Monday, September 30, 2019

No Blood for Oil Infrastructure

After Iran struck Saudi oil export facilities the question was whether America would strike back. I figured it was up to Saudi Arabia to strike back for an act of war against them. Apparently the Saudis will not retaliate militarily.

So no lasting harm, no foul?

Saudi Arabia's crown prince said in an interview aired Sunday that war with Iran would devastate the global economy and he prefers a non-military solution to tensions with his regional rival.

This is an interesting discussion of how the Saudis could weigh options.

I was content to have America squeeze Iran more rather than fight Iran symmetrically in a tit-for-tat militarized dispute that gives Iran the choice of when and how much to fight so that violence is calibrated to bolster support for the mullahs with a bit of victimhood to get sympathy abroad and a rally-around-the-flag effect at home--but not too much violence to threaten the regime.

If the Saudis wanted to strike back--like at Kharg Island, as I've mentioned over the years--I was in favor of supporting the Saudi effort.

But apparently, after thinking about it, nobody will strike back militarily.

I wonder how the Saudis will retaliate?