Iran warns of closing strategic Hormuz oil route

As one that has transited the straits many times, I also do not believe Iran would do it. Being that most of Iran's oil flows through there also and Oil is Iran's biggest income maker, it could cause them alot of problems. China is also thier biggest customer right now, so they would be causing problems there also. Right now Iran is all talk. They do not even have a navy big enough to do the job. They could lay some mines and maybe shoot a torpedo or two but that is about it. Thier Navy ships are not the best kept either. Their so called gun boats, which came out at us a couple of times, once we locked on them they turned tail real fast.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/mid ... s_homepage

otisptoadwater wrote:

It's not that we would not, its that we would not have too.

Agreed, there are too many other nations that would take Iran's attempt to close and hold the Straight of Hormuz as a deliberate act of war. The US would likely have to coordinate with other forces in the region to avoid friendly fire incidents. Geographically the Straight of Hormuz is a small place, from one point of view that should make it easy to defend - nothing could be further from the truth. Iran would have to invest most of their naval resources to begin a blockade and once Iran proclaimed they had control of the Straight attacks would come from the surface and under the sea, land, and air. Iran would run out of ships fast and the disruption to shipping through the straight would be over with fairly quickly.

I think this is just more saber rattling on Iran's part, they happen to be holding a large multi-service exercise and deploying ships to the Gulf of Oman is a big part of that exercise.

Back in the day the biggest threat was their shore based Silkworm missile batteries sinking a tanker and blocking the channel. I expect we have something in mind for that.

On a Fox crawl tonight, Iran is the third largest energy exporter in the world. Just something to consider.

BTW, I think there already if a undeclared war between Iran, the US and Israel, mainly on a cyber and technological basis. And possibly supporting dissident forces insode Iran.

neptunechimney wrote: Back in the day the biggest threat was their shore based Silkworm missile batteries sinking a tanker and blocking the channel. I expect we have something in mind for that.

My guess is shore based anti-ship missles would still be the weapon of choice for Iran since they wouldn't have to invest any of their own limited Naval ships. Many anti-ship missles have plenty of range to cross the Straights from Iran (54 km at their narrowest). These missles are made by many countries including China, but I don't know what Iran has been able to get their hands on. And as you mentioned, who knows what counter measures we may have to jam the guidance systems of these missles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-ship_missile

neptunechimney wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: Here we go again...

Why do you think so?

Oh... maybe...

The Case for Military Action in Iran

In this week's National Review, I make the legal case for a preventive attack on Iran's nuclear weapons facilities. Where the Obama administration has merely checked in this high-stakes game of poker, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich have gone all in (Ron Paul, of course, folded long ago). In last month’s South Carolina debate, Mitt Romney promised that Iran “will not have a nuclear weapon” under his presidency. Economic sanctions and aid to internal opposition come first, said the former Massachusetts governor, but “if all else fails . . .

http://ricochet.com/main-feed/The-Case- ... on-in-Iran

Maybe because some people are already pushing for it.

The threats underline Iranian concern that the West is about to impose new sanctions that could target Tehran's vital oil industry and exports.

China probably won't go along with sanctions and will still buy from Iran. This is just a bluff tactic to get oil over $100 IMO. And just when gas prices were dropping below $3, ^%$#(())&^%$

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

neptunechimney wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: Here we go again...

Why do you think so?

Oh... maybe...

Maybe because some people are already pushing for it.

Given that your original comment that I questioned was "One way or another... this administration is going to find a way to get us involved in another expensive war. It's almost like the Bush clan was still in office." you are as as consistant as LJ's usual drivel. Do drugs much?

the silkworm missles would be the least of the problem. Though they distance, they are not considered to be real accurate. There are so many versions of the them it gets crazy. Some EA6B's can solve a lot of the missle problem with thier jammers, and thier own missles. CIWS can deal with a lot of them also. The bigger problem would be if they were to mine the waterways. It is not very deep to start with, when heading north through the channel the deeper part is located within Iranian terrortorial waters, international law though allows warships to transit free from hostilities and at combat readiness. The ships I have been on, we have made the transit. I have traveled through the straits 8 times, when we went through we through with Battle Conditions set. (GQ). Planes armed and in the air etc.

navycpo7 wrote: the silkworm missles would be the least of the problem. Though they distance, they are not considered to be real accurate. There are so many versions of the them it gets crazy. Some EA6B's can solve a lot of the missle problem with thier jammers, and thier own missles. CIWS can deal with a lot of them also. The bigger problem would be if they were to mine the waterways. It is not very deep to start with, when heading north through the channel the deeper part is located within Iranian terrortorial waters, international law though allows warships to transit free from hostilities and at combat readiness. The ships I have been on, we have made the transit. I have traveled through the straits 8 times, when we went through we through with Battle Conditions set. (GQ). Planes armed and in the air etc.

That is why we have mine sweepers. I worked with them them 96. I have to admit they were reservists and did not impress me but reservists have come a very long way since 9/11.

PS. did you get my PM? My granddaughters essay went to regional.

My faith in the US Navy's 5th fleet is strong and I have no doubt that once the Iranian targeting radars came on there would be a sh*t storm of ordinance raining down on every emitter that they dared to power up.

Mines? Sure they can lay a large field of mines but it occurs to me that we already have a large presence in the region and there are plenty of ships and aircraft who are likely making careful observations of all Iranian combatants. Neptune is correct, the US Navy knows how to deal with mines and the limited space available to the Iranians in the Straight of Hormuz works against them.

Neptune - BZ to your grand daughter! Best wishes for further success in her academic pursuits.