Slash Oil Output Or Else! Senate Bill Would Remove US Troops From Saudi Arabia In 30 Days

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Let the games begin!

This should be an amusing show to watch. 

From ZeroHedge:

Slash Oil Output Or Else! Senate Bill Would Remove US Troops From Saudi Arabia In 30 Days

A new bill has been introduced in the Senate which if passed would punish Saudi Arabia over failure to cut oil production by removing all US troops from the kingdom within 30 days. 

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) introduced it after Louisiana and other states have been impacted by the ongoing OPEC+ crisis and price war between Russia and Saudi Arabia. As of Friday OPEC+ appears to be closing in on a deal which would see a production cut of 10 million barrels a day, which S&P Global Platts still warned "isn’t enough to plug the 15- to 20-million b/d near-term imbalance in the marketplace and avoid tank tops in May."

Sen. Cassidy's bill would also impose tariffs on all Saudi oil imports within ten days of enactment, also aiming to ensure prices would not dip to below $40 a barrel.

"The extra oil from Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter, has made it impossible for energy companies in the United States, the world’s top oil and gas producer, to compete, Cassidy said," as cited in Reuters.

The Republican senator noted of the long-term close US-Saudi partnership: “Withdrawing troops placed to protect others recognizes that friendship and support is a two-way street.”

“Our nation’s economy, national security and the economic welfare of families across Louisiana is threatened by oil being dumped on the world market at below-production costs. The US spends billions protecting other oil producing countries and their ability to safely transport oil around the world. Now is the time to protect ourselves. Tariffs will restore fair pricing,” said Cassidy. 

The bill would also ensure defense funds cannot go to maintaining American troops on Saudi soil.  ...

 

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,177]

48 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

"The extra oil from Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter, has made it impossible for energy companies in the United States, the world’s top oil and gas producer, to compete, Cassidy said," as cited in Reuters.

While "free" market here and the US is pumping 13mbd, I can understand the Saudi frustration, but it should be aimed and the rest of the ME countries that are cheating and putting a couple million barrels daily on the market, not to mention other nations not in the OPEC pact are also trying to make "a buck" and ramping up. But to ought-right pull troops from KSA is dead ass wrong. Iran would take over and then we would be in a world of hurt. Some of these Senators I am not sure how they got elected. Tho I am no friend of Saudis and no trust them, I trust Iran way less. 

[wrs + 893]

I think this bill is a message to Trump.  Don't let that oil get dumped here or else.  He has more power in this case than congress.

Edited April 10, 2020 by wrs

[surrept33 + 609]

1 hour ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

While "free" market here and the US is pumping 13mbd, I can understand the Saudi frustration, but it should be aimed and the rest of the ME countries that are cheating and putting a couple million barrels daily on the market, not to mention other nations not in the OPEC pact are also trying to make "a buck" and ramping up. But to ought-right pull troops from KSA is dead ass wrong. Iran would take over and then we would be in a world of hurt. Some of these Senators I am not sure how they got elected. Tho I am no friend of Saudis and no trust them, I trust Iran way less. 

It's unclear to me how reducing US troops in KSA would make an impact viz-a-viz Iran. That would not preclude US arms and defense systems sales to KSA (which has mostly benefited the defense industry greatly), nor diminish the presence of the US elsewhere in the gulf, especially our naval presence in Bahrain.

These days, Iran can project it's power most effectively in various forms of asymmetrical warfare, which has little to do with boots on the ground in KSA. That made sense to me at a time when Iran or Iraq caused a lot of uncertainty in the area via conventional warfare.

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,177]

2 hours ago, wrs said:

I think this bill is a message to Trump.  Don't let that oil get dumped here or else.  He has more power in this case than congress.

Trump doesn't do threats well. He tends to act on his own analysis and overall judgement. While some think in days or weeks, his thinking and advisory board think in years. The consumer is the only "winner" out of this debacle. And there is an election in the not so distant future. US doesn't get much oil from KSA anymore. So who are they really trying to hurt? Shale oil wasn't their intended target but just a ''bonus'' for said Russian "hit".

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,177]

2 hours ago, surrept33 said:

It's unclear to me how reducing US troops in KSA would make an impact viz-a-viz Iran. That would not preclude US arms and defense systems sales to KSA (which has mostly benefited the defense industry greatly), nor diminish the presence of the US elsewhere in the gulf, especially our naval presence in Bahrain.

These days, Iran can project it's power most effectively in various forms of asymmetrical warfare, which has little to do with boots on the ground in KSA. That made sense to me at a time when Iran or Iraq caused a lot of uncertainty in the area via conventional warfare.

Not sure you remember the Hostage issue in the late 70's, Iranians don't think like we do. Pulling all US troops would be a blood-bath and the Iranians have a lot of Russian tech backing them. Remove the "man" and Iran would crush the Saudis. Remember the Iran/Iraq war? They're some persistent lil buggers, I will give em that. Short of "nukes" threat, I believe we pull out and they will move on in, makes no difference to them if KSA has a large munition dump of USA armament. They've got the numbers of military the Saudis don't.

[surrept33 + 609]

1 hour ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Not sure you remember the Hostage issue in the late 70's, Iranians don't think like we do. Pulling all US troops would be a blood-bath and the Iranians have a lot of Russian tech backing them. Remove the "man" and Iran would crush the Saudis. Remember the Iran/Iraq war? They're some persistent lil buggers, I will give em that. Short of "nukes" threat, I believe we pull out and they will move on in, makes no difference to them if KSA has a large munition dump of USA armament. They've got the numbers of military the Saudis don't.

Yeah, but Saudi Arabia has gone on a military spending binge in recent years to beef up their forces. They (and the UAE) used it in force to intervene in the Yemeni civil war, not that it did yemen any good. KSA buys a majority of their equipment from the US and I'm no expert, but I suspect the tech they buy will be as good if not better than what Iran has. The size of their armed forces isn't quite as big as Iran yet, but it's not tiny either (about 2/3 the number of personnel). The military spend is certainly a lot more.

Everything the Iranian regime seems to have focused on for a long time seems to be nuclear program, greater ballistic missile range capability, drones, and being able to successfully conduct various types of destabilizing asymmetric warfare (funding militias, irregular groups, etc) in other countries. To switch from this strategy to a conventional arms race against KSA would take resources that Iran doesn't have right now, imho.

 

KSA Arms imports:

Compared to other countries:

 

Where they get military equipment from:

Edited April 11, 2020 by surrept33

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

5 hours ago, wrs said:

I think this bill is a message to Trump.  Don't let that oil get dumped here or else.  He has more power in this case than congress.

Other than Motiva refinery (which they own 100%) it's not like the Saudis can dump a ton of oil here. California would likely take the rest, because their brain dead NIMBYISM has disallowed east west pipelines into their state, so they never could benefit from WTI pricing and continually paid Brent or $10 more per bbl than they should have. In sum, maybe a million bbls per day. Motiva does over 600k per day, no idea where they'll store the finished product. Probably one or two VLCC worth. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

9 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Not sure you remember the Hostage issue in the late 70's, Iranians don't think like we do. Pulling all US troops would be a blood-bath and the Iranians have a lot of Russian tech backing them. Remove the "man" and Iran would crush the Saudis. Remember the Iran/Iraq war? They're some persistent lil buggers, I will give em that. Short of "nukes" threat, I believe we pull out and they will move on in, makes no difference to them if KSA has a large munition dump of USA armament. They've got the numbers of military the Saudis don't.

I recall a rather large discussion on here, maybe a year ago, where members with knowledge/experience with the KSA military discussed how incompetent the KSA military is without Uncle Sam's forces there to prop them up.  Anyone else recall that discussion?  @Tom Kirkman??  As I recall, they discussed at length the topic of arms purchases from the U.S. and the resulting stockpiles: I believe they said that this was nothing more than the Saudis purchasing/paying their fair share for arms and munitions and technology that ultimately U.S. forces would be able to draw down on.

To be clear, I was not/am not one of those with the knowledge or experience; I just recall the very interesting discussion.  As I remember, it was pretty much unanimous that Iran could overrun the KSA without much difficulty.

Edited April 11, 2020 by Dan Warnick

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

10 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Let the games begin!

This should be an amusing show to watch. 

