Saudi Arabia shows 'material evidence' of Iranian involvement in oil attacks

The transcript discusses the collection of material evidence from attacks on Saudi oil facilities, believed to be orchestrated by Iran. It highlights the analysis of drones used in the attacks and the potential military responses by Saudi Arabia. The discussion draws a comparison with the MH17 incident, emphasizing the importance of evidence presentation to the public and its diplomatic implications.

What was the Saudi government's claim regarding the attacks on the oil facilities?

• They were orchestrated by the Huthi rebels.

• They were accidental explosions.

• They were a result of internal sabotage.

• They were caused by natural disasters.

Why were the drones used in the attacks recoverable?

• They were intercepted mid-air.

• They were abandoned by the attackers.

• They were found in a nearby warehouse.

• They did not explode.

What was the retired Major General's view on Saudi Arabia's potential military response?

• It would be ignored by the international community.

• It would be too costly.

• It would demonstrate strength.

• It would be seen as unnecessary.

How does the presentation of evidence in the oil facility attacks compare to the MH 17 incident?

• It is less organized.

• It has a similar public impact.

• It involves more international parties.

• It is on a much larger scale.

What is a key difference between the oil facility attacks and the MH 17 incident?

• The MH 17 incident involved a commercial airline.

• The MH 17 incident had no evidence collected.

• The oil facility attacks resulted in more casualties.

• The oil facility attacks were not publicly acknowledged.