• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Saudi threatens to retaliate against any sanctions over Khashoggi disappearance

washunut said:
Reducing their production by 20-40% does not mean not selling oil. The reduction in production would be somewhat offset by the rise in price it would cause.

Domestic or Canadian production can not be raised by 2-4 million barrels a day very quickly.

My sense is that some are just trying to put the administration into an impossible position. Imagine stop doing business with one of the richest nations on earth because of this issue. On the other hand we handed Iran which was actively working to kill Americans in Iraq with over $100 billion. Pretty ironic when you think of it.
Click to expand...

But production can be raised. And it should be.

Ironic is correct. Thanks Obama.
 
jimbo said:
But production can be raised. And it should be.

Ironic is correct. Thanks Obama.
Click to expand...

Agree production has been and can continue to be raised. It should and will be at least until 2020. That being said Saudi can pull oil off the market than be can replace it through raising production. Otherwise I thin we agree.
 
JANFU said:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ns-over-khashoggi-disappearance-idUSKCN1MO0F1



Canada has seen how MBS retaliates
This will not end well

Now consider how MBS under his father cemented power. Bypassing the norms for who was next in line for Crown Prince.

If this gets nasty, MBS may end up being replaced. Rumor has it many in the Royal Family were not pleased with how MBS came to power.

MBS has shut down any and all dissent, even message boards are towing the line.
Many in the West got sucked into the MBS message that he is a reformer, when it comes to dissent, he is not. He is ruling with an iron fist

Now what would retaliation entail? Decreasing oil exports to specific countries or overall reduction of exports, cuts both ways- loss of revenue for Saudi, increases cost of oil & that would hit markets hard.

Here'''s Who Saudi Crown Prince MBS Purged to Win Power | Time
Click to expand...

I love that these idiots refer to their nation as "the Kingdom"... ****ing tossers... :lol:
 
Cardinal said:
September 12, 2018:

The United States is now the largest global crude oil producer

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37053#

You are right that we aren't the world largest exporter, though. Still, we are on track to be.

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-will-export-oil-most-in-world-2018-5
Click to expand...

The eaia says we are number one, however proven oil reserves and prodiction from all other sources says otherwise. Saudi is the largest exporter, russia has the largest oil reserves, and the us has not bumped up production to match, infact I have watched more oil workers laid off and oil fields closed in texas than expanded, I am sure your source included natural gas as oil, which has expanded despite oil price drops in recent years, making america either number one or number 2 in natural gas production depending on who cites it(russia being the other) plus smaller nations not in the same level as the us or russia in south america who still produce plenty in natural gas.
 
beerftw said:
The eaia says we are number one, however proven oil reserves and prodiction from all other sources says otherwise. Saudi is the largest exporter, russia has the largest oil reserves, and the us has not bumped up production to match, infact I have watched more oil workers laid off and oil fields closed in texas than expanded, I am sure your source included natural gas as oil, which has expanded despite oil price drops in recent years, making america either number one or number 2 in natural gas production depending on who cites it(russia being the other) plus smaller nations not in the same level as the us or russia in south america who still produce plenty in natural gas.
Click to expand...

I'm not an expert on this, but the eia mentions nothing about natural gas. They quite specifically refers to crude oil.
 
washunut said:
Reducing their production by 20-40% does not mean not selling oil. The reduction in production would be somewhat offset by the rise in price it would cause.

Domestic or Canadian production can not be raised by 2-4 million barrels a day very quickly.

My sense is that some are just trying to put the administration into an impossible position. Imagine stop doing business with one of the richest nations on earth because of this issue. On the other hand we handed Iran which was actively working to kill Americans in Iraq with over $100 billion. Pretty ironic when you think of it.
Click to expand...

Iran had their own assets unfrozen. They were not handed 'our' money.
The Saudis have funded most of the Wahabi extremists around the world. The Saudi government is many more times repressive than Iran. 9/11 hijackers were almost all Saudis. Iran fears and hates (Sunni) AlQueda and Isis and it has worked to eliminate these mortal enemies. Iran leaders failed to wine, dine and flatter Trump. That is probably why he is so hostile toward Iran.


Politifact:

The 2015 agreement freed up Iranian assets that had been frozen under sanctions. Called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the deal included Iran and the United States, China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the European Union.

The agreement only affected sanctions imposed to punish Iran for its nuclear program. Iran has other assets that remain frozen.

Some conservatives have put the amount released after lifted sanctions as high as $150 billion, which is the highest of estimates we have seen. Another estimate from Iran’s Central Bank topped out at about $29 billion in readily available funds, with another $45 billion tied up in Chinese investment projects and the foreign assets of the Iran’s Oil Ministry.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/opinion/saudi-arabia-qatar-isis-terrorism.html

Even sophisticated observers admit to confusion and consternation about the Middle East, where rivalries and jealousies among nations have reached new levels of complication. Saudi Arabia and some of its neighbors decide to punish Qatar and some of its citizens, ostensibly for fostering and financing Islamist terrorism. But Saudi Arabia itself has been accused of underwriting extremists. No matter: President Trump, captivated by Saudi royalty, sides with the Saudis — even though the United States has two important bases in Qatar.[/COLOR]
 
Godric1970 said:
and the Saudi response will be to cancel that massive defence contract worth hundreds of billions of US dollars .... sending US defence contractors reeling and instead the Saudis will buy there military equipment from Russia and China instead and slashing there oil production
Click to expand...

i dont want us to sell hundreds of billions of dollars worth of weapons to people that murder their journalists though
 
nota bene said:
This article explains what is at stake and why prudence is the wise course: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/prudence-is-the-right-response-to-the-khashoggi-affair/
Click to expand...


support the brutal undemocratic regime that needs us so its easier to maintain shiping get oil and so other countries that we like even less for some reason dont gain influence because **** morality

the punishment must fit the crime

in this murder of critic of the regime to scare others into submission on fear of death

your ****ing disgusting
 
blarg said:
support the brutal undemocratic regime that needs us so its easier to maintain shiping get oil and so other countries that we like even less for some reason dont gain influence because **** morality

the punishment must fit the crime

in this murder of critic of the regime to scare others into submission on fear of death

your ****ing disgusting
Click to expand...

You're.
 
Cassandra said:
Iran had their own assets unfrozen. They were not handed 'our' money.
The Saudis have funded most of the Wahabi extremists around the world. The Saudi government is many more times repressive than Iran. 9/11 hijackers were almost all Saudis. Iran fears and hates (Sunni) AlQueda and Isis and it has worked to eliminate these mortal enemies. Iran leaders failed to wine, dine and flatter Trump. That is probably why he is so hostile toward Iran.


Politifact:

The 2015 agreement freed up Iranian assets that had been frozen under sanctions. Called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the deal included Iran and the United States, China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the European Union.

The agreement only affected sanctions imposed to punish Iran for its nuclear program. Iran has other assets that remain frozen.

Some conservatives have put the amount released after lifted sanctions as high as $150 billion, which is the highest of estimates we have seen. Another estimate from Iran’s Central Bank topped out at about $29 billion in readily available funds, with another $45 billion tied up in Chinese investment projects and the foreign assets of the Iran’s Oil Ministry.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/opinion/saudi-arabia-qatar-isis-terrorism.html

Even sophisticated observers admit to confusion and consternation about the Middle East, where rivalries and jealousies among nations have reached new levels of complication. Saudi Arabia and some of its neighbors decide to punish Qatar and some of its citizens, ostensibly for fostering and financing Islamist terrorism. But Saudi Arabia itself has been accused of underwriting extremists. No matter: President Trump, captivated by Saudi royalty, sides with the Saudis — even though the United States has two important bases in Qatar.[/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Don't you hate dishonest debate points,I do. Where did I say we handed over OUR? Where did I say that Saudi is not a problem when it comes to terrorism?

You seem to have a love affair with Iran,a nation we know actively worked to kill American kids in Iraq. Just wondering why. Also wondering why you are selective in pointing out Saudi Arabia. My sense is that progressives are looking for anything that will adversely impact America to help their "RESISTANCE" movement. Anything that hurts the country hurts the administration.

Not sure Trump bowed to the Saudis as Obama did. Fact is they are an important nation,even if a very flawed one.

Don't see you or your ilk asking for more pressure on Iran and China. Perhaps because Obama kowtowed to them.
 
washunut said:
Reducing their production by 20-40% does not mean not selling oil. The reduction in production would be somewhat offset by the rise in price it would cause.

Domestic or Canadian production can not be raised by 2-4 million barrels a day very quickly.

My sense is that some are just trying to put the administration into an impossible position. Imagine stop doing business with one of the richest nations on earth because of this issue. On the other hand we handed Iran which was actively working to kill Americans in Iraq with over $100 billion. Pretty ironic when you think of it.
Click to expand...

imagining that we stop doing business with rich but murderous regimes seems good

sanctions on iran over them killing americans and others also seems good

but dosent seem to justify keeping sanctions over their nuclear program if they stop trying to build nukes
 
blarg said:
support the brutal undemocratic regime that needs us so its easier to maintain shiping get oil and so other countries that we like even less for some reason dont gain influence because **** morality

the punishment must fit the crime

in this murder of critic of the regime to scare others into submission on fear of death

your ****ing disgusting
Click to expand...

For linking to an article whose opinion you don't like? :roll:
 
nota bene said:
For linking to an article whose opinion you don't like? :roll:
Click to expand...

that would be wrong of me sorry i figured you linked it because you agreed with it

in which case yes for posting an opinion i dont like specifically cutting a country slack over murder by the state in order to silence dissent for the sake money and to fight people that don't seem much worse is disgusting
 
Last edited:
blarg said:
imagining that we stop doing business with rich but murderous regimes seems good

sanctions on iran over them killing americans and others also seems good

but dosent seem to justify keeping sanctions over their nuclear program if they stop trying to build nukes
Click to expand...

Nukes have little value if you can't deliver them to an intended target. We did NOT stop that progress with the agreement we got. Similar o ACA,Obama sold it to his ignorant base. Nothing Obama did ever raised concerns among his syncopates.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I love that these idiots refer to their nation as "the Kingdom"... ****ing tossers... :lol:
Click to expand...

They put the "the" on it when it refers to a title- people would do the same if it was a republic. I hope you dont teach English in your school, Bodie. :2razz:
 
washunut said:
Nukes have little value if you can't deliver them to an intended target. We did NOT stop that progress with the agreement we got. Similar o ACA,Obama sold it to his ignorant base. Nothing Obama did ever raised concerns among his syncopates.
Click to expand...

obama and the leaders of every other country involved who with the exception of us want to stick to it a lot of selling around the world over this

but i guess you have a point if the sanctions weer specificly about launch systems and not nukes
 
blarg said:
obama and the leaders of every other country involved who with the exception of us want to stick to it a lot of selling around the world over this

but i guess you have a point if the sanctions weer specificly about launch systems and not nukes
Click to expand...

When you say every other country of course you include China and Russia. But is great to know that you still remember Obama's talking points,nice job.
 
washunut said:
Don't you hate dishonest debate points,I do. Where did I say we handed over OUR? Where did I say that Saudi is not a problem when it comes to terrorism?
Click to expand...


Yes. I truly dislike people who are misleading. That is why I find it galling for people to imply that Obama gave Iran 100 billion w/o explaining that we gave them back SOME of their own money in exchange for the nuclear agreement. Your comment contained the sin of omission
You seem to have a love affair with Iran,a nation we know actively worked to kill American kids in Iraq. Just wondering why. Also wondering why you are selective in pointing out Saudi Arabia. My sense is that progressives are looking for anything that will adversely impact America to help their "RESISTANCE" movement. Anything that hurts the country hurts the administration.
Click to expand...
"Love affair w Iran"? Here you commit the sin you just said you hate- a dishonest debate point. I am a pragmatist. Of course, Iran is hostile to the U.S. after our fraught history ...but it is undeniable that the Saudi brand of Islamic faith is the biggest menace to terrorism and stability in the M.E. The Saudis are in the midst of creating a huge humanitarian disaster in Yemen with U.S. assistance. So why is the U.S. gov't mum about the crimes of the Saudis while demonizing Iran? I think the answer lies with Israel, primarily.
Meanwhile, I think it is far more effective to reward/ support reformers in Iran than mindlessly impose crippling sanctions- which only bolster the anti- American, hard line elements in Iran.

https://ctc.usma.edu/the-absence-of-shia-suicide-attacks-in-iraq/

"It is widely recognized that the rise of suicide attacks in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003 has been predominately a Salafi-jihadi phenomenon 1. While some suicide attacks are also strategically used by other insurgent factions (both Islamist and nationalist Iraqi groups), most of the known perpetrators are non-Iraqis who are globally recruited or voluntarily come from neighboring countries (such as Saudi Arabia) or other parts of the world 2. Despite a decline of attacks since 2008—partly due to the U.S.-led “troop surge” and the bolstering of the state armed forces—Iraq remains a breeding ground for suicide operations. These operations are organized by either Sunni Iraqi groups (Islamists and nationalists) who use such military tactics against U.S. and Iraqi forces, or the global jihadist groups such as al-Qa`ida in Iraq (AQI) that mainly target the Shi`a civilian population to weaken the Shi`a-dominated government in Baghdad by deliberately creating a sectarian or communal conflict 3. In the context of the U.S.-led occupation and the ensuing sectarian violence, however, one question has remained largely ignored by analysts: Why has Iraq not experienced suicide violence on the part of the Shi`a?


Don't see you or your ilk asking for more pressure on Iran and China. Perhaps because Obama kowtowed to them.
Click to expand...

Wow. Now you know my "ilk"? I did not realize you were so familiar w my points of view. Talk about dishonest!
 
PoS said:
They put the "the" on it when it refers to a title- people would do the same if it was a republic. I hope you dont teach English in your school, Bodie. :2razz:
Click to expand...

I teach The English class here...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom