Saudi Oil fields attack of Trump's masters and the Israeli Harpy Drone

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...-06-24_n25.jpg

The IAI Harpy is a loitering munition produced by Israel Aerospace Industries. The Harpy is designed to attack radar systems and is optimised for the suppression of enemy air defence (SEAD) role. It carries a high explosive warhead. The Harpy has been sold to several foreign nations,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAI_Harpy

This whole thing reeks of false flag, and the evidence is inescapable. If you look at the holes in the tanks, the straightest flight path for the suicide drones would’ve been from the northwest:

https://imgur.com/a/cwvISfz

Photos of the reassembled wreckage show what are very clearly IAI Harpy drones:

https://imgur.com/a/PkYArjt

https://imgur.com/a/u9UFE60


The Saudis and Israelis both hate Iran,,,,,,,,

need some reason to raise the price of oil

I agree, they need a reason to push up the price of oil, so this attack comes in time. But that's not the only reason for the attack.

It is also important that the US and Israel in particular need a reason for war against Iran. Only Iran is too big, not military, more of the area. Iran claims that they have 1 million soldiers.

But if that is true, ...!?! Only the US alone does not have enough power to attack Iran alone. They need the help of the Allies.

In the first place, Israel would strike immediately, and Israel's army and intelligence are really good. Nevertheless, I do not believe that it is enough. The Islamic regime in Iran has good contacts with other countries like North Korea, Russia.

The Hezbollah militia in Lebanon would immediately attack Israel in the event of a US attack on Iran. What happens then ... who knows, I do not know.

What is known is there was an attack at major Aramco installations. Houthis claimed responsibility, and forwarded the threat to UAE at their oil facilities.

Some pictures have shown Iranian cruise missiles used along with multiple drone strikes, so, the first "official" word was that Iran did it and they immediately responded with a statement "touch us, we'll fry you".

Don't kid yourselves. the Israeli military is hardly considered "combat ready", they are easily eliminated from their border posts by small Hezbollah groups, at will. There is no realistic chance of "greater provocation". What is possible is that the attack may have been "green lighted" or somehow supported by western powers who would like to de-value Aramco and sell it cheap.

Saudi Arabia has hundreds if not thousands air defense systems poised to intercept Iranian attack, if something came from there, then there would have been a massive swarm. Towards its south, it is not much besides tatters, less and less capable of defending against Soviet-era equipment. They have asked Iraq for "replacement oil".

We can only say "Yemen has its own jet drones" which may resemble the Israeli. In Arabia, Pompeo says:

Pompeo sounded surprised by the vastness of the operation, saying: “This is an attack of a scale we’ve just not seen before.”

Ten drones and the billion-dollar Patriot batteries are useless. Well. Sounds pretty reliable in a real conflict doesn't it? Sounds like other incidents where some planned narrative is supposed to dictate the future.

He could also only say "no evidence the attack came from Yemen", while another officer says "we don't have an unblinking eye over the entire middle east at all times".

I expect we will see steady attrition of Aramco and similar facilities in Abu Dhabi and Doha. If Israel is somehow involved and trying to get an alliance to step on Iran, it simply will never happen.

Joseph Farrell gives his viewpoints on this in his latest NEWS AND VIEWS FROM THE NEFARIUM SEPT 19 2019

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=N_V7SSpfeVc

The Houthis are trying to turn this into a ceasefire.

In order to pose the belief Iran did it, the Saudis will have to ignore that and keep attacking Yemen.

Meanwhile, the U. S. is sending equipment and personnel. Perhaps Saudi oil money in = Israeli tax dollars out.

Shaberon, I agree with you in both of your contributions. Nevertheless, I have a question. Is it really that important to know who attacked whom with what? If the US and Israel decide to attack Yemen and Iran, they will. I am against any kind of war and brutality. But, I personally found out for myself what the Islamic Republic is capable of.

I've learned how far they go, they're afraid of nothing, nothing at all. Brutalities are part of everyday life, Iran is and was once a beautiful and worth seeing country. Still, the mullahs have destroyed everything, just everything. But that does not belong here. What I hope the US and the EU finally do something against this regime.

I am not sure who pulled the trigger; the OP seems to allege it was Israel. It might be important to know, but, as with many things, it will probably never be fully revealed.

I do not support the U. S. and E. U. doing much to any regime, would rather see them, Saud, and Zion wither, more by a change of law and financial system than anything else. This situation is an almost scripted rerun of the 1961 Yemen War, which is what the British used to sell the Saudis an air force, which now makes brutalities part of everyday life. Street violence in Brazil is part of everyday life; shall we arrange an international coalition to do something about Brazilian citizens?

We said "Japan is afraid of nothing and will fight to the death", which was completely untrue, just an excuse to hurl some atomic bombs in an attempt to scare the Russians. Iran has not attacked any neighbors for over 200 years, but was given the gift of a C. I. A. coup. Much like North Korea, they have plenty of justification to do vicious things if militaries from around the world come over to their place.

It didn't work in Syria, and what that has accomplished is much better transport from Iran to the Mediterranean.

Iran certainly belongs in the thread if the official word is "they did it" and we are sending in hundreds of lives and perhaps billions worth of weaponry due to that stance.

delete it all.

The question you should be asking yourself is



Who Profits by this attack?



Iran? .. well it gets more sanctions against it but may get kudos from the Shiite world religious community
as well as Yemen rebels


US?

Wag the dog for a distraction from domestic troubles

Saudi Arabia?
Well it gets more US troops and more US military advanced technology



Israel?
It gets US condemnation of Iran and more war mongering


None of these players are good guys and you need to think who had the most to lose with an attack where nobody died. False Flag in my opinion and any of the players could be the culprit.

Saudi Arabia was definitely damaged by it:

Aramco, the contractors told the Wall Street Journal, is in urgent talks with equipment manufacturers and service providers and is willing to pay premium rates for faster delivery and installation. Still, the repairs work could last months because the equipment has to yet be manufactured, delivered and installed, and this could take as long as a year, the WSJ’s Summer Said noted, quoting Saudi officials. In that article, they are unlikely to get anything from Iraq, and will probably sell out their own reserves within a month, and then there will be a glut.

Meanwhile, on Monday, the Saudis blew up another civilian family.

Does Yemen not profit by it? These attacks are nothing new. They have showed, or at least claimed, the ability to inflict long-range damage without casualties. To increase the conflict, someone would probably have taken out many human lives. The falsehood on their part is they may have more Iranian parts or armaments than they admit to. If there is no cease-fire, and then they do not carry forward long-range attacks with low civilian collateral, then perhaps they are exaggerating their capabilities.

I suppose the Western story is "Iran", although nothing much seems to have come out of this, however the rest of the world paid no heed and seems to accept "Houthis" without question. France, at least verbally, has agreed to "de-escalate" with Iran, at the U. N. sidelines.

Some of the "unexpected results" of Iranian oil sanctions is that now they manufacture complex polymers.

Meanwhile, India and U. A. E. have agreed to trade in local currencies. This certainly does not fit the plan of Saudi American Petrodollars.

Only twenty years ago, yes, I think the Aramco incident could probably have been twisted around and used as an excuse for war. Now, it is just among more "surprises" which indicate that uni-polar dominance is not the future.

The upswing here is that no European leaders believe Iran attacked Aramco, and at the same time, they are going to resume enriched uranium development, new centrifuges, and plan on broadening ties with India. So that was not even a "western bias", it was only some kind of American allegation that nobody followed. That's not really how these things used to work just twenty years ago. Something is gone.

Next, the Saudi king's bodyguard was killed "in an argument with a friend." The friend managed to wound five police before getting shot himself.

There is a massive blaze underway at their year-old train station in Jeddah. No military has said anything about this.

The Houthi military has, and the Saudi has not, said something about the capture of Two thousand Saudi and multi-national troops, along with armored vehicles and massive piles of weapons. The Saudis apparently bombed their own fleeing troops.

The U. S. is contributing a whole Patriot battery with 200 personnel.

The attack on the Saudi brigades was planned for weeks, well in advance of the Aramco incident. I still do not see much besides attrition to the Saudi regime. This latest attack and capture is probably the biggest thing that has happened so far.

There is some rumor that the King's bodyguard (a Major General) was not so much the victim of an argument, but rather was simply part of the "old guard" being removed by the "young" King's group. Then the train station fire was not military, but was a reprisal by "old guard intelligence units". This came out in something called the U. S. National Interest, who sees all these latest incidents as further evidence the kingdom itself is falling apart.

The small American military unit is definitely seen as "the U. S. unwilling to exercise the military option" on the kingdom's behalf.

Saudi Arabia is now funding the London-based Persian-language TV channel 'Iran International', which makes it something like Al Jazeera, which we were given as the first major western outlet of Arab concerns, but then turned out to be a bit biased.

India, aiming to trade with its neighbors in local currencies, also intends to purchase some of the Russian S400 systems, even though:

“We urge all of our allies and partners to forgo transactions with Russia that risk triggering sanctions under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA),” a State Department Spokesman told The Hindu.

Aramco seems more like a big sign that "something isn't working any more" and that the west faces the likelihood of the Saudi carcass splitting up and trying to get their hands on more of it cheap.