Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dark Skies

I was going to post this earlier, but the thread dropped and didn't feel like looking for it:

Iran has threatened to close the Straights of Hormuz if it is referred to the UN Security Council.

Nothing would play into our hands better.

Even attempting to close the Straights would constitute an Act of War against Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Saudia Arabia and Iraq (We would immediately see how close Iraqi shiites are to their Iranian brothers if Iran tries to shut down 50% of their revenues). Assuming they shot missiles at or near tankers to enforce the closure, it would constitute an act of war against the country of ownership (Greece, Turkey, Cyprus for example), against the flag of registration (OK... Panama... who cares) and against the parent nation of any sailors killed or injured (India anyone?).

Further, while China will take Iran's side in attempting to thwart any disruption in it's oil supplies, it would have difficulty finding a reason for intervening (even if they could) in a "justifiable" counter-attack.

We would also assume that given that French, British and American warships are in the Gulf, that an attack "near" them, would also constitute an "act of war" against those countries. (I assume, again, that in that case the French would give us the codes to disable the Exocets that Iran has purchased from them).

Unilaterally closing (or attempting to close) the straights might also push the Russians to give us the disabling codes to the Moskit/SS-N-22 Sunburn.

Dissident Iranians themselves might then feel that a multi-national strike on the "instigators of war" would be justified, whereas a strike on Iran for simply "attempting to build peaceful nuclear power (barf alert)" would not be.

The Iranians may have just overplayed their hand.


67 posted on 01/26/2006 3:39:21 PM PST by Philistone (Turning lead into gold...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Philistone

Precisely. Oil, which Iran is trying to leverage in exchange for nukes, is what will keep it from going nuke.

It's another poker game that Dubya's got going here. In Iraq, he played the cards so that war was inevitible. With Iran, he is playing the cards to avoid war. All it takes is this: "call."

Iran cannot afford this war. No matter how crazy the mullahs, if Iran chooses war -- and it will be Iran that makes that decision, and not anyone else -- Iran dies. The only nation in this entire game that can afford a Persian war is the U.S. China can't afford it. ($150+ oil hurts China far more than anyone else.) Europe can't afford it. The entire Gulf region can't afford it, as you have described. (Russia is the wildcard here.)

Ahmadinejad thinks he can force the world to accept a nuclear Iran for fear of an oil embargo. The opposite is the case: for fear of an oil embargo, the world cannot afford to let Iran go nuke. This will become evident soon enough.


176 posted on 01/26/2006 6:08:11 PM PST by nicollo (All economics are politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson