« Open Thread 19 September 2019 | Main | "Will bishops at last be held to account in abuse cases? We’re about to find out." Washpost editorial »

19 September 2019


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.



You are assuming that the United States could do an invasion twice as big as Iraq. It cannot. The artillery and tanks are not in position. For a successful occupation more than a million troops are needed. The USA is all by itself. Iran has Russia and China as allies. Their survival is at stake too.

If an aerial bombardment of Iran is launched, Saudi Arabia and possibly American bases and Israel will be under missile and UAV attack within the hour. American troops in the Gulf will replay “They Were Expendable” - the great John Ford movie of the Philippines in 1942. Except there is no draft this century. Due to despair and addiction from the loss of family jobs and homes plus the cut in public health services, 71% of young Americans don’t qualify for military service. America is headed for civil war. Nationalist and globalist oligarchs are at each other’s throat. Iranians will never surrender. Without gulf petroleum energy, the global economy will collapse.

I still think that Houthis contributed 10 UAVs to the attack and the rest came from Shiite proxy forces from Iraq and Syria who have damn good reasons to attack Saudi Arabia. That some UAVs flew or were transported into the Western desert from Iraq is likely why the facts are hidden like the MH-17 shoot down.

The Iraq invasion was crazy. Bombing Iran is utterly insane. With Russian aid, bombers will be shot down and possibly US Navy ships sunk. The only military response available to Iranian retaliation is nuclear weapons.

Our only hope is that Donald Trump wants to have a second term as President.

JP Billen

I stand corrected.

Larry Johnson

Thanks. I fully agree that an invasion of Iraq is beyond our current capabilities. Great comment.


What about israel??? They have this type of sophistication, they can fly from above Jordan, and americans can shut down radars for them, like they did in Iraq. And they want a war between iran and US


Read my comment. But israel has damn good benefits from these attack that happened. And they have done it before more than 10 times. What about them???


Disagree. Nothing higher than Bob Evans on Fourth of July.

I'm reminded of the time when many had a sincere wish to see Rumsfeld and Cheney dropped into Iraq with full packs and no radio.


Only some states. In others you can still exchange your money at the central bank



It was reported that Russia told Israel that planes attacking Syria now will be shot down. I assume that applies to Iran too. I also assume that if Iran identifies the attacker as Israel, Iran’s and thousands of Hezbollah missiles and UAVs will fired at Israel. Iran’s ability to retaliate is what has changed The problem with the fog of war is that the Iranian missiles that target Saudi Arabia and American bases in the Region will likely be fired also at that point to avoid being destroyed on the ground. WWIII starts.



Hizbullah has about 100k missiles and artillery rockets.



I would not have approved this comment. You have no business making snide anti-American comments here for which you have no evidence, And we DID NOT shut down Iraq's radars for the Israelis. When Arabs fail, they fail on their own, not with our "help"

Babak Makkinejad

He is not Armenian, his last name does not end with the common Persian suffix "ian", indicating Lineage. Armenian is full of Middle Persian words Azat=Free: going back to the times when Armenians were bilingual in bothe languages.


'Destroy them now and minimize the damage, or be forced to destroy them later when the damage they inflict would be greater and more on their terms.'

You think that is a reasonable position? I don't see it.
The Arabs and Persians fighting among themselves couldn't possibly do any more damage to oil supplies,since they both dependent on their oil money, than the US would launching a war on Iran and having everyone chose up sides al'la WWI.
If anyone in DC gave a hoot about oil and the global economy they wouldn't have let Israel and Saudi create the chaos that they already have to begin with.
What would be a great idea ...is to round up all the Neos and Zios instead of the US military and FedX them to Israel and Saudi by way of Iran. The taxpayers would be happy to pay for that.

Eric Newhill

How do you know whether or not the arguments have no basis in fact? I read pieces by credentialed people that say Iran violated the agreement and describe how. I read pieces by credentialed people that say did not violate the agreement. I'm not going to just pick the story that makes me feel good. I don't know. Do you?

