilities from similar swarm attacks.

Attacks of this kind will only end when Saudi Arabia makes peace with Yemen and when the U.S. ends its sanctions of oil exports from Iran. As Iran's President Rouhani said:

“If one day they want to prevent the export of Iran’s oil, then no oil will be exported from the Persian Gulf”

It is high time for hawks like Pompeo to recognize that Iran means what it says and has the tools to fulfill that promise.

---

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/09/damage-at-saudi-oil-plant-points
-to-well-targeted-swarm-attack.html#more

An interesting comment on the damage shown by the photos

Quote:

---

No where near an expert, but taking a look on Google Maps, the orientation of the holes on the tanks looks like an attack from the wrong side (ie it looks more likely it came from inside Saudi Arabia). A drone attack from the Iraq or Bahrain side would have travelled further and hit on the other side.

Given the level of precision, I wonder if the attack was launched much more locally - some short distance home-made drone that would fly over the fence with a maximum distance of about a mile from waste land outside the plant. The specific targeting on focused targets instead of indiscriminate scattered destruction would also suggest someone familiar with the plant, and a shorter distance attack flown by hand from nearby would require much less sophisticated equipment.

The photos of the plumes of smoke are also confusing. One is from somewhere outside the plant. And a second at the Haradh gas plant that is appearing in the media, is some 140 miles away from Abqaiq.

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
PNAC?
Javanka?

---