This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Iran Military Practicing Straits Of Hormuz Closure
And just in case a brutal reminder that nothing is solved in Europe is not enough, here comes Iran:
- IRAN MP SAYS MILITARY TO PRACTISE CLOSING STRAIT OF HORMUZ TO SHIPPING; IRANIAN MILITARY DECLINES TO COMMENT - RTRS
And some more from Reuters:
Iran army declines comment on Hormuz exercise
A member of the Iranian parliament's National Security Committee said on Monday that the military was set to practise its ability to close the Gulf to shipping at the narrow Strait of Hormuz, the most important oil transit channel in the world, but there was no official confirmation.
The legislator, Parviz Sarvari, told the student news agency ISNA: "Soon we will hold a military manoeuvre on how to close the Strait of Hormuz. If the world wants to make the region insecure, we will make the world insecure."
Contacted by Reuters, a spokesman for the Iranian military declined to comment.
Iran's energy minister told Al Jazeera television last month that Tehran could use oil as a political tool in the event of any future conflict over its nuclear programme.
Tension over the programme has increased since the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported on Nov. 8 that Tehran appears to have worked on designing a nuclear bomb and may still be pursuing research to that end. Iran strongly denies this and says it is developing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Iran has warned it will respond to any attack by hitting Israel and U.S. interests in the Gulf and analysts say one way to retaliate would be to close the Strait of Hormuz.
About a third of all sea-borne shipped oil passed through the Strait in 2009, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), and U.S. warships patrol the area to ensure safe passage.
As a reminder from Wikipedia:
The strait at its narrowest is 54 kilometres (34 mi) wide.[1] It is the only sea passage to the open ocean for large areas of the petroleum-exporting Persian Gulf. About 13 tankers carrying 15.5 million barrels (2,460,000 m3) of crude oil pass through the strait on an average day, making it one of the world's most strategically important choke points. This represents 33% of the world's seaborne oil shipments, and 17% of all world oil shipments in 2009.[2]
A series of naval stand-offs between Iranian speedboats and U.S. warships in the Strait of Hormuz occurred in December 2007 and January 2008. U.S. officials accused Iran of harassing and provoking their naval vessels; Iranian officials denied these allegations. On January 14, 2008, U.S. naval officials appeared to contradict the Pentagon version of the Jan. 16 event, in which U.S. officials said U.S. vessels were near to firing on approaching Iranian boats. The Navy's regional commander, Vice Admiral Kevin Cosgriff, said the Iranians had "neither anti-ship missiles nor torpedoes" and that he "wouldn't characterize the posture of the US 5th Fleet as afraid of these small boats".
Iranian threats
On June 29, 2008, the commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Ali Mohammed Jafari, said that if Iran were attacked by Israel or the United States, it would seal off the Strait of Hormuz, to wreak havoc in oil markets. This statement followed other more ambiguous threats from Iran's oil minister and other government officials that a Western attack on Iran would result in turmoil in oil supply.
In response, Vice Admiral Kevin Cosgriff, commander of the U.S. 5th Fleet stationed in Bahrain across the Persian Gulf from Iran, warned that such an action by Iran would be considered an act of war, and that the U.S. would not allow Iran to effectively hold hostage nearly a third of the world's oil supply.[7]
In July 8, 2008, Ali Shirazi, a mid-level clerical aide to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was quoted by the student news agency ISNA as saying to Revolutionary Guards, "The Zionist regime is pressuring White House officials to attack Iran. If they commit such a stupidity, Tel Aviv and U.S. shipping in the Persian Gulf will be Iran's first targets and they will be burned."[8]
An article in International Security contended that Iran could seal off or impede traffic in the Strait for a month, and an attempt by the U.S. to reopen it would likely escalate the conflict.[9] In a later issue, however, the journal published a response which questioned some key assumptions and suggested a much shorter timeline for re-opening.[10]
More as we see it.
»
- 43472 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Tis the season.
I was wondering why oil was going verticle. ME wants to maintain price, so must have some saber rattling.
Correct. The premium built into WTI right now is the result of perpetual saber rattling...by the MEDIA. There is almost zero chance that Iran could close the straights. Better to watch the media outlets talk of the threat and watch the phony crude oil price reaction flow right to their bottom line.
There is big downside to the price of crude right now, and criminal syndicate Wall Street bankers know it. And for them, oil represents a big part of the S&P.
We should see $97 taken out convincingly today, and then the downside probe from there...to see if $95 can hold...which I expect it won't.
'There is almost zero chance that Iran could close the straights.'
You meant straight, of course.
'We should see $97 taken out convincingly today, and then the downside probe from there...to see if $95 can hold...which I expect it won't.'
Jesus, Cdad, that is some fine trader jargon but means absolutely nothing in the long run when you consider the drone, the explosion(s) etc etc.
Superficial 'analysis' and I'm being generous.
Funny Gene...as there is no jargon in anything I said. There is simply my observations of how oil has traded compared to the rest of the commodity complex and a calling out of the nonsense WS bid here. It has been propped for many sessions now, and I expect today the props come out and the chimpanzees on the Street take profit on a BS trade that has worked for them.
Check gold, silver, coal, steel, the Agriculture commodities...right on down the line. There is no fundamental reason at all for oil to be priced as it is. The Street has simply moved from the "China bid to oil" to the Iranian catalysts, and since neither of these are relevant arguments for higher oil anymore, I am telling you there is big downside here.
Oh, and if the last straw did not get your attention here, then nothing will...that being J. Cramer's call that "we are entering a period of permanently high oil prices." Of course, he gave no reason for this, but rather did what J. Cramer always does...top ticked.
If $97 breaks today...good luck. With the dollar rising, I think it odds favor a correction in oil. No jargon required.
Perhaps you should read Jim Rogers on the future of oil.
I might agree with you in the immediate short term, but certainly not the long term.
Just check the action in the inverse oil funds. Neg Demarks are at infinity...but there is NO volume to the downticks. NONE. Just another sign that the price of crude is "synthetic" just now.
As for Iran taking out the fifth fleet...and whatever...please.
Supressing the short side instruments is NOT an investment thesis. And oil is not DECOUPLING from global macro economics...and global recession. And just go ahead and toss on top of all of this BS...the obvious hard landing in China forming up nicely now.
fiat vs oil and fiat loses
Cdad, still following the Party line, remarked:
The very same media which have convinced Cdad that:
The media has nothing to do with my own common sense analysis of Iran's naval capability. The media has, instead, pumped the other side of that story. And for weeks.
Actually, the greater risk is that Israel will mistake a tanker or two in the straight for a Palestine-bound flotilla and sink them.
@ uncle remus and 4th step: a story line in search of facts...any facts at all.
Or maybe, like some have suggested concerning the recently downed spy drone, the Iranian hackers (or their Chinese or Russian cohorts) can just take control of one of the Israeli (or U.S. whatever the case may be) cruise missiles and sink an oil tanker with that. How cool would that be?
On the global chessboard, Russia wins (at least a rook) with high oil prices due to ME problems.
Or maybe the Millennium Falcon, from a low orbit, could blast a tanker dead center in the straight and block the enitre world's oil supply, as storm troopers charge across the boarder from Iraq into Iran...just as the Death Star moves into position....too.
If you'll provide the financial backing, I'll see if I can round up a script writer.
Oil is a buy it seems...cheap at this price.
Storm in a teacup. Merry Christmas.
I think the point here is that Iran is terrified because they see a US that now loves war when renamed to hot kinetic action. They are trying to scare off the US but it only feeds into things. All it will take is the US deciding the simple threat of closing the straits is an act of war, and bombs away.
Pleeaaazze. If Iran shut that hole it would be a great starter shot for WWIII
Exactly.
We'll do what we can to provoke it. If that doesn't work, someone will make it look just so.
Italian auction big success today. #WhatCrisis?
Right on que.
Iran is the bad cop folks.
'merikans will gladly grab up arms to fight this boogeyman - how dare they keep our oil and kill our boys (sarc).
wake up folks - you are being played by BOTH sides.
both "sides" are owned by the same master.
jazireh ye qeshm looks a little bit like a friendly dolphin.
I think an oil call is in order!!!
Watch Russia as well ,Europe is too dependent on Russian supplies of oil and NG.
if the anti Putin movements realy gets going it can cause huge drops in Euro stocks
Maps without scales get on my tits.
Any way you slice it, that's a very clear warning of a major escalation pending, and of proxy war brewing.
You'll sanction me? ... er, no, ... I'll sanction you!
What these fools who wrote this rubbish don't factor-in is that Iran is not just going to go away after a month of combat or US bombing. This is their place, their water ways, not the USN's. It's Iran's strategic hub, their own ace in the hole, and Iran can keep blowing up ships there for the next ten years, just like their IEDs did in Iraq.
They have a point to make here and the West better hope they don't decide to make it.
I sure wish I could monitor the portfolios of the boys a the Pentagon. If they're long oil and gold... it's on!!
You sir, have hit the nail on the head.
I find it hard to believe that anyone, including the Iranians, thinks that they can shut down this sea lane.
We're the US of fucking A. Blowing shit up is what we do.
Those high speed Iranian boats wouldn't seem so "high speed" to the 20 year old drone operators sitting in an air conditioned trailer in Phoenix.
Good luck with the tens of thousands of sea mines they'll release with a multitude of different delivery means.
If they decide to close it, it will indeed be closed. These guys do space launches, they'll have the means to kill comm sats. You can bet the Chinese will provide an ASAT weapon. Good luck with the drones then.
Oh, they wouldn't go ship-to-ship. Everyone has learned to fight us asymmetrically by now.
The floor of the Straits is lined with thousands of Russian- and Chinese-made rocket-propelled mines.
The mountains ringing Bandar Abbas have (estimated 350) dug-in SS-N-22 SSMs. In a theater this small, 20 seconds from launch to impact. These missiles are far more capable than a Tomahawk or SLAM/Harpoon,
The Straits aren't very deep. SuperMax tankers must pass through a narrow corridor about a mile wide, easily reachable by shore artillery.
Don't fire on a US capital ship, just an oil tanker. Hell, one of the ancient Silkworms would do the job on a ship without AA capability. It achieves the same end - driving the price of oil unsustainably high, and forces the US to provide escorts.
Iran doesn't have to "win" in any conventional sense. The wheels would quickly come off US society at $200 oil for even a matter of a few weeks.
