Peacemaker threatening Iran with hell

[Alex Po]

The sensational scandal of the events of the night from September 13 to September 14, 2019 still fuels the world community`s interest in the Middle East theme. And as a result of active discussions of the tragic events of attacks on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia, the world has become increasingly aware of the possibility of a military conflict between the United States and Iran, which, in turn, was immediately blamed by Washington.

As a result, oil production in the country halved, and its prices jumped by almost 20% (at some point, almost to $ 72 per barrel). And despite the fact that Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, the head of the Energy Ministry of Saudi Arabia, promised that the previous production level would be restored by the end of September, prices fixed at around $ 65 per barrel (which is about 8% more than it was before the tragic events at the refinery). Obviously, prices will continue to help maintain tensions in the Middle East.

Of course, the conflict between the two regional powers - Saudi Arabia and Iran - is beneficial to the United States. The current American administration, led by an experienced businessman, with its bellicose statements and severe sanctions deliberately heat markets and relations between the two states.

Thus, for example, an attack on the largest refineries in the kingdom is beneficial for the American arms lobby, because now Trump’s plans to close the deal on selling weapons to the Saudis for $ 110 billion will not meet with resistance in Congress.

Also, experts believe that President D. Trump demonstrates that the departure of National Security Advisor John Bolton did not affect the tough US foreign policy towards Iran. However, it is unlikely that it will come to a strike to Iran (at least in the near future) due to the lack of direct evidence of its involvement and the pre-election race that has begun.

Although Trump is dear to his image of the president-peacemaker, which is advantageous in contrast to his predecessors, he still does not manage to maintain this image.

For example, Washington plans to send an additional US military contingent to the kingdom, and the head of the White House even ordered the US Department of the Treasury to «significantly increase» economic sanctions against Iran. According to President Trump, these sanctions are the toughest «of all that have ever been imposed» and they will send Iran to «hell».

This time, under restrictions fell the Iranian Central Bank and the National Wealth Fund. According to the expert of the Atlantic Council, Brian O'Toole, the new sanctions deprive the Central Bank of a special status, which implied an exception for the sale of medicines, medical equipment and food. Moreover, these sanctions violate all US international obligations.

In other words, the Americans want to deprive the Iranian population of food and medicine, they don’t want to hear and listen to Tehran’s position, despite appeals from France and a number of countries not to make hasty conclusions and understand what happened in detail.

[allieakat]

I think Trump's house of cards will fall apart more quickly now than anyone is currently thinking.  All that is left is to hope that he won't start a war on the way out.

[Zagadka]

One of Trump's core promises (not that he keeps those, mind you) was not being an interventionist. His platform was to avoid war and conflict. Back when he "only" fired a bunch of missiles at Syria, it was a big deal. It is fairly interesting to see the hawks on both neocon and neolib sides try to deal with Trump's foreign policy.

 

I don't know how fast Trump's regime can collapse at this point. There are still a lot of factors, and he is far from being in real danger. As much as the left is celebrating, the right is firmly entrenched and moderates are not convinced of impeachment procedures. The Senate will never prosecute him, and it is almost too close to the election for anything to happen, anyway. The only way he is leaving office is resignation, which is not something Trump would ever do under any conditions.

 

BUT the one thing he could lose a lot of supporters on is going to war with Iran. Not only would the betray a core issue, it would be a tremendous undertaking that would probably define the decade for the nation, far more than Iraq did the early 2000s. He may do some kind of limited strike or divert a lot of funds/resources to the Saudis (he probably will, actually), but an actual conflict is unlikely (IMHO, I've been wrong before).

[Sally]

1 hour ago, Zagadka said:

As much as the left is celebrating,

Although this thread is about Iran, I want to quash the idea that the Left is celebrating about Trump being caught (and admitting to) asking a foreign power to investigate one of his political rivals.  This is an extremely depressing and disgusting thing to have been done by someone who's been elevated to the highest office in the nationl.  I'm part of the Left and I'm not celebrating at all.  I doubt that there's anyone in this country who is celebrating today.    

[Skycaptain]

The Colt 45 was known as the Peacemaker 

[uhtred]

I'm actually quite happy that Trump didn't start a war with Iran over the missile attacks.  I had been worried that he was looking for any excuse.