Iranian oil - a paradox

Arnfinn Madsen · #1 10-01-2005, 02:25 PM

Iran is indirectly threatening to stop oil exports while the US is indirectly threatening to block Iranian oil exports. I guess the Iranians would be the big loser in both scenarios though and US the smallest loser?

Felix_Nietsche · #2 10-01-2005, 02:34 PM

I would love to see the USA inact an a naval bloackade of Iran. It would mean higher oil prices but it would many other positive benefits.

*Help to destablize the Iranian govt, a sponsor of terror.
*Help to slow their nuclear program.
*Greatly inhibit the Iranian ability to purchase, manufacture arms to supply to Sunni/Shiite rebels in Iraq.

The only wildcard is how the moderate Iranians will react. Will they sit back or will they rally around the governing theocracy? Personally I wouldn't care if they did, the benefits outway the negatives.... As for Iran threatening to stop shipments of oil, this is an empty threat. This would be like a person with $100,000 of credit card debt threatening to quit their job. Sure they could do it but who would get hurt more?

#3 10-01-2005, 03:03 PM

A Naval blockade is an act of war. Are you suggesting we declare war on Iran? An interesting idea, but it should be reserved for another thread.

My interpretation of your post is that the majority of Iranians are moderates? Widely discussed, but as yet undetermined.

If, in fact, the majority of Iranians are not moderate, but, in fact, loyal to their government and fiercely proud of their country, you have then opened a whole 'nuther can of worms.

[ QUOTE ]

...this is an empty threat. This would be like a person with $100,000 of credit card debt threatening to quit their job. Sure they could do it but who would get hurt more?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're ass-u-ming they think as you. Not something I, personally, want to risk. And the risks that go along with out-and-out war with Iran are many.

radek2166 · #4 10-01-2005, 03:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I would love to see the USA inact an a naval bloackade of Iran. It would mean higher oil prices but it would many other positive benefits.

[/ QUOTE ]

When was the last Naval bloackaed?

Felix_Nietsche · #5 10-01-2005, 04:20 PM

You're ass-u-ming they think as you. Not something I, personally, want to risk. And the risks that go along with out-and-out war with Iran are many.
************************************************** *
What can Iran do if the US fleet imposes a blockade?
*Work on developing nuclear weapons?
*Finance terror groups?
*Manufacturing shape charges to kill US troops more effectively in roadside bombings and then give them to hostile insurgents?
*Supplying small arms and ammunition to insurgents.
*Assassinating any Shiite clerics in Iraq which are friendly to the US.
*Engage in massive countefeiting of US currency?

Hmmmmmm.....they are already doing this. If this is Iran at peace then I guess I don't know what peace is....... It seems to me the biggest risk is allow this behavior to continue without enacting consequences on Iran. I think your thought process is rather cowardly. It is the Iranians that need to worry. They are engaging in several war-like acts on the USA. So far Bush doesn't have the balls to deal with them other than to call them a member of the axis of evil. And it goes with out saying that no Democrat 'leader' has the balls to confront the Iranians.....