Just a wee geopolitical issue...

[foragefarmer]

CASE

"WTf ??" no WMDs!

G.W.B, hey DICK why are we Iraq? Halliburton and my $36 million severance package, you forget George!

And now we know the rest of the story.

[Guest]

CASE

"WTf ??" no WMDs!

G.W.B, hey DICK why are we Iraq? Halliburton and my $36 million severance package, you forget George!

And now we know the rest of the story.

Forage , you are drifting off here , what the **** do you mean trump is impeached? By whom ? The crybaby pissheads that know they cant beat him at the ballot box ?
Doesnt there hafta be a trial ??

[Oliver88]

Why would the US f around with these countries when Ab has enough oil to supply them for 100 yrs. Does Jason Kenny have a phone?

Only lefties in Quebec and environmentalists prefer Iran supplying the world with oil instead of Canada.

The best thing the USA could do to eliminate terrorism funding is bomb major oil refineries and tanker loading sites in Iran.

[bucket]

Robertlarge: The problem with that thinking is since the first gulf war many Iranians, Iraquis and other middle eastern citizens think of the Americans as the terrorists.

And we know that George W. Bush's decisions based on "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction" was a lie.

"The first casualty of war is the truth."

As fuel prices rise in time for spring seeding you may be able thank Donald for the increase.

Not one barrel of middle east oil makes it to saskatchewan for refining....most of the fuel supplied in western canada comes from lower priced oil in western canada....

Why we see an increase in fuel is simply gouging...Gas in Saudi Arabia is 72 cents a litre in CDN dollars....
Diesel is 18 cents in CDN equivalent...

They produce there and sell there...

Federated , Husky and others produce here and sell here and yet they come up with using world prices for retail....

Its collusion and gouging...

[Oliver88]

Not one barrel of middle east oil makes it to saskatchewan for refining....most of the fuel supplied in western canada comes from lower priced oil in western canada....

Why we see an increase in fuel is simply gouging...Gas in Saudi Arabia is 72 cents a litre in CDN dollars....
Diesel is 18 cents in CDN equivalent...

They produce there and sell there...

Federated , Husky and others produce here and sell here and yet they come up with using world prices for retail....

Its collusion and gouging...

Big profits for sure. Why do you think the refinery workers are making $100k+ plus one of the biggest pension plans out there.

Eastern Canadian Liberal refineries such as Trudeau donor Irving, love oil produced by terrorist regimes. Their costs will go up as futures increase. Western Canada oil isn’t as acceptable there compared to Iranian, Sudanese, Venezuelan, Saudi suppliers.

[burnt]

Sharia law in Toronto. The Islamists have brought their war here.

Thanks, sock boy.

[fjlip]

We are screwed

[helmsdale]

Iranian news agencies reporting that their forces have scudded an american air base located in Erbil, Iraq...

Oil going exponential in 3...2...1...

[helmsdale]

[A990]

https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz




MY LATEST IRAN ANALYSIS below:

1) the theocrats of Iran have declared they’ll strike back “openly by Iranian forces” at US targets (see NYT article).

2) If true (and the NYT relied on multiple sources) then what I referred to on the very night of Trump’s strike as his “bold gambit” seems to have paid off.

3) This “bold gambit” was: Trump’s direct attack on #Soleimani emphatically ended the post-Obama era of appeasing Iran’s expansionism. Trump exposed our global conceit, the pretence that Iran wasn’t building multiple terrorist proxy militia in many countries, under our very noses

4) In doing this, US signal to Iran was that from now on, any attack by an Iranian proxy against US &allied interests anywhere, will be blamed by the US on Iran directly. This mission effectively pulled the rug from under Iran’s feet, because it defeats the purpose of her proxies

5) Again, if true, the NYT report confirms that Iran has decided to:

a) strike back using Iranian soldiers out in the open
and
b) not harm civilians but only strike at US & allied “military” targets (however loosely Iran may define that)

6) Now this appears to be bad news: Iran will strike back.
But consider the following: before Trump’s strike against #Soleimani, Iran had a wider range of options against the US&her allies. She could (and actively was) being belligerent out in the open, as well as using proxies

7) in other words: she could use professional military & proxy militia, targeting conventional and/or civilian targets. This is precisely what she had been doing in the weeks & months up to the killing of #Soleimani

8 ) eg: her missile strike at Aramco oil in Saudi (Iranian proxy from Iraq), her seizure of a UK Tanker in the Strait of Hormuz (direct Iranian navy), her downing of US drone (Iranian military), killing of US civilian (proxy in Iraq) & raid on US embassy (Iranian proxy in Iraq)

9) now though, after killing of Soleimani, Iran chose to respond only directly & openly, and not harm civilians. It is too early to tell, but this could indicate a new, self-imposed constraint by Iran. The proxy militia will not go away, but it will be harder for her to use them

10) another point here is that by responding out in the open, Iran will be constrained more so by the rules of war, and obliged to try not to harm civilians, as opposed to what her proxy Hezbollah did while supporting Assad in crushing the popular Syrian uprising.

11) of course, any attack is still bad news. But consider all my examples from point 8 above, and you’ll see that Iran was *already* attacking us. I cautiously say that Trump’s move here *may* have made us safer, by constraining Iran’s ability to operate with impunity via proxies

12) the above relates to Iran’s military capabilities. But politically, socially & culturally regime figures may just have been provided some relief by Trump, because now they can unite many secular but nationalist inclined Iranians behind them, after they’d been losing support

13) likewise in Iraq, where a tide had recently been turning against Iranian interference (especially among young Iraqis), but Trump’s strike may now make their job harder & merely unite more Iraqi factions behind anti-Americanism

14) Also, Trump’s references to using “disproportionate” force and including “cultural” sites among his list of sites to possibly target will alienate him moderate support inside and outside of Iran.

15) my last two points should be balanced against Trump gaining the favour of many Egyptian, Saudi, Emirati, Gulf & Jordanian Arabs who were sick of Soleimani, even if they won’t openly praise Trump.

16) Summary:
A) good will for US is lost & gained
B ) Iran’s ability to rely on proxies is weakened
C) Iran was already attacking us, her retaliation isn’t too far from her existing pattern, but more constrained
D) The post-Iraq invasion upset to the regional balance (caused by Bush’s sins of commission) and then the post-ISIS upset to this balance of power exacerbated by Obama’s sins of omission, may just have started to (I emphasise *started* to) resettle and be restored
E) post-crime of the brutal Khashoggi killing in Turkey by Saudi, crown prince MBS of Saudi has already been somewhat constrained the in moves he get away with, without further isolating allies.

Balance in “the force” may be returning.

D) So I *cautiously* say: so far this looks like a net positive 🤷🏽*♂️

[burnt]

Oil heading low



DJ(T) record