Saudi Arabia has ‘a great deal of explaining to do’ on how its oil assets were attacked, says former US diplomat

[webfact]

Saudi Arabia has ‘a great deal of explaining to do’ on how its oil assets were attacked, says former US diplomat

Yen Nee Lee

 

 

KEY POINTS

-- Saudi Arabia — one of the world’s largest oil exporters — spent an estimated $67.6 billion on arms in 2018, according to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

 

-- The Middle Eastern country was just behind the U.S. and China in terms of defense spending, said Gary Grappo, former U.S. ambassador to Oman.

 

-- “I think the Saudi leadership has a great deal of explaining to do that a country that ranks third in terms of total defense spending ... was not able to defend its most critical, and I can’t underscore that enough, its most critical oil facility from these kinds of attacks,” said Grappo.

 

Saudi Arabia has “a great deal of explaining to do” on how it could not defend its “most critical” oil facility from drone attacks at the weekend, said Gary Grappo, former U.S. ambassador to Oman.

 

The Kingdom spent an estimated $67.6 billion on arms in 2018, according to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Saudi Arabia was just behind the U.S. and China in terms of defense spending, Grappo told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Tuesday.

 

Full story:  https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/17/saudi-arabia-has-to-explain-how-its-oil-assets-in-abqaiq-were-attacked-says-ex-us-diplomat.html

 

-- CNBC 2019-09-17

[tonbridgebrit]

Mr Former US Diplomat, can you stop being ridiculous ?

Saudi Arabia has spent billions on arms, most of it is stuff from the USA. And the billions on arms, some of it was spent on 'missile defence systems'.  So, purchase from America, some defence missiles, these missiles are suppose to knock out missiles that are attacking the country. Does all this mean that, the American missile defence system failed to knock out the missiles that damaged the oil assets ?

Maybe Saudi Arabia can sue Washington, or sue the US defence contracters for selling faulty equipment ? Or, there's the "Trade Desriptions Act".  If you sell something that you said was chicken, but it's not, well, you've gone against the Trade Descriptions Act.  And if you sell a product that claims to knock out incoming missiles, but it does not, well, again, you've gone against the Trade Desriptions Act.


On a different note, what about the billions that have been spent on missile defence systems in other places on planet earth. Do they actually work ?

Edited September 17, 2019 by tonbridgebrit

[Why Me]

Giving SA sophisticated weaponry is like giving a screwdriver to an animal without opposable thumbs. Jeez, they even have Pakstani Army units on call to run errands.

 

The top 1% in SA have all their money in London real estate and couldn't give a rats what happens at home. The remaining 99 live at home off state handouts and can barely tell a camel from a kangaroo.

[canuckamuck]

29 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Mr Former US Diplomat, can you stop being ridiculous ?

Saudi Arabia has spent billions on arms, most of it is stuff from the USA. And the billions on arms, some of it was spent on 'missile defence systems'.  So, purchase from America, some defence missiles, these missiles are suppose to knock out missiles that are attacking the country. Does all this mean that, the American missile defence system failed to knock out the missiles that damaged the oil assets ?

Maybe Saudi Arabia can sue Washington, or sue the US defence contracters for selling faulty equipment ? Or, there's the "Trade Desriptions Act".  If you sell something that you said was chicken, but it's not, well, you've gone against the Trade Descriptions Act.  And if you sell a product that claims to knock out incoming missiles, but it does not, well, again, you've gone against the Trade Desriptions Act.


On a different note, what about the billions that have been spent on missile defence systems in other places on planet earth. Do they actually work ?

Do missile defense systems work on drones?

[Why Me]

37 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

Do missile defense systems work on drones?

Iran's do. They took out a US drone.

 

Military, munition or surveillance equipment carrying, drones are not tiny like hobby drones. About the size of a small single-engine.

[singking]

Mr Former US Diplomat, can you stop being ridiculous ?

Saudi Arabia has spent billions on arms, most of it is stuff from the USA. And the billions on arms, some of it was spent on 'missile defence systems'.  So, purchase from America, some defence missiles, these missiles are suppose to knock out missiles that are attacking the country. Does all this mean that, the American missile defence system failed to knock out the missiles that damaged the oil assets ?

Maybe Saudi Arabia can sue Washington, or sue the US defence contracters for selling faulty equipment ? Or, there's the "Trade Desriptions Act".  If you sell something that you said was chicken, but it's not, well, you've gone against the Trade Descriptions Act.  And if you sell a product that claims to knock out incoming missiles, but it does not, well, again, you've gone against the Trade Desriptions Act.


On a different note, what about the billions that have been spent on missile defence systems in other places on planet earth. Do they actually work ?

Perhaps the Russian ones work? That would be why USA is hesitant to attack countries that have them?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Enoon]

1 hour ago, Why Me said:

Iran's do. They took out a US drone.

 

Military, munition or surveillance equipment carrying, drones are not tiny like hobby drones. About the size of a small single-engine.

Drones that are used by the Houthis:

 

They are all considerably smaller than munitions carrying drones that launch missiles.

 

Because they are the munition........"kamikaze" drones.

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2019 by Enoon

[mfd101]

Spending billions on defence equipment to keep your friendly superpower happy is one thing. Knowing how to operate it is another.

[Lungstib]

One recent report suggests the 'drone' could have been fired from Southern Iraq, now also an anti-Saudi shiite area. Perhaps the locals in Iraq have managed to get their hands on some more sophisticated equipment courtesy of an ex-invader who carelessly left things in dangerous hands. 

[Nobbie49]

Mr Former US Diplomat, can you stop being ridiculous ?

Saudi Arabia has spent billions on arms, most of it is stuff from the USA. And the billions on arms, some of it was spent on 'missile defence systems'.  So, purchase from America, some defence missiles, these missiles are suppose to knock out missiles that are attacking the country. Does all this mean that, the American missile defence system failed to knock out the missiles that damaged the oil assets ?

Maybe Saudi Arabia can sue Washington, or sue the US defence contracters for selling faulty equipment ? Or, there's the "Trade Desriptions Act".  If you sell something that you said was chicken, but it's not, well, you've gone against the Trade Descriptions Act.  And if you sell a product that claims to knock out incoming missiles, but it does not, well, again, you've gone against the Trade Desriptions Act.


On a different note, what about the billions that have been spent on missile defence systems in other places on planet earth. Do they actually work ?

You’ve got the wrong end of the stick. Saudis couldn’t organise a p??sup in a brewery let alone a battery of missiles. Was there for 16 years working for MOD. Bunch of tribal people barely out of their desert tents trying to look like military. Guess how well that went


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[thaiguzzi]

1 hour ago, Enoon said:

Drones that are used by the Houthis:

 

They are all considerably smaller than munitions carrying drones that launch missiles.

 

Because they are the munition........"kamikaze" drones.

 

 

 

Nice little air cooled flat twin motor in that pic.

Shame to destroy it on impact.

Just sayin....

[IraqRon]

it's almost comical isn' t it, no defense of very critical oil infrastructure, usa pledging allegance to the sauds, for whatever reason, blaming  iran, etc. . who really cares besides the war wongers in the usa?

[Tug]

14 minutes ago, thaiguzzi said:

Nice little air cooled flat twin motor in that pic.

Shame to destroy it on impact.

Just sayin....

I’ve got a 1/4 scale 7 cyl 4 stroke radial engine wayyy to cool to risk on one of my rc planes lol but back to the thread pure incompetence and laziness on the part of the Saudis and now Donald waits till the Saudis tell him what to do just unbelievable to here something like that from a potus 

 

[Morch]

4 hours ago, vinniekintana said:

Yeah...how could a missile/drone from Iran penetrate one of the most surveilled/protected pieces of real estate in the world

Unless it was a self-inflicted wound to spike the oil price.

 

 

 

Or relevant defense system being ill operated by incompetents.

Or defense systems not designed to address specific threat.

Or detection and interception of incoming cruise missiles/drones being a tricky business.

 

Of course, conspiracy theories are much more fun.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, Why Me said:

Iran's do. They took out a US drone.

 

Military, munition or surveillance equipment carrying, drones are not tiny like hobby drones. About the size of a small single-engine.

 

Iran intercepted a USA surveillance drone, on a mission profile which apparently wasn't big on keeping it hidden. Also the one they shot down is very large as these things go. More of an ambush, there.

 

Intercepting smaller, low-flying incoming targets is somewhat harder.

 

And then, I would be surprised if the Iranians aren't more pro at things military compared to the Saudis.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Lungstib said:

One recent report suggests the 'drone' could have been fired from Southern Iraq, now also an anti-Saudi shiite area. Perhaps the locals in Iraq have managed to get their hands on some more sophisticated equipment courtesy of an ex-invader who carelessly left things in dangerous hands. 

 

A way less complicated version of this would be Iranian proxy Shia militias getting them from Iran.

[Chomper Higgot]

Any evidence yet or are we still discussing what somebody in Washington wishes is to discus on the basis of their words only?

[Morch]

22 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Any evidence yet or are we still discussing what somebody in Washington wishes is to discus on the basis of their words only?

 

Asking loaded questions is cute.

 

Could be wrong, but weren't you of the opinion that accepting the version of those who took responsibility is the surest path until further details emerge?

[Scott]

Troll post removed.

 

[LomSak27]

13 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

So, purchase from America, some defence missiles, these missiles are suppose to knock out missiles that are attacking the country. Does all this mean that, the American missile defence system failed to knock out the missiles that damaged the oil assets ?

 

It wasn't a missile that struck the oil facility. Miss that did you?!!

[Tayaout]

The most funny thing is nobody is questioning why would the Houti who took credit for this attack would do this? Maybe because their military and civilian infrastructure is getting bombed by the Saudi for several years. They are under sea and air blockade from the US and Saudi. I say bombing of the Saudi most precious infrastructure is fair-play and smart. 

Edited September 17, 2019 by Tayaout

[Skallywag]

All good now, Al Jazeera news from 3 hours ago:  "Saudi Arabian Energy minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman said on Tuesday evening the country's oil supply levels are back at the levels they were at before the Saturday attack" 

 

Plus they will be talking to their unseen deity on Friday to ensure future wealth from oil output and to smite their enemies

 

The Islamic Affairs Ministry said the sermons should "emphasise the blessing of security and stability that God has bestowed upon the kingdom of Saudi Arabia"

.....ask for God's protection of the country and to respond to enemies where they are.  

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/saudi-oil-attacks-latest-updates-190916102800973.html

[animalmagic]

Can't really say that missiles are best used to defend against small targets, but a completely autonomous 'close in weapon system' (CIWS) like Phalanx or Goalkeeper would seem to be a good choice.  They are currently used on naval vessels and combined with specialist radar systems such as Sentinel that automatically direct fire from their 6 barreled Gatling gun at incoming targets.

I'm surprised if they haven't been sold any...…..yet!

[chingmai331]

Someone telling me that one of those tiny drones can haul a big load of explosives 800 km across the desert, with a guidance system to hit the preferred target, and explode into a massive fire-ball?

Asking a lot of something no bigger than a golf bag with wings. 

[mfd101]

You would think the Usofans might have some boots on the ground at the relevant sites whose owners actually understand that BEFORE you press Button B you should press Button A.

[canuckamuck]

13 hours ago, Enoon said:

Drones that are used by the Houthis:

 

They are all considerably smaller than munitions carrying drones that launch missiles.

 

Because they are the munition........"kamikaze" drones.

 

 

 

There is just no way that drones like these could have pulled of that attack. This attack was precise and flawless.

It really had to be drones with multiple rockets and remote targeting. They bulls-eyed every target.

And the attack turns out to be a total gift to the Saudis. Oil price goes up before their record breaking IPO. Everyone is ready to Bomb Iran. They couldn't have asked for anything better. Israel and the war hawks in the US are also pleased with the event.

Iran on the other hand gets nothing from this, Yemen maybe some payback, if it was indeed them.

Pretty easy to bomb your own refinery though. 

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, chingmai331 said:

Someone telling me that one of those tiny drones can haul a big load of explosives 800 km across the desert, with a guidance system to hit the preferred target, and explode into a massive fire-ball?

Asking a lot of something no bigger than a golf bag with wings. 

 

Military usage drones aimed for such purposes are larger, and capable of carrying a more significant payload. There were several instructive links on that on topic dealing with the attack.

 

Whether the attack was actually carried out using drones is another matter.

 

[bendejo]

It's not about the buying and taking delivery of weapons, it's about transferring $50 billion (or whatever number DT says it is today) to the US, with the possibility laundering services rendered.

 

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

There is just no way that drones like these could have pulled of that attack. This attack was precise and flawless.

It really had to be drones with multiple rockets and remote targeting. They bulls-eyed every target.

And the attack turns out to be a total gift to the Saudis. Oil price goes up before their record breaking IPO. Everyone is ready to Bomb Iran. They couldn't have asked for anything better. Israel and the war hawks in the US are also pleased with the event.

Iran on the other hand gets nothing from this, Yemen maybe some payback, if it was indeed them.

Pretty easy to bomb your own refinery though. 

 

I don't know that it was alleged the very same type of drones in the pic was used in the attack.

 

Iran benefits the same way Saudi Arabia does - whatever oil it manages to sell, sells for a higher price. On top of that, it makes Saudi Arabia look weak, and it broadcasts a capability to wreck havoc on SA's economy and stability. Considering these as "nothing" is a choice.

[maxx58]

Saudi Arabia's military is staffed with incompetent idiots.

They can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag!