Pompeo: Aramco Attacks Are An "Act Of War" By Iran

[Guest]

What's the end game here? Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has just arrived in Jeddah for talks with Saudi leaders over a response to the weekend attacks on two of the kingdom's major oil facilities.

FULL ARTICLE

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/pompeo-saudi-arabia-aramco-attacks-act-war-iran

After a prior press conference by the Saudi Defense Ministry where it for the first time assigned public blame on Iran for the attacks which initially knocked out half of the kingdom's daily oil output, saying the air attacks "unquestionably" had Iranian state sponsorship, Pompeo has announced the Aramco attacks constitute an "act of war" by Iran. 

And President Trump himself said Wednesday from the White House that it looks like Iran did it but that he still hopes to avoid war.

He announced via a statement on Twitter that, "I have just instructed the Secretary of the Treasury to substantially increase Sanctions on the country of Iran!" — in what appears an alternative to launching a military response.  "I'm not looking to get into new conflict, but sometimes you have to," Trump told reporters Wednesday.

Pompeo's new "act of war" declaration indeed takes the potential for escalation right back to boiling point ...

 

# $80

Edited September 18, 2019 by Guest

[J.mo + 165]

Here we go. Of course it was Iran. It could have been anyone and it would have been Iran. Why did we even need to waste the resources. It was going be be Iran. 

Even if it was/is Iran. That to me sounds like a Saudi problem. Not a United states problem. if Iran had bombed a major US refinery, do you think the Saudis would be chomping at the bit to be tagged in? Absolutely not. It's time for the Saudis to stand on their own two feet. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, J.mo said:

if Iran had bombed a major US refinery, do you think the Saudis would be chomping at the bit to be tagged in

Well considering they took 4 days to get some debris together for some conference I'll go out on a limb and say No. 

Atleast Pompeo has used some nice neutral language though to calm those fears.

Edited September 18, 2019 by Guest

[J.mo + 165]

22 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Well considering they took 4 days to get some debris together for some conference I'll go out on a limb and say No. 

Atleast Pompeo has used some nice neutral language though to calm those fears.

The only reason I could see any US involvement is to limit the exposure to the presence of Russia in the area. So does the US sit back and see how that would possibly play out, and need to play catch up, or be proactive from the start. 

Mbs probably knows this.

Edited September 18, 2019 by J.mo

[Guest]

[James Regan + 1,776]

[Toranaga + 49]

The best play for the U.S. is if the EU would join in the sanctions.  

[Jesse Man + 17]

Iran doesn't have a Rothschild central bank yet. War with Iran will happen.

[Jon Lester + 1]

It was already becoming obvious in recent weeks that the Houthis have effectively won the war, so of course KSA can't win against Iran, and I, for one, could not care less about the primitive, inbred Wahhabi house of Saud. It's past time they were overthrown and summarily eradicated by their own subjects. Maybe the Hashemites can take control of the holy places again.

[4cryingoutloud + 21]

Well, during October 2016, the USS Nitze fired 3 cruise missiles into Yemen to destroy 3 radar sites.  Is this not an act of war?  I know, I know, the US propaganda will say the ship was fired upon by some unknown group from some unknown location using some unknown types of weapons. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Analysis by The Tylers on ZeroHedge:

The Triumph Of Candidate Trump's Foreign Policy: Backing Off 'Disastrous War' With Iran

 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

On 9/18/2019 at 11:51 AM, DayTrader said:

Well considering they took 4 days to get some debris together for some conference I'll go out on a limb and say No. 

Atleast Pompeo has used some nice neutral language though to calm those fears.

Uh, how long did the fires burn?  How long does it take for things to cool down again?  Days.  The fact they have any debris is frankly amazing if you asked me.  Assuming they did not just grab this debris from there conflict with Yemen.......

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

46 minutes ago, 4cryingoutloud said:

Well, during October 2016, the USS Nitze fired 3 cruise missiles into Yemen to destroy 3 radar sites.  Is this not an act of war?  I know, I know, the US propaganda will say the ship was fired upon by some unknown group from some unknown location using some unknown types of weapons. 

Sanctioning other countries to sanction IRAN is an act of war. 

[Domingo Moros 0]

On 9/18/2019 at 1:48 PM, J.mo said:

Here we go. Of course it was Iran. It could have been anyone and it would have been Iran. Why did we even need to waste the resources. It was going be be Iran. 

Even if it was/is Iran. That to me sounds like a Saudi problem. Not a United states problem. if Iran had bombed a major US refinery, do you think the Saudis would be chomping at the bit to be tagged in? Absolutely not. It's time for the Saudis to stand on their own two feet. 

Well that was exactly the mentallity on 1938 when Germany was conquering all of Europe... what happened then? I Get that for the US trying to police the world is tiring and sometimes even unfair? but the risks are too high. “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”

[4cryingoutloud + 21]

10 hours ago, Domingo Moros said:

Well that was exactly the mentallity on 1938 when Germany was conquering all of Europe... what happened then? I Get that for the US trying to police the world is tiring and sometimes even unfair? but the risks are too high. “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”

what risks, specifically? 

[Jeff_Calgary + 68]

On 9/19/2019 at 8:43 AM, Toranaga said:

The best play for the U.S. is if the EU would join in the sanctions.  

Why would the EU join the sanctions. They consider the Iranians to be the ones playing fair and Trump is playing unfair. I would have to agree with them. The sanctions that the US has put on Iran are not justified -they are just internal political bickering within the US and Trumps playground.

[Toranaga + 49]

11 hours ago, Jeff_Calgary said:

Why would the EU join the sanctions. They consider the Iranians to be the ones playing fair and Trump is playing unfair. I would have to agree with them. The sanctions that the US has put on Iran are not justified -they are just internal political bickering within the US and Trumps playground.

The Europeans may still be suffering from the same mental disorder that led them not to confront Hitler until it was too late. The United States was completely free to leave the JCPOA because it was not a treaty.  Actually I believe it was a treaty, but was never ratified by the U.S. Senate and therefore the U.S. actions were illegal under U.S. law and hence Obama had no authority to enter into the deal. The actions of Iran commencing with the laying of explosives on the tankers show that they are belligerent, willing to lie blatantly, and untrustworthy. The JCPOA looks like Iranian extortion to this observer. Even if the U.S. were still in the deal, it just seems that 5 years from now they would have been demanding more. It's in the nature of the current regime there. The current regime are hostage takers and extortionists.  They brutally stamped out opposition several years ago. People were killed.  Just don't deal with the current regime. Let them trade with Russian and China. They can all fall behind together just like the Warsaw Pact did.

[Toranaga + 49]

On 9/18/2019 at 2:44 PM, DayTrader said:

What's the end game here? Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has just arrived in Jeddah for talks with Saudi leaders over a response to the weekend attacks on two of the kingdom's major oil facilities.

 

At this time, then end game appears to be condemnation of the action. If the Europeans had any balls they would at least delay some major deals by a couple of years as punishment. 

[Jeff_Calgary + 68]

19 hours ago, Toranaga said:

The Europeans may still be suffering from the same mental disorder that led them not to confront Hitler until it was too late. The United States was completely free to leave the JCPOA because it was not a treaty.  Actually I believe it was a treaty, but was never ratified by the U.S. Senate and therefore the U.S. actions were illegal under U.S. law and hence Obama had no authority to enter into the deal. The actions of Iran commencing with the laying of explosives on the tankers show that they are belligerent, willing to lie blatantly, and untrustworthy. The JCPOA looks like Iranian extortion to this observer. Even if the U.S. were still in the deal, it just seems that 5 years from now they would have been demanding more. It's in the nature of the current regime there. The current regime are hostage takers and extortionists.  They brutally stamped out opposition several years ago. People were killed.  Just don't deal with the current regime. Let them trade with Russian and China. They can all fall behind together just like the Warsaw Pact did.

Then the US should drop the sanctions. Trump started any war that ensues by unilaterally stopping Iran from feeding their people. He should try harder to BE BEST. You seem to be forgetting the sanctions in your comment.

[Toranaga + 49]

On 9/24/2019 at 7:42 PM, Jeff_Calgary said:

Then the US should drop the sanctions. Trump started any war that ensues by unilaterally stopping Iran from feeding their people. He should try harder to BE BEST. You seem to be forgetting the sanctions in your comment.

It's hard to know where to start with the above comment. You seem to think a government feeds its people. That would be a society where everybody stands on line at a government feeding station.  Iran doesn't have an economy like that. There are private businesses that sell products and services in exchange for money or probably sometimes other products and services (barter).  The Quds Force and Revolutionary Guard probably have their own money-making operations.

The U.S. sanctions are said to be causing the economy to contract. The worst case is that the Iranian economy could contract by 23% Jan '19 - Jan '20.  But that isn't going to cause a famine in Iran. Any nation, the U.S. included, is perfectly free not to trade with another nation, and perfectly free to slap sanctions on that nation.  For example, Switzerland could embargo the U.S. and slap sanctions on it this coming Monday for any reason, or no reason at all. It's their right as a sovereign nation. It is hardly a cause for a war unless it is a situation where there is a landlocked nation basically surrounded by another nation, that could be embargoed and barricaded from the outside world.  Not so at all with Iran. Plenty of access to the sea and other nations. They can form their own bloc with Russia, China, Syria and whomever else.

Edited September 28, 2019 by Toranaga

[Jeff_Calgary + 68]

On 9/28/2019 at 10:22 AM, Toranaga said:

It's hard to know where to start with the above comment. You seem to think a government feeds its people. That would be a society where everybody stands on line at a government feeding station.  Iran doesn't have an economy like that. There are private businesses that sell products and services in exchange for money or probably sometimes other products and services (barter).  The Quds Force and Revolutionary Guard probably have their own money-making operations.

The U.S. sanctions are said to be causing the economy to contract. The worst case is that the Iranian economy could contract by 23% Jan '19 - Jan '20.  But that isn't going to cause a famine in Iran. Any nation, the U.S. included, is perfectly free not to trade with another nation, and perfectly free to slap sanctions on that nation.  For example, Switzerland could embargo the U.S. and slap sanctions on it this coming Monday for any reason, or no reason at all. It's their right as a sovereign nation. It is hardly a cause for a war unless it is a situation where there is a landlocked nation basically surrounded by another nation, that could be embargoed and barricaded from the outside world.  Not so at all with Iran. Plenty of access to the sea and other nations. They can form their own bloc with Russia, China, Syria and whomever else.

The US is strong arming all the other nations to do its bidding. So your comment is not quite correct. Saudi is the bully in the neighborhood.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,131]

1 hour ago, Jeff_Calgary said:

The US is strong arming all the other nations to do its bidding. So your comment is not quite correct. Saudi is the bully in the neighborhood.

No one is forcing them to use the USD.  Enjoy the RMB and Rupee or just use USD through the Swiss who like to launder money among many other such countries.