I'll believe it when I see it, they can't be that suicidal... not unless they have a trump card like a working nuclear weapon.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/world/middleeast/iran-threatens-to-block-oil-route-if-embargo-is-imposed.html
QuoteIran Threatens to Block Oil Shipments, as U.S. Prepares Sanctions
By DAVID E. SANGER and ANNIE LOWREY
Published: December 27, 2011
WASHINGTON — A senior Iranian official on Tuesday delivered a sharp threat in response to economic sanctions being readied by the United States, saying his country would retaliate against any crackdown by blocking all oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital artery for transporting about one-fifth of the world's oil supply.
The declaration by Iran's first vice president, Mohammad-Reza Rahimi, came as President Obama prepares to sign legislation that, if fully implemented, could substantially reduce Iran's oil revenue in a bid to deter it from pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
Prior to the latest move, the administration had been laying the groundwork to attempt to cut off Iran from global energy markets without raising the price of gasoline or alienating some of Washington's closest allies.
Apparently fearful of the expanded sanctions' possible impact on the already-stressed economy of Iran, the world's third-largest energy exporter, Mr. Rahimi said, "If they impose sanctions on Iran's oil exports, then even one drop of oil cannot flow from the Strait of Hormuz," according to Iran's official news agency. Iran just began a 10-day naval exercise in the area.
In recent interviews, Obama administration officials have said that the United States has developed a plan to keep the strait open in the event of a crisis. In Hawaii, where President Obama is vacationing, a White House spokesman said there would be no comment on the Iranian threat to close the strait. That seemed in keeping with what administration officials say has been an effort to lower the level of angry exchanges, partly to avoid giving the Iranian government the satisfaction of a response and partly to avoid spooking financial markets.
But the energy sanctions carry the risk of confrontation, as well as economic disruption, given the unpredictability of the Iranian response. Some administration officials believe that a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States — which Washington alleges received funding from the Quds Force, part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps — was in response to American and other international sanctions.
Merely uttering the threat appeared to be part of an Iranian effort to demonstrate its ability to cause a spike in oil prices, thus slowing the United States economy, and to warn American trading partners that joining the new sanctions, which the Senate passed by a rare 100-0 vote, would come at a high cost.
Oil prices rose above $100 a barrel in trading after the threat was issued, though it was unclear how much that could be attributed to investors' concern that confrontation in the Persian Gulf could disrupt oil flows.
The new punitive measures, part of a bill financing the military, would significantly escalate American sanctions against Iran. They come just a month and a half after the International Atomic Energy Agency published a report that for the first time laid out its evidence that Iran may be secretly working to design a nuclear warhead, despite the country's repeated denials.
In the wake of the I.A.E.A. report and a November attack on the British Embassy in Tehran, the European Union is also contemplating strict new sanctions, such as an embargo on Iranian oil.
For five years, the United States has implemented increasingly severe sanctions in an attempt to force Iran's leaders to reconsider the suspected nuclear weapons program, and answer a growing list of questions from the I.A.E.A. But it has deliberately stopped short of targeting oil exports, which finance as much as half of Iran's budget.
Now, with its hand forced by Congress, the administration is preparing to take that final step, penalizing foreign corporations that do business with Iran's central bank, which collects payment for most of the country's energy exports.
The sanction would effectively make it difficult for those who do business with Iran's central bank to also conduct financial transactions with the United States. The step was so severe that one of President Obama's top national security aides said two months ago that it was "a last resort." The administration raced to put some loopholes in the final legislation so that it could reduce the impact on close allies who have signed on to pressuring Iran.
The legislation allows President Obama to waive sanctions if they cause the price of oil to rise or threaten national security.
Still, the new sanctions raise crucial economic, diplomatic, and security questions. Mr. Obama, his aides acknowledge, has no interest in seeing energy prices rise significantly at a moment of national economic weakness or as he intensifies his bid for re-election — a vulnerability the Iranians fully understand. So the administration has to defy, or at least carefully calibrate, the laws of supply and demand, bringing to market new sources of oil to ensure that global prices do not rise sharply.
