# When do you think Nuclear War will start?



## Explorer (Dec 2, 2003)

Russia has threatened to use nukes as they get backed into a corner, North Korea continues to make threats, Iran has a active program to make nuclear bombs, Israel has made its âline in the sandâ clear enough and it is hard to tell what the USA would do maybe even a first strike. Also is anyone actively making preps just in case like fallout shelters? I am thinking sometime in the next year or two there is a high probability that someone somewhere will pop off one or two and then the retaliation will start. Your thoughts?


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

It will start this Saturday at 10:45. We play Two Harbors in hockey.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

Seriously, IMHO, it won't happen by an industrialized state, unless they can gain financially. A poorer nation in both material and education, that's a different story. A madman might pull the trigger no matter who he is. And with NSA prodding and coercion, who knows. The beast has been unleashed, so it's only a matter of time. But if you're worried about Obama and Putin, not a chance. Despite all the hyperbole? They are both sane.


----------



## from_wa (Mar 10, 2014)

least of my worries...
Where I live in the PNW, I have Bremerton Ship Yards, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Whidbey Island Naval Air base, Bangor Submarine base, Everett Navel Base, Boeing and more, all with a 50 mile radius. I will have about 2 minutes to worry then I will be non-existent on this earthly plane.


----------



## Ohio dreamer (Apr 6, 2006)

Not something I worry about. Remember the "Big bully" in school that yelled and shouted all kinds of things?? Never once did his Dad really come over and beat up mine, never once did he get me in my sleep, etc. I really think they are just that big bully yelling from across the play ground trying to be "big kid on campus" but nothing will truly come of it - at least in a nuclear format. I think they will stick to hacking the internet and making our live "miserable" that way. BUT...the dear Dot Gov will use their threats to take away more of our freedoms in a fog they call "safety for all".


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Do they have Nuke launchers on Golf Courses?


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

bowdonkey said:


> Seriously, IMHO, it won't happen by an industrialized state, unless they can gain financially. A poorer nation in both material and education, that's a different story. A madman might pull the trigger no matter who he is. And with NSA prodding and coercion, who knows. The beast has been unleashed, so it's only a matter of time. But if you're worried about Obama and Putin, not a chance. Despite all the hyperbole? They are both sane.


ew, you mention madmen, uh ya, wasen't thinken bout that.25 th amendment needs to go in effect.


----------



## Muleman (Nov 8, 2013)

I am going with low probability myself. EMP, now that might be something to think more about, but still not in the near future on a large scale. A slow erosion of society until rioting, gov. control efforts, etc. affects us all now that is a possibility. Much easier to take aim at that 2 ton elephant than those thousands of tiny ants scurrying around on the ground. We always hope it is the elephant who is our most dangerous threat, he is off over there somewhere, but the ants at our feet are probably more likely to kill us, it is frustrating thought!!


----------



## TnAndy (Sep 15, 2005)

As MM says...low probability, but high impact if it happens. Like an EMP or CME event.

I have done some preps along this line....radiation meter, dosimeters, etc, but I'm torn about doing a full blown shelter. 

Reason is, while I'm sure it would make short term survival much more likely, in the slightly longer term, I'm not sure survival is even possible. Not only would you have the radiation of the weapons flying about, you'd have dozens of Fukishima sites all over this country when the cooling water for the waste fuel rods finally evaporated off. My guess is unless you lived at the bottom of the world, your odds of avoiding death by radiation would be fairly low.


----------



## fixitguy (Nov 2, 2010)

Nahh, The Nuclear war thing was soooo last decade.

I look at high tech things now. It would be easier to make a country (like ours) fall from its own people, then just go in and occupy it. (say china)


----------



## 1shotwade (Jul 9, 2013)

I think that's something that we are still first at! I mean the probability of pushing the button! Look at what we've been electing over the last few decades! It's really scary!


Wade


----------



## TxGypsy (Nov 23, 2006)

Yep, I think that they can do as much or more damage in other ways. Remember the Y2K panic? (yes, I loved 1999....I could finally get some of the prep items I'd always wanted and could never find!) We are even more dependent upon technology now. 

Look at the panic over ebola. The truly surprising thing is that biologicals haven't been used against us.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

Sure and final retribution is the one thing that's kept us safe so far. That threat doesn't deter religious zealots though, and when Iran goes nuclear the whole balance changes. The Mullah's belief that conflagration will bring back their 12th Imam, and Islam will rule the world gives them a great incentive for a nuclear attack. 

Some say the Mullahs have too much power and influence to lose to take that course, but remember they're all old men with little time anyway. If they can secure their place with Allah by destroying civilization they'll do it. 

I'm pulling for the Israelis, we sure don't have the fortitude to end their threat.


----------



## Explorer (Dec 2, 2003)

Actually I think the closely aligned pair Iran/Korea is the biggest threat to start things going. With Iran getting technology from Korea and possibly testing their new weapons in Korea to throw off Israel is the biggest threat. Would we back Israel up if Iran nuked them and would Russia back Iran if Israel nuked them? In the world of one up mans ship, little things could get out of hand very quickly. I doubt Russia would actually surface nuke the US, but they very easily could do a nuclear EMP on our country. From there it is anybody's guess.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

I don't think anybody with any degree of sanity wants to nuke us. They wouldn't want to mess up the real estate, damage the prize.

Saw a piece on History channel, apparently we came very close to getting nuked by the Soviets in the 80s. Their equipment they used to monitor us was indicating we had launched at them and they had their finger on the trigger of the "counter attack". A cool headed Russian technician reset the machine and then they saw there was no "attack". But for several minutes our fate hung in the balance.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

fixitguy said:


> Nahh, The Nuclear war thing was soooo last decade.
> 
> I look at high tech things now. It would be easier to make a country (like ours) fall from its own people, then just go in and occupy it. (say china)


They wouldn't even have to go in and occupy. They already have the scabs on their payroll in Congress.


----------



## ntjpm (Sep 1, 2008)

from_wa said:


> least of my worries...
> Where I live in the PNW, I have Bremerton Ship Yards, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Whidbey Island Naval Air base, Bangor Submarine base, Everett Navel Base, Boeing and more, all with a 50 mile radius. I will have about 2 minutes to worry then I will be non-existent on this earthly plane.


Ahhh, but you missed the biggest one of all, Little Jim Creek. We are toast just for this little gem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Creek_Naval_Radio_Station



Tracy in WA


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

The day after jeb bush gets sworn in, about 2 years from now


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

haley1 said:


> The day after jeb bush gets sworn in, about 2 years from now


God forbid, another Bush gets sworn in.


----------



## TxGypsy (Nov 23, 2006)

haley1 said:


> The day after jeb bush gets sworn in, about 2 years from now


That's not even funny as a possibility!


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

ISIL claims to have a nuclear bomb. ISIL's neighbors have stated that ISIL took away the nuclear materials present in the land that they have conquered. Experts have stated that if they have the parts that they need, then *IF* they have an expert that they might, indeed, have the Bomb.

One thing seems clear: the leadership of ISIL will not "Go softly into that sweet night" if they lose. If they do indeed have the bomb, they will probably use it if they decide that all hope is gone.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Ozarks Tom said:


> Sure and final retribution is the one thing that's kept us safe so far. That threat doesn't deter religious zealots though, and when Iran goes nuclear the whole balance changes. The Mullah's belief that conflagration will bring back their 12th Imam, and Islam will rule the world gives them a great incentive for a nuclear attack.
> 
> Some say the Mullahs have too much power and influence to lose to take that course, but remember they're all old men with little time anyway. If they can secure their place with Allah by destroying civilization they'll do it.
> 
> I'm pulling for the Israelis, we sure don't have the fortitude to end their threat.


Yep and not many get this :buds: I think Iran will nuke Saudi Arabia first .


----------



## terri9630 (Mar 12, 2012)

Terri said:


> ISIL claims to have a nuclear bomb. ISIL's neighbors have stated that ISIL took away the nuclear materials present in the land that they have conquered. Experts have stated that if they have the parts that they need, then *IF* they have an expert that they might, indeed, have the Bomb.
> 
> One thing seems clear: the leadership of ISIL will not "Go softly into that sweet night" if they lose. If they do indeed have the bomb, they will probably use it if they decide that all hope is gone.


I hadn't heard that. Thats...... disturbing.


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

TxMex said:


> That's not even funny as a possibility!


His mom Barbara even said earlier this year that she does not went him to run, she said america has seen enough bushes in the white house already.....does it matter along as a dem or reb gets in, we loose


----------



## ZEUS (Nov 28, 2014)

If a nuke is used against us I think it will pop off in space above our country. But that's just one of the several things that are on the brink of destroying life as we know it. It's all around us. We have to be ready to live self reliant. We have to band together to get through it. Whatever "It" is.


----------



## Jupiter (Dec 30, 2012)

I highly doubt it will ever happen.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

The fall out from an EMP would be scary! A couple of days ago someone hit a cell phone tower & Verizon was down for quite some time. My daughter said the kids at school were freaking out because they had no phone service. Could you imagine what would happen if it lasted for months or even years? 
Crazy!


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I wonder how we went to school in the days before cell phone or any common portable phone?


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

AngieM2 said:


> I wonder how we went to school in the days before cell phone or any common portable phone?


 Passing notes or using the message board of the day which was the restroom stall walls of course


----------



## Muleman (Nov 8, 2013)

I do not mean to get us off topic, but I will divert for a bit to discuss the loss of communication a bit. A great set back, but can be overcome. I drove truck cross country for many years, before cell phones. I remember unloading then driving 50 or 100 miles to the nearest truck stop to call and find out about the next load. There were phones on some of the tables in the truck stops then. if you were lucky you got one of those tables. Then you could set there and eat or drink coffee while you called, then waited to call back for info etc. This would take an hour or so usually to get all the info you needed. Sometimes you would think you had a load, leave with all the info. then drive to the first place to pick up only to find the load had been cancelled, back to the truck stop, start over. Driving across some of the western states it was not uncommon to be hours away from the possibility of communicating with some one about anything! You broke down on the side of the road you relied on someone to stop and help, and they would actually stop and help. Help meant if it could not be fixed they would give you a ride to the next truck stop, where you would talk to a mechanic then ride back with him to fix the problem.

At the time, I do not remember it being a big deal, we made money, loads got picked up and delivered and life went on. The impact of instant communication we have become accustomed to would be a setback no doubt, but not the end of the world. What did people do before any communication and cheap transportation? They relied more on local markets to meet their needs. They did not buy their bulk grain in buckets on the net, because it was cheaper than their neighbors down the road or packaged all neat and convenient for them. Truth is, in my mind cutting out some of the instant services we have now and making us more reliable on local economies may not be such a bad thing. 

Oh well, just something to think about I guess. Gotta go, Amazon has wheat in 5 gallon buckets on sale for $2 cheaper than the local store in town, gotta stock up while I can!!


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

I think there's a very low possibility of a nuclear war HOWEVER I think it highly likely that a nuke will be involved in an act of terrorism, no doubt by a middle eastern terrorist group - how soon I would say between 0 and 10 years.


----------



## Mike in Ohio (Oct 29, 2002)

I think it will start when you least expect it.

Mike


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

bowdonkey said:


> It will start this Saturday at 10:45. We play Two Harbors in hockey.


You all can breathe easy now, we won the war.


----------



## Muleman (Nov 8, 2013)

mnn, 

Can you be a little more specific? I am trying to fill in my day planner for next year!


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Muleman said:


> mnn,
> 
> Can you be a little more specific? I am trying to fill in my day planner for next year!


There are a number of missing nukes.


----------



## 1shotwade (Jul 9, 2013)

I'd leave my schedule open between 1-1 and 12-31 next year just to be sure!

Wade


----------



## Explorer (Dec 2, 2003)

In the new now.



> âTensions between nuclear-armed states and alliances in the Euro-Atlantic area and in both South and East Asia remain ripe with the potential for military miscalculation and escalation,â says the letter to Sebastian Kurz, Austriaâs Minister for Foreign Affairs.


 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/risks-of-nuclear-war-is-rising-because-of-global-tensions-and-insecure-stockpiles-warn-experts-9909379.html


----------



## fishinshawn (Nov 8, 2010)

There will never be another world war and there will never be a nuclear war, and it is highly unlikely that a terrorist group will be able to set off a true nuke anywhere in the world, much less here in the USA. 

It is all about money and corporations, no one wins anything when a nuke goes off, land and resources are lost for all intensive purposes permanently. The corporations that run all of the countries in this world would never allow it.


----------



## manygoatsnmore (Feb 12, 2005)

fishinshawn said:


> There will never be another world war and there will never be a nuclear war, and it is highly unlikely that a terrorist group will be able to set off a true nuke anywhere in the world, much less here in the USA.
> 
> It is all about money and corporations, no one wins anything when a nuke goes off, land and resources are lost for all intensive purposes permanently. The corporations that run all of the countries in this world would never allow it.


