Iran under Sanction Pressures – Reaction?


View Poll Results: Oil Sanction
Is the West right to impose sanctions -Morally -Legally 5 29.41%
Is the West wrong to impose sanctions-Morally -Legally 4 23.53%
Will this cause War 1 5.88%
Will this force/persuade Iran to negotiate Nuke Program 1 5.88%
Iran will find other markets-India-China etc 7 41.18%
This will lower the price for Iranian Oil exports 3 17.65%
Is this a positive step by the West 7 41.18%
Is this a negative step by the West 3 17.65%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll

Goober
#1
Iran under Sanction Pressures – Reaction?

With almost complete sanction on Iranian Banks – It is harder then before to conduct business.

The EU and others are in the process of imposing Sanction on Iranian Oil

No oil sales – no money – Cost of living has increased, along with all the other problems that this will cause.

Now Iran is in the threatening Stage – Any imposition of Oil sanctions they state will result in the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

A long term oil embargo will bankrupt the Thugocracy.

Needless to say this will result in a War.

Finally sanctions that may cause Iran to sit down and cooperate on their Nuclear Programs.

Now if oil sanctions are imposed 80% of Iranian Revenue is gone. The political difficulties from this will be immense for the Thugocracy -

U.S. Fifth Fleet: Iran disrupting oil exports through Strait of Hormuz 'will not be tolerated' | News | National Post

The U.S. Fifth Fleet said on Wednesday it would not allow any disruption of traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, after Iran threatened to stop ships moving through the world’s most important oil route.
“Anyone who threatens to disrupt freedom of navigation in an international strait is clearly outside the community of nations; any disruption will not be tolerated,” the Bahrain-based fleet said in an e-mail.

Iran, at loggerheads with the West over its nuclear program, said on Tuesday it would stop the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf if sanctions were imposed on its crude exports.
“Closing the Strait of Hormuz for Iran’s armed forces is really easy … or as Iranians say, it will be easier than drinking a glass of water,” Iran’s navy chief Habibollah Sayyari told Iran’s English-language Press TV on Wednesday.
“But right now, we don’t need to shut it …,” said Sayyari, who is leading 10 days of exercises in the Strait.

Analysts say that Iran could potentially cause havoc in the Strait of Hormuz, a strip of water separating Oman and Iran, which connects the biggest Gulf oil producers, including Saudi Arabia, with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. At its narrowest point, it is 21 miles across.
But its navy would be no match for the firepower of the Fifth Fleet which consists of 20-plus ships supported by combat aircraft, with 15,000 people afloat and another 1,000 ashore.
A spokesperson for the Fifth Fleet said in response to queries from Reuters that, it “maintains a robust presence in the region to deter or counter destabilizing activities,” without providing further details.
A British Foreign Office spokesman called the Iranian threat “rhetoric,” saying: “Iranian politicians regularly use this type of rhetoric to distract attention from the real issue, which is the nature of their nuclear program.”

US Warns Iran Against Closing Hormuz Route - TIME (external - login to view)

www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/wo...ref=middleeast (external - login to view)

U.S. warns Iran that oil disruption 'will not be tolerated' - The Globe and Mail

The U.S. warned Iran Wednesday that it will not tolerate any disruption of naval traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, after Iran's navy chief said the Islamic Republic is capable of closing the vital oil route if the West imposes new sanctions targeting Tehran's oil exports.
Iran's Adm. Habibollah Sayyari told state-run Press TV that closing the strait, which is the only sea outlet for the crucial oil fields in and around the Persian Gulf, “is very easy” for his country's naval forces

Some more research links.

belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/...7_Talmadge.pdf (external - login to view)

Closing Strait of Hormuz not so easy for Iran: analysts | Reuters (external - login to view)

Will Iran Block the Hormuz Strait? | Foreign Policy Journal (external - login to view)

Iran Viewpoint: Strait Of Hormuz As Iran (external - login to view)
Last edited by Goober; Dec 28th, 2011 at 08:08 PM..
 
taxslave
#2
I wonder if Obama is rethinking his position on Keystone XL yet. ANy long term embargo on Iranian oil is bound to cause the already excessively high priced crude oil go even higher.
 
relic
#3
Have you noticed the price of oil lately? don't think there's a conection ?Don't think that's what it's all about ?
 
