Jump to content


Photo

Storm In A Teacup, Or Rn Vs. Iran


  • Please log in to reply
274 replies to this topic

#221 Roman Alymov

Roman Alymov

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,497 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1252 PM

Iran is pushing the boundaries to see up to where it can go. They want the sanctions lifted, but they have already learned that the US is a paper tiger after Iraq was handed to them (and I am sure they haven't forgotten 1980-88) and they hit tankers in tge Gulf twice with no consequences. 

Note US UAW shot down – US officially claimed it was in international airspace, and even if it was not – now everybody know (including more powerful opponents like China) that US UAW in international airspace is legitimate target if you are strong enough.

 

 

 They are now seeing if a direct attack on SA triggers a response. Saddam got topped for that.

Actually, not – Saddam successfully  survived attack on Kuwait, and was only toppled years later on fake reasons/


  • 0

#222 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,282 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1341 PM

Roman Actually, not – Saddam successfully  survived attack on Kuwait, and was only toppled years later on fake reasons/

 

 

Saddam got regime changed because he was weak and held in contempt.  Regime change is not an option here, and killing this or that Mullah or Revolutionary Guards general won't matter to the regime's control.


  • 0

#223 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,937 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1435 PM

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?


  • 0

#224 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,061 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1450 PM

I wish that were the case, but...oil is a Fungible Commodity.
  • 0

#225 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,598 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1450 PM

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?

 

Because the previous deal was a terrible deal, the worst deal, and we're going to negotiate a better deal.

 

On more serious note, I'm all for making the KSA fight its own battles. But I think we know that isn't how this will play out.


  • 0

#226 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,339 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1520 PM

According to CNN,

 

 

The attack involved cruise missiles -- along with drones -- flying at low altitude, the source said, and their trajectory was from the north of the Abqaiq oil plant, which was struck by more than a dozen projectiles in the early hours of Saturday morning.

 

 

The missiles, according to the investigators' current assessment, flew over southern Iraq and through Kuwaiti airspace before reaching their targets. Kuwait on Monday announced it had launched an investigation into reports of sightings of drones or missiles shortly before the Saudi targets were hit.

 

Alertness of Kuwaiti AD left me without words. This looks like ROC spotters in the 21st century.

 

 

Another source who has spoken with Saudi government officials has told CNN that based on images of the wreckage that fell in the desert, at least some of the missiles used are known as the Quds 1.

 

Small problem, Quds 1 is said to be a Houti copy of the Iranian Soumar, itself a copy of Kh-55, a 80's era CM. Nice gene stability through clonings.

 

 

However, the Quds 1 does not appear to have the sort of range that would allow it to hit Abqaiq from Houthi-held parts of Yemen, some 1,300 kilometers away.

Fabian Hinz, research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, has researched the different varieties of missiles the Houthis have and says of the Quds 1, "both the missile's smaller size and its more fuel-hungry engine make it seem unlikely its range would be anywhere close to the Soumar's/Hoveyzeh's range of 1350 kilometers." The Soumar and Hoveyzeh are longer-range missiles that the Houthis have.

 

But, according to Wiki, the original Kh-55 is 2,500 km (1,300 nmi) range, so someone lost in the km/mile change, or the clone lost 50% of range while retained excellent accuracy with a bad quality engine...


  • 0

#227 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,598 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1525 PM

The missile looks very little like the original Kh-55. It doesn't even look like the same scale in terms of length or width. I suspect basic technologies were copied but that the weapons mentioned are not direct copies, possibly because some components could not be duplicated (mini turbojet in particular).


  • 0

#228 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,386 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1731 PM

 

Iran is pushing the boundaries to see up to where it can go. They want the sanctions lifted, but they have already learned that the US is a paper tiger after Iraq was handed to them (and I am sure they haven't forgotten 1980-88) and they hit tankers in tge Gulf twice with no consequences. They are now seeing if a direct attack on SA triggers a response. Saddam got topped for that.

Agreed. They will continue to try to impede the world oil supply in plausibly deniable ways until the US either adheres to the JCPOA (unfathomable) or the US actively attacks Iran. At that point, they play the victim card and strike back and just generally make as much of a mess of the region as they can, with an emphasis on reducing oil output from the area. This in turn either forces the US to the table, or worst case for them, helps push Trump out of office and gives them someone else to negotiate with. I think they'd prefer the first two escalation steps but I suspect are ready to take the game to the third.

 

 

I think Trump is still opposed to any sort of direct military confrontation (and I actually agree with him!) I'm obviously a super-anti-Trumper, but at least he doesn't have the messianic tendencies that Bush and his team did.

 

I think the most probable outcome is that he eventually makes a Best Deal Ever with Iran a la what he did with North Korea. Distant runner-up is that he launches some ineffectual airstrikes that might escalate into regional devastation. :)


  • 0

#229 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,598 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1813 PM

Khameni stated yesterday that to even negotiate, the US must return to JCPOA. The Obama deal. Trump will never do that, therefore eventually he will strike Iran. Probably ineffectively. And Iran will keep being more aggressive because they know Trump has painted himself into a corner where he doesnt want war but is unwilling to accept the previous deal, and also under the gun for the next election.

