|From: hokk124 (Rep: 30) reply to apmoore||Date: 2019-09-16 09:07:01|
|Forum: VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil - Thread #674098946||Msg #109 - Part 1/6 (Rec: 1) |
|NOTE: This message has been revised 2 times. Read original version of this message.|
|From: apmoore (Rep: 41) reply to hokk124||Date: 2019-09-16 10:06:51|
|Forum: VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil - Thread #674098946||Msg #110 - Part 2/6 (Rec: 1) |
|Re: Iran fired cruise missiles in attack on Saudi oil facility: Senior US officia...|
Oil facilities should always have radar, the best way to win any war is to cut off your enemy's access to oil and as long as there is aggression in the world, the possibility of such an attack as a first objective for any hostile nation has to be considered.
Iran is denying responsibility, however, they've threatened to cut off Saudi oil supply/transport logistics numerous times in the past. Such threats wouldn't help Iran's believeability here. For the West, Saudi, and Israel, Iran is the only obstacle to mid-east stability as they empower and fund almost all antagonism to Israel's existence. If anyone should desire middle east peace, they would have to also desire some sort of strategy regarding how to deal effectively with Iran. As far as I know, traditionally, since Khomeni came to power in the late 70's, the US has consistently been determined not to compromise with Iran, at least until Obama.
Lets say the Houthis did actually carry out the attack, it still links back to Iran, since Iran also supplies and aids the Houthi rebels in Yemen. Of course, US always has to calculate how Russia would respond in the case of launching any attack against Iran. The most important factor for the US in the middle east is their relationship with Saudi Arabia, however, the US has to be careful not to give off the impression of taking orders from the Saudis, but at the same time let the Saudis know that the US is in their corner as a major ally. No one can expect any mid-east peace as long as Iran continues its proxy endeavors to remove the state of Israel.
| Reply to hokk124 - Msg #2799737 - 09/16/2019 09:07|
|From: hokk124 (Rep: 30) reply to apmoore||Date: 2019-09-16 10:18:33|
|Forum: VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil - Thread #674098946||Msg #111 - Part 3/6 (Rec: 0) |
Well the Houthis in Yemen already claimed responsibility for this vicious and unprovoked attack but it's doubtful that they possess the type of technology capable of carrying out a successful attack of this magnitude.
I think Iran is most clearly behind this just like the Saudi tanker and US drone attacks over the past few months. This attack may have been launched by the same Iranian-backed militias in Iraq who were/are fighting ISIS.
Imagine Iran having nuclear weapons? Scary thought. If attacked the mullahs would probably actually use them against Israel or Saudi Arabia. (Doubtful they could reach the US mainland so they would hit our regional allies instead)
| Reply to apmoore - Msg #2799757 - 09/16/2019 10:06|
|From: apmoore (Rep: 41) reply to hokk124||Date: 2019-09-16 10:56:40|
|Forum: VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil - Thread #674098946||Msg #112 - Part 4/6 (Rec: 1) |
|In terms of a country's determination to develop a nuclear arsenal, there seems to be no way to circumvent any country's efforts to develop itself in that manner. There would be no way to stop Iran from developing its nuclear arsenal without the use of force, but there is no way to justify attacking on those grounds when other countries have successfully developed their nuclear arsenal without resistance. Attacking simply on the grounds of fear would create a dangerous ripple effect and set a global precedent that makes preemptive strikes from fear alone justifiable. Yes, while its a scary thought of what could happen if Iran has nuclear weapons, that fear wouldn't justify a preemptive based solely on that. The only to way implicate and act against Iran for its nuclear development would be for the UN to designate Hezbollah as a terror group. If that happens, all of Hezbollah's affiliates would inherit that same status including Iran. In that case Iran would be done for as a nation and its threat to mid-east peace would effectively end. |
The way Iran has been acting in terms of its aggression towards Saudi Arabia and Israel, Iran actually ends up as a result working against itself, because now any action against Iran doesn't have to revolve around the nuclear aspect, but simply around its hostility to the existence of globally recognized nation states like Israel, which would in itself give justification for a military response against Iran, which would then provide an avenue for that same military response to also go ahead and stop its nuclear development.
| Reply to hokk124 - Msg #2799759 - 09/16/2019 10:18|
|From: hokk124 (Rep: 30) reply to apmoore||Date: 2019-09-16 12:28:21|
|Forum: VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil - Thread #674098946||Msg #113 - Part 5/6 (Rec: 0) |
Iran wanted higher oil prices and they got them.
| Reply to apmoore - Msg #2799770 - 09/16/2019 10:56|
|NOTE: This message has been revised 1 time. Read original version of this message.|
|From: apmoore (Rep: 41) reply to hokk124||Date: 2019-09-16 12:44:55|
|Forum: VelocityShares 3x Long Crude Oil - Thread #674098946||Msg #114 - Part 6/6 (Rec: 0) |
|Exactly. For Iran, the attacks are the only workaround to the current sanctions on their oil exports. When oil prices are high, it helps offset the negative effects of the reduced exports. Desperation by Iran can easily precede such aggressive action. I guess Iran figured they can just make use of "Plausible Deniability" to avoid the repercussions of it all. |
| Reply to hokk124 - Msg #2799801 - 09/16/2019 12:28|