Major drone attack cripples Saudi oil production

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,094
2,363
136
You have a very weird way of arguing. You act like he was completely wrong then basically agree with him. No idea where you're getting that wasn't exactly what he was talking about. I mean, holy shit, duh, that is the sanction program so obviously its about Iran wanting to get the sanctions to stop. That was his point though. They have no interest in negotiating/talking unless the US actually shows they'll adhere to reducing sanctions as otherwise there's no point to anything as Iran will just get stuck with sanctions no matter what agreements they have or what they do...
My statements re Bolton were not contradictory, but re-stated to qualify context and meaning to the previous poster who didnt seem to understand it. Again, Boltons dismissal - in and of itself - was not the point, but rather that it signaled Trumps leaning to discussions with the Iranians and whatever he thought he could achieve from that. Kupperman would have been aware of that before accepting the job. The U.S. 'hard-line' towards Iran remains, just with the added flexibility of discussions when or if the need arose (which Bolton seemed to oppose).

Now, if discussions were ever to be on the table, that would have been an opportune time for the Iranians to do something drastic to gain leverage. The Iranians have now dramatically demonstrated that they cannot be ignored while sanctions remain in place. Bear in mind that as of May this year, the sanctions tightened to include an embargo on Irans oil sales. Iran itself has said they will not sit idly by while this goes on. After May, oil tankers and other assets have been attacked, either by Iranian proxies or directly by Iran. The Saudi attack is the big one.
 
Last edited:

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
47,990
37,161
136
Now, if discussions were ever to be on the table, that would have been an opportune time for the Iranians to do something drastic to gain leverage. The Iranians have now dramatically demonstrated that they cannot be ignored while sanctions remain in place. Bear in mind that as of May this year, the sanctions tightened to include an embargo on Irans oil sales. Iran itself has said they will not sit idly by while this goes on. After May, oil tankers and other assets have been attacked, either by Iranian proxies or directly by Iran. The Saudi attack is the big one.

I believe the Iranians have ably proven that many Saudi assets are vulnerable despite the purchase of every US weapons system they can get their hands on. I doubt the kingdom thought that prior to this incident.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KMFJD

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,952
8,002
136
Have any of you ever watched the Houthis work? They deserve to be carpet bombed!

People fighting a war are seen... fighting a war? Please explain the outrage.

PS, how are those people running around in the dirt expected to be the ones who carried the drone attack? Seems a bit too sophisticated for them alone.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
People fighting a war are seen... fighting a war? Please explain the outrage.

PS, how are those people running around in the dirt expected to be the ones who carried the drone attack? Seems a bit too sophisticated for them alone.

They're just foot soldiers. The Houthis captured the Yemeni state. Their leadership & capabilities are highly sophisticated-


It's a long article & highly informative from an excellent source.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,671
28,824
136
Can someone explain to me how the Saudis get to decide if our soldiers are put in harms way?

We have no treaty with SA and the attack on their oil fields was not an attack on the United States.

Constitutional much? Do any of you care?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
30,031
45,261
136
Will you consider joining the Houthis fighters before our bombers arrive on station? :p
wouldn't be the first time your country bombed the wrong people, better hurry up, MBS doesn't like his servants taking too long
 
Last edited:

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,094
2,363
136
Can someone explain to me how the Saudis get to decide if our soldiers are put in harms way?

We have no treaty with SA and the attack on their oil fields was not an attack on the United States.

Constitutional much? Do any of you care?
It has nothing to do with protecting Saudi per se, but everything to do with the global economic and security issues this presents. The U.S. would not be acting on behalf of the Saudis, but entirely for their own self-interest. 20% of the worlds oil is shipped from the Persian Gulf. There are other oil producing countries, namely Kuwait, UAE and Iraq and are equally vulnerable to similar attacks. The turmoil that would hit the global economy is tremendous. That from an economic perspective.

From a security perspective, a potential nightmare now stares everyone in the face. Civilian installations, airports, vital infrastructures of other countries now face the same potential threats and from a good distance. A lot of angry misfits, terrorists have now gotten ideas from the attack on the Saudis and its only a matter of time before their ideas could be put into action.

Also, the U.S. would not want to go to battle without the approval of the Saudis. Since its their own country that would face the brunt of any further attacks in response to any military action the U.S. does.
 
Last edited:

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,165
28,812
136
It has nothing to do with protecting Saudi per se, but everything to do with the global economic and security issues this presents. The U.S. would not be acting on behalf of the Saudis, but entirely for their own self-interest. 20% of the worlds oil is shipped from the Persian Gulf. There are other oil producing countries, namely Kuwait, UAE and Iraq and are equally vulnerable to similar attacks. The turmoil that would hit the global economy is tremendous. That from an economic perspective.

From a security perspective, a potential nightmare now stares everyone in the face. Civilian installations, airports, vital infrastructures of other countries now face the same potential threats and from a good distance. A lot of angry misfits, terrorists have now gotten ideas from the attack on the Saudis and its only a matter of time before their ideas could be put into action.

