Evidence from Saudi oil attack points to Iran, not Yemen - U.S. official

[Scott]

Troll posts and replies removed.  

[Morch]

10 hours ago, stevenl said:

Naw, more an Israeli state department stooge.

 

How to answer such an ignorant comment? Guess those that are ill equipped to post on topic must...errr...bait.

[Chomper Higgot]

While we wait for the US to provide reliable evidence to back their assertions we (please forgive the collective pronoun) would be well advised to contemplate the very likely outcome of a war with Iran.

 

Hundreds of thousands of innocents killed, social breakdown, another mass migration, another State left open for non-state actors to take control and yet more regional instability.

 

 

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

While we wait for the US to provide reliable evidence to back their assertions we (please forgive the collective pronoun) would be well advised to contemplate the very likely outcome of a war with Iran.

 

Hundreds of thousands of innocents killed, social breakdown, another mass migration, another State left open for non-state actors to take control and yet more regional instability.

 

 

 

It would depend which sort of war you envisage. A full blown invasion? A series of (mostly aerial) strikes?

 

Currently, there are not enough USA troops in the region to mount an invasion. Massive deployments would, I think, require authorization and approval, plus they'd be very noticeable.

 

Social breakdown? Doubtful. Unlike many of it's Middle Eastern neighbors, Iran is actually a national entity rather than a made up one. Much more cohesive and robust on this front. That would also relate to the prospects of "mass migration" - not impossible, but less probable if a country retains its integrity. Open to non-state actors? Such as? 

 

Accepted wisdom and lessons from other Middle Eastern past examples and experience is fine, directly applying these to Iran, doubtful.

[bristolboy]

13 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I kinda doubt China would have much interest in driving oil prices up. Or increasing ME instability. Additionally, the link provided relates a Chinese drone deal with Saudi Arabia and and factory set up .

 

Can one get the required spec drones on Alibaba and have them shipped to Yemen?

The Houthis don't have to get them directly from China. As the article shows, China sells these drones widely and is none too scrupulous about whom they sell to. 

[Chomper Higgot]

14 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

It would depend which sort of war you envisage. A full blown invasion? A series of (mostly aerial) strikes?

 

Currently, there are not enough USA troops in the region to mount an invasion. Massive deployments would, I think, require authorization and approval, plus they'd be very noticeable.

 

Social breakdown? Doubtful. Unlike many of it's Middle Eastern neighbors, Iran is actually a national entity rather than a made up one. Much more cohesive and robust on this front. That would also relate to the prospects of "mass migration" - not impossible, but less probable if a country retains its integrity. Open to non-state actors? Such as? 

 

Accepted wisdom and lessons from other Middle Eastern past examples and experience is fine, directly applying these to Iran, doubtful.

I enjoy many of your posts for the thought and breadth of knowledge you often bring to the discussion, but the above is plain silly.

 

We (once again please for the pronoun) are living with the consequences of ill considered war, millions displaced, the rise of a terrorist regime and much else.

 

Time perhaps for some jaw jaw.

 

[Morch]

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I enjoy many of your posts for the thought and breadth of knowledge you often bring to the discussion, but the above is plain silly.

 

We (once again please for the pronoun) are living with the consequences of ill considered war, millions displaced, the rise of a terrorist regime and much else.

 

Time perhaps for some jaw jaw.

 

 

Silly would be to assume all wars are similar, or that all countries and nations involved are similar.

 

Iran is not Iraq. or Syria. Or Afghanistan. All of these countries did (and maybe, do) not have a sound sense of national identity, and all are massively fractured when it comes to various ethnic/religious groupings.

 

There's a whole lot of talk about war. But what sort of war? Is there much concrete talk about actually invading Iran? Conquering it? Holding on to the territory? I don't think so. Most references relate to three themes - air strikes and less boots on the ground, regime change through limited military/full economic pressure, and dismantling Iran's nuclear/ballistic programs. I'm not saying these objectives are realistic or that they ought to be condoned. Just pointing out that there's not a whole lot of talk about "going in".

[ExpatOilWorker]

10 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Silly would be to assume all wars are similar, or that all countries and nations involved are similar.

 

Iran is not Iraq. or Syria. Or Afghanistan. All of these countries did (and maybe, do) not have a sound sense of national identity, and all are massively fractured when it comes to various ethnic/religious groupings.