I'd like to think you're right, but I can think of a number of terrorist organizations who would like nothing more than to take down "The Great Satan".


----------



## terri9630 (Mar 12, 2012)

Never say never.... isn't that what was said about WW1?


----------



## Explorer (Dec 2, 2003)

terri9630 said:


> Never say never.... isn't that what was said about WW1?


Yes, the War to end all Wars.


----------



## michael ark (Dec 11, 2013)

Explorer said:


> Yes, the War to end all Wars.[/Q
> 
> The war big business found out that their is a profit to be made in war.


----------



## anahatalotus (Oct 25, 2012)

My original post decided to crash my browser nd delete itself but anyways..
Sort of relaited by six degrees of separation and such is the fact that many folks returned to the nuclear fallout zone of Chernobyl and some are still alive and thriving. There is a film called the babushkas of Chernobyl that is coming out next year. Here's an article on the women who returned to their own land and have been living of of Gods green earth.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ear...men-living-in-Chernobyls-toxic-wasteland.html
Anyways, I suppose this simply means those of us who are not instantly vaporized, survival is not too far fetched...


----------



## vicker (Jul 11, 2003)

There will never be a nuclear war. Anyone who now has the ability also has the intelligence to know the results. I think that even terrorist know that using a nuclear device would leave their remains in a crater. As crazy as it may sound, I feel nuclear weapons have made, "real" war obsolete. It is just a matter of time. We all know we are small tribes living on the same small planet. It just can't happen. Anyone who uses a nuclear device will immediately become the world's worst enemy. 

There may, someday, be a detonation of one or two devices. That will be the end of that.


----------



## 1shotwade (Jul 9, 2013)

vicker said:


> There will never be a nuclear war. Anyone who now has the ability also has the intelligence to know the results. I think that even terrorist know that using a nuclear device would leave their remains in a crater. As crazy as it may sound, I feel nuclear weapons have made, "real" war obsolete. It is just a matter of time. We all know we are small tribes living on the same small planet. It just can't happen. Anyone who uses a nuclear device will immediately become the world's worst enemy.
> 
> There may, someday, be a detonation of one or two devices. That will be the end of that.



I certainly hope you're right but I really doubt it. There are too many variables.And I certainly don't have that kind of faith in humans to think that there is some hint of intelligence lurking in the minds of some of these nut cases that are leading countries. And certainly not in the leaders of all the little agenda driven groups around the world.And that's not just terror groups but it also includes what I call "soft terror" groups.You know,"greenpeace","peta," save the trees,save the whales, save the seals. Some of these people are truly nuts.Have you forgotten the numerous cases of genocide around the world throughout history? These acts are insane perpetrated by the insane.
Now even if all these nuts play nice you still have the fact that humans are not capable of making something that lasts forever. All it takes is the right wire to fail and things can get ugly in a hurry! Rodents and/or insect damage could do the damage needed to end life as we know it.Or how about weather related events! Earthquakes,tornadoes,hurricanes,flooding,volcanoes,solar flares,even draught could adversely affect the control measures that are in place to control Nukes.
Like I said,hope you're right but I don't think so!

Wade


----------



## Cygnet (Sep 13, 2004)

Survival is certainly possible after a nuclear war. Knowing how to protect yourself from radiation in the short term (which does not always mean bugging out -- you do NOT want to be caught on a clogged freeway under fallout) will make a huge difference. There's a lot of factors to consider, but fallout decays faster than most people think, and unless you're unfortunate enough to be at ground zero, you may very well be able to survive. There's more to it than I feel comfortable covering in this post, but there's lots of information out on Youtube or the internet. 

Big flash in the sky? Don't look at it, and duck and cover (seriously -- dive for cover, both to protect yourself from burns and from the blast wave that will follow, this was and is actually good advice), and start counting seconds so that you can tell how far away it was. 

More or less, it's like lightning -- five seconds per mile between the flash and the boom. (Might be slightly less if it's a big weapon, as the blast front would exceed the speed of sound.) 

Knowing how far away and what direction can help you figure out if you want to bug out or stay put. 