Also, the U.S. would not want to go to battle without the approval of the Saudis. Since its their own country that would face the brunt of any further attacks in response to any military action the U.S. does.
The U.S. carrying out attacks in response to the apparent drone attack on Saudi facilities would do nothing to alleviate any of the concerns mentioned in your post and would most likely encourage further attacks. Also, the Sauds don't dictate when the U.S. goes to war. Only the U.S. Congress can do that. As things stand, I see zero reason for the U.S. to go to war with anybody. In fact, now would be an excellent time for the Trump administration to refrain from further assisting the Sauds in their dirty little war.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
47,990
37,161
136
It has nothing to do with protecting Saudi per se, but everything to do with the global economic and security issues this presents. The U.S. would not be acting on behalf of the Saudis, but entirely for their own self-interest. 20% of the worlds oil is shipped from the Persian Gulf. There are other oil producing countries, namely Kuwait, UAE and Iraq and are equally vulnerable to similar attacks. The turmoil that would hit the global economy is tremendous. That from an economic perspective.

From a security perspective, a potential nightmare now stares everyone in the face. Civilian installations, airports, vital infrastructures of other countries now face the same potential threats and from a good distance. A lot of angry misfits, terrorists have now gotten ideas from the attack on the Saudis and its only a matter of time before their ideas could be put into action.

Also, the U.S. would not want to go to battle without the approval of the Saudis. Since its their own country that would face the brunt of any further attacks in response to any military action the U.S. does.

Wut?

Drone attacks of varying sophistication are not really new. It's been a problem for years. Whatever the Iranians did rather likely took more resources and operational skill than is readily available to garden variety terrorists.

I doubt there is much appetite domestically for a war to protect Saudi interests that they themselves put at risk by propelling to policy to antagonize the Iranians. Also Iran isn't Iraq or similar. If we kick over that hornet's nest it's going to get regionally ugly. US interests would have been better served adhering to our deal and assuring sufficient supply.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,094
2,363
136
I doubt there is much appetite domestically for a war to protect Saudi interests that they themselves put at risk by propelling to policy to antagonize the Iranians. Also Iran isn't Iraq or similar. If we kick over that hornet's nest it's going to get regionally ugly. US interests would have been better served adhering to our deal and assuring sufficient supply.
The Saudi-U.S.-Israel anti-Iran drive since Trump took over messed everything up. Obama was on the right track with the JCPOA. Trump comes to power and flushes it down the toilet and ratchets up the sanctions vs Iran. In May, he enforces a ban on Irans oil shipments. Iran tells the world they will not sit idly by while they are being economically strangled to death. Attacks on oil tankers occur, Houthi rebels increase their attacks on the Saudis, and then the big one at Abqaiq/Kurais. It was all percolating. Trump screwed it all up. Its what happens when a super-power country elects a moron as head of state.
 

Juiblex

Banned
Sep 26, 2016
500
253
136

Houthis have been attacking with Drones for years. Anyways. That video I just linked goes over it.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,619
4,674
136
In my honest opinion since SA has all of the weapons they need, they should protect their own countries assets against Iran or who ever launched the attacks.

I would say that the US should support a precision strike in retaliation by SA against Iran. The US should not be directly involved unless they strike US Assets.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,952
8,002
136
Houthis have been attacking with Drones for years. Anyways. That video I just linked goes over it.

Meanwhile.... Iranian cruise missiles and drones used

It has been more than three days since Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure was crippled and, as the investigation continues, fingers are pointing toward Iran as not only the perpetrator, but also the launch territory.
U.S. officials told Fox News on Tuesday that Iranian cruise missiles and drones were both used in the attack on the two Saudi Arabian oil facilities, and that they were fired from inside southwest Iran.
If this is our government's official statement on the attack, I don't see how they can justify avoiding a full scale military response.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
Meanwhile.... Iranian cruise missiles and drones used

It has been more than three days since Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure was crippled and, as the investigation continues, fingers are pointing toward Iran as not only the perpetrator, but also the launch territory.
U.S. officials told Fox News on Tuesday that Iranian cruise missiles and drones were both used in the attack on the two Saudi Arabian oil facilities, and that they were fired from inside southwest Iran.
If this is our government's official statement on the attack, I don't see how they can justify avoiding a full scale military response.

And you believe this govt. You do remember who is in charge of this govt.? And you believe them?

Remember a wee place called Iraq?
 

Juiblex

Banned
Sep 26, 2016
500
253
136
Meanwhile.... Iranian cruise missiles and drones used

It has been more than three days since Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure was crippled and, as the investigation continues, fingers are pointing toward Iran as not only the perpetrator, but also the launch territory.
U.S. officials told Fox News on Tuesday that Iranian cruise missiles and drones were both used in the attack on the two Saudi Arabian oil facilities, and that they were fired from inside southwest Iran.
If this is our government's official statement on the attack, I don't see how they can justify avoiding a full scale military response.
I don't believe our government with anything they say. We are run from Israel. And Saudis are in bed with both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,165
28,812
136
Meanwhile.... Iranian cruise missiles and drones used

It has been more than three days since Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure was crippled and, as the investigation continues, fingers are pointing toward Iran as not only the perpetrator, but also the launch territory.
U.S. officials told Fox News on Tuesday that Iranian cruise missiles and drones were both used in the attack on the two Saudi Arabian oil facilities, and that they were fired from inside southwest Iran.
If this is our government's official statement on the attack, I don't see how they can justify avoiding a full scale military response.
Of course our government can avoid a military response. We can mind our own business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie