0
0

[–] 20608899? ago  (edited ago)

I've been trying to figure this out since I heard about it on the weekend. There are no coincidences, so what is the connection between the departure / ouster of John Bolton, and this "Iranian" attack on Saudi Arabia.

1. Bolton left after the debacle with the Taliban meeting at Camp David. Still don't understand the strategic decision to tweet out that the meeting had been planned. They could have kept it secret, so there must be a reason they let it be known. Distraction?

2. Rand Paul was happy about Bolton leaving. Paul is basically a pacifist, so his being happy about Bolton leaving would indicate that he figured Bolton was pushing Trump towards some kind of military strike / action against Iran.

3. Ted Cruz was disappointed that Bolton left, basically saying that it meant Trump was planning on easing up on sanctions.

4. 2 and 3 seem to make sense together ... that Bolton's departure indicated reduced pressure on Iran.

5. If 4 is true, why would Iran attack the Saudi oil fields and risk any good will that MAY have been being created with US?

6. Whether the attack came from Yemeni Houthis, or directly from Iran is irrelevant since Iran is supplying the Yemeni's anyway.

7. What other local actors other than Iran would be well served by trying to drag US into military intervention in that area? Trump seems to be steadfastly avoiding blatant military involvement, but this has the markings of someone trying to drag him in, possibly somewhat desperate after "their guy" Bolton the "warhawk" was removed from his position of influence.

Trump has made his career and fortune by negotiating, pressuring, and outsmarting his opponents / competition. The Persians invented the game of chess, so they're master strategists. Trump is clearly a master strategist himself, but I'm hoping he doesn't fall into the trap of underestimating his opponent, or wait too long to knock over the chess board. Maybe he can move a few pieces when the Iranians aren't watching?

0
0

[–] 20619155? ago 

I think those pieces were already moved!

US is #1 oil producer now. That's likely to remain, even if SA rebuilds in 2-3 weeks like news today said. Another attack seems likely. And I wouldn't be surprised to learn that ... it's self-inflicted.

Xi and Kim seem to smile much more than they should. Seems a game's afoot, but what do I know? :)

0
4

[–] 20608897? 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

China is the cabal's territory. Everything done to the citizens there, was to happen here. China needs to be totally Boycotted. We have to stop FUNDING CHINA. It is not the people, it is the satanic leaders.

0
2

[–] 20610604? [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

^ exactly

0
3

[–] 20607905? 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Trump said it LOOKS like Iran did it, this tells me he actually knows who did it, but it wasn't Iran.

0
2

[–] 20607927? [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

^ agreed. Experience has demonstrated time after time that our three letter agencies exist to fool us.

0
0

[–] 20617200? ago 

Exactly, there is another suspect DS news cycle surrounding the Australian "tourists" that have been jailed for over 10 weeks. This story along with the Australian story smells like DS fuckery, Ausies would love to get their DS operatives out of Iran jail through publicly disguising these two citizens as innocent, highly empathetic individuals.

0
1

[–] 20607607? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11563761/US-to-launch-blitz-of-gas-exports-eyes-global-energy-dominance.html

Ryan Lance, head of ConocoPhillips, said North American oil output could reach 15m b/d by 2020 and 25m b/d over the next quarter century, three times Saudi Arabia's current exports.

It does not hurt then to have Saudi Arabia a bit to the sidelines, does it. It will also provoke Iran to try a few fast ones. Let's see what happens. At any rate, Us is set for the coming 100 years. (Check the map in the article)

0
0

[–] 20605109? ago 

Dunno about that. Fuel prices jumped 30 cents per gal. this morning. Trump said he would open the reserves if necessary.

0
0

[–] 20604598? ago 

Theory. It will hurt the Saudis more than anyone...

1
-1

[–] 20604105? 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

No. Everyone is fucked with this act. The whole thing is a M.A.D. Activation Probable.

The multi-system cascading collapse has just now begun. We have three options left: collapse a major system in the cascade path ourselves and direct it away from the rest of the planet; crawl into the biggest-deepest-toughest bunker possible; stick head between legs and kiss ass goodbye. Choose quickly.

0
1

[–] 20605466? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Temporary lessening of Saudi Oil production isn't going to trigger world war, you drama queen.

0
0

[–] 20611620? ago 

Not that, rather an escalating OPEC War.

0
1

[–] 20602683? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

How does this compute? We are net energy exporter, and energy independent now. President just announced he is releasing oil from out reserves to make up the shortfall. If we are independent, then why would there be a shortfall?

2
-2

[–] 20603203? 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

It's because we are not energy independent nor do we have the infrastructure in place to be. It would take years to get our infrastructure built back up to where we could be fully energy independent.

I

0
3

[–] 20602976? 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Our oil price is the global price! The net shortfall is global, not domestic. The USA can put additional volumes on the global market, so as to hold the available 'supply' steady.

There could be a 'where available' problem, east coast vs west coast.

load more comments ▼ (5 remaining)