I can be more sure that Iran is developing ballistic missiles with greater range and payload capacity. The credentialed people agree a lot more about that. I do know that Iran won't recognize a sovereign country's right to exist and has made statements that suggest it would like to destroy the country it says has no right to exist. I do know that Iran is a religious government that has beliefs that can compel it to fight with neighbors for sectarian supremacy. I do know that Iran has a nuclear program that could produce weapons grade material in short order if it wanted to.

Maybe it all adds up to nothing. Maybe Iranians are as pure as the freshly fallen snow and as peace loving as Jesus and my rotten government and their evil agents are lying to me. I have no idea. I'm just keeping an open mind. That appears to be unpopular. There are lot of people that apparently have access to highly quality information that I don't.

China probably will develop a super weapon capability that will be able to destroy the United States. And we'll probably let them. I'm pretty sure Russia did debate the continued existence of the USA as we debated the continued existence of Russia. Who knows what the facts are?


The argument that Iranian sponsored attacks on the Saudi kingdom will impinge the global economy and consequently the US should strike Iranian assets to insure the conflagration infect the whole ME including Israel and make the economic situation even worse is an example of the prescription even worse than the symptoms.

If the Houthis with Iranian material support cripple the Saudi oil infrastructure it will primarily impact those oil importing countries who are heavily dependent on Gulf oil. It will benefit oil exporting nations who produce outside the Gulf region like Russia and Venezuela. The US in contrast are relatively self-sufficient in both oil & gas. In fact we produce so much gas there are not enough storage facilities and so we have to flare considerable amounts.

If anyone should intervene it should be those most vulnerable to a Gulf oil shock like China. The CCP essentially have the Iranian theocracy by the short-hairs. They could end any Iranian belligerence with a single call from Xi. We have limited interests relative to Asia and Europe in a halt to Gulf oil supplies. We should definitely not be supporting the Al Qaeda sponsoring House of Saud militarily.


Hi Pat. Robert Lindsay here.

In a way, Iran is responsible for the attack but only in a roundabout way. Obviously the Houthis did it from Yemen. God knows how they pulled it off. The Houthis are absolutely able to pull of this sort of thing. In recent months, Houthi drone technology has absolutely exploded.

I believe that in the past few months, as the US tried to stop Iran from exporting oil, Iran has radically ramped up the supply of technology to the Houthis. Because their technology has exploded in a short period of time.

Under Obama, Iran wanted to keep a bit of distance from the Houthis due to the nuclear deal. Trump blew up that deal and Iran had no reason to keep distance from the Houthis anymore, so they ramped up support for the Houthis. Iran absolutely exports weaponry to the Houthis. I am not sure how much gets in. It comes in on small boats. It starts on large boats but around the east end of Oman at the end of the Straight of Hormuz they shift to small boats.

With the drones I understand that Iran may be actually flying them in from boats off the coast of Yemen! There are probably some Iranian advisors working with the Houthis on the battlefield. I have no idea if Iran is helping the Houthi build the rockets.

However, there is now a unified command center in Iran consisting of IRGC, Iran, Houthis, Iraqi militias, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad. Not sure if Syria has a seat too. So Iran probably heard about the operation and said fine.

The Houthis are not really proxies. They do what they want. Earlier Iran ordered them not to take Sa'ada, but the Houthis told Iran to stuff it and took the city anyway. On occasion they do carry out orders from Iran. One was to hit a ship off the coast of Yemen with a missile. I doubt that this refinery attack was due to an Iranian command or order.

When you think of Houthi technological capabilities, there is a part to the equation that is being left out. Because we are talking about not "Houthi" abilities but "Houthi + Hezbollah" abilities. I guess you could argue that some attack or manufacture is beyond the Houthi, but is it beyond Hezbollah?

Because I know how those drones are made, and they are all made in factories in Yemen.

An Iranian prototype is supplied for most models. The rocket and missile builders are none other than Hezbollah. Hezbollah are now experts at building missiles and rockets. Hezbollah builds drones, rockets, etc. for the Houthis using the Iranian prototype, but it is always modified somewhat, often in an ingenious way. For instance the Saudi display included a Quds-1 which is a Houthi cruise missile built off the prototype of an Iranian Soumar cruise missile.

After the initial prototype is built, I am not sure if Hezbollah makes new ones or if the Houthis just use a schematic.

There are also Hezbollah advisors advising the Houthis on the battlefield.

This attack surely came from Yemen. The US is lying through its teeth that the attack came from Iran. It's Iraqi WMD all over again. There are various reasons for blaming Iran which you may be able to figure out yourself.

The US says the attack came from the north. Nope, it came from the west. Furthermore there are Youtube videos out there of Saudis living to the west of the oil refineries where you can hear the sounds of the drones coming in. The Saudis state in these videos that they can see the drones coming in from the west due east towards the refineries.

Also the whine you hear in the attack videos is a drone siren, not some other type of siren. It's activated in a drone attack. It would not be activated in a cruise missile attack.

You can hear gunfire of Saudi forces shooting at the attacking objects. This proves they were drones because you can shoot at a drone with a gun. You can't shoot at a cruise missile with a gun. No one does that. It's on top of you as fast as you see it.

Also Reuters reported that a witness stated that there were 15 ambulances at one refinery that was attacked, so the Saudis may be covering up some casualties.

The US says the radars were turned to the south and west, so they did not see the swarm. Nope, they were turned towards the north and east, towards Iran.

If Iran launched 27 missiles at Saudi Arabia from their land, they would have been seen on the some of the 50 US and countless Saudi radars that are pointed right at Iran. Unless Iran has some stealth technology for drones and cruise missiles, this didn't happen. And no one has that tech.

The US says Khameini approved of the attack with the qualification of deniability. How would we know? We have spies right next to Khameini in his palace? Forget it.

Pompouseo insisted that this was an Iranian attack very soon after the attack before he could have possibly known such a thing. You can tell when the US is trying to frame an innocent party for an attack someone else did (and we do this sometimes) because the patsy nation or group is blamed almost immediately after the attack, before anyone could possibly have known who did it, before any investigations. They are working off a script.

The disinfo may be cooked up by the CIA. Quotes from "US intelligence sources" may be from CIA people sending disinfo to their sources in the media.

The CIA itself says different things. Internally they want to know what really happened. They don't want to believe lies or crap. I am sure that they know that the Houthis launched this attack.

Internal CIA knowledge is sometimes leaked to a few select journalists such as Seymour Hersch. For instance, Hersch's CIA sources told him that half of the CIA thinks a Ukrainian fighter jet shot down the M-17 jet in Ukraine, and the other half thinks it was a missile shot by Donbass rebels but not a Buk missile as the fake lie narrative goes. That is because the CIA says the rebels never had any Buk missile in Ukraine. So that is what the CIA believes internally.

But they put out disinfo about this attack almost instantly after it went down when Kerry started saying the rebels shot it down with a Buk missile supplied by Russia. This was the lie story that was supposed to go out. So the CIA talks out of both sides of its mouth.

Another thing a fake patsy US lie to frame someone does is it often changes too fast. Pompouseo said the attack came from Iraq at first. Then he met with the Iraqis, and the story changed to launched from Iran.

Also the "intelligence material" is typically very vague and often never released. The intelligence confirming that the Donbass rebels shot down the jet has not been released to this day. That's because there is none. Predictably the US has no evidence in this refinery attack.

Also a delay in evidence is often due to a US lie frame story. The US is "trying to find the evidence to connect Iran to this attack." Really they are trying to fabricatethe evidence that Iran did it. This often takes a while, hence the long delays in confirming the evidence.

A few other things. Iran has never conducted an attack and then had one of its proxies claim it. Iran claims all of its attacks and denies all false claims of attacks directed at it. The Houthis have never taken credit for an attack that was actually launched by Iran. In fact, no Iranian proxy has ever claimed an attack that was launched by Iran. The proxies claim their own attacks, and they claim all of them.

The photo of the wreckage of a Quds-1 cruise missile in the Saudi desert appeared mysteriously on the net soon after the attack. No one knows who put it up or what it is. Houthis have used Quds-1's to attack Saudi Arabia in the past. They were not used in this attack, so the photo is from earlier attack. The Quds-1 wreckage in the Saudi display is not an Iranian weapon but a Houthi weapon. I know the Quds-1 and the Soumar and how to tell them apart. That is absolutely a Quds-1.

That black drone in the front of the display is apparently from a Houthi attack on a pipeline back in May. I know because there are photos of the drone used in that attack and it is this very drone. I believe the rest of the wreckage is simply wrecked drones from past Houthi attacks recently.


Simple, they were not seen because they never happened. Absolutely we would have that on radar or on satellite. The images of Iran loading the missiles are faked because this attack absolutely did not come from Iran. Iran is not so stupid and insane as to launch an attack from their territory. That would be suicidal.


"They continue to deny the right of Israel to exist."
Is Iran's affirmation of Israel some legal requirement? Enforced by whom/what -- UN? CUFI?

Is Israel so insecure of its own legitimacy and identity that Iran's affirmation of its "right to exist" is necessary? (Or does Iran's taunts pique the consciences of some who know in their heart of hearts that Israel was founded on terrorism.)

"Whether we like it or not, The US is going to support Israel into the foreseeable future."

This "we" decidedly does NOT like it, and finds that he is far from alone is his dislike and vocalization of it.

Moreover, Robert ("Send more donuts") Kagan's recent OpEd sounded to me like the overture to a divorce:
Israel and the decline of the liberal order

"[T]here is broad agreement among Israeli conservatives that the central institutions of the liberal world order created since the end of World War II — the European Union and the United Nations, and perhaps even the transatlantic alliance NATO — are hostile toward Israel and should be taken down a peg. A united Europe, regarded by many on both sides of the Atlantic as one of the great accomplishments of the post-Cold War era, “hasn’t been a blessing for this country,” Michael Oren, former Israeli ambassador to the United States, has argued. “The less united Europe is, the better.” "

The same divisive intent and agenda applies to USA, in spades.

imo smart politicians will step out ahead of this "divorce"-- USA does not need Israel--throw the bum out-- and stake claims to the kids, the bank accounts, the family silver, and the family name: UNITED States of America.


That was yesterday.

Babak Makkinejad

China has no leverage on Iran.

Babak Makkinejad

I would to your very very informative comments the following opinion: that the strategic aim of the United States pursued for the last 17 years, to destroy enemies of Israel has caused strategic stalemate: the Shia have taken Israel and Saudi Oil fields hostage.

Babak Makkinejad

Good point!

If Israelis desire Iran to affirm their right to exist, they need to fly to Tehran, kiss the hand of Ayatollah Khamenei and ask him what would it take for Iran to do so. That would be the basis of ending the war over Palestine.

Babak Makkinejad

There was no assumption there, Iran was honorable.

I do not think you understand Honor.


Yeah, right.

The petrochemical investment deal announced demonstrates the leverage in spades.

different clue

I was offering hopeful advice about "don't mention the Obama" in hopes that President Trump can find a way to re-enter JCPOA without having to admit a single thing about "Obama was right". If Trump can say it was his own sudden new brilliant idea based on new information, he can perhaps do the beneficial thing without injury to his pride.

About Adelson and Bibi, money is always money. But if there is no Bibi to buy support for; what will Adelson buy support for with the money?

To the best of my extremely limited knowledge, Hantz is/was part of the long-standing Military Establishment there. If so, he might still nourish some private quiet bitterness over the Bibi-Likud engineered and incited assassination of Mr. Military Security
Rabin. If so, Hantz might make coalitioning with Likud dependent on Likud stripping Bibi of any and every government position. Perhaps a lot of political operators in Israel have decided that Bibi's tread has worn all the way off, that he is now just stinking up the joint, and the time has come to drop him off in the alley along with the rest of the trash.


''I read pieces by credentialed people that say Iran violated the agreement and describe how.''

Who are those credentialed people? Five minutes on goggle says it is mainly Netantahu, his US Fifth Column Think Tanker and some congressmen that claim that Iran violated the agreement even before Trump recinded the agreement. And then there is this nonsensical claim...'A White House claim that Iran violated the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal before the agreement even existed ...'

Yes Iran has recently violated the 'non existant deal ' .
Its too amusing that the Neos and Zios are all hollering that Iran should stick to the deal even though there is no longer any deal.

But let us not forget how the current situtation started:......and it goes back before the Obama deal .

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad