This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Iran & the Strait of Hormuz: Bad Bluff or Good Gamble?

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by Peter Beutel of Cameron Hanover

Iran & the Strait of Hormuz: Bad Bluff or Good Gamble?

Was Iran born to bluff, or is it really much closer to building a nuclear weapon than anyone really knows? Now that the Islamic Republic has made its intentions clear, one has to assume that it has given away a certain measure of strategic surprise. If it really wants to get the most that it could – militarily – from an attack on tankers moving through Hormuz, it should have never even raised it as a possibility. By discussing it, we figure Iran has given the US “notice” that it might not have had in the event of an attack from the blue. Weren’t the maneuvers in the Straits (by Iran) enough to raise the question without raising alert conditions from the West and from Israel?

Why would Iran make the threat to attack Hormuz when it seemingly cannot gain maximum military strategic advantage from it? Surely, it knows that the US and Saudi Arabia cannot allow the Strait of Hormuz to be closed, even briefly. Was it just testing market responses? Did it want to shake a couple European countries loose from the EU position on sanctions – or was it just looking for a few extra million from higher oil prices? Any one or more of those could be the case, and there is one more possibility. Iran may actually be closer to developing a nuclear weapon than we believe to be the case. If it did, it could make a closure of Hormuz ‘stick.’ In any event, Teheran seems more aggressive than really makes much sense.

With Iran producing 3.575 million bpd at last count, a $4.00/bbl jump in prices is worth $100 million over the course of a week. That is a lot of pistachios (Iran’s number two export). What has changed in the last few weeks is glaring: Iran is acting like the US well after the War of 1812, when it embraced the Monroe Doctrine (1823). Iran is saying basically the same thing – that any interference in the Petroleum Gulf is within Iran’s realm of interest, but clearly not in others’ realms of interest. It has told the US that any redeployment of naval units beyond the Straits of Hormuz will be taken as acts of war. This is as far-reaching a new doctrine as the Monroe Doctrine was in its day, or as the threat to close Hormuz in the event of European adoption of new sanctions. There is one set of glaring differences, though.

The US, in 1823, faced a Europe drained by 23 years of on-and-off fighting from the French Revolution through Waterloo (1815). England and France had been driven to the precipice of economic ruin by the wars – which could also be true of the US and EU now (by various other factors, wears among them). Bt, England and France were done looking for new Atlantic colonies and the US knew that it could proclaim the Monroe Doctrine without it being immediately tested. Iran may feel that it has the financial plight of the EU and US on its side, but it surely knows that the US will be bringing a carrier group to the PG next week or next month. It will not wait until next year. Iran knows this.

Iran also knows that the EU is on the brink of accepting new sanctions against Teheran. China has opposed new sanctions undertaken by the US as being “unilateral” sanctions adopted by Washington, but the unilateral aspect comes only in the timing. European countries are considering – and have been for two weeks – new sanctions against Teheran. The new sanctions force companies to choose between doing business with Teheran or Washington. As of this writing, EU governments seem to be moving nearer to halting oil purchases from Iran. Any new positions taken against Iranian banking will be announced on January 30th at a meeting of EU foreign ministers. Earlier today, Greece agreed to go along with the larger European Union on any decision to boycott Iranian oil. Everything from tighter banking conditions to a total embargo – with tightened banking conditions – is on the table. A number of new sanctions seem certain.

And, that brings us back to Iran’s new Doctrine, which we hesitate to further connect to US President Monroe. When he announced his doctrine, he was not entirely sure it would stick. But, he thought he had good odds. Iran’s leaders must certainly know that the odds are heavily stacked against them. Either new sanctions or the return of US carrier groups to the Petroleum Gulf – or both – are likely.

So, Iran already has a nuclear device already or it wants to drive up oil prices as it possibly increases its bid to lead the anti-American group in the region. That latter one is a non-starter because of the ethnic Persian versus Arab component. So, what can it reasonably expect to achieve? Is this all for domestic consumption? Does it seriously plan on starting a hot war, or will it take the extra money on higher oil prices and walk away.

One thing is certain. If Iran does ever have a nuclear weapon, it looks likely that it will use it. The new Gulf Exclusion Doctrine cannot be allowed to stand. It has to be tested.  But, Iran really looks like it wants the doctrine to stand … at some point.  It seems to need a nuclear deterrent, though, first, to make it stick.  As far as we know, it has the cart before the horse on that, though … right now.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 01/05/2012 - 11:55 | 2035536 Squishi
Squishi's picture

Iran expects US to attack. thats why they pretend to play hard

actually its already game over! 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:02 | 2035571 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

All you need to know right here.

http://www.juancole.com/2012/01/turkey-warns-against-sunni-shiite-civil-...

Turkey is a Sunni-majority country and the current Justice and Development Party government has strong Sunni Muslim constituencies, including the Naqshbandi Sufi order, which is important in Iraq and Syria. But the government has striven, despite significant tensions, for correct relations with Iran. Turkey imports natural gas from Iran and the two countries did more than $15 billion in trade with one another in 2011, up 55% over the previous year. Turkey, like South Korea, is seeking an exemption from upcoming US sanctions on sales of petroleum and gas via Iran’s central bank. Its Halkbank handles India’s purchase of Iranian petroleum.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:07 | 2035593 trav7777
trav7777's picture

there is a difference between a nuclear weapon and the means to deliver it.

Iran's threats on Hormuz will be ignored...these are international waters, meaning they belong to whomever has the strongest bluewater navy

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:11 | 2035617 seek
seek's picture

Iran is capable of launching satellites, which basically means with a warhead they have an ICBM. Means to deliver is not an issue.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:20 | 2035660 lolmao500
lolmao500's picture

Yeah but from a ``bomb`` to a ``warhead`` there's at least a gap of 5 years. Unless China-Russia-Pakistan has given them blueprints.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:54 | 2035846 Ahmeexnal
Ahmeexnal's picture

Germany and France have supplied iRan with all the needed technology.
iRan is a proxy for the euro-sociopath banking mafia bent on bringing the US and the rest of the world to a global feudal slavestate.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:17 | 2035947 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

I will have respect from you, serf. You won't call me ever sociopath again. Ups, I gave me away...

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:36 | 2036018 The Big Ching-aso
The Big Ching-aso's picture

 

 

1).   Question:   N. Korea already has nukes.   How come western allies aren't circling them ala Iran?

       Answer:   They have nukes.

2).  Question:   Why does Iran want nuke capability so much considering all the negatives?

      Answer:   See 2)., above.

 

 

 

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:51 | 2036067 macholatte
macholatte's picture

 

3) Why not stop making war, wasting resources on weapons and just enjoy your wealth and prosperity and have a 21st century society instead of living like it's a thousand years ago?

         Answer: The leadership is psychotic.

 

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 15:15 | 2036344 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

3) Why not stop making war, wasting resources on weapons and just enjoy your wealth and prosperity and have a 21st century society instead of living like it's a thousand years ago?

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////

US citizens walled in their propaganda, unable to face reality.

Iran making war?

Iran allowed to enjoy their wealth and prosperity?

So::

Question:

What is Iran doing?

Iran is trying to resist a siege laid around them, in an attempt to see their wealth siphoned away by US citizens, in a plan similar to Saudi Arabia, a country that is by the way and modeled by the US, engaged in more wars than Iran (not that hard though)

US world order. US citizens trapped in their propaganda. Cant even state they hope war against Iran would help the gas price down at the station.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 17:44 | 2037062 d_senti
d_senti's picture

You know, I've concluded that I should just say I agree with you and that I'm a US citizen. That should cause your head to explode and then you'll finally shut up. If you think the rest of the Western world isn't as propagandized and immoral as the US, then you're the brainwashed one.

Also I'm pretty sure no one bothers to even read your posts anymore, except me when I feel like complaining about you.

Fri, 01/06/2012 - 05:35 | 2038530 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

Reason why N. Korea is not colonized by USA...

 

It is already owned by China. Read history on Korean War. China helped push American forced back to the DMZ when N. Korea was all but eliminated.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 19:44 | 2037469 delbutler
delbutler's picture

Duplicate answer accepted for same number of points : look in a mirror, America.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:58 | 2036092 SilverRhino
SilverRhino's picture

 

 

Question:   N. Korea already has nukes.   How come western allies aren't circling them ala Iran?

  • Because they don't have a damn thing of strategic significance???
  • The US government isn't a dick just to be a dick, they're dicks because they WANT something.

Sucks but it's true.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 15:17 | 2036348 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Yes, they want something.

But North Koreans might provide US citizens with something they want: murder and resources.

US citizens usually go in such ventures for two things: resources and murder.

NK provide both opportunities.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 17:46 | 2037068 d_senti
d_senti's picture

Yes, we all appreciate the strategic value of a few good murders.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:19 | 2036619 johny2
johny2's picture

actually answer to the first question are two words. Israel and Oil. Neither is close to N. Korea.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:33 | 2036677 CompassionateFascist
CompassionateFascist's picture

NK nukes aimed at Japan, US. Not Israel. Potential Iran nuke aimed at Yizroel, so Iran will be attacked by Israel's colony, America.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:04 | 2035895 caconhma
caconhma's picture

Personally, I hate all fanatics regardless of their religion or ideology.

Iranians religious-fanatics leaders are neither good people nor smart. But, at the same time, nuclear-weapon capabilities are a must for Iran to protect itself from American & Israeli zionist aggression.

As for the USA, it is a fading & failing empire. China is a growing empire with many problems but with its leaders are ready to compromise and flexible.

Iran is a major China ally. Consequently, a military zionist aggression against Iran will be an aggression against China with all following consequences.

The only questions left are:

·        How far is Iran ready to go to protect itself?

·        How bad or catastrophic will be consequences from a zionist aggression against Iran for the USA/Israel and their EU puppets?

 

 

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 14:27 | 2036189 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

Iranians religious-fanatic leaders come in all shades of nutter which often clash with each other - there is a whole side of the issue that I haven't seen any good recent reporting on (not that I have been looking) - but the short version of what I'm looking for is an update on AhMadNutJob's ongoing struggle to keep his job and increase his powershare in the face of the increasing discontent of the actual religious-fanatic leaders with the title of Imam or Ayatollah (12th Imam Nutters All). 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 14:40 | 2036229 Eally Ucked
Eally Ucked's picture

I'm not negating your point, because I don't have any knowledge what's really going on in Iran. Interesting point is where you get all that info about clashes and nuttjobs and so on. Is it the same source we all can access? That means news networks, major newspapers or stratforts of this world? There is discontent with Obama and his gov performance in US, are they nutjobs too? 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:46 | 2036737 Think for yourself
Think for yourself's picture

Indeed, anyone who is discontent with Obama's performance is a nutjob - for having fallen in his obvious false hopes shtick and having expected something out of him.

Fri, 01/06/2012 - 04:24 | 2038364 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

That's the problem- the news is inconsistent on the outside, beyond squabbles and feuds over political appointments and impeachments.  Whenever the regional political rhetoric heats up the local papers clamp down- Al Jazeera was all for the Arab spring as long as it was off in distant Tunisia and Libya, when it rolled into neighboring Bahrain you could literally see the clampdown as the days progressed.  If things weren't so tenuous right now the Persian and UAE press might have something useful to contribute.  Otherwise, the only good source is people on the ground, and I don't have any business in the bathtub now.

If you happen to visit the Gulf, then stick to people over 50 who can remember the days before the British withdrawal and have a personal perspective and experience in the region.  Stick to Arabs and Persians who can cut through the cultural nuances in their sleep- even lifelong diplomats and oilmen are generally useless in this regard.  And lastly, everyone talks their book, so retired professionals, black sheep of the elite (who stand to benefit less than their brethren), and even the local Imams (because some of them look at things on a long timeline) are all good people to share a pot of tea or coffee with.   

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:18 | 2035956 ian807
ian807's picture

I would bet that Pakistan has gifted them a warhead or two. Seriously, would you trust the Pakistani government *not* to?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 19:52 | 2037485 UP Forester
UP Forester's picture

Why would Pakistan do that?

Oh, yeah, 'cuz they're gonna need help, they're near the top of the list, behind Syria and Iran.

 

If my neighbors were all thieves and killers, had guns, and I knew it but couldn't move, I'd get a gun, too.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:50 | 2035815 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Iran could certainly place a conventional warhead atop a rocket used for satellite launches, and if it could reach Africa or Europe then, technically it would be an ICBM. Trying to do the same with an atomic warhead, especially an untested one, raises the complexity by an order of magnitude.

The article below, although written six years ago, provides an excellent description of the technical challenges which would need to be overcome if Iran should seek to construct a missile-delivered atomic warhead:

http://lewis.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/948/iran-the-bomb-2-irans-missi...

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:07 | 2035912 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Indeed, Lawrence Livermore labs, in the recent past, discovered that US warwheads, when simulated from launch to detonation, were found to undergo some event somewhere the boost phase that just about systematically dialed back their yields to something unimpressive. A lot of US standard issue MIRVs had to be fixed thanks to that. So yeah, having an ICBM or even a low orbit launcher with a decent heft, plus an A or H bomb, doesn't mean you can get the combination to immediately work together.

Still, a kiloton of prevention is worth several dozen megatons of cure.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:09 | 2035918 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

And there are things called "containers" and "container ships" and "ports".

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:24 | 2035975 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

And there is also, nuke + low earth orbit launch vehicle = EMP device. No rentry vehicle, nor any particularly accurate guidance required. A decent EMP device, in the worst case scenarios that dead-ender islamo nutters would count on, would destroy the US in an apocalypic frenzy of starvation and cannabilism, on the cheap. Lots of the islamic world would get nuked on principle, or starve from lack of US grain on the market(and lack of a market come to that), but the islamo-nutters can be OK with that.

Fri, 01/06/2012 - 08:30 | 2038624 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

It's theLikud-nutters that are pushing the envelope.  Based on your unbalanced comments, you must be one of them.  Itmust suck to be hate-spewing you.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:22 | 2035971 ian807
ian807's picture

Sounds like you read "The Jesus Factor" when you were younger.

But really, why use a missile? A little boat up the Potomac or NY harbor would be more than sufficient. Cheaper too.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:21 | 2035970 Cast Iron Skillet
Cast Iron Skillet's picture

I'm not a military person, but there would seem to me to be a difference between launching a satellite into orbit and hitting a faraway target.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:14 | 2035638 Ignatius
Ignatius's picture

I want Iran to have a nuke. 

In fact, we should ALL have one. 

I think people would be a lot more polite in that world.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:18 | 2035650 Squishi
Squishi's picture

the redistribution of nukes will be the end of the big bang.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:53 | 2035833 EnglishMajor
EnglishMajor's picture

Does it matter?  If economic sanctions don't close Pandora's Nuclear Box, I am sure it can be done with an iron fist...or is the safest of "mutually assured", bad alternatives a worldwide, nuclear cold war?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:51 | 2035824 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

The problem with that is that the regime in Iran is far from rational. They are leading a dying project, with oil and gas field yields declining, and a large population that mostly hates them, and is mostly intent on enjoying this life without breeding. It is game over for their ambitions, BUT they're desperate. They opt for faith that Allah will carry them the full 90 yards if they can just make a first down. Sorta like so many muslims thought about watching the twin towers fall.

Back in reality world, if they put a few big holes in a US carrier in international waters, nevermind sink one, they(the regime) are dead meat, the more so if they set off a nuke.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:06 | 2035907 Shizzmoney
Shizzmoney's picture

I agree with this sentiment; if the US can just COOL down and not poke the beehive, the workers bees will eventually be so weak or fly away thanks to the regime's neglect of its people.

If something happens now, though?  Then CHina/Pakistan get involved, and that's DIRE.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 14:26 | 2036182 Hugh G Rection
Hugh G Rection's picture

Back in reality world

Funny, doesn't sound like you are famliar with reality world.  Is that the world where 19 Arabs with box cutters, commanded by a man on dialysis from a cave, made NORAD stand down, flew 3 seperate airliners into their targets, 1 pulling off an impossible 270degree corkscrew turn and slamming into the pentagon at 500mph?

In this world I suppose the Muslims prayed to Allah for wtc7 to collapse in it's own footprint at freefall speed (25 minutes after media was reporting it collapsed).

If you want to take it up the ass from Israel and the traitors in our own government thats fine, just know who is giving it to you.

shalom

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 14:36 | 2036220 ObungaBoy
ObungaBoy's picture

you must be very naive if you believe that 9/11 has been organized by the Arabs

the jew's lobby has strong influence on Wall Street and the congress but you are wrong if you believe that America will fight for Israel just because the Jews in the Congress and Wall Street are scared to dead about their profits

Fri, 01/06/2012 - 08:35 | 2038628 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

re. but you are wrong if you believe that America will fight for Israel just because the Jews in the Congress and Wall Street are scared to dead about their profits

Have you been trapped in a mine shaft for the past few decades?  What do you mean America will not fight, die, kill and be killed for the tail that wags the dog? 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 15:11 | 2036323 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture

Why is it impossible to turn 270 degrees while descending 7000 feet?

That actually sounds pretty easy to me.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 15:33 | 2036402 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture

I'm trying to find out what the radius of curvature was, and having no luck yet.   If it's too tight, then yes -- that would be weird.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 15:37 | 2036429 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture

Ah -- rotation radius of 3.5 miles, descending 7000 feet in 2.5 minutes.  Sorry -- but if that manuever is impossible in a 757 then it's not an aircraft, it's a hot air baloon.

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:09 | 2036592 Hugh G Rection
Hugh G Rection's picture

Ok let's assume a guy that had a hard time with a Cessna could pull of that turn. Take the sum of the parts from that day ( starting with wtc7 collapse) and the official story is beyond ridiculous.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 15:37 | 2036428 ExpendableOne
ExpendableOne's picture

It's the combination of rookie pilot and near perfect tragectory that has more than a few pilots scratching their heads.

Fri, 01/06/2012 - 08:44 | 2038646 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

The gross outlines of what went down are pretty clear. 

9/11 Aircraft Technologies & PNAC co-author Dov Zakheim

http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/64915/9_11_Aircraft_Technologies___Dov_Zakheim/

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:56 | 2035845 Cyrano de Bivouac
Cyrano de Bivouac's picture

Ignatius-if I were the only fellow in a class where everyone had a black belt in karate I would be down "hi ya!"-ing at a Dojo. Esp. after I saw two classmates(Iraq and Libya) get their asses kicked. 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:34 | 2036004 Ignatius
Ignatius's picture

I am not in favor of the US imperial project though living here I have clearly benefited from it.  Now how f*cked up is that?! 

If one really tracks their way to the 'root' of the world's problem it begins with a totally immoral factory food system.  Americans eat shit.  Literally.  Being way ahead on our food -- immorally -- allows us to  pursue our other immoral pastime which is squandering our childrens/grandchildrens limited energy resources.  An opportunistic lot, are we not?