"I don't think anybody thinks we can contravene the laws of supply and demand any more than we can contravene the laws of gravity," said David S. Cohen, who, as treasury under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, oversees the administration of the sanctions. But, he said, "We have flexibility here, and I think we have a pretty good opportunity to dial this in just the right way that it does end up putting significant pressure on Iran."
The American effort, as described by Mr. Cohen and others, is more subtle than simply cutting off Iran's ability to export oil, a step that would immediately send the price of gasoline, heating fuel, and other petroleum products skyward. That would "mean that Iran would, in fact, have more money to fuel its nuclear ambitions, not less," Wendy R. Sherman, the newly installed under secretary of state for political affairs, warned the Senate Foreign Relations Committee earlier this month.
Instead, the administration's aim is to reduce Iran's oil revenue by diminishing the volume of sales and forcing Iran to give its customers a discount on the price of crude.
Some economists question whether reducing Iran's oil exports without moving the price of oil is feasible, even if the market is given signals about alternative supplies. Already, analysts at investment banks are warning of the possibility of rising gasoline prices in 2012, due to the new sanctions by the United States as well as complementary sanctions under consideration by the European Union.
Since President Obama's first months in office, his aides have been talking to Saudi Arabia and other oil suppliers about increasing their production, and about guaranteeing sales to countries like China, which is among Iran's biggest customers. But it is unclear that the Saudis can fill in the gap left by Iran, even with the help of Libyan oil that is coming back on the market. The United States is also looking to countries like Iraq and Angola to increase production.
Daniel Yergin, whose new book, "The Quest," describes the oil politics of dealing with states like Iran, noted in an interview that "given the relative tightness of the market, it will require careful construction of the sanctions combined with vigorous efforts to bring alternative supplies into the market." He said that it would "add a whole new dimension to the debate over the Keystone XL pipeline," the oil pipeline from Canada to the United States that the administration has sought to delay.
"The only strategy that is going to work here is one where you get the cooperation of oil buyers," said Michael Singh, managing director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "You could imagine the Europeans, the Japanese, and the South Koreans cooperating, and then China would suck up all of the oil that was initially going to everyone else."
A broader question is whether the sanctions — even if successful at lowering Iran's oil revenue — would force the government to give up its nuclear ambitions.
One measure of the effects, however, is that the Iranian leadership is clearly concerned. Already the Iranian currency is plummeting in value against the dollar, and there are rumors of bank runs.
"Iran's economic problems seem to be mounting and the whole economy is in a state of suspended expectation," said Abbas Milani, director of Iranian studies at Stanford University. "The regime keeps repeating that they're not going to be impacted by the sanctions. That they have more money than they know what to do with. The lady doth protest too much."
What are they going to block it with?
Mines
A "Do Not Enter" sign.
The charred corpses of their people once NATO and everyone else plasters them into the Stone Age. Neolithic.
Ha. To quote some guy, bring it on.
:lol: Blocking the Strait is easily the strongest move to guarantee support behind just about anything the USA does in response.
It's times like this not having a Soviet Union around makes things sooo much easier for the United States Navy.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 27, 2011, 10:26:21 PM
It's times like this not having a Soviet Union around makes things sooo much easier for the United States Navy.
Russians were pretty helpful in dealing with Iran in '41. Let's be friends again.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 27, 2011, 10:28:03 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 27, 2011, 10:26:21 PM
It's times like this not having a Soviet Union around makes things sooo much easier for the United States Navy.
Russians were pretty helpful in dealing with Iran in '41. Let's be friends again.
They totally cock-blocked us in '79, though. Fuck Ivan, can't float shit now.
I guess they don't have a land border anymore, either. Forgot about that. -_-
!! RED ALERT !! Emergency Broadcast : On The Brink of Ww3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1yIWOiDMZw&feature=share (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1yIWOiDMZw&feature=share)
This better not be that same retard talking about Jews and banks or whatever.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 27, 2011, 10:40:39 PM
This better not be that same retard talking about Jews and banks or whatever.
