Iran warns of closing strategic Hormuz oil route

30 Dec 2011 09:54 - 30 Dec 2011 10:10 #21 by bailey bud
So, buy some oil futures........

You can't stop Iran from doing stupid things - so you might as well profit from it.

Iran's oil has a single route: The Gulf. (as of August, 2011). Arabia's oil has two options: The Gulf or the Red Sea (or the Indian Ocean). A closure would hurt Iran's oil more than it would hurt Arabia. Granted - opportunistic money managers would run the cost of oil up (for no good reason, since there's ample supply).

Arabia has multiple ways around a blockade. They've developed highway systems and pipelines that run from the Gulf to the Indian Ocean/Red Sea. The Indian Ocean is home to thousands of bunker ships that are anchored just offshore specifically to hold oil as a contingency. Were the straits to close, oil companies would simply call up the bunker ships, and start directing oil to alternative ports.

While you can certainly inconvenience the flow of oil - there's no way to cut if off.

PS --- 85 percent of the oil flowing through the straits goes to Asia! I'm not sure why they're not paying to keep the straits open.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

30 Dec 2011 10:04 #22 by Blazer Bob

bailey bud wrote: So, buy some oil futures........

You can't stop Iran from doing stupid things - so you might as well profit from it.


LOL. Exactly how I feel about the current administration. Thank you President Obama.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

30 Dec 2011 10:06 #23 by Blazer Bob

neptunechimney wrote:

bailey bud wrote: So, buy some oil futures........

You can't stop Iran from doing stupid things - so you might as well profit from it.


LOL. Exactly how I feel about the current administration. Thank you President Obama.




http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=dej&uf=0&type=2&size=2&sid=6708797&style=320&freq=1&time=8&rand=1364274835&compidx=&ma=0&maval=9&lf=1&lf2=0&lf3=0&height=335&width=579&mocktick=1

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

30 Dec 2011 10:33 #24 by navycpo7

neptunechimney wrote:

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.


Then you were there when I was in 96 I am thinking. 96 is when we did a crash back on the GW to avoid hitting a mine up towards the middle of the gulf. I prefer the mine sweep sled pulled by the helo's.

Did not get your PM. Is this thru the vfw. If so regional then would be District. From there to State, then to National. The entries have to be to National if they won state I think by middle of January.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

30 Dec 2011 10:40 #25 by bailey bud
Amazing what a little fear can do to the markets......

15 percent of Gulf oil goes to some place other than Asia (that includes Europe, South America, and North America).

The USA gets a small fraction of that 15 percent --- yet we bear almost all the cost of defending the Straits.

I think India and China should be guarding the Straits (or paying for it).

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

30 Dec 2011 13:28 #26 by Rockdoc
No question about it. The problem is the continued perception in Washington that we must be the world's police force if not military. There is also the matter of feat. Fear of what might be if China start's taking over some of the role the US had shouldered over the years. Of course, the fear is not unrealistic, but one that we ought to expect to take place and best prepare for it as best we can.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

31 Dec 2011 14:07 #27 by Blazer Bob
I'm not sure what to make of this. I do not know the source and am unsure of what they mean by "operational level" source. In my experience sub ops are held close to the vest. Also, it seems to me that un-rep by helo would slow them down more than an all hands in port working party.

Otis, any thoughts?

"According to operational-level military sources, an Ohio-class nuclear submarine is on its way to the Gulf of Hormuz. Rotation and leave were cancelled for the cruise-missile carrying sub, which is based at the US Navy base in Bremerton, Washington.

Additionally, according to the source, on-shore resupply was cancelled and any necessary supplies will be delivered by helicopter. ".............


http://www.speroforum.com/a/ITRRCTBPLL1 ... Spero+News

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

31 Dec 2011 15:27 #28 by otisptoadwater
I'm not sure what "operational-level military sources" are either. Maybe it's disinformation? Subs are effective because they are stealthy, when and where they go and what they do while out to sea isn't public information. Sending in a boomer when there is already a carrier group on station seems like over kill to me. It's very likely that there are already other boats in the region or at least closer than Bremerton, Washington.

In the meanwhile, at least one Iranian General is now saying there is no need to block the Straight of Hormuz:

"Discourse about closing the Strait of Hormuz belongs to five years ago. Today's debate in the Islamic Republic of Iran contains new layers and the time has not come to raise it," Gen. Masoud Jazayeri said in comments posted Saturday on the Guard's website, sepahnews.com.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/12/31/iran-backs-off-threat-to-close-strait-hormuz/#ixzz1i9Wf18pl

I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." - Henry Ford

Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges; When the Republic is at its most corrupt the laws are most numerous. - Publius Cornelius Tacitus

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

01 Jan 2012 09:54 #29 by lionshead2010
They may very well just be talking about the "operational" level of warfare. As you know, the Senior Service College folks divide it up into tactical, operational and strategic levels of warfare. Most of us spent the vast majority of our time living in the tactical world. The President, his National Security Council and the Joint Chiefs of Staff function at the strategic level...leaving people at the very senior levels of the joint and services world to dabble in "operational".

It is at this level of war that combatant commanders execute operational art. Placing a nuclear capable submarine in the Gulf lies somewhere between operational and strategic. Although it's very tactical for the sailor on board the submarine, the placement of that or similar capabilities in that "strategic" location requires operational art and has strategic implications. Especially if we start pulling some triggers.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

01 Jan 2012 10:38 #30 by Wily Fox aka Angela
This scenario reminds me of Hitler. After WWI, Germany was not to re-arm itself, but Hitler was re-arming and the world knew it. This was a prime example of appeasement to Hitler/Germany. They let him to do and well, we know what happened after that.

I know we are all war weary. I am not a fan of war, not at all, but the world needs to be paying attention to Iran. Not just the US, but the world.

One thing that has happened under Obama, is that the US is not acting unilaterally in the world. It has become part of the world community and shares this responsibility. I think that is a good thing.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.161 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+