(May 20, 2019 at 4:57 am)Mathilda Wrote:

(May 20, 2019 at 4:27 am)WolfsChild Wrote: trust trump to pick a fight , he will involve others  like the uk government if this starts another gulf war  am going to be at as many demos i can get to may just wants to kiss trumps ass

.....The Brits are by and large cynical bastards so there won't be any fooling them a second time.....

And yet royal weddings seem to occur every decades or so.......

(May 23, 2019 at 8:52 am)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(May 23, 2019 at 6:43 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Iran and Saudi Arabia together produce about 25% of the worlds oil. In 1973 oil was embargoed and in 1979 oil exports from Iran and Iraq virtually dried up. Both of these last much longer than 'a single week'. If these shortages (both real and perceived) didn't result in a global war, why would interruption of Saudi and Iranian oil do so?

Boru

25% of the world's reserve of oil is a huge portion, big enough to shake the economy of the globe.
A single organ might be a 5 or 10% of your body (probably less); but amputating it will hurt like hell and it will change your life permanently, might even kill you.

The least expected aftermath of such war is the change of the world's map. That means millions dead, and trillions of $ evaporating

But it's oil production, not reserves.  Oil supplies have been disrupted before and the world recovered without resorting to global war.  Additionally, I think you may be overstating the effects of a regional war involving Iran and the Saudis.

Boru

(May 23, 2019 at 9:19 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: -and yet, that's not what happened even when they produced a greater portion of the oil required.  A natural disaster in canada would cause a more significant disruption to us oil than both Iran and KSA being wiped off the map, at this point.  

We're not there for your oil anymore, lol....we get it from the americas.   We're there for the spiffy airbase locations and money laundering. Pewpewpew.

Of course the economy of the world is not dependent on 25%, but losing that huge portion has devastating effects. The U.S is not the only customer.
The chain reaction from the effects of such hit is big.

---

(May 23, 2019 at 12:46 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(May 23, 2019 at 8:52 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: 25% of the world's reserve of oil is a huge portion, big enough to shake the economy of the globe.
A single organ might be a 5 or 10% of your body (probably less); but amputating it will hurt like hell and it will change your life permanently, might even kill you.

The least expected aftermath of such war is the change of the world's map. That means millions dead, and trillions of $ evaporating

But it's oil production, not reserves.  Oil supplies have been disrupted before and the world recovered without resorting to global war.  Additionally, I think you may be overstating the effects of a regional war involving Iran and the Saudis.

Boru

Non of the previous conflicts involved whole region maps. They were changes in a single country.

The war with Iran on the other hand has 4 major  fronts basically:
1-Yemen
2-Lebanon
3-The Persian Gulf (main front)
4-Iraq

Front number 2,3 and 4 can expand each to cover vast regions including Syria and Palestine. Israel wants that war so bad too.

Excuse me; Boru: this is a world war. Or at least the seeds of a world war.

(May 24, 2019 at 7:07 am)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(May 23, 2019 at 9:19 am)Gae Bolga Wrote: -and yet, that's not what happened even when they produced a greater portion of the oil required.  A natural disaster in canada would cause a more significant disruption to us oil than both Iran and KSA being wiped off the map, at this point.  

We're not there for your oil anymore, lol....we get it from the americas.   We're there for the spiffy airbase locations and money laundering. Pewpewpew.

Of course the economy of the world is not dependent on 25%, but losing that huge portion has devastating effects. The U.S is not the only customer.
The chain reaction from the effects of such hit is big.

We don't get 25% of our oil from the middle east.  We cut yall out of the loop....and you know we dgaf about other people.

(May 24, 2019 at 10:09 am)Gae Bolga Wrote:

(May 24, 2019 at 7:07 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: Of course the economy of the world is not dependent on 25%, but losing that huge portion has devastating effects. The U.S is not the only customer.
The chain reaction from the effects of such hit is big.

We don't get 25% of our oil from the middle east.  We cut yall out of the loop....and you know we dgaf about other people.  

And that's the main problem for the White House and its allies today. They must give a fuck because they are literally playing with fire; the world came a long way since the time of Saddam and war turned even more deadly and terrifying, if the oil market was hit the lifestyle of people will get hit too; causing chain reactions that are so scary to think about.

========================
atlass journals: May 25, 2019:

News from the Persian gulf are not good, neither do they promise with anything other than more beating on the drums of war. The U.S is sending troops and reinforcements for its forces guarding America's interests in the region, along with B-52 bombers and an aircraft carrier.

This is terribly alarming because B-52s were made to carry nuclear weapons, so it's a matter of 1 single rash decision now to be taken by the American administration for nuclear apocalypse to start.

After a storm of mutual threats, Iran threatened that it has secret weapons capable of sinking American ships:



https://sputniknews.com/world/2019052510...-warships/

Having Russian and Chinese merchants and allies at its disposal Iran can sure have weapons like these; consider the example of North Korea's nuclear program.
Iran has strong friends; and is being bullied by a group of psychopaths..a hit is the only logical consequence.

(May 25, 2019 at 8:25 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: ========================
atlass journals: May 25, 2019:

News from the Persian gulf are not good, neither do they promise with anything other than more beating on the drums of war. The U.S is sending troops and reinforcements for its forces guarding America's interests in the region, along with B-52 bombers and an aircraft carrier.

This is terribly alarming because B-52s were made to carry nuclear weapons, so it's a matter of 1 single rash decision now to be taken by the American administration for nuclear apocalypse to start.

After a storm of mutual threats, Iran threatened that it has secret weapons capable of sinking American ships:



https://sputniknews.com/world/2019052510...-warships/

Having Russian and Chinese merchants and allies at its disposal Iran can sure have weapons like these; consider the example of North Korea's nuclear program.
Iran has strong friends; and is being bullied by a group of psychopaths..a hit is the only logical consequence.

1.  News from the Persian Gulf is almost never good.

2.  When haven't the 'drums of war' beat in that region?

3.  That USian resources are being sent to the region is nothing new.

4.  Yes, B52s are bombers.  But in almost sixty years of deployment, no B52 has ever dropped a nuclear weapon, not once.

5.  It has always been a matter of one rash decision to deploy nuclear weapons.

6.  The deployment of a nuclear weapon doesn't automatically mean 'a nuclear apocalypse'.

7.  Iran has secret weapons? Really?  Remember, this is the country that decided it could sink an aircraft carrier after they pretended to sink a wooden mockup of an aircraft carrier.  This is the equivalent of claiming you can kill a grizzly bear with your hands because you punched a teddy bear.

8.  You really, seriously think that Russia and China are going to allow a war that would (as you claim) disrupt oil supplies?

9. The case of North Korea isn't really germane to the discussion.

10.  Your level of paranoia seems to be increasing.

Boru

(May 25, 2019 at 8:25 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: This is terribly alarming because B-52s were made to carry nuclear weapons, so it's a matter of 1 single rash decision now to be taken by the American administration for nuclear apocalypse to start.

Once again, you have no clue what you are talking about, just wallowing in your hysteria.

B52s, are excellent in dropping conventional ordnance, because they can carry a shitload of it. Thats what they have been used for, again and again.

If you want to drop a nuke, single (multi warhead) is enough, and you want to make sure it gets to target. Thats when you choose the B2.

(May 25, 2019 at 9:12 am)Deesse23 Wrote:

(May 25, 2019 at 8:25 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: This is terribly alarming because B-52s were made to carry nuclear weapons, so it's a matter of 1 single rash decision now to be taken by the American administration for nuclear apocalypse to start.

Once again, you have no clue what you are talking about, just wallowing in your hysteria.

B52s, are excellent in dropping conventional ordnance, because they can carry a shitload of it. Thats what they have been used for, again and again.

If you want to drop a nuke, single (multi warhead) is enough, and you want to make sure it gets to target. Thats when you choose the B2.

To be fair to Atlas, he's correct that the B52 was purpose built to carry nuclear weapons.  The fact that it has never dropped them doesn't alter the fact that that's what they were made for. 

Boru

I never disputed that the B52 was made to drop nukes IN THE LATE 40S.
What I disputed is that B52 getting ready in 2019 is a sign of an impending nuclear strike/war.
What I dispute is that even an idiot like Trump would drop nukes. Why would/should he? He is a narcissist, not a genocidal maniac.