You pass on a very narrow technicality, Moriarty. Sigh.
Quote from: Ideologue on December 27, 2011, 10:42:43 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on December 27, 2011, 10:40:39 PM
This better not be that same retard talking about Jews and banks or whatever.
You pass on a very narrow technicality, Moriarty. Sigh.
You freak me out.
What did I do?
fucke if i know. i think im running a fevr or something because a lot of things are freaking me out. That or I'm having a psychotic episode. All I know for sure is you are freaking me out and its about 30 degrees in here.
OK, Raznaard.
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on December 27, 2011, 10:50:28 PM
fucke if i know. i think im running a fevr or something because a lot of things are freaking me out. That or I'm having a psychotic episode. All I know for sure is you are freaking me out and its about 30 degrees in here.
You really need to lay off the refrigerant fumes, son. At least on an empty stomach.
I'm pretty sure I had some Oreos for dinner.
No, wait, Wagzgovory. That's way better.
No, it isn't. Not at all. I think you need a break from posting.
Apparently, we're on the verge of a world-wide food crisis/shortage. :mad:
Quote from: Darth Wagtaros on December 27, 2011, 10:59:18 PM
No, it isn't. Not at all. I think you need a break from posting.
Just kidding. I hope you feel better, Wags.
Yay. I feel validated.
War with Iran would be good for Obama's re-election chances. :)
Well, they sure as hell don't want that.
Anyway, if they block it up, it'll probably be with hair and dirt or something. We can just use large amounts of liquid plumber. That'll do the trick.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 28, 2011, 02:00:56 AM
Anyway, if they block it up, it'll probably be with hair and dirt or something. We can just use large amounts of liquid plumber. That'll do the trick.
Not always, sometimes you need to call in Roto-Rooter.
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 28, 2011, 02:27:34 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 28, 2011, 02:00:56 AM
Anyway, if they block it up, it'll probably be with hair and dirt or something. We can just use large amounts of liquid plumber. That'll do the trick.
Not always, sometimes you need to call in Roto-Rooter.
you could send in Joe
Quote from: Razgovory on December 28, 2011, 02:00:56 AM
Anyway, if they block it up, it'll probably be with hair and dirt or something. We can just use large amounts of liquid plumber. That'll do the trick.
Greasy Middle Eastern hair? :yuk:
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on December 28, 2011, 06:48:39 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 28, 2011, 02:00:56 AM
Anyway, if they block it up, it'll probably be with hair and dirt or something. We can just use large amounts of liquid plumber. That'll do the trick.
Greasy Middle Eastern hair? :yuk:
No shit. Worse than pubes.
And yet, crude is down a buck fifty today.
The news this morning had a statement from the WH that basically blew it off as a threat. Sure, they have a plan to keep the strait open, but it would take way less resources on Iran's part to close it than it would on ours to open it. If not mines, then a missile strike could sink a tanker or two in the shipping lane and fuck everyone over. One LNG dome going off would be big fireworks.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 28, 2011, 12:59:00 PM
And yet, crude is down a buck fifty today.
The news this morning had a statement from the WH that basically blew it off as a threat. Sure, they have a plan to keep the strait open, but it would take way less resources on Iran's part to close it than it would on ours to open it. If not mines, then a missile strike could sink a tanker or two in the shipping lane and fuck everyone over. One LNG dome going off would be big fireworks.
It is a giant and pathetic cry for attention. They block the strait, and then what is the next step? The middle east (and rest of the world) sides against them, and a few missiles into Iran cripples their economy. Not to mention they need that strait open more than we do.
I'm guessing whoever is running Iran is just jealous of all the attention North Korea and Syria are getting at the moment.
Quote from: alfred russel on December 28, 2011, 01:10:50 PM
It is a giant and pathetic cry for attention. They block the strait, and then what is the next step?
Sort of like Occupy Wall Street.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 28, 2011, 01:23:14 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on December 28, 2011, 01:10:50 PM
It is a giant and pathetic cry for attention. They block the strait, and then what is the next step?
Sort of like Occupy Wall Street.
OOOOOHHH.
Ah heck, let them block the Straits of Hormuz. Won't matter to us in the USA. We get very little oil from there anyway. And if we avoided taking action, then we can't be ragged on for sticking our noses in everything. If we do react, then we're the heavies for getting involved. I say don't worry about the Straits, and build the Canadian pipeline! What could possibly go wrong? ;)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 28, 2011, 01:23:14 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on December 28, 2011, 01:10:50 PM
It is a giant and pathetic cry for attention. They block the strait, and then what is the next step?
Sort of like Occupy Wall Street.
:XD:
Quote from: KRonn on December 28, 2011, 02:52:01 PM
Ah heck, let them block the Straits of Hormuz. Won't matter to us in the USA. We get very little oil from there anyway. And if we avoided taking action, then we can't be ragged on for sticking our noses in everything. If we do react, then we're the heavies for getting involved. I say don't worry about the Straits, and build the Canadian pipeline! What could possibly go wrong? ;)
It's not like it won't have an effect on our commodity prices though. Sure, we won't have supply shortages, but we'll still pay a lot more.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 28, 2011, 03:02:11 PM
Quote from: KRonn on December 28, 2011, 02:52:01 PM
Ah heck, let them block the Straits of Hormuz. Won't matter to us in the USA. We get very little oil from there anyway. And if we avoided taking action, then we can't be ragged on for sticking our noses in everything. If we do react, then we're the heavies for getting involved. I say don't worry about the Straits, and build the Canadian pipeline! What could possibly go wrong? ;)
It's not like it won't have an effect on our commodity prices though. Sure, we won't have supply shortages, but we'll still pay a lot more.
Higher prices, all the more incentive for green energy! Higher prices would help make green energy more plausible. And we could open up a lot more offshore drilling, instead of just China, Mexico or who ever else doing so just outside our borders.
More likely it will spur faster investment into shale plays in flyover US and Canada.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 28, 2011, 12:59:00 PM
And yet, crude is down a buck fifty today.
The news this morning had a statement from the WH that basically blew it off as a threat. Sure, they have a plan to keep the strait open, but it would take way less resources on Iran's part to close it than it would on ours to open it. If not mines, then a missile strike could sink a tanker or two in the shipping lane and fuck everyone over. One LNG dome going off would be big fireworks.
It's not as big a deal as is made out to be. Iran would mostly still be using Silkworm missiles of Iranian manufacture (the Chinese theoretically stopped selling HY-2s to Iran in the early 90s but Iran can make them themselves now.) These missiles are essentially "dumb", you launch them in a direction and the on-board radar flies them into stuff and they blow up.
During the Iran-Iraq War Iran used several of these to damage tankers and hit a Kuwaiti oil platform. But it was pointed out because they are essentially dumb missiles, you could put out
ten decoys for every legitimate target that Kuwait had in the area for less than the cost of one Silkworm missile. So if you properly deployed decoys it would make it very un-economical for Iran to use those against land-based targets.
If we end up having to escort tankers through the Straits as we did in the late 80s, that's an expensive proposition and we'll probably suffer a few missile hits. But we have more advanced anti-missile technology than we did back then, and I don't think the Iranians have significantly improved on a 25 year old missile design (one that even in its prime was not first rate.)
Anyway, if Iran tries anything I don't imagine the situation will be any worse than it was during the end of the Iran-Iraq War when tanker attacks got to be really common (especially in 87.) It caused problems and reduced the volume of oil coming through there, but it wasn't the economic cataclysm I've seen some people suggest Iran could bring about.
They launched Silkworms against the USS Gary in Operation Mantis with zilch results.
You can learn more about Silkworms and how an even light US Navy deployment in the Gulf pushed Iran's shit in at your local library or with a copy of Lee Zatarain's "Tanker War: America's First Conflict With Iran, 1987-1988", available from Casemate Publishing.
The Navy responds :cool:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45805706/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/#.Tvuu_HrmL1s
QuoteUS Navy warns Iran: Hormuz disruption 'will not be tolerated'
5th Fleet responds after Iran says closing strait 'will be easier than drinking a glass of water'
msnbc.com news services
updated 2 hours 21 minutes ago
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates —
The U.S. Navy's 5th fleet Wednesday warned Iran that any disruption of traffic flowing through the vital Strait of Hormuz oil route "will not be tolerated."
The warning came after Iran's navy chief Habibollah Sayyari told Iran's English language Press TV that "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."
"But right now, we don't need to shut it as we have the Sea of Oman under control and we can control the transit," said Sayyari, who is leading 10 days of exercises in the Strait. His reference to control was unclear.
In response, 5th Fleet spokeswoman Lt. Rebecca Rebarich said, "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 U.S. Navy is "always ready to counter malevolent actions to ensure freedom of navigation," she said.
Rebarich declined to say whether the U.S. force had adjusted its presence or readiness in the Gulf in response to Iran's comments, but said the Navy "maintains a robust presence in the region to deter or counter destabilizing activities, while safeguarding the region's vital links to the international community."
At the Pentagon, Press Secretary George Little also said that Iranian interference with passage of vessels through the strategic waterway "will not be tolerated," NBC News reported.
Little said that blocking naval traffic through the Strait represents "an important issue for security and stability in the region," and called the Strait "an economic lifeline."
Iran's fears
Sayyari's warning underline Iranian concern that the West is about to impose new sanctions that could target Tehran's vital oil industry and exports.
Western nations are growing increasingly impatient with Iran over its nuclear program. The U.S. and its allies have accused Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop nuclear weapons. Iran has denied the charges, saying its program is geared toward generating electricity and producing medical radioisotopes to treat cancer patients.
The U.S. Congress has passed a bill banning dealings with the Iran Central Bank, and President Barack Obama has said he will sign it despite his misgivings. Critics warn it could impose hardships on U.S. allies and drive up oil prices.
The bill could impose penalties on foreign firms that do business with Iran's central bank. European and Asian nations import Iranian oil and use its central bank for the transactions.
Iran is the world's fourth-largest oil producer, with an output of about 4 million barrels of oil a day. It relies on oil exports for about 80 percent of its public revenues.
Iran has adopted an aggressive military posture in recent months in response to increasing threats from the U.S. and Israel that they may take military action to stop Iran's nuclear program.
Iran's navy is in the midst of a 10-day drill in international waters near the strategic oil route. The exercises began Saturday and involve submarines, missile drills, torpedoes and drones. The war games cover a 1,250-mile (2,000-kilometer) stretch of sea off the Strait of Hormuz, northern parts of the Indian Ocean and into the Gulf of Aden near the entrance to the Red Sea as a show of strength and could bring Iranian ships into proximity with U.S. Navy vessels in the area.
Iranian media are describing how Iran could move to close the strait, saying the country would use a combination of warships, submarines, speed boats, anti-ship cruise missiles, torpedoes, surface-to-sea missiles and drones to stop ships from sailing through the narrow waterway.
Iran's navy claims it has sonar-evading submarines designed for shallow waters of the Persian Gulf, enabling it to hit passing enemy vessels.
The Fifth Fleet consists of 20-plus ships supported by combat aircraft, with 15,000 people afloat and another 1,000 ashore.
A closure of the strait could temporarily cut off some oil supplies and force shippers to take longer, more expensive routes that would drive oil prices higher. It also potentially opens the door for a military confrontation that would further rattle global oil markets.
Iran claimed a victory this month when it captured an American surveillance drone almost intact. It went public with its possession of the RQ-170 Sentinel to trumpet the downing as a feat of Iran's military in a complicated technological and intelligence battle with the U.S.
American officials have said that U.S. intelligence assessments indicate the drone malfunctioned.
About the Strait of Hormuz:
Location: The most important oil transit channel in the world is a narrow bend of water separating Oman and Iran. It connects the biggest Gulf oil producers, such as Saudi Arabia, with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. At its narrowest point, the strait is only 21 miles across and consists of 2-mile-wide navigable channels for inbound and outbound shipping and a 2-mile-wide buffer zone.
Oil shipments
Flows through the Strait in 2009 were roughly 33 percent of all seaborne traded oil (40 percent in 2008), or 17 percent of oil traded worldwide, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
Some 15.5 million barrels passed through in 2009, according to the U.S. EIA. U.S. warships patrol the area to ensure the safe passage.
The bulk of the oil exported through the Strait of Hormuz travels to Asia, the United States and Western Europe. About three-quarters of Japan's oil imports and about 50 percent of China's pass through this strait.
An additional 2 million barrels of oil products, including fuel oil, are exported through the passage daily, as well as liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Other shipments: Merchant ships carrying grain, iron ore, sugar, perishables and containers full of finished goods also pass through the strategic sea corridor en route to Gulf countries and ports such as Dubai.
That's not a response, you fucking moron. That's a press release.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on December 28, 2011, 08:30:20 PM
That's not a response, you fucking moron. That's a press release.
Oh come on, man. They had a lieutenant go on record.
Er, that would be seen as a clear Casus Belli by the US and the gulf arabs as well. And with no Soviet Union to hold either one in check I forsee a glorius demonstration of Western power via kinectic means...
Quote from: Legbiter on December 28, 2011, 08:47:19 PM
Er, that would be seen as a clear Casus Belli by the US and the gulf arabs as well. And with no Soviet Union to hold either one in check I forsee a glorius demonstration of Western power via kinectic means...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.gamerant.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2FXbox-360-Slim-and-Kinetic.JPG&hash=7e94b31ce889771bb1c5be86452e8c5b06d2a236)
:blink:
This kind of thing will all work out so well once Iran gets nukes. <_<
10,000 to 1? Advantage: Amerika.
Quote from: KRonn on December 28, 2011, 09:07:26 PM
This kind of thing will all work out so well once Iran gets nukes. <_<
What thing ?
I'd guess it'll take the rest of the decade for the Iranians to get a deliverable nuclear weapon system.
Meanwhile, I forsee the Saudi's buying Pakistani A-bombs sooner than that, assuming Pakistan holds together for that long. :unsure:
Quote from: mongers on December 28, 2011, 09:13:42 PM
Meanwhile, I forsee the Saudi's buying Pakistani A-bombs sooner than that, assuming Pakistan holds together for that long. :unsure:
The Saudis don't buy anything second-hand, my friend.
Quote from: mongers on December 28, 2011, 09:13:42 PM
Quote from: KRonn on December 28, 2011, 09:07:26 PM
This kind of thing will all work out so well once Iran gets nukes. <_<
What thing ?
I'd guess it'll take the rest of the decade for the Iranians to get a deliverable nuclear weapon system.
Meanwhile, I forsee the Saudi's buying Pakistani A-bombs sooner than that, assuming Pakistan holds together for that long. :unsure:
The posturing and diplomacy, gunboat or otherwise. I wonder how things will be when Iran gets nukes. Not that they'll use them, but I'd think they'll be a lot more confident in threats and blustering.
Quote from: KRonn on December 28, 2011, 09:23:41 PM
Quote from: mongers on December 28, 2011, 09:13:42 PM
Quote from: KRonn on December 28, 2011, 09:07:26 PM
This kind of thing will all work out so well once Iran gets nukes. <_<
What thing ?
I'd guess it'll take the rest of the decade for the Iranians to get a deliverable nuclear weapon system.
Meanwhile, I forsee the Saudi's buying Pakistani A-bombs sooner than that, assuming Pakistan holds together for that long. :unsure:
The posturing and diplomacy, gunboat or otherwise. I wonder how things will be when Iran gets nukes. Not that they'll use them, but I'd think they'll be a lot more confident in threats and blustering.
Gotcha. :thumbsup:
Personally i don't see anything happening for a while, probably until after Obama's re-election. Given events in Syria, I'd be very surprised if the Israelis did anything.