 

There's a whole lot of talk about war. But what sort of war? Is there much concrete talk about actually invading Iran? Conquering it? Holding on to the territory? I don't think so. Most references relate to three themes - air strikes and less boots on the ground, regime change through limited military/full economic pressure, and dismantling Iran's nuclear/ballistic programs. I'm not saying these objectives are realistic or that they ought to be condoned. Just pointing out that there's not a whole lot of talk about "going in".

Nobody is going to war with Iran. They are a formidable force and it is simply not worth it. At most we will see iron clad sanctions, even agreed by the soft Europeans.

 

 

[bristolboy]

13 hours ago, Morch said:

 

And from this end sounds like you're a common variety troll. Nothing of substance to address points made. Not even a single factual reference.

 

Proxy, in the sense used, was applied to non-state organizations. The USA mostly supports governments. If you're not clued in on the difference, do some reading.

Lots of wiggle room in "mostly".

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

Nobody is going to war with Iran. They are a formidable force and it is simply not worth it. At most we will see iron clad sanctions, even agreed by the soft Europeans.

 

 

 

I tend to agree. With the caveat that this is the Middle East, and things can certainly escalate even if no party is really interested in going to war.

 

Some sort of limited conflagration is a real possibility. A full blown war-cum-invasion, doubtful. As you said - too hard, stakes too high, and other than in neocon fantasies, the bottom line would not benefit the USA.

 

Sanctions are taking their bite as it is. And for all of Iran's talk, their options are limited. Whether there will be more of these confrontations (or worse) and more sanctions before sides would seat to negotiate remains to be seen.

[ExpatOilWorker]

13 hours ago, Morch said:

 

I kinda doubt China would have much interest in driving oil prices up. Or increasing ME instability. Additionally, the link provided relates a Chinese drone deal with Saudi Arabia and and factory set up .

 

Can one get the required spec drones on Alibaba and have them shipped to Yemen?

Sure, but China have sold about 100 drones to Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, the UAE, and Zambia.

Maybe the Houthis have been out shopping.

[wayned]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

While we wait for the US to provide reliable evidence to back their assertions we (please forgive the collective pronoun) would be well advised to contemplate the very likely outcome of a war with Iran.

 

Hundreds of thousands of innocents killed, social breakdown, another mass migration, another State left open for non-state actors to take control and yet more regional instability.

 

 

No war, No invasion no strike, he is in campaign mode and knows that if he starts another war in the middle east he might as well kiss re-election goodbye.  He's already backing off the "we're locked and loaded" statement to saying that noons destroyed a US installation, it was a Saudi oil plant and it's "up to them".

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

Sure, but China have sold about 100 drones to Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iraq, Jordan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, the UAE, and Zambia.

Maybe the Houthis have been out shopping.

 

That's possible, but then it wouldn't be "from China", but rather "Chinese made". Given that Iran's got rather well developed UAV industry and capabilities it may represent a handier source. Getting stuff into Yemen is troublesome, so the same Alibaba point remains an issue.

[ExpatOilWorker]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

That's possible, but then it wouldn't be "from China", but rather "Chinese made". Given that Iran's got rather well developed UAV industry and capabilities it may represent a handier source. Getting stuff into Yemen is troublesome, so the same Alibaba point remains an issue.

Then we are on the same page. I didn't mean to say that China had open a drone shop in the medina in Sana'a.

That said, it could be that China have a white paper strategy that is open to sell military hardware to anybody that will keep the US busy in the Middle East in order to minimize interference in the South China Sea.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

Then we are on the same page. I didn't mean to say that China had open a drone shop in the medina in Sana'a.

That said, it could be that China have a white paper strategy that is open to sell military hardware to anybody that will keep the US busy in the Middle East in order to minimize interference in the South China Sea.

 

China got a vested interest in Middle East stability, or at least, maintaining oil supply and keeping prices down. The spice must flow and all that. I think it represents as much as a national security issue for them as the South China Sea thing. Selling a few drones to the Houthis would hardly be worth enough to offset their main interests.

[ExpatOilWorker]

37 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

China got a vested interest in Middle East stability, or at least, maintaining oil supply and keeping prices down. The spice must flow and all that. I think it represents as much as a national security issue for them as the South China Sea thing. Selling a few drones to the Houthis would hardly be worth enough to offset their main interests.

It is unlikely China ever foresaw an attack like this could ever happen. Before this weekend nobody had every heard about the Abqaiq plant. Even the Saudis didn't seem to protect it very well.

Anyhow, it is most likely Iranian drones were used, just keeping an open mind.

[singking]

Until there is proof the most likely suspects are the ones who claimed responsibility.

Also serial liners, like America?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[singking]

I read it as Iran stating they are prepared for a war of defence given the direct accusation by the US.
There are many players in the chaos in the middle east but Iran as the convenient fall guy for almost all blame is aware of the potential for a major escalation.
 
 

Yep Iran the fall guy in the Middle East and China in the East. Now what’s the connection again?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[tifino]

22 hours ago, stevenl said:

There may be more, but afaik the difference is that a drone is remotely controlled.

a Drone... think of an aeroplane - which is designed to go on a mission... and Return 

 

a Missile.... goes on a one way trip 

 

 

There have also been Missiles (Remote Controlled) since at least 1961 

The Bristol BloodHound was radar guided from the ground, with Telemetry Guidance Control being fed back up to it via microwave. 

 

[Morch]

7 hours ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

It is unlikely China ever foresaw an attack like this could ever happen. Before this weekend nobody had every heard about the Abqaiq plant. Even the Saudis didn't seem to protect it very well.

Anyhow, it is most likely Iranian drones were used, just keeping an open mind.

 

I think it unlikely China's intelligence services are not well informed on things Middle East. And I'm sure no one with a bit of a clue couldn't project attacks would intensify and include higher value targets. As for the "nobody had ever heard of" bit - most people would have no reason to. Such nodes exist in almost every industry, they are not necessarily a "thing" for the general public, or even everyone employed in such an industry worldwide.

 

Protecting facilities against cruise missiles and drones is a relatively new thing. Or, more correctly, the threat poised by such means grew in recent years, whereas defense measures still lag behind some. Add to this Saudi Arabia armed forces being well armed but not particularly top notch (for reference, see failed operations in Yemen). Toss is a bit of hubris, all-will-be-well, they-wouldn't-dare, with a slice of corruption as garnish. Paper tiger vs. mosquitoes. And people still don't get why they are freaked of the Iranians....

 

It could easily have been a Chinese made drone supplied by Iran, for example. Would help some when it comes to covering tracks etc.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, tifino said:

a Drone... think of an aeroplane - which is designed to go on a mission... and Return 

 

a Missile.... goes on a one way trip 

 

 

There have also been Missiles (Remote Controlled) since at least 1961 

The Bristol BloodHound was radar guided from the ground, with Telemetry Guidance Control being fed back up to it via microwave. 

 

 

Attack drones can be roughly divided into two groups, one carries payload and designed for multiple uses (return), the other is what's sometimes referred to as suicide drone, think Kamikaze.

 

[Dumbastheycome]

4 hours ago, singking said:

Yep Iran the fall guy in the Middle East and China in the East. Now what’s the connection again?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Is  it International  chess or Poker with a fixed  deck? Maybe  a dominos demonstration with the assumption all will  fall according to design?

[Scott]

Inflammatory post removed.   I suspect if the discussion continues in this manner, suspensions will be given.  

 

[Rimmer]

Off topic troll post removed

[FritsSikkink]

On ‎9‎/‎16‎/‎2019 at 9:44 PM, Morch said:

 

Do you see enough USA forces deployed to carry out any such "invasion"?

Did the USA "take" Iraq, Syria and libya's oil?

Do you see enough USA forces deployed to carry out any such "invasion"?       Have a look at the picture.

 

Did the USA "take" Iraq, Syria and libya's oil?                        Yes.

[Morch]

 

@FritsSikkink

 

Bases are not troops. And hardly all of the bases in your go-to pic would have anything to do with an imaginary invasion of Iran. If you have trouble grasping the scope of figures required, perhaps have a look at past instances. Then factor them up, as Iran is stronger than Iraq was. The short version - not enough troops deployed for a full scale invasion.

 

As for your claims regarding oil, "yes" is not an even remotely satisfactory answer. It's not even correct.

[Scott]

Troll post removed.