From ZeroHedge:

Slash Oil Output Or Else! Senate Bill Would Remove US Troops From Saudi Arabia In 30 Days

A new bill has been introduced in the Senate which if passed would punish Saudi Arabia over failure to cut oil production by removing all US troops from the kingdom within 30 days. 

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) introduced it after Louisiana and other states have been impacted by the ongoing OPEC+ crisis and price war between Russia and Saudi Arabia. As of Friday OPEC+ appears to be closing in on a deal which would see a production cut of 10 million barrels a day, which S&P Global Platts still warned "isn’t enough to plug the 15- to 20-million b/d near-term imbalance in the marketplace and avoid tank tops in May."

Sen. Cassidy's bill would also impose tariffs on all Saudi oil imports within ten days of enactment, also aiming to ensure prices would not dip to below $40 a barrel.

"The extra oil from Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter, has made it impossible for energy companies in the United States, the world’s top oil and gas producer, to compete, Cassidy said," as cited in Reuters.

The Republican senator noted of the long-term close US-Saudi partnership: “Withdrawing troops placed to protect others recognizes that friendship and support is a two-way street.”

“Our nation’s economy, national security and the economic welfare of families across Louisiana is threatened by oil being dumped on the world market at below-production costs. The US spends billions protecting other oil producing countries and their ability to safely transport oil around the world. Now is the time to protect ourselves. Tariffs will restore fair pricing,” said Cassidy. 

The bill would also ensure defense funds cannot go to maintaining American troops on Saudi soil.  ...

 

Interesting, some real ‘hardball’....kinda like it!

But what is to stop Russia from offering a real ‘sweetheart’ defense/military assistance package after the US is gone!

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,177]

32 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Interesting, some real ‘hardball’....kinda like it!

But what is to stop Russia from offering a real ‘sweetheart’ defense/military assistance package after the US is gone!

Right on point! Russia supplying Iran as is China, Get the best of both worlds 🙂

 

[JoMack + 547]

Okay, let's get real.  The Saudi's and Russia and other oil producing nations are desperate to open the U.S. crude oil market again.  They want those big dollars and will do whatever it takes to get it.  Problem:  Private enterprise.  Trump can't impose mandates on private minerals so Texas, Oklahoma, North Dakota, etc. are out of reach unless he wants a Constitutional crises on his hands.

So, the feds can curtail production of Federal minerals in New Mexico and small areas in the U.S., but when push comes to shove what state is going to say "hey, you operators here in TX, etc. we want you to cut production",  or what?  No permit fees, no taxes, no other massive fees that drive the state's billion dollar revenue stream so you can have "no income tax policies".  

It's a mess.  The end result is we're back to the U.S. dependence on foreign crude. Crushing energy prices, embargo?  What administration did anything to help the oil industry?  

Ford:   Conservation, SPR, 55 mph an hour speed limit, created the IEA, fuel economy standards, etc.

Carter:  Price controls, gas tax increases that choked the consumer, taxes on the industry, tax incentives for solar power mileage fees.

Regan:  Zip

Bush:    Ethanol

Obama:  Crushing regulations on federal lands, fees out the wazoo, no true competitive lease sales

Trump:  Zip

So, out of the group of these oh so enlightened administrations, all we have is the pushing and shoving of the oil and gas industry so we sit and wonder "how do they survive?  Will they survive now?"

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

To my knowledge, the US oil industry has never presented a unified lobbying body/front to either educate the public or to defend itself against the anti-oil lobby.

This has led to a large part of the population distrusting the industry and not understanding how it works.

They have been inundated by the media concerning the financial state of the shale oil industry, and how they now want a bailout.

Once again, either due to arrogance or ignorance, we have shot ourselves in the foot simply because we refused to defend ourselves.

If the people are not supporting the oil industry (face it, the loudest voices now are only those at risk of losing their jobs), how do you expect politicians to support the industry?

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

1 hour ago, Dan Warnick said:

I recall a rather large discussion on here, maybe a year ago, where members with knowledge/experience with the KSA military discussed how incompetent the KSA military is without Uncle Sam's forces there to prop them up.  Any else recall that discussion?  @Tom Kirkman??  As I recall, they discussed at length the topic of arms purchases from the U.S. and the resulting stockpiles: I believe the said that this was nothing more than the Saudis purchasing/paying their fair share for arms and munitions and technology that ultimately U.S. forces would be able to draw down on.

To be clear, I was not/am not one of those with the knowledge or experience; I just recall the very interesting discussion.  As I remember, it was pretty much unanimous that Iran could overrun the KSA without much difficulty.

Yes, I remember that thread.  Finding the thread is a different matter, though.  Long threads hete tend to cover a multitude of topics, so the search function can be hit or miss, unless ypu can remember a key word in the thread title.

[Wombat + 1,028]

10 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

While "free" market here and the US is pumping 13mbd, I can understand the Saudi frustration, but it should be aimed and the rest of the ME countries that are cheating and putting a couple million barrels daily on the market, not to mention other nations not in the OPEC pact are also trying to make "a buck" and ramping up. But to ought-right pull troops from KSA is dead ass wrong. Iran would take over and then we would be in a world of hurt. Some of these Senators I am not sure how they got elected. Tho I am no friend of Saudis and no trust them, I trust Iran way less. 

Iran AND Russia!

[JoMack + 547]

Throw the little boy out of SA and get back to business where all of the o&g industries can make a buck.  Stop swinging the markets like the bat dung that  flew out of China and let the markets and the o&g exporters deal with the world consumption and market prices like they actually know what they're doing.   They all roil the oil markets with their spitting matches. I just wish someone with some balls would stand up for America's oil and gas industry which operates on a string and at the whim of oil producing nations headed by the stooges and Spanky (Salman) from Our Gang.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

3 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Yes, I remember that thread.  Finding the thread is a different matter, though.  Long threads hete tend to cover a multitude of topics, so the search function can be hit or miss, unless ypu can remember a key word in the thread title.

I'm pretty sure it was the discussion about Iran's ability to close off the Strait of Hormuz.  @Jan van Eck educated us about Iran's capabilities with many many many low flying craft that could attack ships at anchor by the 100s or even 1,000s.  But I could be wrong.

It may well have been the one about Iran Sanctions.

Edited April 11, 2020 by Dan Warnick

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

22 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

@Jan van Eck educated us about Iran's capabilities with many many many low flying craft that could attack ships at anchor by the 100s or even 1,000s.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

Thanks, Jan.  How many of those things did you estimate they have?

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

Just now, Dan Warnick said:

Thanks, Jan.  How many of those things did you estimate they have?

thousands.   Huge production. Bomb or torpedo on every one.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

15 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Tho I am no friend of Saudis and no trust them, I trust Iran way less. 

I distrust U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein even less.  She wants to give $5 Billion in "aid" to Iran.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

5 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

I distrust U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein even less.  She wants to give $5 Billion in "aid" to Iran.

Actually, other than her condescending and nagging tone, the proposal seems relatively positive, IMHO.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

4 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Actually, other than her condescending and nagging tone, the proposal seems relatively positive, IMHO.

Do you actually think the Iranian government would use $5 billion to help their citizens?  After the Iranian Mullahs have repeatedly and brutally quashed dissent by Iranian citizens?

If the Iranian government used $5 Billion in cash to actually help Iranians, it would likely go only to religious leaders (the dictator Mullahs), political leaders and military leaders.  But zero aid to ordinary citizens.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

6 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Do you actually think the Iranian government would use $5 billion to help their citizens?  After the Iranian Mullahs have repeatedly and brutally quashed dissent by Iranian citizens?

If the Iranian government used $5 Billion in cash to actually help Iranians, it would likely go only to religious leaders (the dictator Mullahs), political leaders and military leaders.  But zero aid to ordinary citizens.

I have to ask: did you read the entire letter?

Like I said, it sounds positive.  But I don't believe any more than you do that anyone could effectively channel the money properly.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

2 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

I have to ask: did you read the entire letter?

Like I said, it sounds positive.  But I don't believe any more than you do that anyone could effectively channel the money properly.

I simply don't believe that would happen.

Obama secretly shipped pallets of cash to Iranian leaders.

Diane Feinstein sides with China and Iran and is basically anti - U.S.  That is why I distrust the senator in this attempt to give more cash to the Iranian dictators.