The longer the flash lasts, the bigger the weapon. If it's a brief few seconds, it's probably a terrorist strike. If the flash is tens of seconds, we just got hit by a major enemy superpower. A strike from a major enemy superpower is more likely to be followed up very quickly by additional strikes, which should factor into your decision about what to do next. 

Building a Hiroshima sized bomb would not be particularly hard if the bad guys could get their hands on enough enriched uranium. Smack two chunks of uranium together hard enough with high explosives, and the bomb goes boom. 

IMHO, I would NOT be surprised to see a terrorist strike somewhere in the world from terrorists. At least at this time, I don't think we have much to worry about from enemy superpowers. 

If Iran had nukes, they'd be far more likely to bomb ISIL than us or Israel. They are probably quite unamused by ISIL, and more than willing to swat them flat. They're not stupid, and they're not going to pick a fight with the west that they can't win, but ISIL's a whole different story.


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

.............I don't think Iran would nuke ISIS because their forces are too spread out over a very large area for it to have any effect ! An Iranian nuke would kill to many noncombatants , only the US , Russia , and maybe Israel have mini nukes to pinpoint a focused strike as well as limit the blast area damage to whatever group they desire to hit . , fordy


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

Shane from K14U has a few primers on the subject of survival.

The Good News About Nuclear Destruction
http://www.ki4u.com/goodnews.htm


Basically most people will survive except if your directly hit...


----------



## stickinthemud (Sep 10, 2003)

As for When: When somebody who has a nuke thinks he can get away with it. 

To follow up on Cygnet's post, I suggest a look at the aftermath of Chernobyl. The forbidden radiation-contaminated zone at Chernobyl has gone back to nature. DS once asked "Don't the animals have cancer & birth defects too?" I told him "People care, nature doesn't." Yeah, stuff happens, but not to everyone and life goes on. 
Radioactive Wolves of Chernobyl:
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK99dvJO5PY[/ame]

Link is (you know the beginning) youtube/watch?v=dK99dvJO5PY


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

fishinshawn said:


> There will never be another world war and there will never be a nuclear war, and it is highly unlikely that a terrorist group will be able to set off a true nuke anywhere in the world, much less here in the USA.
> 
> It is all about money and corporations, no one wins anything when a nuke goes off, land and resources are lost for all intensive purposes permanently. The corporations that run all of the countries in this world would never allow it.


Not only that but those who supply the weapons and other logistics for the war machine don't make any money from nuclear strikes. The big money is in conventional war, supplying guns, ammo, vehicles, planes, ships, etc. All the military suppliers would do all they can to prevent nuclear war too.

If anyone is going to set off a nuclear attack it will be some rogue, fanatical group who doesn't care about this world and has aspirations for the next one.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

It's unrealistic to underestimate what zealots will do to further their cause. Look into the "12th Imam", and the Shiite beliefs as to hastening his return. The Iranian mullahs, in my opinion, are the greatest threat to the rest of the world that exists. Martyring their own people to bring about their dream of worldwide caliphate is an easy choice for them. To them it's a win-win-win situation. Their 12th Imam returns to rule, the entire world worships allah, and all those believers they sacrificed to bring it about are in paradise.

There are plenty of examples where a parent has killed his/her wife/husband and all their children to "save" them.


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

http://www.jibjab.com/originals/this_land

This thread reminds me of this old funny, when 3/4 of the way through and they pick on George because he can't say "nuclear"


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

TxMex said:


> That's not even funny as a possibility!


God forbid, another Bush gets sworn in.


I saw last week Jeb was starting exploring committee to look into running


----------



## trulytricia (Oct 11, 2002)

One thing tyrants all around the world have in common. Once they reach the top they sure do love their luxury. And getting old. And primping to look younger.

Maybe their vanity is all that keeps them from blowing everything up.


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

haley1 said:


> God forbid, another Bush gets sworn in.
> 
> 
> I saw last week Jeb was starting exploring committee to look into running


 
.................Maybe you'd rather have the Idiot Mayor of New York City run for president ! He's a big hit with the Obama crowd like Big Mouth Al Sharpeton who owes 4 million in back taxes . , fordy:facepalm:


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

You obviously don't know me because I think both of our 2 major parties should be eliminated and replaced with politicians for the people. But I can guess from your response you have propbaly have fallen into the trap laid by the republicans that they are the savor of the world. I hope someday maybe you will see the light

Best wishes


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

trulytricia said:


> One thing tyrants all around the world have in common. Once they reach the top they sure do love their luxury. And getting old. And primping to look younger.
> 
> Maybe their vanity is all that keeps them from blowing everything up.


That's the key point. The ruling ayatolahs in Iran have amassed some serious personal wealth. If a nuclear weapon is detonated my gut tells me it will be from a rogue source. I'm already on record as believing we'll lose one of our sea coast cities. I wouldn't put it past certain Saudi factions to aquire a Pakistani nuke and arrange for it to be hidden inside a ship. We'll never know until the weapon is detonated. 

The key point is arranging things so it point to Iran. The Saudis had us on leash until recently when private business did what the government didn't have the cajones to do. With the oil glut, the Saudis are being forced into a corner. The only hope is that low oil prices limit terrorism and curb Iran's nuclear program.


----------



## 1shotwade (Jul 9, 2013)

Darren said:


> That's the key point. The ruling ayatolahs in Iran have amassed some serious personal wealth. If a nuclear weapon is detonated my gut tells me it will be from a rogue source. I'm already on record as believing we'll lose one of our sea coast cities. I wouldn't put it past certain Saudi factions to aquire a Pakistani nuke and arrange for it to be hidden inside a ship. We'll never know until the weapon is detonated.
> 
> The key point is arranging things so it point to Iran. The Saudis had us on leash until recently when private business did what the government didn't have the cajones to do. With the oil glut, the Saudis are being forced into a corner. The only hope is that low oil prices limit terrorism and curb Iran's nuclear program.





I don't think you even close on the Saudis and oil prices. What I have seen is a very close relationship between the saudis and the Bush family. They scratch eachothers back. The Saudi princes were in Texas during 911 and GW got them out of the country for their safety.They have worked together to control oil to keep making each other rich.
The reason oil prices are down is because production is up. The intent is two fold. One is to hurt Iran. ALL the middle eastern countries fear Iran. The know Iran is full of a bunch of nut cases and they worry about what Iran will do if they ever get nuke's. After Israel the U.S. they will turn on the rest of the middle east.
Secondly,the increase in production is an attempt to undermine the ramping up of American oil production.If they can keep oil prices low enough for long enough it will become less profitable for oil companies here to continue to develop our oil. When and if we fully develop our own oil we will no longer need to import from the middle east.
The ripple effect of our oil development will be lower corn prices because we will not be making much ethanol and a serious reduction in the efforts to bring alternative power sources online such as wind and solar.
These are being pushed big time by Obama so they will make it look like another failed project of this administration.
I think it's relevant that Jeb Bush is now getting serious about running for President also.The timing of all this suggests political influence.It will definitely be a strong talking point running up to the next election!


Wade


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

It will my luck the same day I win the lottery


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

I think Jeb is irrelevant. The Saudis have had us under their thumb since the oil embargo in the early 70's. It was the Saudis that had Obama on a mission to attack Syria. When all is said and done, I wouldn't be surprised if they were behind our involvement in Iraq. Prince Badar was a force in DC during those years. The Bush family was just some of the ones in a series of Saudi appeasers. Every president since Nixon and the oil embargo knew the drill. You don't upset the Saudis. We were all lovey dovey with the Saudis until public outrage scuttled Obama's plan to attack Syria.

If you missed Obama's unscheduled visit to Saudi Arabia and the dismissal without dinner, you missed a key world event.

The Saudis were probably also behind our action in Libya. It is all about oil and who gets to call the shots. The Saudis have been bankrolling the anti-frack movement. Unfortunately for them the natural gas side of the house won't be affected like the oil side. That means oil as a secondary product from natural gas production will continue to flow no matter what the price. 

The Saudis have no control over the price of natural gas in Europe and elsewhere. That's a potential money tree for US companies. After January, it's very possible the feds will speed up approval of LNG export facilities. There will be a shake out in the oil patch. Those that remain are looking at a bonanza. The big oil players have bought into the natural gas plays. We're still drilling the deep shale formations. Most of those wells are not producing. They're just a hole in the ground waiting for demand. Exports will unleash a flood of natural gas along with the oil that comes with it.

IMNSHO, the Saudis are screwed.

Ultimately the Saudis may be in the process of cutting off the branch holding them up.

The good thing is when and if we ever tell the Saudis to go pound sand, they'll have all they need.


----------