Goober
+2
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

I wonder if Obama is rethinking his position on Keystone XL yet. ANy long term embargo on Iranian oil is bound to cause the already excessively high priced crude oil go even higher.

Whoever is elected keystone will flow. We should be fast tracking a pipeline thru BC. Then another east. With refineries. Added value to the product. That may happen if Harper has the balls to go face to face with Aboriginals that are against the western lines. Naturally deals would have to be made.
 
DaSleeper
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Whoever is elected keystone will flow. We should be fast tracking a pipeline thru BC. Then another east. With refineries. Added value to the product. That may happen if Harper has the balls to go face to face with Aboriginals that are against the western lines. Naturally deals would have to be made.

The first two options should read (The west is right) and (the west is wrong). and so on
 
Cliffy
+3
#6  Top Rated Post
Oh my! The fifth fleet has an over abundance of testosterone. They are standing at attention, ready to blow a lode.

Of course this is about jacking up the price of oil. "Oh, it's all Iran's fault!" Hysteria works,BS works, money is king. Praise the Lord. Watch the monkeys dance.
 
DaSleeper
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Oh my! The fifth fleet has an over abundance of testosterone. They are standing at attention, ready to blow a lode.

Of course this is about jacking up the price of oil. "Oh, it's all Iran's fault!" Hysteria works,BS works, money is king. Praise the Lord. Watch the monkeys dance.

Yup...and then the left can push for more solar panels and alternative energy that costs more.
 
Goober
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Oh my! The fifth fleet has an over abundance of testosterone. They are standing at attention, ready to blow a lode.

Of course this is about jacking up the price of oil. "Oh, it's all Iran's fault!" Hysteria works,BS works, money is king. Praise the Lord. Watch the monkeys dance.

Cliffy - Explain why we in the west have to buy Iranian Oil?
 
Cliffy
+2
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Cliffy - Explain why we in the west have to buy Iranian Oil?

Has nothing to do with Iranian oil. Iranian sanctions are about raising the price of all oil. It is about greed and malice not about any reality except the pocket books of those who own the oil.

I really have trouble following your train of thought. It is almost as if we are on different planets. Where did I say we needed to buy anybody's oil?
 
Goober
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Has nothing to do with Iranian oil. Iranian sanctions are about raising the price of all oil. It is about greed and malice not about any reality except the pocket books of those who own the oil.

I really have trouble following your train of thought. It is almost as if we are on different planets. Where did I say we needed to buy anybody's oil?

Well you voted that we were legally and morally wrong to impose sanctions.
 
Cliffy
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Well you voted that we were legally and morally wrong to impose sanctions.

What has that got to do with it. It is not the government that suffers from sanctions. It is the people who suffer. Hundreds of thousands died as a result of sanctions against Iraq, Saddam did not.
 
Goober
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

What has that got to do with it. It is not the government that suffers from sanctions. It is the people who suffer. Hundreds of thousands died as a result of sanctions against Iraq, Saddam did not.

Wondering the reasoning behind your vote. Deflection is not a good reason now is it.

Legally and morally wrong - Check the options.
 
Cliffy
+1
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Wondering the reasoning behind your vote. Deflection is not a good reason now is it.

Legally and morally wrong - Check the options.

People, especially children, will die because of sanctions. Do you think it is morally right to kill Iranian citizens because you have a hate on for their government? You are the one doing the deflecting.
 
Goober
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

People, especially children, will die because of sanctions. Do you think it is morally right to kill Iranian citizens because you have a hate on for their government? You are the one doing the deflecting.

More than enough money for the basics. It would divert funds from their nuke program. Now if the Iranian govt did not see fit to do that, then who is at fault?
 
damngrumpy
+1
#15
Funny we can demand better behavior from Iran and impose sanctions but not
China hmmm. I see we have principles, but if you don't like our principals we
have other principals, This is about greed, the stabilization of oil prices and the
consumer is really being handed a bag of sh*t.
Iran is going to build a bomb, its a done deal the problem is they can threaten all
they want, if they are going to use it China and Russia are likely to take kindly to
such actions.
America and the west in general have used the element of fear for decades and
again they have no other solutions so fear it is then. The real problem is we are
running out of options to keep the economy going and that tank is running on
empty. We are closer and closer to some kind of war regardless of what the
Iranians or anyone else does. The problem is this time China will sit on the side
lines and make the money before coming in to restore order. Most people have
not yet figured out, capitalism itself is in danger of becoming a thing of the past
as a result of corporate greed, and the other side what do they have? Nothing
they have no incentives, no expertise and no ability to ignite prosperity.
The occupy people are onto something, oh I know idealists camping in the street
is not an answer, but their goals will be driven by different people who will take
over.
As for Iran, they are part of this whole play their actions, threats and moves, are
designed to weaken the base for western culture and to some degree its working.
Iran is not a threat to America, Israel yes America no. And we could see the day
when Israel gets attacked and the American people say so what, the appetite for
war is done.
At present the whole issue of Iran is about oil, the price of oil, greed, the balance of
power in the Middle East and protecting Israel. Different issues the same scenario
for going into Vietnam in the early years. Also the quarrel with Iran justifies leaving
troops, planes and ships in the Gulf to control the interests of the West not just
America. Iran in short is only a small part of the problem and the control needed
to make more oil money.
 
gopher
+2
#16
Small wonder why Iran has signed long term contracts with Russia and China. As India's economy continues to grow, both countries will exchange more commerce and derive mutual benefits. The smarter thing for the USA to do is to just follow Ron Paul's advice and leave Iran alone.

By the way, contrary to the heading in this topic, the "West" is not causing commercial harm to Iran as Europe remains its biggest trading partner:

PressTV - 'Iran's main trade partner still EU' (external - login to view)

Sorry to burst your bubble with the facts:

"Eurostat, the European Union statistical office, announced in its October report that despite unilateral sanctions by the West, Iran's exports to the 27-member EU have increased 6.4 percent in the first five months of 2011 compared to the same period last year. "

Quote:

Iran is in the threatening Stage – Any imposition of Oil sanctions they state will result in the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

Correction: Iran will take action only if a war is imposed on them:

PressTV - 'US won't brook disruption in Hormuz' (external - login to view)

Iran has repeatedly warned that in the event of a military attack on the country, it will not hesitate in taking all necessary measures to protect its sovereignty one of which would be to close the strategic oil passage.
 
Goober
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by gopherView Post

Small wonder why Iran has signed long term contracts with Russia and China. As India's economy continues to grow, both countries will exchange more commerce and derive mutual benefits. The smarter thing for the USA to do is to just follow Ron Paul's advice and leave Iran alone.

By the way, contrary to the heading in this topic, the "West" is not causing commercial harm to Iran as Europe remains its biggest trading partner:

PressTV - 'Iran's main trade partner still EU' (external - login to view)

Sorry to burst your bubble with the facts:

"Eurostat, the European Union statistical office, announced in its October report that despite unilateral sanctions by the West, Iran's exports to the 27-member EU have increased 6.4 percent in the first five months of 2011 compared to the same period last year. "



Correction: Iran will take action only if a war is imposed on them:

PressTV - 'US won't brook disruption in Hormuz' (external - login to view)

Iran has repeatedly warned that in the event of a military attack on the country, it will not hesitate in taking all necessary measures to protect its sovereignty one of which would be to close the strategic oil passage.

PS - Eye opener - The West includes Europe.

Iran threatened to close Hormuz if Oil Sanctions take effect.

Come up above ground and see daylight. Now prove me wrong.
From the OP

Iran, at loggerheads with the West over its nuclear program, said on Tuesday it would stop the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf if sanctions were imposed on its crude exports.
“Closing the Strait of Hormuz for Iran’s armed forces is really easy … or as Iranians say, it will be easier than drinking a glass of water,” Iran’s navy chief Habibollah Sayyari told Iran’s English-language Press TV on Wednesday.
“But right now, we don’t need to shut it …,” said Sayyari, who is leading 10 days of exercises in the Strait.


www.eurasiareview.com/2712201...ts-sanctioned/ (external - login to view)

Roundup: Commander says Iranian navy "can readily block" Strait of Hormuz|chinadaily.com.cn (external - login to view)
 
earth_as_one
#18
Can I vote for "none of the above?"

All countries should be free to define their trading relationships with other countries. Canada can legally choose to do business or not do business with anyone we like or don't like. That's our right as a sovereign nation. However, Canada should not attempt to impose our trade policies on other nations, except in the case of war. In other words, we can do what we like, but we should not demand other nations pick a side except in the case of war.

The US, Europe and other sovereign nations are free to attempt to impose trade polices on other countries and force them not to do business with Iran. Good luck with that.

Russia and China aren't interested in imposing any sanctions on Iran which don't improve their bargaining position. If some countries choose not to buy Iranian oil, then they'll have to buy their oil elsewhere driving up world oil prices. Russia and other oil producing nations will be able to sell their oil at a premium. Meanwhile China and other nations who are willing to trade with Iran will get a relative bargain for their energy. Cheaper energy prices for China and anyone else who does business with Iran, while the West pays a premium for non-Iranian oil probably won't help the US or Europe economically.

On the bright side, these countries will demand more Canadian oil and be forced to pay a premium. Since and Iranian trade embargo works in Canada's favor as a producer of non-Iranian oil, I support a ban on Iranian oil for purely selfish reasons. I would also support a ban on Saudi and Kuwaiti oil too until these nations hold free and fair democratic elections and recognize equal rights for women and homosexuals.

Another consequence of this embargo is the effect it will have on the $US as the oil trading standard. Iran will make deals that don't involve $US. Venezuela and Russia are willing to sell oil in other currencies. China, India and other oil consuming nations would probably prefer to use their own currency to buy oil.

Many non-aligned countries probably don't appreciate the US and Europe trying to control their trading activities and they could decide to collectively revolt, (as a group ignore the sanctions) especially if they perceive that Iran has been treated unfairly. Considering the relative weakness of western banks, a revolt would likely be successful.

Regarding the morality of this embargo. Let's just say when it comes to economic embargoes the West isn't exactly able to claim the moral high ground. The economic embargo imposed on Iraq long after Iraq ceased to possess WMDs, is a good example of western morality:
>>>
'We Think the Price Is Worth It'

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

--60 Minutes (5/12/96) Then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's quote, calmly asserting that U.S. policy objectives were worth the sacrifice of half a million Arab children, has been much quoted in the Arabic press.

'We Think the Price Is Worth It' (external - login to view)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I predict attempts to isolate Iran economically will not only fail but backfire. Iran is not in the same situation as Iraq. They have no history of attacking other countries. Iraq had proven WMD programs. Iran has been compliant with all mandatory parts of the NPT. While they haven't agreed to all the voluntary confidence building parts of the NPT, they have respected the parts that they signed. Since they haven't signed all confidence building parts, sanctions can be legally imposed.

I would support penalizing Iran for not agreeing to and respecting the entire NPT provided Canada holds other countries to the same standard. All countries which have not signed all parts of the NPT (voluntary and mandatory) should also face similar punitive measures based on their level of non-compliance.
Last edited by earth_as_one; Dec 29th, 2011 at 10:37 AM..
 
gopher
+1
#19
Quote:

Iran threatened to close Hormuz if Oil Sanctions take effect.

Interesting how two different sources say two different things. Well, at least mine came directly from Iran. The reader will have to determine for him/herself which is more accurate.

As for the West including Europe - that's true. And it remains Iran's biggest trading partner.
 
Praxius
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

Oh my! The fifth fleet has an over abundance of testosterone. They are standing at attention, ready to blow a lode.

Of course this is about jacking up the price of oil. "Oh, it's all Iran's fault!" Hysteria works,BS works, money is king. Praise the Lord. Watch the monkeys dance.

If they decided to put all the research into the electric car back when they first came out, this sort of crap wouldn't be happening in the first place.... but NNOOoooooo.... petroleum was better.

Oil is good.... that's why we have a weenie like Al Gore and those muppets Greenpeace, Sea Shepherds & PETA droning on and on about the precious widdle animals in oil slicks, Global Warming is going to ruin our pretty glaciers and ice & turn them all into sludge puddles like the ones you see on the side of the road in the winter..... that's why most of the products we buy & put on, in, around and out of our bodies are made from petroleum..... it's just that good.

And it's great because now you can control society by getting the masses conditioned to a life utterly dependent on oil based products, for cleaning, washing, making yourself smell nice, little babies have soft rubber duckies to play with in the bath tub.... and nobody can go very far very fast without gasoline, and the money that you need to obtain it.

Anytime the masses get unruly or don't like how you run things, just put on a show with your other leader buddies, make it like a soap opera on live TV, or a wrestling match where the two gorillas thump their chests at one another and display their genitals to their potential mates..... then you tighten the leash around your society's neck by jacking up the prices of the things you depend on every day of your life..... and then finger point at the other guy for being such a meanie.

Then you look like the good guy, the masses like you for a little while longer.....

rinse and repeat.

Everybody would want us all to believe it's all more complicated than that, but in reality, that's all that's really going on.

They're on their Blackberries and their IPhones chatting to one another on how to screw with us all tomorrow..... and when they have their G8 meetings, they're not really doing anything.

Sure we all knew they weren't doing anything and the G8's are all a waste of money & time.... but it's worse than that.

They put on their show for a bit, then they close the doors, crack out the beer and vodka, get sh*t faced, snort, shoot & inhale every drug imaginable..... and then turn on the TV to see everybody a few floors down and a wall away rioting, protesting and getting their asses kicked by riot police.....

..... And they laugh and laugh.... Hoo boy do they laugh their asses off at us, because nothing can be done.... nothing is every done. Societies around the world are hooked on their drug called oil already & the withdraw isn't something any society can deal with and expect to survive in the end and so long as our leaders keep smiling at us, they won't be touched. When society does crumble, they're long gone in their jets, off to live in the mountains bordering Pakistan and Afghanistan.... and they'll all sit in their underground bunkers & caves with their so-called "terrorist" buddies....

.... they'll look through their satellite images beaned to them from space to see everybody tear each other apart, kill, rape, murder... possibly even eat some flesh.

And they'll all get drunk and Laugh and laugh.... oh boy will they laugh.

They duped us good.... what suckers were are.

Happy F'kn New Year

Now excuse me, as I got offended by this post and thus, I am going out on the streets to protest.
 
taxslave
+1
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Whoever is elected keystone will flow. We should be fast tracking a pipeline thru BC. Then another east. With refineries. Added value to the product. That may happen if Harper has the balls to go face to face with Aboriginals that are against the western lines. Naturally deals would have to be made.

Aboriginals are not against the pipeline. They are just negotiating for a larger piece of the pie.
 
petros
#22
A 3/4 ton?
 
Goober
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Aboriginals are not against the pipeline. They are just negotiating for a larger piece of the pie.

They are formally against an oil pipeline - Until better negotiations - slice of the profits come. They had voted unanimously against the oil pipeline. Not the gas, the bitumen line

Quote: Originally Posted by gopherView Post

Interesting how two different sources say two different things. Well, at least mine came directly from Iran. The reader will have to determine for him/herself which is more accurate.

As for the West including Europe - that's true. And it remains Iran's biggest trading partner.

From the horses mouth.

U.S. in no position to prevent Hormuz Strait closure: IRGC deputy commander - Tehran Times (external - login to view)

“In the event that Iran’s vital interests are threatened in any way, we will use threat against threat and will not stop implementing our strategies,” he added.


Iran will not ask for any country’s permission to employ its defensive strategies, he said, adding, “The Islamic Republic of Iran, over the past 33 years, has showed that it has successfully implemented its measures despite the U.S. interference.”


He also said, “We will act more determinedly and strongly than ever to implement defensive strategies to defend the vital values of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Oil Sanctions are a threat - We both know how it will impact Iran.
 
Goober
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

They are formally against an oil pipeline - Until better negotiations - slice of the profits come. They had voted unanimously against the oil pipeline. Not the gas, the bitumen line



From the horses mouth.

U.S. in no position to prevent Hormuz Strait closure: IRGC deputy commander - Tehran Times (external - login to view)

“In the event that Iran’s vital interests are threatened in any way, we will use threat against threat and will not stop implementing our strategies,” he added.


Iran will not ask for any country’s permission to employ its defensive strategies, he said, adding, “The Islamic Republic of Iran, over the past 33 years, has showed that it has successfully implemented its measures despite the U.S. interference.”


He also said, “We will act more determinedly and strongly than ever to implement defensive strategies to defend the vital values of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Oil Sanctions are a threat - We both know how it will impact Iran.

Gopher must be hiding out.
 
ironsides
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

I wonder if Obama is rethinking his position on Keystone XL yet. ANy long term embargo on Iranian oil is bound to cause the already excessively high priced crude oil go even higher.

The Keystone pipeline will be built, we (Canada and the U.S. cannot continue to rely on Mid-Eastern oil).
 
Goober
+1
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by ironsidesView Post

The Keystone pipeline will be built, we (Canada and the U.S. cannot continue to rely on Mid-Eastern oil).

We hunt Gophers up here. Cause a lot of damage for cattle / horses problems with the burrows etc broken legs. You hunt them down south. I think gopher went under ground. Gun shots make them a tad skittish.
 
ironsides
#27
If Iran tries to block the straits of Hormuz, the 5th fleet will reduce their offensive capabilities in 2-3 days not to mention what will fly over from Diego Garcia. The straits will remain open.
 
Goober
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by ironsidesView Post

If Iran tries to block the straits of Hormuz, the 5th fleet will reduce their offensive capabilities in 2-3 days not to mention what will fly over from Diego Garcia. The straits will remain open.

It was good to get the Carrier out. Prime target. They can sit nicely out of range and safer. Diesel subs are a problem but they also have a weakness.
 
earth_as_one
#29
Iran doesn't have to fire a single missile or torpedo to shut down the Straits of Hormuz. The threat of military action alone would raise insurance rates to the point where oil tankers could not afford the risk of running an Iranian blockade. The US could also shut down Iran's ability to export oil the same way.

If the US and other nations shut down Iran's ability to export oil, then Iran would be completely justified making a *** for tat threat to sink any oil tanker attempting to pass through the straight of Hormuz. So its highly doubtful the US or any nation would resort to force or the threat of force to shut down Iran's oil exporting capability. However, Iran would have no justification for action if its clients simply stop buying Iranian oil. Iran's problems with Israel and the US aren't a priority for China and many other countries, so I doubt US/European led embargo would completely shut down Iran's oil exports.

If the question is does Iran have the ability to sink ships in the gulf despite the presence of the US Navy, I'd say yes. Its pretty hard for an oil tanker to defend itself from conventional torpedoes and missiles, never mind Iran's supercavitating Hoot Torpedo:

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Iran tests 'super-fast' torpedo (external - login to view)

No ship or submarine can outrun that type of torpedo. The only way the US could prevent Iran from shutting down the straight is by invading and occupying Iran. In the current situation, Russia and/or China would likely veto any US resolution at the UNSC to use force against Iran. The US would have to have concrete proof that Iran is attempting to acquire nuclear weapon technology. Given the lucrative Iran/China trade relationship, it would be in China's best interest to help Iran defend itself, rather than risk loosing the billions they've already invested in Iran's energy infrastructure:

People's Republic of China (external - login to view)

Any US attack against Iran's oil infrastructure would risk a direct conflict with China.
 
ironsides
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

It was good to get the Carrier out. Prime target. They can sit nicely out of range and safer. Diesel subs are a problem but they also have a weakness.

The diesel shouldn't be to much of a problem for the attack subs escorting the carrier. If they were Japanese or Swedish electric's I would worry more.

Quote: Originally Posted by earth_as_oneView Post

Iran doesn't have to fire a single missile or torpedo to shut down the Straits of Hormuz. The threat of military action alone would raise insurance rates to the point where oil tankers could not afford the risk of running an Iranian blockade. The US could also shut down Iran's ability to export oil the same way.


BBC NEWS | Middle East | Iran tests 'super-fast' torpedo (external - login to view)

No ship or submarine can outrun that type of torpedo. The only way the US could prevent Iran from shutting down the straight is by invading and occupying Iran. In the current situation, Russia and/or China would likely veto any US resolution at the UNSC to use force against Iran. The US would have to have concrete proof that Iran is attempting to acquire nuclear weapon technology. Given the lucrative Iran/China trade relationship, it would be in China's best interest to help Iran defend itself, rather than risk loosing the billions they've already invested in Iran's energy infrastructure:

.

It will not be NATO or the U.S. that will do something foolish first. Iran is doing enough already to provoke preventive measures. What makes anyone so sure were not using that torpedo or counter measures.
 

Similar Threads

no new posts