As terrifying as the 9/11 attacks were, they might have been even scarier if they’d been accomplished with unmanned drones. If the technologically had been widely available then, it’s possible that the plotters would have used that strategy instead of the more complicated and risky plan to train pilots and hijack civilian aircraft to use as fuel bombs. The airplane-as-missile option had its advantages and I don’t know that drones could bring down towers as large as the World Trade Center, but at least we had some basic ideas of how to prevent a recurrence.
I don’t know what Saudi Arabia is going to do.
A weekend drone attack on Saudi Arabia that cut into global energy supplies and halved the kingdom’s oil production threatened Sunday to fuel regional tensions, as Iran denied U.S. allegations it launched the assault and tensions remained high over Tehran’s collapsing nuclear deal with world powers.
Houthi rebels from Yemen took credit for the attack on two of the Saudi kingdom’s largest oil refineries. Since they are in a loose alliance with Iran, Iran has naturally taken some blame. Yemen is five hundred miles away from the targets, and the American government believes that at least one of the drone was launched from Iraq where Irianian-backed Shiite militias freely operate. Iran denies involvement.
Iran called the U.S. claims “maximum lies,” while a commander in its paramilitary Revolutionary Guard reiterated its forces could strike U.S. military bases across the Mideast with its arsenal of ballistic missiles. A prominent U.S. senator suggested striking Iranian oil refineries in response for the assault claimed by Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels on Saudi Arabia’s largest oil processing facility.
“Because of the tension and sensitive situation, our region is like a powder keg,” warned Guard Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh. “When these contacts come too close, when forces come into contact with one another, it is possible a conflict happens because of a misunderstanding.”
Aside from the humanitarian concerns that come with any regional war, the international community has a selfish reason for not wanting open warfare to break out in the Persian Gulf. Even these drone strikes were significant enough to cause global pain.
The attack Saturday on Saudi Arabia’s Abqaiq plant and its Khurais oil field led to the interruption of an estimated 5.7 million barrels of the kingdom’s crude oil production per day, equivalent to over 5% of the world’s daily supply.
Gas prices will go up, and the only questions are by how much and for how long, and with what consequences for consumer prices and overall employment levels. We have a large military footprint in the region precisely to prevent these kinds of disruptions. Clearly, a war including ballistic missiles and aerial attacks will be several times more disruptive.
If the Iraq War showed that improvised explosive devices and car bombs can be military equalizers, we have probably reached the drone stage. If Iran wants to, they can utilize drones to harass their enemies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Israel. So, this isn’t a threat that is limited to Yemen and Saudi Arabia, or even to the Middle East.
I don’t really know what Iran’s involvement is in this case, but I feel pretty certain that they had a role.
This is what the next phase might look like:
Iran, meanwhile, kept up with its own threats Sunday as well. Hajizadeh, the Guard brigadier general who leads its aerospace program, gave an interview published across Iranian media that discussed Iran’s downing of the U.S. drone in July. He said Guard forces were ready for a counterattack if America responded, naming the Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar and Al-Dhafra Air Base near Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates as immediate targets, as well as Navy ships in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea.
“Wherever they are, it only takes one spark and we hit their vessels, their air bases, their troops,” he said in a video published online with English subtitles.
It wasn’t just Iranians making threats. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican close to President Donald Trump, suggested retaliatory strikes targeting Iran.
“Iran will not stop their misbehavior until the consequences become more real, like attacking their refineries, which will break the regime’s back,” Graham wrote on Twitter.
Perhaps because drone strikes are so hard to stop, deterrence becomes more important, which is why the temptation to send a message to Iran is so high. Another factor is that many countries, including prominently India, want to buy Iranian oil without running afoul of sanctions. A disruption of the Saudi supply gives them a stronger argument. Lindsey Graham’s solution is to cripple Iran’s supply so they do not get any political or economic advantage out of the “Houthi” attacks.
It all adds up to a much higher likelihood of war. And war will not prevent economic pain for the rest of us. It will assure it.
And it’s one, two, three,
What are we fighting for?
