Saudi Roll in 9/11 Oil Price War with US

[Domer Dude 0]

Since when are Saudi's our friends. Read the below article. Add to that the threat to dump US assets...

 

Add to that the price war on US oil to destroy a US industry. Saudi thinking, if US doesn't need us for oil they won't protect us...

 

Add to that as being the source of wahhabism...

 

http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/how-us-covered-up-saudi-role-in-911/

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2016/04/03/saudi-arabias-last-weapon-in-the-oil-war/#725329444247

Edited April 17, 2016 by Domer Dude

[edcubby 2]

I'm curious to hear how the candidates handle this...

 

Trump: this could play into his hands 2 ways. Either he rolls out the "we don't bow down to anyone" stance or he plays his hand as a negotiator and businessman who can work this out.

 

Cruz and Clinton will lie, lie, lie and try to say so much **** and attack Trump's stance it will be mind numbing.

 

Bernie will say we have to deal with the Suadis and make this work.

 

USA! USA! USA!

[jfschellcrna 11]

Been saying it for years..Those turds are and have been the bane of this country's existence ....

[VCDomer 68]

Last time I checked... They have no real military. Just saying. A few well placed articles like this and a growing sense of outrage during a campaign year will put a shiny light on them. Even if we need them to keep some of that area stable,I say we should flood the market with good ole US oil and make their knees buckle a bit. Don't answer a few of their calls, offer Israel a bit more support openly, push to be the international leader in clean energy and gas free vehicles, and take a more agressive posture in the gulf and don't answer any calls about it.

[Irish_Convert 1]

The only reason we're their "buddies" is because they were the major player in OPEC back when we agreed to provide Saudi Arabia with defense support in exchange for creating the petrodollar.

 

I can completely see this as plausible. Shoot, 75% of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi natives and so was OBL. They have one of the worst human rights records in the world but the US just turns a blind eye towards that. They can afford to fund an adequate military but would rather pump their money into the kingdom and the extensive welfare system they fund to keep the natives from getting restless.

[OklahomaIrish 0]

Really curious how Trump will handle this. I have not been one of his backers but when I see what is left I think I just might have to give him a shot. Really skeptical about the world situation right now. Just don't see how our economy will stand much longer with such a huge debt and nobody doing a thing about it. How soon will Iran nuke somebody?

[jessemoore97 1,281]

The only reason we're their "buddies" is because they were the major player in OPEC back when we agreed to provide Saudi Arabia with defense support in exchange for creating the petrodollar.

 

I can completely see this as plausible. Shoot, 75% of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi natives and so was OBL. They have one of the worst human rights records in the world but the US just turns a blind eye towards that. They can afford to fund an adequate military but would rather pump their money into the kingdom and the extensive welfare system they fund to keep the natives from getting restless.

 

Your last sentence is very true. I remember right before 9-11 there were experts who were predicting the fall of their government within a year or two. It didn't happen, but apparently there must have been a lot of unrest that was festering which now seems to be placated to an extent.

[Soko 128]

The West's relationship with Saudi Arabia stinks to high heaven and flies completely in the face of everything we say is policy. They flat out fund terrorism, have one of the worst human rights records on the planet and general scum.

 

 

However they are perfectly entitled to produce as much oil as they want and sell it at whatever price they like. Let market economics sort it out. They have one of the lowest cost bases in the world so why should they stop producing oil? It is hurting them a lot as well and we will see over the next 18 months who is right in all of this.

 

 

It's also interesting to think that Donald Trump can deal with this because he develops real estate. How in the world is that related to dealing with these guys?

[roarcity269 0]

Here is the issue... the Saudis continue to look the other way when it comes to terrorism both homegrown and abroad despite being an ally. Doing nothing (and in other cases we've seen actually promoting terrorism) is just as big of an issue as being a terrorist. I guarantee if we cutoff relations with the Saudis we would be better off for it.

[roarcity269 0]

The West's relationship with Saudi Arabia stinks to high heaven and flies completely in the face of everything we say is policy. They flat out fund terrorism, have one of the worst human rights records on the planet and general scum.

 

 

However they are perfectly entitled to produce as much oil as they want and sell it at whatever price they like. Let market economics sort it out. They have one of the lowest cost bases in the world so why should they stop producing oil? It is hurting them a lot as well and we will see over the next 18 months who is right in all of this.

