Saudi Arabia oil supply was attacked. There is reason to believe that we know the culprit, are locked and loaded depending on verification, but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2019
As part of Bibi Netanyahu’s desperate pre-election machinations, he and Pres. Trump announced plans for a mutual defense pact, which they’re set to sign after the election. It was a nice pre-election goodie offered by the American leader to help seal the Israeli leader’s victory in a tight race.
But given Trump’s statements today, Bibi doesn’t need such an agreement for the U.S. to jump into action, were Israel to face a military threat. The U.S. president boasted that the U.S. is “locked and loaded” and waiting for Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to give him the green light to attack Iran. Using macho slang more suitable for a Rambo movie than a presidential policy statement, this is a shameful bit of posing. It makes Trump appear to be MBS’ partner in crime, rather than the leader of the most powerful nation on earth.
Apparently, Sen. Lindsey Graham can fire off a tweet calling for military strikes against Iran in retaliation for the missile assault on Saudi oil fields yesterday, and Trump immediately phones in an airstrike. That’s how U.S. military strategy works these days. The only thing I’m thankful for now is that John Bolton is no longer perched on his shoulder like a tiny devil whispering sweet nothings about the next country we should pummel into submission. But despite the ex-national security advisor’s demise, it doesn’t mean there will be many other voices trying to restrain him. Pompeo, after all, hates Iran as much as Bolton did.
Trump believes that he can launch such an attack as a discrete military operation with little impact outside the attack itself. But that’s clearly delusional. Until this week, Trump was planning a summit meeting with Iran’s Pres. Rouhani at the upcoming UN session. He was said to be considering $15-billion in sanctions relief in return for Iran coming back into compliance with the JCPOA agreement. That of course, will go out the window the second cruise missiles are fired and F-35s take off from U.S. aircraft carriers in the Gulf.
That may be why Trump has changed his tune about the UN meeting. He tweeted yet another lie about the conditions under which he would attend:
The Fake News is saying that I am willing to meet with Iran, “No Conditions.” That is an incorrect statement (as usual!).
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2019
Of course, several of his cabinet secretaries, including Pompeo and Mnuchin have said precisely that. And Trump did not dispute their characterizations when they voiced them. Clearly, Trump was willing to meet with Rouhani unconditionally…until he wasn’t.
What’s especially alarming is that Trump sees no “daylight” between Saudi and Israeli interests on the one hand, and our own: to him, an attack on one is an attack on all. This sort of approach is what led to World War I. And it should not be repeated.
Israel is the most aggressive, expansionist state in the region. Saudi Arabia is not far behind. Why should the U.S. backstop their bloodthirsty military assaults in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and Iraq? If these two countries face resistance in pursuing regional hegemony, how does that damage U.S. interests? If they are attacked due to their reckless policies toward their neighbors, why do we owe it to them to give their enemies a bloody nose? Let them fight their own battles, winning or losing on their own terms.
The truth is that Trump is a bully. Not the kind of bully who will roll up his sleeves and get into a slugging match with an adversary. Rather, he’s the kind who starts the school year looking for the skinniest, weakest student in the class. Then he goes about making life a living hell for him over the course of the rest of the year. In other words, he’s a bully who exploits the weak and fears the strong. He makes a cold calculation about how aggressive he can be based on how much his victim can harm him in return.
Israel and the Saudis are much the same. That is why they thump their chests like silver-back gorillas in the face of rivals like Iran and Turkey. If either of them had nuclear weapons, the saber-rattling would be substantially toned down. But as it is, they bully because they can. The Saudis can kill tens of thousands of Yemenis with hardly a whimper from Yemen or the world. Israel can massacre thousands of Gazans over more than a decade and suffer little more than a few minor scratches from Palestinian rockets fired in response.
Trump and these two states are drawn to each other because each of their leaders is a bully threatening rivals with an iron club. They stare in the mirror each morning and admire their manliness. They preen and coo to each other as charter members of a mutual admiration society.
Iranian Missiles Attacked Saudi Arabia from Bases in Iraq
David Hearst confirms reports that the devastating attack which took out half of Saudi oil production yesterday, was the product of Iranian missile strikes originating from southern Iraq. Though Iran’s leadership has denied it was responsible, Hearst’s report seems far more credible:
The strikes which paralysed the Saudi oil industry on Saturday morning, forcing it to halve its output of crude oil, were made by Iranian drones launched from Hashd al-Shaabi bases in southern Iraq, a senior Iraqi intelligence official has told Middle East Eye.
The attacks on Abqaiq and Khurais, two key Aramco facilities in eastern Saudi Arabia, were in retaliation for Israeli drone strikes on Hashd al-Shaabi bases and convoys in August, which were co-ordinated and funded by the Saudis, the official said.
If you read my post published last night, you’ll recall that I speculated that this attack was connected to the Israeli assaults on Iranian assets and bases inside Iraq. Turns out I was right. Hearst further details the purpose of the attack:
“The latest attack comes for two reasons: another message from Iran to USA and its allies that as long as its siege on Iran continues no one will have stability in the region. However, the second more direct reason is a strong Iranian revenge for the recent Israeli attacks by drones launched from SDF-controlled areas in Syria against pro-Iranian Hashd bases,” he said.
“These Israeli drone attacks were supported and financed by the Saudis. That is why the recent attack was the most devastating, while the previous attacks were more symbolic and inflicted little harm,” the official said.
This too echoes what I wrote last night: Iran is sending a pointed message to the Israelis who mounted the original attack inside Iraq (possibly on behalf of the Saudis), the Saudis themselves, and the U.S., that the more pain you inflict on Iran and its allies, the more damage you will suffer in turn.
This is also the first time anyone has confirmed not just the Saudi-Israeli military alliance, but that the Saudis are financially subsidizing the Israeli military assaults. You’ll recall that they invested up to $1-billion in the earlier Israeli-U.S. joint cyber-attacks on the Natanz nuclear facility. So the Saudis funding Israel’s assaults on Iranian bases in Iraq seems entirely within the realm of possibility.
More anti-Iranian zionist propaganda… I don’t know who we should trust less… Saudi Arabia, David Hearst or Richard Silverstein… “Saudi story is very suspicious. Called it a drone attack. US satellites showed it was really a missile attack. Now Saudis agree it was a missile attack.”… Could have come from ANYwhere (!)…
@ economasterful: You’re an idiot. I’m interviewed by PressTV usually 2-3 times a week. Would they interview me so regularly if I was anti-Iranian? David Hearst is a distinguished journalists with decades of experience reporting similar exclusive stories based on Middle Eastern sources. What are your bona fides?
And your claims about what U.S. satellites showed is wrong. In fact, U.S. officials have said there could have been a coordinated attack that involved both drones AND missiles.
Syrian air-defense is able rather successfully to down the very developed western and Israeli missiles and drones, even they do not have the best latest requirements. Saudi Arabia has spent completely absurd sums to western, especially American, weapons and they can not even locate a swarm of drones and/or cruise missiles flying one thousand kilometers through their country against their biggest oil producing facility in the world.
There are three possibilities to make this
1) Americans have sold Saudi Arabia total garbage as radars and air defense training
or
2) The Houthi or Iranian drones or cruise missiles are so developed that western radar systems do not see them at all
or
3) It did not happen as we are told.
With the present “official” story line we have to choose to explain the consequences either with the useless but expensive Saudi air defense or superior skilled enemy.
The irony of all this is that American regime claims to know certainly who was behind the attack, but did not warn their best weapon customer and do not want to explain how US equipped, trained and partly operated Saudi defense was beaten in this scale.
@ SimoHurtta: Another factor to consider: if it is this easy for the Houthi &/or Iranians to hit Saudi targets with their drones and missiles, Israel may want to rethink how impregnable it is from these same weapons should it attack Iran. One has to assume that Saudi anti-missile defenses are at least as good as Israel’s. If so, and these strikes are so effective against Saudi targets, could they inflict a similar level of damage on Israel?
It is so cool to see how you treat a missile attack by Iran as a legitimate strategic move while when Israel is the one to attack you treat it as a crime against humanity.
You are an agent in this debate and long ago chose a size. This isn’t journalism.
@Joshua: You confuse analysis with advocacy. I an analyzing events and policy. I am not advocating on behalf of one side or another. Your problem is that your ox is being gored and you don’t like my Pointing out it was your ox that started the fight.
All Israel has to do to stop these attacks is resolve its hostilities with its neighbors. As long as it maintains a bellicose, rejectionist stance, it will continue to reap the whirlwind.
Your definition of “journalism” is what you like to hear. That’s not journalism either.
@SimoHurtta: “Syrian air-defense is able rather successfully to down the very developed western and Israeli missiles” – and this is based on what, Syrian and Russian statements every time Israel successfully strikes various sites in Syria?
Russian air defense systems are very good at shooting down planes. Intercepting missiles is a very different story.
@Nisim: it hardly matters whether Israel succeeds or fails at delivering its missiles to targets in Syria. the fact is, that it has failed to topple Assad as it attempted to do, and it has failed to suppress Iranian military activity there as well.
@Richard Silverstein: Whether Israel succeeds at delivering missiles to targets in Syria matters to the only point I was making: that failure to thwart the attack on the Saudi facilities does not support SimoHurtta’s proposed exclusive scenarios. Whether Israel’s strikes in Syria are strategically successful or merely operationally successful is beside the point.
How do we know that it was not Israel, israel did it and blamed saudi
@ali: oh please. Don’t be ridiculous. How do we know al Qaeda didn’t do it? Or the dancing Israelis didn’t do it? Or the Jinn didn’t do it?
[comment deleted: you’re either a pro-Israel troll or an Islamist anti-Semite. I don’t know which and it doesn’t matter. Try this crap again and you’ll be banned.]
In the fog of war …
Gulf of Tonkin on Aug. 2, 1964
the States involved will distort the truth … decades later perhaps we’ll find the facts.
Consider this, Richard Silverstein.
Consider this.
In May of this year, the U.S. government announced it had gathered intelligence indicating Iran might be preparing to launch attacks on American military personnel or other interests across the Middle East.
Satellite imagery appeared to show elements of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) loading large missiles – possibly cruise missiles – onto boats in the Persian Gulf.
Were these the cruise missiles used in yesterday’s attack on the Saudi oil installations?
@ Benyamin: Why does any of this matter? My post plus the source to which I linked both said it was likely Iranian missiles attacked Saudi Arabia. Why do cruise missiles on Iranian ships have any significance?
Miss Piggy Sara Natanyahu really should give the pink suits a miss…
Well Nisin how many planes have Russians and Syrians shot down above Syria during this “civil war”? A couple at best, but they have shot down hundreds of Israeli, American etc missiles and guided bombs. Israelis do not dare to enter Syrian airspace. They fire the missiles and guided bombs from the airspace outside Syria (Lebanon or the sea). Most of these objects have been then shot down by the Syrian air defense. It is stupid to undermine the skills and technology the “enemy” has, especially when the evidence clearly shows “results”. It is not anymore 1967 or 1973 and even then Israel was saved only by US aid and interference. Today Russia (and their customers) have missile defense systems as (or more) developed as Israeli and US systems.
Now the American regime is spreading “evidence” that the drones came from Iran. So we are demanded to believe, that the large swarm of Iranian drones and missiles flew undetected through the area full of warships, giant military bases of numerous local and foreign countries and finally through Saudi defense lines. That must be the world record in bypassing the most sophisticated radar systems in the world. It is almost impossible to believe that Iranians would have so sophisticated drones and missiles. If it has US and Israeli leaders have real problems with their enemy’s weapons and own missile defense’s quality.
In the news is that Russians are now publicly (with a smile) offering Saudi Arabia air defense systems, that must really enrage the main weapon salesmen in “Trumpistan”. First they lost Turkey and now …
@ SimoHurtta: There is very little evidence, except Syrian government officials and media, that the Syrians have shot down Israeli missiles. I believe a few years ago I covered a story about an Israeli missile that was shot down and landed in Jordan. Other than that, I’ve read nothing credible or convincing about such interceptions. Just to be clear, I’m opposed to Israeli intervention in Syria, as I’ve said here many times before. But I also believe that statements made should be based on credible facts and not on government propaganda from one side or another.
How come you always rant about “israeli hostilities” and now, after Iran is being invited to the table, Iran decides go on the offense, you are silent?
“If it was Israel, you would have called it rejectionism. Why when Iran is destroying the chance for peace, it is a legitimate step?
@ Joshua:
Invited to the table? By whom? How? When? When the U.S. began starving Iranian babies by imposing sanctions? When the U.S. insulted Iran by calling it the worst agent of terror in the world? When it flew drones over Iranian airspace?
There was a chance for peace. It was called the JCPOA. And Bibi and Trump destroyed it. There is so longer a chance for peace. There is only a chance for war. Until BIbi and Trump are toppled and the world can step back from the precipice.
@Richard
” Why does any of this matter?”
It matters because David Hearst’s single, unidentifiable, Iraqi ‘source’, says the recent attack is revenge for an Israeli-Saudi attack in August, but, there was as American warning of a pending attack in May, months before Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Kurds allegedly struck a deal.
How does Hearst’s ‘source’ know Iran’s recent attack, using some sort of hybrid cruise missile, wasn’t planned in May, before the Israel-Saudi attack?
Why is Hearst’s ‘source’ the only one pointing to the Israel-Saud-Kurd attack as the root cause of the attack on the Saudi refinery? Don’t other journalists throughout the world have ‘sources’ in Iraqi Intelligence?
It would help of another ‘source’ could confirm Hearst’s claim.
@ Benyamin: David Hearst and his sources are impeccable. Hearst needs to prove nothing to you. He has proven himself time and again with previous inside scoops on Middle East politics.
No, there was a warning of an impending attack in May against U.S. assets. Not a warning of an attack on Saudi Arabia.
You clearly don’t understand much about how things work in this neck of the woods. Iran doesn’t plan an attack in May and execute it in September.
Again, he doesn’t need authentification of his source. Heart’s record stands for itself. He’s practicing journalism. You’re practicing bullshit.
I guess not.
Hearst’s job is not to help you. His job is to be the best journalist he can and report stories no one else can. And he does it well.
You are done in this thread.
[comment deleted: yet another offensive, anti-Semitic comment. YOu are now moderated. Your next comment violating the rules will earn banning.]
Sorry Richard, what did I say that is antisemitic?
There is no proof that Iran did the attack only what the american admin says. They may be lying or they may be misled.
I really believe Israel did it to put Saudi and Iran to war. Why are you so sure it is not Israel?
Did you read ‘Gideon’s Spies’ by Gordon Thomas? He is a respected journalist. He said, Mossad and Israel are always doing things like this, using a ‘divide and rule’ policy.
@ Ali: You’re fighting a losing battle. THere is ample proof either Iran or one of its ally/proxies did it. I hate conspiracy theorists and I’m not going to permit you to sling bullshit here. That means you’re done in this thread. No more comments here.
Frankly, I don’t understand why the resistance to accepting an Iranian role, either direct or indirect. If the U.S., Israel and Iran’s enemies are threatening it and trampling on its interests, why doesn’t Iran have a right to respond and defend those interests? I think you want your cake and to eat it too. You want Iran to be able to actively resist threats and damage to its interests, but you also want to deny Iran has any role doing so. That seems disingenuous.
Gordon Thomas is a jackass. He knows as much about the Mossad as he knows about nuclear physics or brain surgery. He is not a respected journalist. He’s a sensationalist.
And even if Israel did it (which it didn’t) the Mossad would have little or nothing to do with it. THis would be an IDF operation, not Mossad. Which once again betrays your ignorance…
[comment deleted: I warned you to pay attention when I told you that you were done in the thread. You have repeatedly ignored this including in this thread. Therefore, I have moderated you. You may continue to post comments if you wish. But only those which respect the comment rules will be published.
[comment deleted: you have again violated the comment rules by posting an off-topic comment not directly related to the post. The next comment violation will cause you to be banned.]