Saudi oil fields easy target for Iran missiles if attacked by United States
The myth of the New York Times Case for attack on Iran
One of the critical aspects of any an attack on Iran that to date has not been explained to the American public, apart from the national debate is how would the United States protect Saudi and other oil rich states infrastructure from a massive Iranian missile attack. The Saudi antimissile shield is designed to protect military assets not oil infrastructure. Iran has the missile power to turn Saudi oil infrastructure into what Hezbollah turned north Israeli cities.
There is little the US, China or Israel can do if Iran fired thousands of missiles at Saudi oil infrastructure.
Middle Eastern writers, political analysts and thinkers being featured on North America TV and newspapers but refused to share is basic fact of political life in the Middle East.
Trita Paris, the Iranian-born author of “Treacherous Triangle: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the United States, which according to the New York Times will be publish next year by Yale University Press, is one of group of impressive Middle Eastern writers, political analysts and thinkers being featured on North America TV and newspapers to build the case for an United States led attack on Iran nuclear and missile infrastructure.
Mr. Parsi statement, carried in the New York Times article Caution: This Coalition Is Fragile—that … “Lebanon has proven that there’s no military solution to the problem in the Middle East”…is both not true and very dangerous.
An Iranian supported terrorist attack on the US homeland, Iranian attack on US forces in Iraqi or Iranian attack on Saudi oil infrastructure or a massive Hezbollah missile attack from northern Lebanon on southern Israeli cities would prove the necessary political cover for US led forces to immediately take out Iran nuclear and missile infrastructure with in 24 hours. Any of the above scenarios would allow the White House act. The problem is not military problem, it’s a political problem.
The problem for the US oil lobby and Bush Administration is that short of one of the above scenarios cases the political critical mass necessary to support an Iran is not developed yet. American political culture requires that just as long as there is no immediate perception of an Iranian threat to American national security or strategic assets Bush must try sanctions. Lacking even the perception of a real Iranian threat, the Bush administration is forced to try a number of rounds of sanctions against Iran, as it builds the case for war.
Iran and China knows that with less than three months to US elections, the political window of opportunity for an massive attack is closing and they are doing every possible to appear reasonable to the American public.
Most Americans view, even after the war between Israel and Hezbollah, North Korea more of an immediate threat to their national security than Iran. More Americans think that if the Bush administration is now willing to work with South Korea, Japan and China, used sanctions, while starting direct talks with the North Koreans, why not try the same process with the Iranians. Americans, many of whom have visited Japan and South Korea correctly view their solution far more indicate and threatening than Israel situation with Hezbollah.
If the US oil multinationals and the Bush administration were to make public a energy accommodation with China and other Asia countries to provide energy shipments out the US streagtic supply during the after shock of the attack on Iranian and agreement to allow the Colombia –Venzenlia oil pipeline to increase China’s direct access to South American oil supplies: The Iranian nuclear threat would disappear. So would many republican positions in Congress.
The Bush Administration doe not have the time to reinforce the Saudi antimissile shield or extend the shield to protect the oil fields and refineries in the immedicated future. Given the streagtic important of Saudi oil to both the US and China, any attack on Iran would require a massive attack on all it missile infrastructure that could reach Saudi Arabia and other key oil production centers. This would mean taking out Iranian air, land and sea weapon platforms before they fired on Saudi oil infrastructure.
If US Space Command had major problems assisting the Israeli Air in finding and destroying Hezbollah older missiles launchers with no air force or SAM missiles to fight with, how will they find the thousands of Iranians advanced Chinese mobile missile launchers before they fire their GPS guide missiles at Saudi oil infrastructure. Even with three weekends hunting, US Space Command lost the missile launcher shell game with Hezbollah and finally need Israeli ground forces to finish the job. Few American or Saudi military planners have conference in the US Space Command’s ability to defense Saudi oil infrastructure against a potential attack from Iranian missiles.
In the case of southern Iran, the missile shell game with Saudi infrastructure could go on for months. This would stop the supply of oil few weeks. Few Asian countries could last weeks, much less months without Middle East oil shipments. The most immediate effect of an US lead attack on Iran would be a major ratcheting up of already high global oil prices, potentially reaching a 100 per barrel and a possible Venezuelan led oil embargo on the US.
Saudi oil is the corner stones of US energy planning, without which, even for a short period of time would force a political showdown with Cuba and Venezuela on less than favorable terms. For these reasons it going to be real tough for a weaken Secretary Condoleezza Rice to create a coalition of countries other than Israel willing to try to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions, before North Korea is dealt with.
Trita Paris, and other Middle Eastern writers, political analysts and thinkers being featured on North America TV and newspapers should tell the American peopele the real economic danger to them of an United States led military attack on Iran nuclear and missile infrastructure.
One of the critical aspects of any an attack on Iran that to date has not been explained to the American public, apart from the national debate is how would the United States protect Saudi and other oil rich states infrastructure from a massive Iranian missile attack. The Saudi antimissile shield is designed to protect military assets not oil infrastructure. Iran has the missile power to turn Saudi oil infrastructure into what Hezbollah turned north Israeli cities.
There is little the US, China or Israel can do if Iran fired thousands of missiles at Saudi oil infrastructure.
Middle Eastern writers, political analysts and thinkers being featured on North America TV and newspapers but refused to share is basic fact of political life in the Middle East.
Trita Paris, the Iranian-born author of “Treacherous Triangle: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the United States, which according to the New York Times will be publish next year by Yale University Press, is one of group of impressive Middle Eastern writers, political analysts and thinkers being featured on North America TV and newspapers to build the case for an United States led attack on Iran nuclear and missile infrastructure.
Mr. Parsi statement, carried in the New York Times article Caution: This Coalition Is Fragile—that … “Lebanon has proven that there’s no military solution to the problem in the Middle East”…is both not true and very dangerous.
An Iranian supported terrorist attack on the US homeland, Iranian attack on US forces in Iraqi or Iranian attack on Saudi oil infrastructure or a massive Hezbollah missile attack from northern Lebanon on southern Israeli cities would prove the necessary political cover for US led forces to immediately take out Iran nuclear and missile infrastructure with in 24 hours. Any of the above scenarios would allow the White House act. The problem is not military problem, it’s a political problem.
The problem for the US oil lobby and Bush Administration is that short of one of the above scenarios cases the political critical mass necessary to support an Iran is not developed yet. American political culture requires that just as long as there is no immediate perception of an Iranian threat to American national security or strategic assets Bush must try sanctions. Lacking even the perception of a real Iranian threat, the Bush administration is forced to try a number of rounds of sanctions against Iran, as it builds the case for war.
Iran and China knows that with less than three months to US elections, the political window of opportunity for an massive attack is closing and they are doing every possible to appear reasonable to the American public.
Most Americans view, even after the war between Israel and Hezbollah, North Korea more of an immediate threat to their national security than Iran. More Americans think that if the Bush administration is now willing to work with South Korea, Japan and China, used sanctions, while starting direct talks with the North Koreans, why not try the same process with the Iranians. Americans, many of whom have visited Japan and South Korea correctly view their solution far more indicate and threatening than Israel situation with Hezbollah.
If the US oil multinationals and the Bush administration were to make public a energy accommodation with China and other Asia countries to provide energy shipments out the US streagtic supply during the after shock of the attack on Iranian and agreement to allow the Colombia –Venzenlia oil pipeline to increase China’s direct access to South American oil supplies: The Iranian nuclear threat would disappear. So would many republican positions in Congress.
The Bush Administration doe not have the time to reinforce the Saudi antimissile shield or extend the shield to protect the oil fields and refineries in the immedicated future. Given the streagtic important of Saudi oil to both the US and China, any attack on Iran would require a massive attack on all it missile infrastructure that could reach Saudi Arabia and other key oil production centers. This would mean taking out Iranian air, land and sea weapon platforms before they fired on Saudi oil infrastructure.
If US Space Command had major problems assisting the Israeli Air in finding and destroying Hezbollah older missiles launchers with no air force or SAM missiles to fight with, how will they find the thousands of Iranians advanced Chinese mobile missile launchers before they fire their GPS guide missiles at Saudi oil infrastructure. Even with three weekends hunting, US Space Command lost the missile launcher shell game with Hezbollah and finally need Israeli ground forces to finish the job. Few American or Saudi military planners have conference in the US Space Command’s ability to defense Saudi oil infrastructure against a potential attack from Iranian missiles.
In the case of southern Iran, the missile shell game with Saudi infrastructure could go on for months. This would stop the supply of oil few weeks. Few Asian countries could last weeks, much less months without Middle East oil shipments. The most immediate effect of an US lead attack on Iran would be a major ratcheting up of already high global oil prices, potentially reaching a 100 per barrel and a possible Venezuelan led oil embargo on the US.
Saudi oil is the corner stones of US energy planning, without which, even for a short period of time would force a political showdown with Cuba and Venezuela on less than favorable terms. For these reasons it going to be real tough for a weaken Secretary Condoleezza Rice to create a coalition of countries other than Israel willing to try to rein in Iran’s nuclear ambitions, before North Korea is dealt with.
Trita Paris, and other Middle Eastern writers, political analysts and thinkers being featured on North America TV and newspapers should tell the American peopele the real economic danger to them of an United States led military attack on Iran nuclear and missile infrastructure.
posted by Nubianobserver at 2:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home