"Iran doesn't have to "win" in any conventional sense. The wheels would quickly come off US society at $200 oil for even a matter of a few weeks."
Exactly, they dont have to close it off just sink a tanker and $200+ oil will choke the economy just as effectively as closing it.
I'm not saying they can't shut it down for a while, that's why we have a SPR.
However, the Iranians realize that shutting down this shipping lane is the equivilant of nuking New York.
The fierocity of our response would be truly breathtaking.
The SPR would last a few days
Just the news of something like this would get every motor vehicle whose owner has some credit left into a gas line to fill up the tank.
I haven't seen any stats, but I suspect, due to the depression, the average fuel tank is less than half full.
You realise the SPR is not for you, not for normal economic functioning, it's for the military to fight WWIII.
The 'S' is the key word.
The US would quickly reflag all oil tankers as US ships - as was done the last "tanker war" - thus any attack on an oil tanker becomes an act of war against the US which allows us to retaliate.
wwIII won't solve anything
Iran does not need to use speedboats it has sunburn missiles, you cannot shoot them down they fly to fast at about 4000 fps , and can be fired from at least 50 miles away
Dude, listen. How much would you hate being occupied by the fucking Chinese? What if Russia decided to talk shit each and every day to the US of fucking A? Test our limits by invading our air space, or running ships up and down each of our coasts? You think maybe you'd accept a little hardship just to cram some violence up their cramholes?
Yeah, it's like that. Iran could freeze Hormuz in a day. The length of the freeze is largely irrelevant, and you can't just blow up a couple thousand mines. If a half dozen tankers are disabled in transit, you can't just "blow them up," get an extra life, and go on to the next level.
It's almost 2012 and you're acting like your Tandy is the hottest thing since sliced bread.
We're the US of fucking A. Blowing shit up is what we do.
Quite the neanderthalic position.
Caveman from Geico commercial: "Hey, don't lump all of us in with that sod head!"
It's ironic that most of the Iranians do not agree with their government and would prefer the individual freedoms enjoyed by most people in western hemisphere.
Also ironic that most US citizens that actually pay taxes do not agree with their government and would prefer sweeping changes.
Seems like the citizens of Iran and the US have more in common than they think.
Great post.
But the Chosen people aren't common, are they?
"The Israeli military is warning that a possible attack on Iran might cost thousands of lives among Israeli citizens. The majority of Israelis believes that an attack on Iran is most likely to cause a regional conflagration. Nevertheless, according to recent polls, more Israelis are in favor of an attack than against. How do you explain that?"
Israel, November 21, 2011
http://www.kas.de/israel/en/publications/29463/
Why wouldn't they be common? Here is the authors response to the question... seems pretty common to me... follows the exact script from above...
The explanation lies on two reasons:
1. The success of the politicians, especially Netanyau to scare the public from a nuclear Iran. Netanyau and others warn that nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranian regime will be an existential threat to Israel. On the other hand, the politicians hint that an attack on Iran will put an end to the Iranian nuclear program. So, when the public has to choose between the Iranian response and the attack, it prefers the attack even if it will lead to a lot of casualties in Israel.
2. The Israeli public has no real information on the chances of success of an Israeli attack. In this case most of the Israelis prefer to believe that the IDF could destroy the Iranian nuclear program.
<<. . .most of the Iranians do not agree with their government and would prefer the individual freedoms enjoyed by most people in western hemisphere. >>
Apparently most Iranians have never stood in a airport security line getting irradiated so some asshole can look at their balls while they're in their stocking feet.
Watching Oil and Gold get cheaper and cheaper
Not to worry(much), short term flex only.
moron
oil is 1000% higher today than 10 years ago
gold is 1000% higher today than 10 years ago
stroke off to DAILY swings and embarrass yourself here, but the long term out look is VERY bullish
what - no one donated money to your cause to bet on etrade?
fundys dont make money(day traders!) techincals do!!!!!!!!!
Well a quick check shows that Iran is still importing food and is short on refining capacity for gasoline and diesel and there are still signs of internal upset about food and gas prices. If they shut down the straits and nothing is going in an out of their ports how long can they last?
How long is Ramadan?
29-30 days (lunar calendar) and has already occurred for 2011 (August). The Shi'ite have a few more religious observations than do Sunni, but Ramadan and Hajj are common.
I doubt the Iranian gasoline queues would be any longer than the American ones.
Fun with math: Unfortunately, these arguments apply to all the countries involved.
Think about this, aside from the Pigmen welcoming war, Putin is in trouble and could reestablish control if an armed conflict were to break out. The same goes for China where social unrest is on a big upswing and they wouldn't miss a few million young men with no hopes for a wife or a job.
Within each country there are the military, political, and pigman factions. So, using simple math, you have three different factions within three different countries, or 9 different opportunities for the fuse to be lit either by design or by mistake. Add Iran to the mix and you have 12 groups with their fingers on the trigger.
With so many groups involved and so much self interest in a conflict, is this conflict even avoidable?
We men evolved as hunter-killers. This was our sole purpose in the early stages of human development: kill to live.
This translated into killing other men for territory and women. We have an innate urge to slaughter; however, as Adam Smith put it, civilization makes the great majority of people altogether unwarlike.