 

 

It's also interesting to think that Donald Trump can deal with this because he develops real estate. How in the world is that related to dealing with these guys?

 

Have you ever seen the movie Syriana? Funny how a movie can be so true.

[Soko 128]

Here is the issue... the Saudis continue to look the other way when it comes to terrorism both homegrown and abroad despite being an ally. Doing nothing (and in other cases we've seen actually promoting terrorism) is just as big of an issue as being a terrorist. I guarantee if we cutoff relations with the Saudis we would be better off for it.

 

 

They don't look the other way - they directly fund it terrorism. Likewise high level Qataris who are playing a bigger and bigger role because their heard of goats happened to have a land mass with enormous gas reserves underneath it.

 

Somehow the way the status quo has been established they are now the West's main 'ally' in the region. You wouldn't find it in a science fiction novel it is so absurd. Cutting off ties unfortunately is not going to do anything positive either. The better the devil you know and all that crap...

[Domer Dude 0]

From a security standpoint I think we need to get the Canada/America pipeline built. Pump money into clean energy. Keep incentives in place to reduce consumption including raising gas tax, raising fuel standards, and while funding green projects.

 

Too bad Venezuela is such a mess, even with their dirty oil it is one of the best options.

 

Long term, for security, it is best to consume other people's oil and keep our reserves.

[nickman54 0]

From a security standpoint I think we need to get the Canada/America pipeline built. Pump money into clean energy. Keep incentives in place to reduce consumption including raising gas tax, raising fuel standards, and while funding green projects.

 

Too bad Venezuela is such a mess, even with their dirty oil it is one of the best options.

 

Long term, for security, it is best to consume other people's oil and keep our reserves.

 

Keystone wont happen as long as Soros owns his railway.

[Jim2Dokes 3]

Keystone wont happen as long as Soros owns his railway.

 

Nick, from my understanding Buffett owns the line in which Soros may be an investor. But this is quite a stretch at an indirect way to bring Obama into this. This is a deep rooted problem that has repub blood on its hands as well, if not more. If you would just allow investment into green energy this wouldn't be an issue. Create a new economy on it, f Texas and big oil. They have powerful lobbyist however. Fact is, more liberal policies actually solve this problem. Us and Canada barely provide any oil there is no way at this consumption rate without electric cars and everything else we can give the middle finger to SA. Trump would have gas prices at $10 if he postured aggressive

[nickman54 0]

Nick, from my understanding Buffett owns the line in which Soros may be an investor. But this is quite a stretch at an indirect way to bring Obama into this. This is a deep rooted problem that has repub blood on its hands as well, if not more. If you would just allow investment into green energy this wouldn't be an issue. Create a new economy on it, f Texas and big oil. They have powerful lobbyist however. Fact is, more liberal policies actually solve this problem. Us and Canada barely provide any oil there is no way at this consumption rate without electric cars and everything else we can give the middle finger to SA. Trump would have gas prices at $10 if he postured aggressive

 

Actually I misspoke I meant to say Buffet. I work in the "green energy" field and can tell you who are the winners and losers in that regard. The oil industry in the US is taking a beating right now. As are the Saudis. I am not blaming Obama as Buffet will likely buy the next guy as well. Just so we are clear too. Electric cars require electric to run. Obama has killed the coal industry and electric rates are through the roof across the us. Natural gas and wind are being used to replace the coal. Guess what, left leaning people hate fracking for NG. Lol. Wind is at best a zero return investment when you factor in initial costs for infrastructure.

Edited April 18, 2016 by nickman54

[Jim2Dokes 3]

Actually I misspoke I meant to say Buffet. I work in the "green energy" field and can tell you who are the winners and losers in that regard. The oil industry in the US is taking a beating right now. As are the Saudis. I am not blaming Obama as Buffet will likely buy the next guy as well. Just so we are clear too. Electric cars require electric to run. Obama has killed the coal industry and electric rates are through the roof across the us. Natural gas and wind are being used to replace the coal. Guess what, left leaning people hate fracking for NG. Lol. Wind is at best a zero return investment when you factor in initial costs for infrastructure.