None of it is sustainable though it is highly profitable if one's on the right side of the trade.  Who's on the winning side of the "Iran's got nukes!" trade?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 14:04 | 2036112 nugjuice
nugjuice's picture

A Confederacy of Dunces is one of my favorite books ever written. Love the picture. It's such a shame he never got to finish the series, tragic really.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:30 | 2035718 Chump
Chump's picture

Just remember that a nuke doesn't have to be attached to a missile to be "delivered."

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:55 | 2035847 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Well if they had to be successful nuking one US city as their last act on this earth, Schoedinger forbid, well Heisenberg help me I have a preference which one, and I can't help that.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:52 | 2035829 chistletoe
chistletoe's picture

Hormuz is only 30 miles wide.

Having the world's strongest and largest navy does not mean jack shit if even a speedboat

can punch a hole in one of your ships.  Have you ever heard of the Spanish Armada?

People who don't know history are ....

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:59 | 2035866 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

History is entirely unreplete with stories of small third world powers overwhelming Aegis-protected US aircraft carrier battle groups with any kind of attack. But supposing a surprise of this nature, that'd be the end of the Iranian military capability, within a week if not a couple of days.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:29 | 2035983 ian807
ian807's picture

History is replete with stories of small third world powers that defeat much larger powers by being distributed and hidden (i.e. guerrila warfare). Countries like Vietnam, Afghanistan and some little country called the USA in a war against the British all come to mind. This can happen on sea as well as on land. You can defend yourself from another carrier, but not a few hundred unmanned speedboats coming from all directions at once.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 15:14 | 2036341 EINSILVERGUY
EINSILVERGUY's picture

your missing the point. The NVA and Viet Cong never won a battle where they came out and fought against the US in a conventional battle. They won the war through mental attrition at the home front

It would take the US military forces about 48 hours to destroy most of the larger Iranian Naval and air units and then have to deal with the smaller speedboats. The Iranians could get lucky and damage a few of our vessels but make no mistake. The US can annihilate the Iranian military forces.

What has to be a real concern is Iran sinking international shipping in the strait disrupting commerce and causing shipping hazards. Image the traffic jam trying to shepherd backed up tankers on either side of the strait while swatting at the Iranian gunboats. 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 18:31 | 2037258 ian807
ian807's picture

You're missing the point. The NVA and Viet Cong never fought a conventional battle against the US since they knew they wouldn't win - that way.

Yes, the US Navy could destroy the larger Iranian naval and air units. And so what? Unless you're wiling to wipe out everybody in Iran, and possibly the region, what you have is a Vietnam-style guerilla war. No hearts and minds BS required. Just modern technology, deployed in the same way one might fly a plane into a building (or a ship). Or a hundred rowboats with motors, radio jamming devices and C4.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:05 | 2036572 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Who said anything about invading Iran, or dumber still, engaging in nation building?

Destroying their ability to do harm in the gulf, and securing nuclear locations long enough to demolish what's there, doesn't require and pussy footing around in blue helmets with targets on one's back, nor hanging around building bridges, fixing infrastructure or doing police work.

The job we are talking about is breaking things and killing people, which is what our military does devastatingly well.

I don't see us being stupid enough to get drawn into their kind of fight one mo' time, after afghanisatan and iraq. Especially afghanistan, a multi-decade mission without a point.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:05 | 2035586 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

of course, they are trying to get us to attack them since... since... since they had a revolution against our puppet Shah, since they are destardly catching our spies, since they refuse to catch enough Stuxnet viruses, since they are cowardly catching our drones, since the 5th has new bases...

I'm sure I missed a few, but you are right, they expect us to attack since quite a while...

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:20 | 2035662 sushi
sushi's picture

You missed the fact that the Iranian leadership is evil.

They allowed the USA to supply chemical weapons to Saddham Hussien so that he and his brother "Crazy Ali" could gas and kill their fellow Iranians. The Iranian leadership even allowed the USN to shoot down a civilian airliner with the loss of 290 Iranian lives and they did nothing to retaliate!! Evil incarnate!! Bomb them all!!

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:53 | 2035837 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

They are not only evil, they are also a threath at our borders! they are practically encircling us with their menacing troops at the borders of

Turkey (friend and NATO member), Iraq (finally good friend), Pakistan (somewhat good friend even though no NATO transit country anymore - wonder why?), Afghanistan (Friend, hosting our troops), Turkmenistan (friend, NATO transit country) Azerbaijan (good friend) and of course all the good friends on the other side of the Previously-Persian Gulf.

How did they get so far? How could we let them go so far? They could have asked Jimmy Carter, he would have explained...

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 14:12 | 2036120 Cyrano de Bivouac
Cyrano de Bivouac's picture

Sushi-Another provocative action by Iran was the assassination of several of their nuclear experts.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:55 | 2036783 CompassionateFascist
CompassionateFascist's picture

Neither bluff nor gamble. Never assume rational behavior on the part of state-actors.  They've taken all the crap they are going to take from Isramerica, and drawn a line. Either ZOG will cross the line, or it won't. I'd say yes, c. July-September. Invest in lead.  

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:06 | 2035589 redpill
redpill's picture

Ahmadinejad savors the conflict with the US because it allows him to stoke nationalism in the Iranian citizenry and consolidate his support. If there were an outbreak of common sense and there was de-escalation and peace, the Iranian people would look inward at their domestic issues which causes more problems for Ahmadinejad and the ayatollahs. This is obviously not a phenomenon limited to Iran.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:28 | 2035708 Joe Davola
Joe Davola's picture

Which leads to the question of why their protesters were allowed to twist in the wind all the while POTUS was fanning the Arab spring flames elsewhere.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:59 | 2035867 karzai_luver
karzai_luver's picture

While you are at it maybe you can explain to the "protestors" of Bahrain about the US "wind" that blew over them??

 

 

 

Maybe ?????????

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:33 | 2035734 DCFusor
DCFusor's picture

Right.  One wonders what these "leaders" say to one another over drinks.  I bet they have a good laugh about how easy it is to whip up support for themselves from the sheeple with ploys like this.  Remember the flap over us trying to put anti missile missiles in eastern Yurp?  Anyone who knows the physics of a "stern chase" knows - including Putin at the time - that this wasn't useful for defending against Russian missiles.  But it was a great "crisis" that helped cement a couple world leaders in power.