Until they're hungry, obviously.
someone should explain to adm. jackass the concept of asymetric war:
Vice Admiral Kevin Cosgriff, said the Iranians had "neither anti-ship missiles nor torpedoes" and that he "wouldn't characterize the posture of the US 5th Fleet as afraid of these small boats".
" The Phalanx CIWS remained in standby mode, Mark 36 SRBOC countermeasures were not armed, and the attacking Exocet missiles and Mirage aircraft were in a blindspot of the defensive STIR (Separate Target Illumination Radar) fire control system, preventing use of the ship's Standard missiles. The ship failed to maneuver to bring its weapons batteries to bear before the first missile hit."
Someone has to advise vice admiral to look up INS Hanit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_Hanit
If Hezbollah has anti-ship missiles, then iranians most definitely will have at least similar ones in their possession.
I'm astonished a US Vice Admiral would say this, as it is completely and ludicrously incorrect.
Category:Anti-ship missiles of Iran
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Anti-ship_missiles_of_Iran
Iran Unveils New Marine Missile, Torpedo
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=7457855
That's one seriously fucked-up and delusional vice admiral
I got it, he meant these small speeding boats don't have either missiles or torpedoes commenting on standoff in 2008. Nevertheless, small boats can lay mines quite easily and escape unpunished - Strait is so narrow it is routinely crossed by iranians going into Oman and smuggling stuff back into Iran, wouldn't be surprising to see them creating havoc with relatively little efforts.
Yes, that most probably was the context, as it is unimaginable that he could rise to that rank and not know how heavily-armed Iran is with torpedos, mines, and antiship missiles, and diverse means of delivery.
Those boats are just used to harrass USN and NATO fleet units ... they are hardly edge of the sword stuff, for Iran. Anyone expecting those to be THE primary offensive tool, is not paying attention.
Iran has dedicated 300km range TRUCK MOBILE BALLISTIC anti-ship missile, that homes on the target at about Mach 5.0
This is a demonstrated operational capability, not fantasy, it works, and it will kill US and NATO frigates:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=aPBSsVYA2IE
They are not relying on a bunch of little boats. If there is a naval battle it can go fully into high-intensity combat.
Lots of pinch points for subs - the Straights are only 200-300 ft deep at their deepest in many areas around the point. Tough place for subs.
This is a non-story...Persians are full of scat, they like beating their chests and then running away leaving a trail of urine. And if they do try something so foolish, they'll be lit up like a Christmas tree and the rest of the world that relies on the flow of oil will be publically or privately joyous that the Persians got bitch-slapped, especially the Saudi's.
Plus, profiting from oil moves is fun.
;)
First sensible comment in the entire thread...also the truest. +1!
vote me up if u think this will end up in ww3
WWIII is CURRENTLY being fought without one shot being fired.
don't buy the hype - iran is on the side of the bankers
What the hell is there to practice? "The Strait of Hormuz at its narrowest is 54 kilometres (34 mi) wide." A cruise missle can sink anything that passes. Won't even need to sortie a jet.
I see alot of "Fuk Iran. We'll kill em all." shouting up thread. This is exactly what the MIC wants to stir up so they can start another PROFITABLE WAR with the help of the patriotic public. Same as the two Gulf Wars with Iraq. Same as it ever was.
Yes, exactly, they can make a 'cruise missile' that will sink a tanker out of timber and canvas using a civilian jet engine and RC controllers with a wireless security cam for guidence if necessary.
Should be able to knock one up for a couple of hundred bucks. These things are not expensive or hard to do, of you have to do them.
Not that Iran doesn't make real cruise missiles.
You win the blue ribbon!!
Some dude firing a Stinger from the back of a camel on the beach could get the job done.
Iran has loads of Stingers, thanks to Ollie North.
A heat seeking missle with a 5 mile maximum range is going to hit an oil tanker 50 miles away? really? I'd be more worried about the small boats, a la the attack on the USS Cole.
Ahmeexnal stated:
...and also thanks to the government of Israel. After all, they're the ones that provided delivery service.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_affair
Lithium Drive: California today announces the strongest push ever for electric cars
Maybe we still have the chance after all and something will be done here to preserve our way of life after the Peak Oil will be realised by the 99% and there will be NO more Oil bearing countries to be liberated without the risk of total collapse of the Empire?"We are just coming out of the "Europe's End of The World" scenario, all world economies are on the edge of recession, but Oil is moving closer to $100 again. We have a very sobering reminder from IEA about the real issues behind all recent events in the financial markets. There is NOT enough Oil for everybody left, Peak Oil is all about the price and transportation is driving this demand with half of the global oil demand coming from China only. By 2015 more cars will be manufactured outside of OECD. Oil prices can go up to $150 by 2015 in the real terms and $176 in the nominal terms. It will be the major risk for the global economy. Time is to check your Lithium portfolio."
http://sufiy.blogspot.com/2011/12/lithium-drive-california-today.html#
Too bad your going to need >10,000 square feet of solar panels to charge your car each day to commute to work. Or more nuclear reactors in the midwest and more grid to transmit additional power.
I was curious, so I actually did the math. Nissan Leaf can go a little over 60 miles under stop-and-go conditions. So a 30 mile commute each way would be one charge out of a 24 KwH battery. 8 hours a day of direct sunlight on stationary panels means you would need 3 Kw worth of panels. At the upper-end you can get 15 watts per square foot, so 2000 square feet of panels in California would work. Quite a bit better than I expected.
In the water maybe...
The U.S. Navy has the situation well in hand. The West is Best in Air War and Sea War.
Yeah, the USN thought that in Korea too, then they tried to do landings with beaches full of 1914 tech sea mines ... it went badly.
To elaborate, the Iranians have plenty of their vessels (including military) doing their own thing in those waters off their coast, while the U.S. Navy patrols non-stop, and they pass warily by, like a couple of sharks moving in opposite directions. This "exercise" might go down the same way, the Iranian picket boats mill around, and the Americans keep an eye on them from a distance. BUT-- if shooting breaks out, in swoop the jets.... so, if the Iranians have anything to do with it, they will try to avoid chomping the bigger shark on the tail.
BTW I always heard that Inchon was a brilliant success, I need to look into that history..
Don't forget about the civilian fishing boat seeding mines in front of the on-station DDG.
The USN lost a lot of ships to sea mines in Korea ... it went badly.
They do not need to close it 100 percent. Once one or two even relatively minor tankers go down it will be all over. Insurance premiums will be so high that (super)tankers will not sail there anymore. Even without those premiums spiking up how many would even try to see whether their flag ship goes through or not...NONE.
What's to stop the Iranians from sinking some of their own ships in the straight? It's not rocket science.
Certainly the US military is the most potent and powerful that the world has ever seen. They certainly ought to be,
as expensive as they are ... as much money as ALL of the rest of the countries in the world combined ....
They only things that they lack, in fact, are humility (has anyone noticed that the US has LOST every military engagement its been involved with for the last 60 years?)
and imagination.
Yes, the US Navy has vastly superior firepower.
But all Iran has to do is to sink one tanker, just one,
and let the US insurance companies shut down all shipping in the straits ....
Yes. Private insurance companies will not insure the tankers and western governments will just throw up their hands and walk away. Note to Iran: cut out the middle man and just bomb the insurance companies.
Not so fast. The U.S. and various European countries have small, but quasi-military, Merchant Marines. If it came down to it, the tankers would be insured by governments, and piloted by Merchant Marines. The West 'n Nippon won't roll over and die if Lloyd's croaks.... the Spice Must Flow....
The US did all this in the 1980s when no one was firing at them, they only had to deal with a hand-full of sea mines then. The Iranians were just making a point back then.
This time their would be tens of thousands of mines and they would be constantly replenished as they were slowly cleared ... and literally thousands of anti-ship missiles ... plus half a million Iranian marines in small boats with RPGs or demolition limpets.
If that Strait is closed, yes, the entire western world will go completely ape-shit, every navy will send combat ships to the scene, and they will be rendered unusable and impotent by sea mines, and mobile antiship missiles hidden in things like shipping containers - on ships at sea and on civilian trucks on land.
You need to understand that Iran has been expecting this battle to occur for 33 years, they have planned for every aspect of its unfolding, they know how to do it. They would have no chance to just fight back defensively, but if they fight aggressively, with commitment, they will take the West and the USN to the mat.
They know that too.
And that Strait definitely will not open again without Iran's explicit consent, and that will only be gained via direct negotiations for the withdrawal of US and NATO forces from the region, and the lifting of all sanctions and embargos on Iran and the elimination of Israel's hold on Golan and the West bank, etc.
Oh yes, things would change.
In the meantime, the global economy will be in smoking ashes, and so will be the political architecture and institutions of the Western world, and China and Russia will be thrilled to be relative great-powers again.
End of Empire - want to go there?
The USN and CIA apparently do.
Mining would be a last resort for them. Why? They use the straits themselves to get food and other vital supplies (including refined gasoline) in, and their #1 export (crude oil) out, to their customers in China and elsewhere. Tehran is like L.A., everybody drives, a lot, and all those cars need gas. They mine everything, nothing goes in, nothing goes out. Big pain in the butt. I agree with you that the Iranians COULD do a lot of things in those straits, but do they WANT to do that right now? You seem convinced that they are ready to go. I disagree. "Thousands" of missles, the "mother of all battles," I have to say it, the countries in that part of the world have a track record of having a bigger bark than bite. Aka Saddam's military in 1990, very impressive on paper, but..... the real issue is whether there will be a Tonkin Gulf moment that serves as the starting gun. That's a real possibility, before Iran is able to lay a single mine, that would only pose a danger to its own ships. BTW I got a good laugh out of your description of the canvas and wood cruise missle, that's a neat image....
But let's be real. Iran v. U.S. in a naval/air conflict? No contest. So, the Iranians are being careful not to actually attack American forces directly. That's my point. Now, a land war is a different story, but the article is about naval/air maneuverings.
I think many of the same things, really, I do.
I am not saying they want to 'go', as you put it.
However, I am 100% convinced they believe they will have to, at some point soon, and like a dying person, they have reconciled with this over the past three decades, and they will go down in a way the pounds the crap out of the US, in ways it does not generally expect (even though it has been extensively warned).
That is very dangerous.
So what I am saying is, hey, wake up USA, you're in for a real fight here, and it will devastate your economy, and it will be the end of your free and easy ride in the world, and lead to the collapse of global support. Even more so than Iraq did.
Remember when everyone was saying that the US had taken all of its international support and pissed it all away for nothing in Iraq?
Times 100 this time.
The spice might need to flow, but flow through the Straight of Hormuz it won't if there's war with Iran. It's too easy for either side, even a real terrorist organization like Mossad, to disrupt shipping by sinking a few old junkers (or newer tankers with explosives bolted to their bottoms).
It would be interesing if an aircraft carrier was trapped in the Gulf due to an event such as this.
How long was the Suez Canal closed due to the sunken ships from the Six Day War -- 8 years? Isn't that the reason VLCCs were built to begin with?
If it requires an underwater tactical nuke to clear the straits, they'll do it. They will do anything needed. Hell, they'll build a pipeline through the S.A. desert to an alternative port that will make the Alaska Pipeline look like a slowpoke job. This is Serious Bidness, and however the deal goes down (paging Lyndon Johnson, cough cough) Maximal Effort will be expended on all sides. We can agree on that.....
During the last tanker war, the US re-flagged all the tankers as US ships. This meant that an attack on a tanker was an attack on the US. This provides the legal fiction necessary to nuke Iran in self defense.
In the past year I worked in every country in the Persian / Arab Gulf and the Iranians were the easiest to work with. It's funny how cooperative people can be when you aren't threatening to bomb them.
Let's ask Israel.
Why? So their government can spin more fairy tales about threats to "wipe them off the map"?
And, what, sinking that one tanker will cause the rest of the nations that must live on oil to survive to just throw up thier hands and tell Iran "you win"?
WTF, are you French?
Iran sinks one tanker, the nations will rally and Iran will become one big parking lot.
You're forgetting simple realities like the rapid Desert Storm build up by air, and sea, at the end of the cold war when heavy strategic transport was very abundant, with a large trained ready force doibng nothin, with excellent availability ... it still took six months to build up a force to liberate a tiny spec of an Emerate.
You ain't got six months
The US couldn't even pacify Iraq in 6 years.
Ummm it might be different this time around, remember you have Iraq to the north and Afghanistan to the south with a current large US military presence in both .... "the force" is in place and ready to go. This has nothing to do with Pacifing.....
But neither location is stable and the US is already under concerted insurgent attack, that looks set to intensify considerably after next melt.
Want to spread it even thinner?
BTW, Iraq is west and 'ghan is east of Iran.
Iran is quite capable of sending large unconventional militia forces to where US forces are within the region, and attacking them directly.
Iran has the aggression option too, and it would be very foolish to imagine the US is dealing with another Iraq.
Don't need to invade and occupy, just decapitate and destroy, put them back in their box...and with a lot less capability before they decided to go full retard.
Wait - are you talking about Israel?
He must be. Their government is the only one in the region making threats against other countries there (unless you also count the US).
They also said that about Iraq ... at first ... Iran knows that gig ... seen it, knows the tactic, oil for food for ten years ... then an invasion anyway.
Fuck it then, let's just go full retard in the strait first, instead, and force the West to sue for ceasefire -- or no oil.
why exactly, would there be a need to turn Iran into a "parking lot"? should that type of action not be reserved only as a last resort when diplomatic, economic and conventional options have failed, when the US is facing a defeat so final and dire that the take over or annihilation of the home land is assured unless such drastic measures are taken?
is Iran capable of posing such a threat? I have seen nothing to indicate that they are capable of of invading or striking the US in such a way so as to threaten our way of life or our very existence, have you?
so you support an action that would kill millions of innocent Iranians over the sinking of one oil tanker?
in order to turn Iran into one big parking lot you would need to deploy strategic , not the smaller tactical nuclear weapons. given the size, yield, fallout and destructive power of these weapons do you suppose the rest of the world would be just fine with this? particularly China and Russia who also posses large amounts of ICBM's and massive militaries, will they just sit back and do nothing while NATO turns their backyard, their source of oil into a radioactive wasteland?
I don't think it's a safe bet to say that they would.
how would you feel if you or your children got a draft notice in the stocking next Christmas and were forced to go fight a war thousands of miles away knowing that you or your loved ones will most likely not be coming back because it's not just turban wearing boogiemen your going to fight, it's other professional armies trained and equipped much the same way we are, capable of dealing massive casualties.
would you then wish the idiot, psychopathic chest thumpers in DC, who agree with your parking lot mentality, had just shut the fuck up and found different path to take, one that didn't require millions of Americans to die for what exactly nobody knows.
"should that type of action not be reserved only as a last resort when diplomatic, economic and conventional options have failed"
It hasn't failed yet? Iran gave up their nukes, stopped threatening to annihilate Israel and live peacefully with everyone? Lemme guess, we haven't "tried hard enough yet" right? Just like we haven't "spent enough yet" to solve poverty, health care and the deficit! I'd laugh but the bile is preventing me.
Don't worry, I'm sure you'll have your peace at any cost wish come true, what with the bedwetting loser in the WH!
Iran has never threatened to 'annihilate Israel' - are you genuinely ignorant of the facts, or just a lying shill?
Israeli Knesset members routinely talk of bombing - even nuking - Iran. Iran has only ever said it will retaliate.
Iran has never threatened to annihilate Israel? Really, wow! Did ya get that out of al-Jazeera? Your naivite is shocking.
You need to get some insight into the thinking of these people that you're facing and so terminally underestimating. These are not the usual deplorable wimps we're used to seeing get bombed. They are ultra motivated from within. They have a deep sense of morality and righteousness (which you may assume is complete shit and hypocracy, of course, but it's there still), and you won't understand them as viewed from within our depraved cultural MSM cheese factory bullshit world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8doiHDPb4g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XokMXhy448U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_nXE5mfCLI
You attack a people who think like this guy does, or even a bit like this guy does, and you'll be in for a real fight, as they will fight, and not give in, no matter what you do to quell the situation back to a manageable peace and normality. In this world there are irreversible processes, and starting a strategic war with Iran would be one of those great Humpty Dumpty moments.
i.e. the US/NATO/UN will lose, and the world's economy will be in smoking ruins.
And most of political Islam, Russia, and China, would be absolutely thrilled to bits by this.
Yeah, so why are you so keen to talk-up defeating Iran in a mere short-term battle, as though that will even matter any more?
Al-Jazeera is a CIA operation. Google it (although google is suspected CIA too).
While there is some argument over translation, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said either that Israel would be wiped off the map, or removed from the pages of history. The only arguments are about translation and meaning; nobody denies what was said.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel
Dishonest translation is not "an argument about translation".
Removing an ideology (Zionism) from the pages of history cannot be translated with "wiping Israel from the map".
Ahmadinejad quoted Khomeini. Saying he treatened anyone with annihilation is just propaganda.
my question was is it justifiable to nuke a country killing millions because one oil tanker was attacked...
your response is assumptions on my political and moral views of which you know nothing about, as evidence by the fact that you automatically assume I am an Obama supporting liberal which I am not. if you read any of my other posts it would be clear to you that my views are largely libertarian which is as opposite from liberal as one can be.
so if my questioning the need to kill millions over one oil tanker offends you and pisses you off for some reason might I suggest that your views and your obvious tendency to ignorantly jump to conclusions may be better suited for fox news or medi matters than here at ZH, where people actually think for themselves.
You are assuming "parking lot" means nuking...parking lots can be made conventionally too, and not cost "millions" of lives. And perhaps they can be weakened enough for regime change.
Libertarian makes sense, like Ron Paul they've become absolutely zenophobic in their isolationism. The world doesn't operate in a vacuum, doing nothing means others make decisions for you. That's a lovely strategy if you're a sheep, but that kind of thinking almost got us killed before WWII.
Keep working on that thinking part, I'm pulling for ya!
There's probably a Jewish fingernail somewhere there.
Rabbi Yaacov Perin also announced at Baruch Goldberg's funeral that "One million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail."
From what i have read- Iran made an offer through Switzerland many years ago to give up total control on nuclear activities in exchange for a guarantee no attack on Iran. Please google through for your details.
the US declined
The rest is now and will be history
Iran is fighting with it's back to the wall with Russian & Chinese behind them.
The problem is the US has been hijacked by people who are not representative of the average American
But they are representative of AIPAC....
That BS came out of Wiki -
In late February 2006, IAEA Director Mohammad El-Baradei raised the suggestion of a deal, whereby Iran would give up industrial-scale enrichment and instead limit its program to a small-scale pilot facility, and agree to import its nuclear fuel from Russia (see nuclear fuel bank). The Iranians indicated that while they would not be willing to give up their right to enrichment in principle, they were willing to[100] consider the compromise solution. However in March 2006, the Bush Administration made it clear that they would not accept any enrichment at all in Iran.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran
Yeah...I'll consider trusting the Iranians when it comes to nukes...
WHEN PIGS FLY!!!
No, dumbass, it happened shortly after Iran assisted the United States in the initial stages of the invasion of Afghanistan. President Khatami proposed normalization of diplomatic relations and the resolution of all outstanding issues, including the recognition of Israel.
Chimpy Bush's response was to label them with "Axis of Evil".
The United States Navy will love nothing more than to kick in the door after Iran bars, gates, built a moat, filled pots of burning oil etc etc etc.
The last time I read a bit about US Naval combat stragety, they are quite predatory and the desire to close with the enemy and take control of the sea, under the sea and everything above the sea.
But if the Iranians sink a carrier.... The United States Media is going to have a Seizure and the Cititzens are going to scream blood.
It might be difficult to maintain a proper war after that.
There are two movie trailers out somewhere for a movie called "Battleship" something about a alien from the sea trashing earth and wrecking hardware left and right.
Gas pries have been falling, I have been slowly adding to reserves while sheep has been celebrating fillups that costs a dollar or two less... In event of a total shut out, I could probably keep the vehicle going to work about two months having done everything necessary to ensure employment in the same county close enough for horseback if necessary.
We should still have the 4 Iowa Class ships in museum storage. It's time to bring them back out and make ready. We are gonna need them against Iran.
The US has great morons in charge of everything else, I wouldn't be surprised if Iran DOES sink a Carrier. In fact, Im kind of hoping for it.
one sick fuck mega
I love the bravado that breaks out when conflict is discussed.
That map brings back memories of my many F-114 bombing runs on Bandar e Abbas. Now where is that aircraft carrier hiding?
When might that have been? I don't recall the US government having the spine or the stones to make an actual declaration of war since the 1940s.
He refers to a computer game ...
In a related development, Occupy protesters are now officially TERRORISTS. Bring on the drones and frickin' blinding lasers!
Occupy protesters seek to shut West Coast ports:
Anti-Wall Street protesters along the West Coast joined an effort Monday to blockade some of the nation's busiest ports from Anchorage, Alaska, to San Diego, with the thought that if they cut off the ports, they cut into corporate profits.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016997540_apusoccupypor...
Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.
George Orwell
This is about appearances and expectations. It appears that the Islamic Republic is under the single command of "Supreme Guide", Ali Khamenei. We expect that he may be the puppet of the military-security leadership.
It appears that Khamenei believes that conflict with the U. S. is inevitable and that this conflict will be a (G.W. Bush doctrine) series of air strikes focusing on suspected nuclear sites, followed by a ground invasion. We think that the Iranian military expects an unprecedented 10,000 target air strike, lasting a few hours, (Obama doctrine) against all conventional military, nuclear, industrial and economic targets with no ground invasion. In the latter scenario, the Fifth Fleet would play a key roll but air strikes would come from all over.
Expect Iran to play for time.
People are forgetting one thing. A war with Iran wouldn't be limited to conventional weapons. It would be nuclear. Used upon US, and the majority of the world, and specifically Asia.
People can say all they want about how long a war with Iran would last before we kicked their ass...but then one must wonder...how long does a nuclear war last....and how can we kick anyone's ass, if a nuclear war breaks out before the conventional war is finished.
Russia, China, Pakistan all have nukes. We're fucking with each one of them VERY HARD. Of course it's our banksters pulling the strings, and once again using our troops, and the world as fodder. Completely unnecessary.
This World War will be ignited by us....which means we are a) allies, or b) axis. You make the call, but it really is quite simple given we're running around like idiot bankster whores imperially fucking everyone. Thanks Queeny!
Confrontation with Iran would take one stupid motherfucker. Who doesn't know shit from shinola...ignores our imperialism, ignores the threats made to us if we continue on with our imperialism, and ignores the bankster influence in every part of our foreign policy. People need to wake up, or melt away in the sun. Most of the world's troubles are related to imperialism. Fight that, not the bankster's cause against Iran, Russia, China, Pakistan, and all the other countries we do raids and drone bombings in...what it is about 20.
Impeach Obama
Glass-Steagall
You guys with your "Iran will be a cake walk and China's got nothing" talk are mind-blowing.
"Days not weeks"
"Afghanistan has no real military, no problem"
"Its not a quagmire" Vietnam or A-stan, you pick....
"They'll greet us with flowers"
"we're the best ever, we'll always win, his Fordship is a genius who will see us through" Yadda, Yadda...
Q: "Mr. Secretary, on Iraq, how much money do you think the Department of Defense would need to pay for a war with Iraq?"
Rumsfeld: "Well, the Office of Management and Budget, has come up come up with a number that's something under $50 billion for the cost. How much of that would be the U.S. burden, and how much would be other countries, is an open question."
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=1322
World War 3 is just around the corner... Russia and China, Syria, Iran and so on, there are thousands of China troops on the India borders just last week a cyber attack on three major cities happened and in one city the water supply was shut down. Just think of what will happen when massive cyber wars happen, no water, food disruption, lots of sleepers in the US, poisoned food supplies, banks shut down and the list goes on and on. China owns all major shipping ports in American, thousands of chinese troops have filtered in to the US through Mexico.
"thousands of chinese troops have filtered in to the US through Mexico."
credible reference please
I've been wondering if this isn't really about the mideast at all. Consider that even Germany seems to be making overtures toward Russia. Could it be that the US feels this is the last chance it will have to set Russia and China back before they become too powerful? They would get sucked into this war and this could lead to an exchange of nukes between the US and China/Russia. To some extent, our posture in this part of the world has always been frustrating, hobbling, or containing the Russians and the Chinese. If those countries do become ascendant, it could very well be curtains for US control of the world.
Hey, maybe even Israel is our puppet and does our bidding. Is that possible?
Iran gets something like 60% of its gasoluine through the straits. Closing the Straits would be a very stupid move for them. Take out their gaslone refinery and they will need 100%.
Weakness pretending to be strength.
Sounds simple, and it is, but what don't you grasp about that if you attack Iran like that the Straits can be closed for 5 years by tens of thousands of sea mines, that are constantly replenished from an almost endless supply built up over 30 years of preparation. A stock that itself can be massively re-provisioned, effectively indefinitely? You can't just stop it, it would take years.
IEDs for oil tankers
Or that Russia has actually field deployed real nukes, pointed at the west, just a few weeks ago, and said don't attack Syria or Iran, or else.
And you realise the Iranians can smash every oil loading terminal in the gulf within hours, precluding all bulk exports indefinitely - right?
Weakness pretending to be strength - the western feet of clay.
No intelligent economic commentary here - just political crap. Chest beating and Rambo geeks.
Article Tags ... try and stay on-topic next time
Forget the oil tankers then. Just pipe it.