 

Well fracking does suck, reason for people not liking it. Anytime you mess with the earth it's gonna bite back. But your right I mean what's the alternative there isn't enough panels and turbines to light and fill the consumtion of this country. So it goes back to how you handle this situation. Hopefully an alternative because Russia has been making power plays in the Middle East and China in Africa to gain access to more natural resources. Best for the US to somehow focus on alternatives. And unless folks want 10 a gallon not much we can do about SA. Which actually goes back to the Iran deal, they hate the Saudis and vice versa, it is in our advantage to make deals with Iran to have them compete with SA. Obama got that deal done at least. SA hated we made that deal with Iran.

 

I know that no one on this board wants to hear this but the reason Bush wanted to go to Iraq was to gain access to more oil. The Iran deal Obama without a war opened up a **** ton of exports to Europe and the us with the sanctions lifted. The sole reason that the Saudis had to lower there price and is the reason we have gas under $2. In my view, the Saudis are worse than Iran but they both are pretty bad folks to deal with.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Jim2Dokes

[jessemoore97 1,281]

Well fracking does suck, reason for people not liking it. Anytime you mess with the earth it's gonna bite back. But your right I mean what's the alternative there isn't enough panels and turbines to light and fill the consumtion of this country. So it goes back to how you handle this situation. Hopefully an alternative because Russia has been making power plays in the Middle East and China in Africa to gain access to more natural resources. Best for the US to somehow focus on alternatives. And unless folks want 10 a gallon not much we can do about SA. Which actually goes back to the Iran deal, they hate the Saudis and vice versa, it is in our advantage to make deals with Iran to have them compete with SA. Obama got that deal done at least. SA hated we made that deal with Iran.

 

I'm looking forward to a alternative I read about a year or so ago. The Navy was in the process of using seawater to power engines for their future fleet. IF it's able to work imagine the possibilities for a larger scale version.

[nickman54 0]

Well fracking does suck, reason for people not liking it. Anytime you mess with the earth it's gonna bite back. But your right I mean what's the alternative there isn't enough panels and turbines to light and fill the consumtion of this country. So it goes back to how you handle this situation. Hopefully an alternative because Russia has been making power plays in the Middle East and China in Africa to gain access to more natural resources. Best for the US to somehow focus on alternatives. And unless folks want 10 a gallon not much we can do about SA. Which actually goes back to the Iran deal, they hate the Saudis and vice versa, it is in our advantage to make deals with Iran to have them compete with SA. Obama got that deal done at least. SA hated we made that deal with Iran.

 

I know that no one on this board wants to hear this but the reason Bush wanted to go to Iraq was to gain access to more oil. The Iran deal Obama without a war opened up a **** ton of exports to Europe and the us with the sanctions lifted. The sole reason that the Saudis had to lower there price and is the reason we have gas under $2. In my view, the Saudis are worse than Iran but they both are pretty bad folks to deal with.

 

I'll likely respond with something logical tomorrow. In the meantime there isn't anything cheaper and easier than fossil fuels. The Iran deal had little impact on worldwide oil prices. The fact that Obama couldn't stop the boom here in the US is what happened. He blocked almost all federal land exploration.

[nickman54 0]

Furthermore when you are the most powerful country in the world and you make a deal with a tiny country you would think you would have some leverage. What's the angle for the Iran deal?

[Soko 128]

I'll likely respond with something logical tomorrow. In the meantime there isn't anything cheaper and easier than fossil fuels. The Iran deal had little impact on worldwide oil prices. The fact that Obama couldn't stop the boom here in the US is what happened. He blocked almost all federal land exploration.

 

 

The Iran deal is major reason the OPEC meeting in Doha yesterday went nowhere to freeze production. What's the point is capping production when they are increasing at a rate of knots?

 

Iran is not a tiny country btw. It is a very interesting market for a lot of companies to enter as they have an educated population and despite what you might think one of then more progressive young demographics in the ME. This country used to be one of the US closest allies. They are tired of the older generations nut jobs and want to enter the world markets once again. And US sanctions have not been lifted yet. Until it passes congress no US company can go there and no banks will touch financing for fear of massive fines. Once that hurdle is cleared then their oil will really start to flow.

 

Like Cuba, I agree it is better to engage with these guys rather than keep them in the cold. If your going to be best pals with the Saudis then you can't say this is a bad deal.