Attacco con droni sugli impianti petroliferi in Arabia Saudita: cui prodest?
Data: 17/09/2019
Argomento: Arabia Saudita

Traduzione automatica

Drone Attack On Saudi Oil Facilities: Who Benefits?
I have been watching all of the recent news reports coming out of the Jew spew media concerning the latest Houthi drone strike against two Saudi Arabian oil facilities deep within Saudi territory itself.... I  can not honestly believe what I have been seeing from those consumate liars, as they are hammering the American public with the bold faced lies that this attack was carried out by Iran.... These lunatics are also frothing at the mouth for the want to see a war against the innocent nation of Iran be carried out immediately even before the proof is shown to the public that the Iranians most definitely did not carry out this attack and that all evidence (so far) shows that the attack was indeed carried out by the Houthis in Yemen!

OK, even with all of the illogical articles that have been coming out of so many Internet websites since the Saturday morning strikes by the Houthis against Saudi Arabia, I have been looking for the more logical and sane ones that provide real information about these strikes and exactly "who benefits?" from attacking Saudi Arabia at this time... And one of course came out earlier today, and comes from the Global Research group from right here in Canada... I do in fact want to present that article, from writer Tony Cartalucci, and is entitled: "Drone Attack On Saudi Oil Facilities: Who Benefits?" right here for everyone to view for themselves... I do of course have my own thoughts and comments to follow:

“Drone Attack” on Saudi Oil – Who Benefits?
Global Research, September 16, 2019

Huge blazes were reported at two oil facilities in Saudi Arabia owned by Aramco. While Saudi authorities refused to assign blame, media outlets like the BBC immediately began insinuating either Yemen’s Houthis or Iran were responsible.
The BBC in its article, “Saudi Arabia oil facilities ablaze after drone strikes,” would inject toward the top of its article:
Iran-aligned Houthi fighters in Yemen have been blamed for previous attacks.
Following an ambiguous and evidence-free description of the supposed attacks, the BBC even included an entire section titled, “Who could be behind the attacks?” dedicated to politically expedient speculation aimed ultimately at Tehran.
The BBC would claim:
Houthi fighters were blamed for drone attacks on the Shaybah natural gas liquefaction facility last month and on other oil facilities in May.
The Iran-aligned rebel movement is fighting the Yemeni government and a Saudi-led coalition.
Yemen has been at war since 2015, when President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi was forced to flee the capital Sanaa by the Houthis. Saudi Arabia backs President Hadi, and has led a coalition of regional countries against the rebels.
The coalition launches air strikes almost every day, while the Houthis often fire missiles into Saudi Arabia.
Deliberately missing from the BBC’s history lesson are several key facts, leaving readers to draw conclusions that conveniently propel the West’s agenda versus Iran forward.
The US and Saudi Arabia vs. MENA
The war in Yemen was a result of US-backed regime change operations aimed at Yemen – along with Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Syria, and Egypt – starting in 2011.
Major hostilities began when the client regime installed by the US was ousted from power in 2015. Since then, the US and its Saudi allies have brutalized and ravaged Yemen triggering one of the worst humanitarian crises of the 21st century.
The UN’s own news service in an article titled, “Humanitarian crisis in Yemen remains the worst in the world, warns UN,” would admit:
An estimated 24 million people – close to 80 per cent of the population – need assistance and protection in Yemen, the UN warned on Thursday. With famine threatening hundreds of thousands of lives, humanitarian aid is increasingly becoming the only lifeline for millions across the country.
The cause of this catastrophe is the deliberate blockading of Yemen. Reuters in its article, “U.N. aid chief appeals for full lifting of Yemen blockade,” would report:
The United Nations appealed on Friday to the Saudi-led military coalition to fully lift its blockade of Yemen, saying up to eight million people were “right on the brink of famine”.
Essentially – the United States – with the largest economy and most powerful military in the world – along with its allies in Riyadh – are attempting to erase an entire nation off the map through bombings, starvation, and disease.
Saudi aggression carried out on behalf of Washington isn’t confined only to its war on Yemen. Saudi Arabia has played a key role in radicalizing, arming, and funding US-backed militants attempting to overthrow the government of Syria as well as extremist groups bent on destabilizing Iraq and even Iran itself.
Likewise, the militants who overran Libya in 2011 were drawn from extremist networks funded for decades by Riyadh. Thus, Saudi Arabia is not merely menacing neighboring Yemen, it is menacing the entire Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and even beyond.
Saudi Arabia the Victim?  
The BBC’s recent article attempting to portray Saudi-Yemeni hostilities as a tit-for-tat conflict rather than Yemen’s desperate struggle for survival is yet another illustration of not only the West’s hypocrisy in terms of upholding or in any way underwriting human rights, but also the Western media’ complicity in advancing this hypocrisy.
Saudi Arabia is no victim.
If the US can predicate the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of its government on deliberately false claims of possessing “weapons of mass destruction,” wouldn’t Yemen and its allies be justified in using any means possible to attack and undermine Saudi Arabia’s fighting capacity as it and its US allies openly carry out a war of aggression unequivocally condemned by the UN itself?
Houthi fighters or Iran would both be well within their rights to strike at the economic engine driving what even the UN has repeatedly declared as an illegal war of aggression waged by Saudi Arabia and its Western sponsors against the nation and people of Yemen.
Unfortunately, provoking such attacks – however justified – is key to US machinations toward igniting an even wider and more destructive regional conflict.
Two Possibilities 
The alleged attacks on Saudi oil facilities mean one of two things.
Either it is indeed retaliation against Saudi Arabia for its criminal activities across the region – showcasing new military capabilities raising the costs for Riyadh to continue down its current foreign policy path – or it was a staged provocation that will be used by the US to station yet more military forces in Saudi Arabia and to ratchet up tensions with both Iran to the east and Yemen’s Houthis to the south.
The recent departure of US National Security Adviser John Bolton led many to believe the US may be changing tack on its foreign policy – particularly toward Iran. However, it was much more likely a means of portraying the US as a “peacemaker” ahead of another round of attempts by the US to escalate tensions with Iran and if at all possible, trigger a wider conflict long sought by US special interests for years.
The US already used recent and highly questionable incidents in the Persian Gulf to justify sending hundreds of troops to Saudi Arabia. The New York Times in its July 2019 article, “U.S. to Send About 500 More Troops to Saudi Arabia,” would report:
The United States is sending hundreds of troops to Saudi Arabia in what is intended as the latest show of force toward Iran, two Defense Department officials said Wednesday. 
The roughly 500 troops are part of a broader tranche of forces sent to the region over the past two months after tensions between Washington and Tehran escalated. 
Since May, a spate of attacks have left six oil tankers damaged in the Gulf of Oman, with Washington accusing Tehran of inciting them. Iranian officials have denied that claim. The downing of an American drone in June by an Iranian surface-to-air missile only heightened tensions, prompting President Trump to approve military strikes against Iran before abruptly pulling back.
With a growing number of US troops in Saudi Arabia, the US will be well positioned to launch offensive attacks against Iran in any future war, as well as carry out defensive operations to protect Saudi Arabia and essential infrastructure from retaliation.
This most recent alleged attack, along with a series of questionable incidents in the Persian Gulf have afforded the US justification – however tenuous – to further build up its military presence along Iran’s peripheries it otherwise would have had to carry out in an openly provocative and unjustified manner.
It was just these sort of provocations that were described for years by US policymakers who sought to “goad” Iran into war with the West.
For example, in a 2009 Brookings Institution paper titled, “Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran,” US policymakers would openly admit (emphasis added):
…it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. 
However beneficial this campaign of provocations may be for US foreign policy objectives, neither possibility – a provoked reaction from the Houthis or Iran or a staged attack organized by the US – bodes well for those ruling in Riyadh.
For Washington’s allies – the fact that they are just as likely – or more likely – to receive a devastating attack from the US itself than from their actual enemies – all to trigger an even more devastating war they will find themselves in the middle of – is added incentive for nations like Saudi Arabia to take the extended hands of future potential allies like Russia and China, and begin walking down a new and different path.
Only time will tell how far Saudi Arabia is willing to go down its current path, and how much they are willing to risk doing so, before they join the growing list of nations departing from America’s unipolar global order and choosing a more equitable multipolar future.
Whether the US and Saudi Arabia finally provoked genuine attacks from nations they’ve purposefully goaded for years, or staged the attacks themselves, a dangerous course toward war has been set – and a course the rest of the world must now work hard to steer away from.
*Tony Cartalucci is Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

NTS Notes: I do agree with much of Tony's assertions in this article..... And he shows, as I have said for a long time, that the nation that best benefits from striking Saudi oil targets and hitting them hard is of course Yemen.... These strikes against Saudi oil targets IMHO being done for the years and years of Saudi criminals committing horrific acts of genocide against innocent Yemen civilians... The Houthis are strike back for those crimes against humanity, and payback is a *****!

I have been seeing a LOT of articles come out today with claims that the strikes were conducted by (a) Israel, (b) Qatar and UAE, (c) by the US itself as a 'false flag' to blame Iran, (d) from inside Saudi Arabia conducted by rebels against the criminal Saudi family of criminals, (e) from inside Iraq, which I find so ludicrous.. and (f) from Iran itself.....  From my own logical thinking,  (a) I find intriguing, and possibly sinister.....But consider the facts that Jews run Saudi Arabia, I seriously doubt if the tribe would strike another tribe member....(b) also intriguing considering that UAE and Qatar are now basically enemies of the Saudi kingdom, but to attack Saudi Arabia would be tantamount to suicide for both of those tiny nations........ (c) is a possibility, but would the US be so bold and arrogant?. Absolutely, considering that the US wants a "false flag" to blame Iran to get a war going. I also thought that if the Houthis didn't do this attack, that it could well be a US false flag attack..... (d) interesting, but seriously doubt. Building and arming those drones requires materials that would be difficult to get to any 'rebels' operating in Saudi Arabia... (e) intriguing, but many reports have already dismissed that one! I honestly doubt that the Iraqis would be this bold....And (f) is exactly who the criminals want to blame, but even the Iranians are not this stupid....

Basically once you tear apart each false assertion of what is claimed to be the perpetrators of this attack, you are indeed left with the conclusion that the Houthis did this attack and are now scaring the hell out of the Saudis..... The Houthis are indeed going to continue these strikes, as they should, until the Saudis come to the conclusion that they have indeed lost their evil war against Yemen and should sue for peace immediately!

The scary part is that right now we could be on the brink of a new "Gulf War" with Iran being the target... And this is all based on the FALSE allegations that Iran did this attack... Common sense should be the rule of the day here, and should tell everyone that Iran did NOT do this attack simply because they are smart enough to see that such an attack would trigger a massive attack by the US that could cost the lives of millions and the destruction of their nation..... Therefore Iran did NOT do this attack, period...

More to come

Questo Articolo proviene da

L'URL per questa storia è: