Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
DarkHunter

Aramco facilities on fire in Saudi Arabia

384 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Earl.Of.Trumps
4 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Well, I'm tempted to agree @Earl.Of.Trumps

We should have an international commission to examine ALL of the evidence, with access to the restricted USA satellites, detailed forensic investigation of the missile debris, and a thorough engineering report of the actual site damage. 

And THEN we bomb Iran :D 

<grin>  America back in the day had a judge in the wild wild west, Isaac Parker, who earned the moniker "the Hanging Judge".

He was famous for saying, "First we'll give him a fair trial, then we'll hang him".  :lol:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
6 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

<grin>  America back in the day had a judge in the wild wild west, Isaac Parker, who earned the moniker "the Hanging Judge".

He was famous for saying, "First we'll give him a fair trial, then we'll hang him".  :lol:

My point precisely @Earl.Of.Trumps ! (although I didn't specifically know about Isaac Parker, so thanks for that :) ) 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter

The American troops currently heading to Saudi Arabia have been announced.  Its 1 patriot battery, 4 sentinel radars, and 200 support troops.  A further 2 patriot batteries and a THAAD unit are being put on alert for potentially being sent to Saudi Arabia.

A bit surprisingly the Netherlands has recently joined the group blaming Iran for the aramco attacks.  The joint investigation involving Saudi Arabia, America, EU, and the UN is still ongoing.  America is going through the process of declassifying the satellite photographs which they claim show the cruise missiles and drones being prepped for the attack.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

Looks like war is abrewing, to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
crookedspiral
On 9/25/2019 at 7:48 AM, RoofGardener said:

Lets face it; the attack came from the North. It seems highly improbable that the Houthis - without expert guidance - could have carried out this attack. And they would have had to transport the drones and cruise missiles all the way into southern Iraq (or Kuwait) to do it. This seems..... highly improbable. 

It's a false flag.

Part of the ''maximum pressure'' campaign against Iran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
10 hours ago, crookedspiral said:

It's a false flag.

Part of the ''maximum pressure'' campaign against Iran.

I do consider that a possibility.  Can't prove it but that might be real. Israel/US pull these stunts more than is generally known.

USS Liberty, anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
On 9/25/2019 at 12:40 PM, RoofGardener said:

The Saudi's - unlike the Iranians - do NOT have a track record of making extravagant bellicose empty threats.  

they just have a track record of lying and of being general cowards so that they try to get their big powerful allies to do things for them that they're too cowardly to do themselves. It is quite bemusing watching people tying themselves up in legalistic quibbling in their attempts to manufacture sympathy for such an unpleasant bunch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

* In other news, the subject of Syria seems to have dropped off the front page, but as it's in the Middle East I'll just put this little snippet here. It's relevant to the subject of bellicose empty threats anyway, 

Also on Thursday, the Treasury Department imposed economic penalties against a subsidiary of a Russian shipping company, three of its executives, and five vessels accused of evading American sanctions to deliver jet fuel to Russian forces in Syria who are assisting Mr. Assad’s government.

So Pompeo the Pompous is sanctioning Russians for supplying their own forces? He's getting that absurd now? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
44 minutes ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

* In other news, the subject of Syria seems to have dropped off the front page, but as it's in the Middle East I'll just put this little snippet here. It's relevant to the subject of bellicose empty threats anyway, 

Also on Thursday, the Treasury Department imposed economic penalties against a subsidiary of a Russian shipping company, three of its executives, and five vessels accused of evading American sanctions to deliver jet fuel to Russian forces in Syria who are assisting Mr. Assad’s government.

So Pompeo the Pompous is sanctioning Russians for supplying their own forces? He's getting that absurd now? 

 

And just a political aside, DtA, the US sanctions Russians in Syria helping to fight ISIS and al Qaeda, gives military aid to Russia's enemy, Ukraine, and yet silly people in America think that Trump is Putin's lap dog.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Caspian Hare
Quote

It's a false flag.

Part of the ''maximum pressure'' campaign against Iran.

Don't think that makes sense for a couple reasons. This kind of attack is consistent with Iran's past behavior, current capabilities and limitations, and goals.

1. Iran considers itself already in an economic war with the US. The sanctions are hammering them. This is a way of trying to get the US to back down.

2. Iran is weak economically but good at covert action and asymmetric warfare. This is exactly how they hsould be expected to fight a militarily, economically superior foe.

3. Iran is able to endure more hardship than Saudi Arabia, and therefore willing to risk limited military action by the US. They fought Saddam Hussein for 8 years and endured air raids, invasion and chemical weapon attacks.  Saudi Arabia's is by comparison quite vulnerable, dependent on patronage for loyalty. A major attack on its oil infrastructure, bigger than what we have seen, could cripple producttion and bring down the house of Saud.

4. At the same time the recent attacks are precise. They are dramatic and attention-grabbing but non-lethal, proving that Iran must be taken seriously without requiring a large-scale response.

To sum up: the regime feels under pressure and is willing to risk a military response.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

@The Caspian Hare,  Iran - if they did the dirty, took umbrage at and punished Saudi Arabia, not the US.  One would expect a response from SA.

But if it is a false flag, surely it would be  made to look like Iran did it for purposes of getting the US involved. I still suspect false flag because SA is just sitting there without much to say, as if they were tipped off to the operation.

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
On 9/27/2019 at 6:09 AM, crookedspiral said:

It's a false flag.

Part of the ''maximum pressure'' campaign against Iran.

You know I'm as far from wanting a war with Iran as can be but I don't believe this was a false flag. It's the result of pushing a nation to the absolute brink with no way out. 

Iran is backed into a corner by the US's unjustified sanctions and has no option but to strike back where they can. Which is exactly what the likes of Pompeo and Bolton wanted. 

I don't think Trump really wants a war but to avoid one now would mean admitting he made a mistake. Something he's just not mature enough to do. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
18 hours ago, The Caspian Hare said:

the regime feels under pressure and is willing to risk a military response.

It's their last play in a losing game.  Just a matter of time before they are compelled to ratchet up the tempo again if the sanctions stay in place.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
5 hours ago, Setton said:

You know I'm as far from wanting a war with Iran as can be but I don't believe this was a false flag. It's the result of pushing a nation to the absolute brink with no way out. 

Then why didn't Iran just admit it? - as in "let's get it on"? And why did Iran attack Saudi Arabi instead of the US?

This is only a US/Iran conflict because the bully US says so! It is really an Iran/Saudi Arabia affair

5 hours ago, Setton said:

Iran is backed into a corner by the US's unjustified sanctions and has no option but to strike back where they can. Which is exactly what the likes of Pompeo and Bolton wanted. 

I don't think Trump really wants a war but to avoid one now would mean admitting he made a mistake. Something he's just not mature enough to do. 

I hope beyond hope Trump keeps us out. He's our only hope in the sea of war pigs in Washington. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
14 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

This is only a US/Iran conflict because the bully US says so! It is really an Iran/Saudi Arabia affair

To be fair though, it think it;s mainly a US/Iran conflict because the Saudis have bullied the US into fighting, or at any rate blustering bellicosely, on their behalf. Never mind Russia or Ukraine, one day someone's going to be brave enough to really probe into what this hold is that Saudi has over the US . I just hope they don't accept any invitations to a have a nice friendly chat at any Saudi consulates to discuss the matters they bring up ... 

Edited by Dumbledore the Awesome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
1 hour ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

To be fair though, it think it;s mainly a US/Iran conflict because the Saudis have bullied the US into fighting, or at any rate blustering bellicosely, on their behalf.

Let them bully. Who cares. Will the US let Iran bully them into warring with Israel?  lol
Nah. The US is doing what it always does - fight in someone else's back yard on the other side of the planet. "Iran says bad words about Israel..? I keel you, Iran!"

Quote

Never mind Russia or Ukraine, one day someone's going to be brave enough to really probe into what this hold is that Saudi has over the US . I just hope they don't accept any invitations to a have a nice friendly chat at any Saudi consulates to discuss the matters they bring up ... 

What do you suspect?  Oil=$$$?  I'd like to know why Israel has a Christian nation (US) right by the short hairs, too.
I think the US is doing more the bidding of Israel than SA, myself. Like Iraq and the bogus WoMD claim. 

How hard would it be to have SA put a battery of troops/drones dressed in Iran garb into northern SA to make it look like the Iranians did it? (convincing satellite images)

I wouldn't at all put it past the US/Israel to concoct such a false flag. Very easy to do and SA would go along as part of the US invading an enemy

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
2 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

I'd like to know why Israel has a Christian nation (US) right by the short hairs, too.

Well that one's easy. the Senate is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Knesset. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
On 9/28/2019 at 7:01 PM, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

Well that one's easy. the Senate is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Knesset. 

Yeah, and the Jews drink the blood of christian babies as well, dontcha know ? 

Quit it with the antisemitic tropes, Dumbledore. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
19 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Yeah, and the Jews drink the blood of christian babies as well, dontcha know ? 

Quit it with the antisemitic tropes, Dumbledore. 

there it is see, the classic tactic of the Israel at All Costs lobby. Any criticism of the Israeli government = you subscribe to Der Stürmer and want to haul the Jews off to the camps. I'm afraid that tactic's wearing a bit thin, people are beginning to see through it. Perhaps the time is coming to consider some of the things that are said about the way the Israeli government behaves rather than just resorting to the "Antisemitism!!" trigger word. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
Just now, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

there it is see, the classic tactic of the Israel at All Costs lobby. Any criticism of the Israeli government = you subscribe to Der Stürmer and want to haul the Jews off to the camps. I'm afraid that tactic's wearing a bit thin, people are beginning to see through it. Perhaps the time is coming to consider some of the things that are said about the way the Israeli government behaves rather than just resorting to the "Antisemitism!!" trigger word. 

No @Dumbledore the Awesome. I didn't pull you up as part of a "trigger" campaign. I pulled you up because you used the tired old trope that "Israel controls the US government". 

This is as offensive to the US government as it is to the Jews. Now sit in the corner of the room with your nose against the wall until October ! 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
8 minutes ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

there it is see, the classic tactic of the Israel at All Costs lobby. Any criticism of the Israeli government = you subscribe to Der Stürmer and want to haul the Jews off to the camps. I'm afraid that tactic's wearing a bit thin, people are beginning to see through it. Perhaps the time is coming to consider some of the things that are said about the way the Israeli government behaves rather than just resorting to the "Antisemitism!!" trigger word. 

"Jewish money controlling (fill in the blank)" IS an anti-Semitic trope, by definition.  Try it anywhere other than a website that glorifies them and you'd be called out on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Meanwhile, back in Topicsville.... 

We don't need a major war against Iran. A week or three spent bombing its coastal facilities would shut down pretty much all of its oil production, wouldn't it ? This would cause them to rapidly run out of money, including the ability to pay its soldiers.. at which point it seems increasingly likely that there would be a coup against the Mullahs. 

No need for land troops. No "boots on the ground". Nice and easy ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

Meanwhile, back in Topicsville.... 

We don't need a major war against Iran. A week or three spent bombing its coastal facilities would shut down pretty much all of its oil production, wouldn't it ? This would cause them to rapidly run out of money, including the ability to pay its soldiers.. at which point it seems increasingly likely that there would be a coup against the Mullahs. 

No need for land troops. No "boots on the ground". Nice and easy ? 

Wouldnt even need an entire week let alone 3.  Kharg Iand, Lavan Island, and Sirri Island pretty much handle all of Iran's oil exports.  Just taking out Kharg Island would practically end Iran's oil exports but all three could be destroyed within minutes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then
3 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

No need for land troops. No "boots on the ground". Nice and easy ? 

Oh, no.  Not easy.  They would have lots and lots of tricks set up for us around the globe.  It would be a real war.  They could kill Americans there and here at home.  If they are allowed to possess nukes, they could do far more damage.  No one ever said war didn't involve pain and costs.  With Iran, the price paid today will be far less than the cost in a few more years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DarkHunter
16 minutes ago, and then said:

Oh, no.  Not easy.  They would have lots and lots of tricks set up for us around the globe.  It would be a real war.  They could kill Americans there and here at home.  If they are allowed to possess nukes, they could do far more damage.  No one ever said war didn't involve pain and costs.  With Iran, the price paid today will be far less than the cost in a few more years.

But without money to pay for the terror cells and facing certain death how many would actually follow the orders and how many would rather just continue what is probably a rather comfortable and safe life.  Undoubtedly some fanatically loyal cells would attack no matter what

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.