Don’t ask me, I don’t give a damn,
Next stop is I-Iran;
JFC – After 1974 it was obvious that the United States needed to be able to break its dependency on middle-east oil. In 1979 the White House had solar panels on its roof…it’s been all downhill since then. What a disgusting display of greed and willful, deceitful ignorance our country has been.
Stand your ground against climate change deniers!
This is a proxy war in Yemen between the Sunni vs shite Muslims. Why we must pick a side and join in makes no sense to me. It is so time to walk away and let them have at it.
That means accepting a lot of death, or finding a way to assimilate millions more refugees. Personally, I think we need to revamp the world immigration system to make it easier to come here and to do so legally. It takes too long and the process is too complicated. And people are stuck in war zones and can’t get here.
The entire reason Europe was concerned about Libya was because of these immigration flows. They offshore their detention and immigration facilities across the Mediterranean, just as we are trying to do now by pushing migrants into Mexico even though they’re legally allowed to be here. Offshoring immigration systems and erecting mass detention facilities is the future if we do not become involved in some way in the region. Or we let them come in. I like the odds on the latter better, but the politics are much more difficult.
I believe you think there is going to be some kind of ground war in Iran. That’s what Bolton wanted and why he is gone. The donald wants to drop a the bomb and there might not be anyone left in WH to stop him. The Saudis will make sure there are no refugees.
How will there be no refugees if there are air strikes on civilian populations? I am not imagining Donald using ground troops at all, but that doesn’t mean there cannot be escalation without our involvement.
The Iranians have an an Army. The Saudis have what they call a National Guard, which is actually a make-work unemployment program. The Saudi National Guard has not actually participated in Yemen since 2015, when they took 50 casualties. The Saudis are not willing to take casualties, so they started using troops from the Emirates and mercenaries, including Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Neither the Saudis nor the Israelis are going to send troops against Iran. If Trump nukes Tehran, every one of those 45 American bases in the middle east is toast, as is Tel Aviv, Riyadh, and all the oil fields in the middle east.
I really am uncomfortable saying this but large scale immigration on account of a refugee crisis on account of war or the environment is not popular anywhere in Europe or the US. It is just not going to happen easily. It is the reason for being for Boris and the Orange Cheeto. We need to find another way to deal with it, like not starting a war and dealing with the problems in Central America and the environment.
From HP.
So now Yemen/Iran strikes back. What next?
Hmmm, so KSA is permitted to run a brutal, insane and ultimately pointless war in Yemen, finds out that it is not immune from damaging counter-strike, and the “answer” is US militarism against Iran? Flawlessly logical!
Our “allies” in the region–KSA and Israel–are doing as much as anyone to build the powder keg, and we stand idly by watching them do it. If we don’t want the creation of a powder keg, then maybe we should do what we can to stop the keg from being filled, not help to ignite it. And we don’t even need to mention the absolutely crazed and unnecessary provocation of von Bolton, Pompous-eo and Der Trumper gratuitously trashing the Iran nuclear deal and imposing sanctions.
But just as the Kaiser’s Germany should have restrained its Austrian ally from starting WWI by declaring war on minor power Serbia, we should have long ago told KSA to end its bloody Yemen war. Now the shit has hit the fan and the communiques are flying. In the 1914 debacle, Russia mobilized against Austria to “protect” (fellow Slav) Serbia and Germany was forced to put its war plans into effect. Now with Iran perhaps diddling around to protect some side in Yemen, we are called to “save” the world’s oil supply and aid our hapless grandiose ally, KSA, and protect it from Iran.
The Western world was led by militarist fools in 1914 who slept-walked into apocalypse, but they were giant intellects compared to the preening imbeciles who now wield power in DC and London. Perhaps Macron and Merkel can bring some sense to the proceedings, but it’s unlikely. And of course it is crucial what White Nationalist leader Putin instructs the Prince of Fools Trumper to do. But 1914 showed how the miscalculations of those who don’t really fear war can unleash calamity upon a world of “nationalist” regimes.
Googled it…there are 45 us military bases surrounding Iran. They are there to protect the SA oil and Israel from Iran and yet they appear to have unable to prevent the most recent attack on SA oil. 19th century tactics in a 21st century world.