 

S funny in a way.  If you filled a bar with people from two countries that the leaders were trying to get to go to war - you probably would just have a bunch of happy drunks, couldn't even get a decent brawl going.  ALL of this is political leaders trying to create situations where "you need me as a strong leader though these difficult times".  No mention why there is a difficulty in the first place.

In a sense, we get what we deserve.  We can't seem to act without a crisis.  But in truth, letting things get to that point is a sign of bad, not good, management.  It's a trick used to burn out engineers in the computer business (and probably others) too - "we'll all lose our jobs if we can't pull off the impossible overnight".  Because it takes little skill to use a stick and drive from behind - and a lot more to learn to work a carrot and lead from ahead.

Nah, it's bad if everyone gets nukes.  While it's true that an armed society is a polite one, we need non nuke states to do our proxy wars on and test all the new cool tech toys the military favors.

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:19 | 2035961 redpill
redpill's picture

And viewed through that prism it makes the "nuclear Iran" hysteria all that much more absurd.

"OMFGWTFBBQ they are going to nuke Israel!!11!"  

Right.  They are going to slaughter hundreds of thousands of muslims including Palestineans, destroy and/or hopelessly irradiate countless muslim holy sites and drop fallout on multiple neighboring muslim countries, all with full knowledge Israel would immediately retaliate 10-fold and turn every major Iranian city into a smoldering radioactive hole in the ground.  And we are supposed to believe the Iranian government sees victory somewhere in that scenario?  It's utter nonsense.  And yet you can't swing a cat in Washington DC without hitting some neocon a-hole who wants to bomb them tomorrow.  What a joke.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 14:18 | 2036150 Cyrano de Bivouac
Cyrano de Bivouac's picture

 The US State Department is working feverishly to ease tensions with Iran.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 15:23 | 2036369 EINSILVERGUY
EINSILVERGUY's picture

He savors a conflict becasue he believes in the return of the 12th Imam . He beleives in the prophecy that Iran fights Israel and the US in a great final battle. It is the opposite side of Christianity's Revelations

Thats why  Ahmandinejad and the ruling mullahs are dangerous. If they beleive it is prophecy there is no reasoning with them

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:47 | 2035801 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

What's with this simplistic binary postulating?

All of the above:

Iran can achieve at once simultaniously: greater oil profits at $200 barrel WHILE crippling US and Europe WHILE securing it's international position a la North Korea as a nuclear nation. The provocation = timing and timing only. Not too stupid actually.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:32 | 2035998 ian807
ian807's picture

Or Iran can create a situation where other Arab countries find effective oil deliver methods that don't involve the strait of Hormuz. Iran itself only provides 5% of the world's oil supply. If their oil disappeared tomorrow, we'd all adapt.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:28 | 2036656 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

Not so easy and like above TIMING. Oil over $100 and Hormuz is major route RIGHT NOW! Get it?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:13 | 2036578 sof_hannibal
sof_hannibal's picture

My guess is that Iran doesnt have a nuke, but clearly we know they are working on getting one. My sense is that if they had a nuke, they would advertise the shit out if it -- as to avoid an attack via deterence, like a N. Korea... I bet they think we are going to attack them, but if they can say they have a nuke, it would be a major deterant. I am not sure what Iran's motive is here (and sanctions dont help), but understand that this type of posturing has easily been going in between Iran and rhe US for like 30 plus years. I think we came close to bombing them in 2004, and here again, time now; but if there was an attack it would likely only be if the US ensured it doesnt have a nuke; but regardless it wouldnt stop all hell breaking out in the Gulf with Iran targeting, Isarel and all US bases/ and green zones/ and military assets-- inciting major escalation on both sides... End game... Buy gold/ silver.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 17:52 | 2037086 Things that go bump
Things that go bump's picture

.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 11:58 | 2035545 DormRoom
DormRoom's picture

Only reason US & Europe want to control the Strait & Oil is because they may announce a DEBT JUBILEE in the next couple of years.

 

Thus pissing off all foreign Treasury holders.

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 11:58 | 2035547 Bazinga
Bazinga's picture

i VOTE "Potentially Good Gamble". Suck the US into another conflict. The economic war continues!

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:10 | 2035549 Dapper Dan
Dapper Dan's picture

Is this about oil or the USD that pays for the oil?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

 

oh, and I think good bluff,  bad gamble is fitting.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 11:59 | 2035553 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

WTF is it just me, or did this article make absolutely no sense at all?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:03 | 2035573 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

It's a translation SD1. Re-read it with that eye.

oreye

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:06 | 2035590 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

The guy is clearly a wise strategist or a complete war mongerer.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:07 | 2035594 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Interesting Gene. See below. 

ori

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:14 | 2035628 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

No reason to cudgel our brains ORI, I think the author's continual use of 'Teheran' is revealing in itself.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:19 | 2035656 smlbizman
smlbizman's picture

are you referring to the big O.....

or are referring to the big A....

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:04 | 2035580 john39
john39's picture

total warmongering bullshit.  there is no evidence that Iran is developing anything other than a perfectly legal nuclear power station.   More mind control for the sheeple to justify another illegal, immoral fucking war.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:36 | 2036019 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

And even if it is developing a nuke, how can someone state: "One thing is certain. If Iran does ever have a nuclear weapon, it looks likely that it will use it."

WTF?!

NK is EASILY TEN TIMES the crazy of Iran, has had a nuke for over a decade...  But for some reason hasn't used one, or exported one that has subsequently been used.

Oh, I forgot:  NK doesn't have any oil.  Derp!

This is clearly designed to distract from the ass raping they are giving US citizens via bailouts and USD trashing.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:37 | 2036021 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

Then why are they being so uncooperative about inspections? What does that gain them?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 19:00 | 2037363 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Which inspections are they being uncooperative about?

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 21:49 | 2037735 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

I'm reminded of what the Klingon Captain told Kirk when he "requested" the release of the young Spock:

Kirk:  "Why won't you release him?"

Klingon:  "Because you wish it!"

Make sense?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:05 | 2035581 Eally Ucked
Eally Ucked's picture

Agree

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:10 | 2035613 EverythingEviL
EverythingEviL's picture

I agree too.  And if they do get a weapon so what? What, they launch one at us and we reign down 300 Nukes on them?  It's all posturing and BS.  They will get one someday just like everyone else is getting them.  The only reason we used it in WW2 is because no one else had one.  If these things get launched today, everyone is launching them, that's why they don't get used. 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:34 | 2036006 Randall Cabot
Randall Cabot's picture

But the jewish supremacists tell us that the Iranians want total destruction so the dude can come out of the well.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:48 | 2036741 CompassionateFascist
CompassionateFascist's picture

And, as the MSM assured us awhile back, the Mullahs are making Iranian Jews wear Yallow Starz. NOT...but we SHOULD make neo-cons wear Yallow Starz.

