Posted on 03/26/2016 4:36:39 PM PDT by Hojczyk
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump told the New York Times he would consider stopping U.S. oil purchases from Saudi Arabia unless the Saudi government provide troops to fight Islamic State.
Trump’s comment on Friday was included in a lengthy foreign policy interview published by the newspaper on Saturday and came in response to a question about whether, if elected president, he would halt oil purchases from U.S. allies unless they provided on-the-ground forces against Islamic State.
“The answer is, probably yes,” Trump said, according to a transcript.
Trump has said the United States should be reimbursed by the countries it provides protection, even those with vast resources such as Saudi Arabia, a top oil exporter.
“And yet, without us, Saudi Arabia wouldn’t exist for very long,” Trump told the Times.
“… We’re not being reimbursed for the kind of tremendous service that we’re performing by protecting various countries. Now Saudi Arabia’s one of them.”
Trump also named in the interview retired Major General Gary Harrell, Major General Bert Mizusawa and retired Rear Admiral Charles Kubic as additional foreign policy advisors to the five named earlier this week who were criticized as obscure.
Trump has faced questions about his reluctance to reveal who was advising his campaign. He told the Times he was willing to rethink traditional U.S. alliances should he become president.
(Excerpt) Read more at oann.com ...
That is not correct. Oil is a commodity, but purchases are made either by spot or contractual price. Eliminating a major pool source to a country or Companies of a Country, places those companies at a disadvantage in contract negotiations.
So, if it’s not the oil, why are we protecting them?
That is just what I wrote.
That’s a great question. The reason is now gone, now that we have shale oil.
I don’t know if it would antagonize Russia. China buys a lot more middle eastern oil than we do. They also buy from Russia. From Russia and China’s perspective it may be good business. China is building a navy and they have a strategic interest in middle eastern stability to keep oil markets stable. I wouldn’t be surprised if they do take an active role in the middle east.
So he’s right, they need to be freaking paying for services. One thing Trump says that I thank God somebody’s saying is we aren’t a rich country any more. We’ve been sucked, not dry, but we’re a shade of what we once were.
Don't forget....depending on the field , shale is only profitable in and above the $50 - $80 bbl range.
Sustained low oil prices like now, need contingenices.
And make them fill that empty tent city in Mecca while you’re at it.
L
“Andrew Jackson is very under-rated. An all-time great IMO.”
And don’t forget his protege James K Polk. We have Texas, the Southwest, California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho thanks to his efforts.
But there are contingencies already planned for. Plenty of other countries exist from which to get oil. On top of that, the Saudis can do their own defense work. Their cost of production is extremely low.
“Wow! I always pictured him as a commonfolk who was loved by the rabble. And a war hero.”
He was both of those as well.
Right. The world supply of oil is essentially one giant pool. SA oil will still be a part of it.
Yeah, but your original statement read something like that since we have shale oil, it didn't matter anymore.
Which obviously is not the case.
Things will be fabulous after Islamic radicals overthrow the House of Saud, and then when oil stops being sold in dollars.
The minute everyone in the world isn’t demanding dollars to buy oil is the minute our debt becomes very real and our economy collapses.
Yea, Trump!
No entity that takes over Saudi Arabia would stop the oil. Even ISIS keeps the spigot going on what it captured.
I don’t see your concern.
How about just making the Saudis take in all of the Syrian "refugees?"
Here’s a list that estimates the wealth of each President:
I don’t see your concern
ISIS or any other Radical Islamic entitiy may not turn off the spigot, but they will selectively sell crude to non-west interests. The immediate effect would be a disastrous whammy on the European economy, starting with bond defaults. This in turn , as you know would domino into a world wide financial crisis. Even if we build the XL pipeline, a crumbling european economy will domino over here, and eventually world wide.
You mean besides the tons of defense spending they do from America? And besides continuing the use of dollars in the global oil market?
You Trump believers need to be careful of what you ask for.
You mean besides the tons of defense spending they do from America? And besides continuing the use of dollars in the global oil market?
You Trump believers need to be careful of what you ask for.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.