Terrorist attack on Saudi oil
 

This is the worst attack in decades, including Saddam firing scuds. https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-o...ne-11568480576

Is there any electric car equivalent? What if ten drones blew up a solar or wind farm? Maybe if they took out a battery array, but would that be as disruptive or horrible to the environment?

Kamikaze automatons?

edit:
One source (coffee with you-know-who) is saying the attack was a pulled punch. If they were serious they'd have attack the desalination plants.

As for the vulnerability of oil vs electricity, that's a question for penetration testers. But electricity is fungible, it comes from varied sources.

Buy an electric vehicle so the US can export more petroleum products, it's the American thing to do.

That's if you're serious about disrupting Saudi society and maybe forcing them to import more bottled water.

If you want to send price shocks around the world and make the Saudis look bad to their customers, you throw a cheap little attack (that everyone knows is scalable) at the oil.

Is it? Isn't a country's infrastructure a legitimate target in a war?

Is there a declared war? If you're implying it was not a terrorist attack, the definition of terrorism is an attack by a non-nation group without having declared war.

All targets are legitimate in war because anything supporting an existential threat must be destroyed as quickly as possible. Existence trumps any notions of fair play.

Words and definitions don't matter. Terrorists are anyone that "we" don't like. And if you disagree, you're a terrorist too.

Sure they matter, which is why we're able to have discussions. We share a notion of the meaning of words well enough that we can understand each other.

The definition of terrorist doesn't include whether they are "good" or "bad", it simply defines what constitutes terrorism.

I am going to put Marianne Williamson in a cannon, fire her at them, and she will love them to death.

Sorry, the covfefe got in the way.