They will place a handful of mines in the gulf using subs as the next move. Plausible deniability, minimum actual damage, but the Iranian equivalent of maximum pressure. When Trump finally gives in to MbS and launches a strike, hell look like the aggressor to a lot of the world. Which is unfair, even as someone who hates Trump, but he let himself get led into a blind alley by his hubris.
  • 0

#230 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,386 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1822 PM

Khameni stated yesterday that to even negotiate, the US must return to JCPOA. The Obama deal. Trump will never do that, therefore eventually he will strike Iran. Probably ineffectively. And Iran will keep being more aggressive because they know Trump has painted himself into a corner where he doesnt want war but is unwilling to accept the previous deal, and also under the gun for the next election.

They will place a handful of mines in the gulf using subs as the next move. Plausible deniability, minimum actual damage, but the Iranian equivalent of maximum pressure. When Trump finally gives in to MbS and launches a strike, hell look like the aggressor to a lot of the world. Which is unfair, even as someone who hates Trump, but he let himself get led into a blind alley by his hubris.

 

I respectfully disagree -- my hunch is Trump will do a deal with Iran that's (cough) so much different from Obama's JPCOA and shows what an awesome dealmaker he is. Evidence = firing Bolton and calling off that last airstrike (thank god). Honestly it's kind of the best outcome really. Trump thinks he's the world's best deal-maker (lol) and that's what he gets off on.


Edited by Brian Kennedy, 17 September 2019 - 1829 PM.

  • 0

#231 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,598 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1856 PM

That would only work if he first accepted the Obama deal, which he will never do. Either that or Khameni backs down, which seems almost as unlikely. The Iranians feel they have him over the barrel and don't want to compromise. I suspect they will find he'd rather blow something up than admit he was wrong, so I think Iran is rather over playing a winning hand. If they removed the JCPOA requirement and were just willing to sit down and negotiate, Trump would be willing to give away the store. But as hurricane Dorian proved, he will never admit he's wrong even over the simplest thing, let alone one of the cornerstones of his pre-election foreign policy.

 

*spelling edit


Edited by Josh, 17 September 2019 - 1856 PM.

  • 0

#232 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,386 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1859 PM

That would only work if he first accepted the Obama deal, which he will never do. Either that or Khameni backs down, which seems almost as unlikely. The Iranians feel they have him over the barrel and don't want to compromise. I suspect they will find he'd rather blow something up than admit he was wrong, so I think Iran is rather over playing a winning hand. If they removed the JCPOA requirement and were just willing to sit down and negotiate, Trump would be willing to give away the store. But as hurricane Dorian proved, he will never admit he's wrong even over the simplest thing, let alone one of the cornerstones of his pre-election foreign policy.
 
*spelling edit


My opinion is that he will take something similar to the Obama Deal and vehemently deny that it is in any way similar to the Obama Deal.
  • 0

#233 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,061 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1944 PM

Even if he takes exactly the Obama Deal the press and the media will say that it's the worst thing ever and that Trump was setting back progress 100 years with Iran. 


  • 0

#234 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,598 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 1954 PM

Even if he takes exactly the Obama Deal the press and the media will say that it's the worst thing ever and that Trump was setting back progress 100 years with Iran. 


Which would only be fair, since that is how he described it himself.
  • 0

#235 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,386 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 2048 PM

https://www.politico...-strike-1500742


  • 0

#236 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,598 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 2055 PM

 

Which I absolutely agree with. I just regret he scrapped the JCPOA *before* he came to the conclusion he was going to be a limp dick if Iran pushed back against sanctions.


  • 0

#237 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,386 posts

Posted 17 September 2019 - 2108 PM


https://www.politico...-strike-1500742

 
Which I absolutely agree with. I just regret he scrapped the JCPOA *before* he came to the conclusion he was going to be a limp dick if Iran pushed back against sanctions.

Agree as well.
  • 0

#238 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,027 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 0331 AM

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?


The US has about 50 billion barrels of oil reserves. In the current state, the US is producing 15 million barrels a day. That makes about 5 billion in 1 year. It'll be gone in 10 years at the current rate. Maybe I got the numbers wrong, but if not, no one is talking about. America seems to have no idea that they will be in an oil crunch situation not long from now.
  • 0

#239 Yama

Yama

    The only honest Scorpion

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,975 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 0359 AM

 

And now the US is a net exporter of oil, why should it give a damn?


The US has about 50 billion barrels of oil reserves. In the current state, the US is producing 15 million barrels a day. That makes about 5 billion in 1 year. It'll be gone in 10 years at the current rate. Maybe I got the numbers wrong, but if not, no one is talking about. America seems to have no idea that they will be in an oil crunch situation not long from now.

 

 

Solution is same as last time - buy from Saudi.


Edited by Yama, 18 September 2019 - 0400 AM.

  • 0

#240 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,283 posts

Posted 18 September 2019 - 0418 AM

I wish that were the case, but...oil is a Fungible Commodity.


Also, AFAIK the US currently exports most of its shale oil because its domestic refineries are still largely set up for the imported crude types. Until those capabilities get reconfigured to process its own supply, "net exporter" merely means they're selling more of their oil abroad than the slightly smaller volume they are importing from the same sources as everybody else.
  • 0