Fri, 01/06/2012 - 08:59 | 2038673 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

Randall, +1 for using the forbiden term jewish supremacists.  I think I'm done with the somewhat neutral term zionists. Jjewish supremacists more accurately captures the issue we are confronted with. 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:07 | 2035592 ricksventures
ricksventures's picture

no, its not you, the article doesnt make any (or very little sense)

the author has no idea what iran will do, but decided to write, PERHAPS one possibility is the mad ben from fed to dry up oil price and so increase the dollar in circulation, but then its an election year and people wont be happy about 8 bucks for a gallon so i am not sure about that

and this is happening on ZH more and more, just crap, there was no crap on ZH 2 years ago, now its about 50-50, in a year it will turn into AOL, its time for some kardashian boob picture-articles i guess

 

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 21:51 | 2037740 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

I'm in favor of boob pictures, Kardashian or not... :>Q

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:06 | 2035901 karzai_luver
karzai_luver's picture

"Was Iran born to bluff, or is it really much closer to building a nuclear weapon than anyone really knows? Now that the Islamic Republic has made its intentions clear, one has to assume that it has given away a certain measure of strategic surprise. If it really wants to get the most that it could – militarily – from an attack on tankers moving through Hormuz, it should have never even raised it as a possibility. By discussing it, we figure Iran has given the US “notice” that it might not have had in the event of an attack from the blue. Weren’t the maneuvers in the Straits (by Iran) enough to raise t"

hahaha petey petey,

 

It's only been around 50 YEARS or so that this has been gamed in the US.

bwhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 11:59 | 2035555 Payne
Payne's picture

This whole thing was a consolidation of power inside of Iraq.  They have had many embarassing failures lately.  The fleet excercise was poorly thought out from an intelligence point of view.

The US satelites and aircraft filmed every moment.  The regime is failing and tried a show of power to restore confidence in the leadership.  It over, question is does it go out with a wimper or a bang ?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 11:59 | 2035556 Payne
Payne's picture

This whole thing was a consolidation of power inside of Iraq.  They have had many embarassing failures lately.  The fleet excercise was poorly thought out from an intelligence point of view.

The US satelites and aircraft filmed every moment.  The regime is failing and tried a show of power to restore confidence in the leadership.  It over, question is does it go out with a wimper or a bang ?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:02 | 2035569 Killtruck
Killtruck's picture

A.) one post is enough. B.) Iraq? Where the hell have you been?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:37 | 2035748 BigJim
BigJim's picture

Iran. Iraq. Ipod, Ipad. It's all the same out there in warmongerland.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:01 | 2035557 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

"One thing is certain. If Iran does ever have a nuclear weapon, it looks likely that it will use it."

Dear Peter Beutel, I don't know you and this is probably the first piece of your's I've ever read. So I'll keep it short:

Go into some closet and do some unspeakable things with your body. You are either an idiot or a paid fearmongerer.

Where were you in the half century? Skipped your history lessons? Have you ever heard of MAD?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:05 | 2035583 Killtruck
Killtruck's picture

Anyone ever wonder how the U.S. has more nuclear weapons than anyone, and I never see anything along the lines of "it looks likely that they will use them all". And what the hell is it about ONE nuclear weapon that has everyone pissing their pants and holding themselves? So what? Maybe you get a city, or part of a city...are you really willing to bet your entire continent on a single strike? It's mind-boggling.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:12 | 2035622 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Right Killtruck...also Israel has an estimated 250 nuclear weapons, which are EXEMPT from inspection or formal inventory. Is anyone shivering in fear that 'theyll surely use them all'? Bunch of total hypocrisy and excuses for takeovers of sovereign countries, who have initiated NO hostile actions to anyone in centuries.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:27 | 2035700 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

Think about the ambivalence the US showed towards N. Korea and their first test of an Atomic Bomb. 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:39 | 2035754 BigJim
BigJim's picture

How is Mother Shipton these days?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:08 | 2035910 peekcrackers
peekcrackers's picture

Its not the U S that cares .. Ask the Zionest you will get a difrent reaction.

The U S is just the muscle

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 14:35 | 2036217 Hugh G Rection
Hugh G Rection's picture

agreed.

They have subverted our political process and control the presstitute media (see this)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvzeowlqmBI

Looks like the muscle is figuring out whose pulling the puppet strings.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:41 | 2035771 hyperbole2000
hyperbole2000's picture

Monoply like war/economic gaming on my universty VAX mainframe, 30 years ago when the 8088 was just released, with other students always ended the same. 3 or 4 students would have large industrial technologically advanced concentrations of power in a state of MAD with trip wire nuclear responses. One of the minor players would become obsessed with building one weapon to the detriment of their economy (starvation, desease, etc: think North Korea) so that they could trigger the nuclear trip wire and end the game. The country had to be covert (not be to economicall deprived) because if the powerful nations found out about it they would pummel the country (player) into oblivion. Reality is a bit more complex as nuclear retards are now used for proxy wars by the mega powers. i.e. Self preseravtion along with common sense seems to be an extict species like we will become following this path.

Reality unlike the game has radiologocal partical sniffing orbiting sattelite assets to amp up the targeting and frequency for pummeling the nminor players.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:06 | 2035588 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

I agree...WTF is this shit with broad sweeping conclusions like 'If Iran has a nuclear weapon, they will use it'...says who? You Peter? 

WTF we've got other maniacs out there WITH nuclear weapons, such as Pakistan. WHO will 'Iran use a nuke on', Israel? I dont think Iran is RETARDED...this is all simply a bunch of fear mongering nonsense. 

OH and BTW Peter, you talk as if Iran shouldnt know WE have been planning to INVADE THEM for over a year? What would you say if Iranian spy drones were dropping like flies in the US midwest and Iranian warships were all over the east coast? 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:07 | 2035595 TheBadgersSett
TheBadgersSett's picture

+1

 

There's clearly skullduggery going on on both sides but I don't see how any evidence points to Iranian desperation to nuke another country. They'd be flattened inside 5 minutes & are well aware of it.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:40 | 2035763 richard in norway
richard in norway's picture

of course they will use a nuke if they have one but only if they are attacked

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:58 | 2035865 EnglishMajor
EnglishMajor's picture

Yes, which isn't profitable for the military-industrial complex, but it may be the only hope of a path around WWIII, if one exists.

Ron Paul Revolution!!!

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:55 | 2036081 TheBadgersSett
TheBadgersSett's picture

I'm not even certain they'd use a nuke then. The question would be (if they had a nuke) 'how far does the US/NATO want to push them to see if they will use it'. i.e How close does the US/NATO want to get to risking its own countrymens lives.

Ahmadinejad may or may not be nuttier than squirrel turds, but would he put the US/NATO in a position where they are obligated to level his country, killing millions in the process, simply out of spite? From everything I have seen & read, here & elsewhere, Iran wants a weapon (assuming it does because lets face it, the evidence thus far only supports a desire for Nuclear energy) as a deterrant, so that he, his country & their resources are not subject to the same transparent thievary as were Iraq & Libya. Were the US/NATO to explicitly attack Iran in any shape or form, retaliation via a nuke would only expedite that attack & subsequent occupation of Iran & its resources, while guaranteeing the deaths of many many more Iranians.

We can speculate ad nauseum on Ahmadinejads sanity & care for the well being of Iranians, but these are not stupid people, neither are they or have they ever been (in recent history at least) bloodthirsty warmongers.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:01 | 2035558 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

The degree of detail they add to the drama on the fly is obvious like hydrogen sulphide in a tight room.

iran does not have Nukes already? Really? Pakistan has had them for 2 decades and Iran is bereft?

There is some Nuclear Hanky Panky being planned on the 33rd. I wonder where it runs through Iran, because of course it does!

ori

/axis-of-evil-doing/

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:08 | 2035603 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Right, its pretty nieve to think Iran doesnt have a nuclear weapon, not even 1, when Pakistan, Russia, China, and other friends of Iran have been dealing with them for decades. They know exactly what Iran has, and theyre not bereft of nuclear weapons certainly.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:14 | 2035637 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Precisely SD1. Lucky for PTB, you and I and the rest here are not their target audience.

ori

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:10 | 2035923 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Ori, we may never know what is really going on behind the scenes, because the plot twists always run quite deep.

As an example, an article was published last month which presents credible evidence that the so-called fourth customer of Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan was India. As you are an Indian, I was wondering if you could give us your take on this. Thanks.

source: http://lewis.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/4905/india-was-khans-fourth-cus...

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:01 | 2035561 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Or, Ahmedinejad does not have the Iranian citizens' best interests in mind, and he's acting as an agent for someone or something else's best interests.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:09 | 2035605 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Always a possibility BB, always that tiny possibility that he is yet another puppet.

ori

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:27 | 2035701 sushi
sushi's picture

Or, Obama does not have the US citizens' best interests in mind, and he's acting as an agent for someone or something else's best interests.

 

---

Strange how that works.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:11 | 2035928 karzai_luver
karzai_luver's picture

He has SOME of the "citizens" best interests in mind , just as all the sainted ones before him had SOME of the "citizens" best interests at heart.

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:51 | 2035823 Azannoth
Azannoth's picture

I give this 2 possibilities

1 - The Iranian Leadership(or part of it) is acting on behalf of foreign interests trying to push Iran into a war

2 - They are simply Bat-Shit crazy egomaniacs thinking they will last more than 2 weeks going head to head with the US Navy

The US needs only 1 excuse to use Nukes and they will get it in the form of a prepared IAEA statement that Iran has or is days away from having nukes of it's own, and all this posturing from Iran makes this even more credible, sure when the dust settles it will be Iraq all over again but by then no1 will care. Remember the holocaust(myth) if they can get away with a lie of this magnitude they can get away with anythig they throw at Iran(who's leaders are not the brightest bulbs in the Lighthouse)

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:13 | 2035939 karzai_luver
karzai_luver's picture

Tune out the MSM sources and your "possible" may expand "citizen".

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:26 | 2035564 Zola
Zola's picture

"One thing is certain. If Iran does ever have a nuclear weapon, it looks likely that it will use it"

And now we bring you back to your daily dose of MSM propaganda...Beehhh

Ps: For more info click here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_405910&feature=iv&src_vid=B4O3_CED1Fk&v=2_mI5rcwQko

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:02 | 2035566 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Sheesh next thing you know is we will see Colen Powell in front of the U.N with some crappy photos of old military trucks calling for war. This looks like a piece for the major networks.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:01 | 2035567 vegas
vegas's picture

Good gamble.

The West gets played by tin-horn dictators all the time. Make a little whoopy; get what you want in concessions or a commodity price you can sell higher. Either way, the West [especially Amerika] plays every time with predictable results. Until SHFT, this is a yawner.

 

http://vegasxau.blogspot.com

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:02 | 2035568 Quintus
Quintus's picture

"If Iran does ever have a nuclear weapon, it looks likely that it will use it. The new Gulf Exclusion Doctrine cannot be allowed to stand. It has to be tested."

Fuck it.  Let's just bomb them now and then figure out where to go from there.  I mean, that's worked out so freaking well in Iraq.  And Afghanistan.  And Libya.

What could possibly go wrong?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:58 | 2035814 Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

It's hgh seeking. Thrill seeking. Look at the high and thrill Libya got US and europe politicians. I mean hilary and the maverik were buzzing so hard they looked like elephant vibrators.

They are going to want to taste that power drug again. I mean libya didn't fix france but it gave them a high non-theless.

Problem is win in Iraq spawned anti war demonstration. Win in libya is under the blanket of occupy wall street. As I said on george washingtons post these are narcissists. They don't want equality can't stand equality and don't want anyone having the power to knock them down and humilate them. And they seem unable to triage the threats. Which is why all the foreign war mongering is being balanced by homeland war mongering and threats. It eventually all ends up in  world war III for foreignors and fema camps for domestics. And then slow slide of status for collaborators as they ween them off the reward for service behavior manipulator.

Economically they have a behavioral problem with citizens. Because they work off the More Doctrine. If the citizens aren't consuming way beyond their needs then they aren't justifying the More Doctrine and it affects the judgement of actions. It was absolutely no mistake that George Bush said go shopping at 9/11.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:54 | 2035842 Rakshas
Rakshas's picture

Let's just bomb them now again and then figure out where to go from there.

...there I fixed it for ya...

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:04 | 2035579 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

'In any event, Teheran seems more aggressive than really makes much sense.'

Yeah, Iran is the aggressor.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:19 | 2035651 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Yea Iran is being 'overly aggressive' HOW exactly? What should Iran have done by this point, abandonded the country and fled for Mongolia?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:05 | 2035585 Parabolic
Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:09 | 2035607 john39
john39's picture

yeah, but for opposite reason that troops should be sent there.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:08 | 2035600 overmedicatedun...
overmedicatedundersexed's picture

bring me the head of Ahmedinejad..or better yet Jon Corzine a real terrorist.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:10 | 2035610 sbenard
sbenard's picture

Wars or just rumors of wars?

I think Iran has discovered that "rumors of wars" are the most effective way of keeping the price of crude oil up! If it's over $100 during the winter season, what will the price be when the summer driving season arrives? I shudder to think!

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:11 | 2035615 mirac
mirac's picture

I don't understand the idea of building a nuclear weapon.  What one should try to develop is a really good biological weapon and a delivery system.  Much cheaper and just as effective if not more.  And if Iran wanted a nuclear weapon, they probably could have bought one from North Korea.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:42 | 2035777 BigJim
BigJim's picture

Bit unpredictable, biological weapons.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:32 | 2035997 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

Yea, but how you going to bet?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:42 | 2035782 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

In this little world of ours everyone is down wind.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:12 | 2035621 Jim in MN
Jim in MN's picture

Based on the US military response to Iranian attacks on shipping during the Tanker War, it is a good bet that the limited damage we would inflict is a fair tradeoff for the benefits to Iran of forcefully asserting 'semi-control' over the Strait of Hormuz. 

Even if it's a bad bet, it's almost certainly better than letting the financial attacks sink the Iranian state. 

If the world thinks they can just 'stick it to Iran' and not face blowback, well, let's just say that karma's a bitch. 

Oil dependence is our problem.   Given that it is our weakness that underlies this dynamic, it would be prudent to adopt a more humble attitude in the Middle East.  God put the oil there, and we keep showing contempt and hatred for the people He gave it to.  Democratic middle class societies are the best hope for peace--and yes, the Green Revolution would be a positive development alongside the Arab Spring.

But we are simply driving over a cliff by trying to control the process of technological innovation--missles and WMDs are not difficult to make in practice--while failing to constructively embrace the small geography and diverse populations in the region.  Hot wars make no sense there.  But neither does trying to impose one nation's will upon another.  And the sectarian and ethnic conflicts will continue to alter the map.

Fun fact: Britain pioneered ethnic cleansing in Bahrain, with their 'deiranisation' efforts in the early 1960s aimed at avoiding a popular vote to join Iran.  That's where the Fifth Fleet is based.  Pretty secure, eh?

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:12 | 2035623 clones2
clones2's picture

"One thing is certain. If Iran does ever have a nuclear weapon, it looks likely that it will use it"

Some pretty good scaremongering right there... They get one weapon and use it...?  I hope Ahmenijad and all the soldiers of Iran are preparing for martyrdom...

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:42 | 2036035 hawks5999
hawks5999's picture

Cue the "100 virgins" canard.

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:12 | 2035627 sabra1
sabra1's picture

israel has nuclear weapons, and, who are they going to use it against, without blowing themselves up in the process? WMD's in iraq? still waiting! rumsfeld wanted to shoot down an american plane to start a war, same way hitler had his own men, dress up in polish uniforms, and then  attack german troops! sometimes you've just got to start a war if no one else wants to!

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:15 | 2035642 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Right, and Israels vast nuclear arsenal is also totaly exempt from inventory disclosure or inspection....because theyre the 'special people' of the world? LOL 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:25 | 2035981 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

i agree about the article;  if it doesn't make much sense, it doesn't make much sense.  duh

there are so many "known unknowns" abt this situ [for public consumption] that every time somebody pees off the deck, we have satellite intel

then some oil analyst decides to tell everyone what it means, often by weighing stacks of propaganda and "official data"

overall, what i see happenening is this:  iran (with a little help from its friends?) is using the "war games & practice closing the straights" to draw attention to what it may see as the US goal in all this warmongering and end-game palavering~~gaining control of these straights

is iran causing the US and europa to go to the "either US or tehran" side-choosing?  doesn't appear so to slewie

is the US & EU response appropriate to what tehran is saying and doing?  given that very few know what the salient facts are beyond "weRgood and theyRbad", one dog's opinion or one rat's opinion or any opinion is just that, only less than usual, perhaps

so iran doesn't get to sell their oil to the US and all/parts of europe.  but, the US, the brits and NATO have spent a decade making military adjustments to OPEC, which they (their oil, banking, and engineering corporations + ?) designed and built, as i recall...

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 16:01 | 2036459 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

rather than edit...

now i have this thought:  if iranian oil goes to china (+ russia&co) and is used in trade w/ [arab & asian] neighbors, perhaps that is the end of these OPEC "military transactions".  perhaps that is the denoument of the "north african spring" and the rise of the muslim brotherhood to victorious revolutionary stature

china and russia both appeared to me to be holding their noses in public over libya like myself.  now china has a nice piece for it's new mega-port in sri lanka, perhaps?  russia will help europe develop new ways to run on natGas?

"regime changes" from iraq>egypt>libya>tunisia (and syria?)

africa is wide open to different influences from different directions

logically, this could be the end of it, for a while, but that is just one BiCh's opinion;  still, for "world trade" this fits and also seems to be a point of relative stability, from which to proceed economically

whatever tf that means...  but listen: didn't prez0 just sign a "law" that was more like a treaty about this?

i mean:  china financed this!  thru red-blooded americans in wal-mart!

so they just sail off into the sunset w/ the ianian oil?  what about the poor europeons? 

stay tooned!

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:16 | 2035643 john39
john39's picture

yeah but the U.S. and Israel are democratic and therefore represent the people, this could never happen...  /s

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 13:12 | 2035934 peekcrackers
peekcrackers's picture

Israel is the Man behild the curtain

 

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:13 | 2035631 ChelseaAggro
ChelseaAggro's picture

Iran 1 US Warship 0

Thu, 01/05/2012 - 12:21 | 2035665 loveyajimbo
loveyajimbo's picture

I was shocked that we didn't sink one of our own ships (a small one) so as to start the next war (is this #4 or #5?)... Yes, call the smegma-breath Rumsfeld if you need the "how to"... or Dickless Cheney... I thought the EU had passed the sanctions... so it should be soon... better load up on Gold Drachmas.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!