You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Sri Lanka
Iran Unable To Block Hormuz
2006-04-27
Iran lacks the capability to block the world's leading shipping route for crude oil exports. The Center for Strategic and International Studies said the Iranian Navy, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, has failed to procure the platforms or weapons required to block the Straits of Hormuz, the passage for 60 percent of the world's oil trade. In a report, the Washington-based center said the United States could block any Iranian attempt to attack Gulf shipping, particularly from the sea.

"Iran could not close the Strait of Hormuz, or halt tanker traffic, and its submarines and much of its IRGC forces would probably be destroyed in a matter of days if they become operational," the report said. The assertion undermined an Iranian warning to threaten the global oil trade if attacked by the United States. The warning was issued during the Holy Prophet exercise in the Gulf, which took place from March 31 to April 6.
Posted by:Fred

#14  What AP sed. A mullah gotta know it's limitations.
Posted by: 6   2006-04-27 19:29  

#13  Iran needs the Persian Gulf, too, for its oil exports and the Mad Mullah Moolah. Kharg Island terminal and all. Any existing pipelines through Pakland, Turkmenistan (?) would be destroyed, so Iran would have no foreign exchange AND no 36 cent/gallon gasoline for their masses. Iran has seriously miscalculated their position by making threats against shipping in the Straits of Hormuz. The only thing stopping the rest of the world the will to wack the MMs back. Cut off Persian Gulf oil and the Iranian MMs will get wacked---big time.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2006-04-27 18:09  

#12  "Iran Unable To Block Hormuz"

This is a conclusion based on relative strengths of US and Iranian military forces, and the fact that the US would stop such an attempt cold through whetever means necessary, including occupation of Iranian territory. It does not mean that they lack the men and materiel to do such a thing.
Posted by: Mark E.   2006-04-27 18:04  

#11  Wonder how long the west could cover Iranian exports? Ummmm..... the US could do it for a year from the SPR. That's assuming no Persian leaks. LOL!
Posted by: 6   2006-04-27 17:05  

#10  You all got it wrong, the US will not allow Iran to 'direct funnel' it's oil to other communist and Arab nations as a 100% stoppage to the west is inacted by the mullahs! My hunch is that Iran's capacity will by 'capped' until the dust clears and the resistance gauged!
Posted by: smn   2006-04-27 16:27  

#9  What about nuclear mines or some kind of chemical mixture that poisons the water? I thought nuclear mines were a concern at one time in Iraq. Any attack of that magnitude would be enough to choke the global economy if 60% of the oil is shipped through there. They are suicidal and willing to kill their own people if it will usher in the Mahdi, so if they claim to have nukes, we'd better believe their bluster. Bin Laden promised he will not die humiliated, so he might personally go out in a blaze of martyrdom, so we shouldn't give them another breath and pre-emptively eliminate the threat, with extreme prejudice.
Posted by: Danielle   2006-04-27 16:26  

#8  The first world simply can't do without that oil. There is no blocking the straits. Any amount of force would be approved by the world community to keep the oil comming.
Posted by: Unereque Anguth5552   2006-04-27 11:05  

#7  I suspect Bush would not delay in instituting convoys for Gulf traffic as was done last time this was an issue. The markets will charge for the additional risk, but it won't be exorbatant, especially given what has already happened to oil prices.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-04-27 10:17  

#6  Mines are not going to block the shipping traffic. The Iranians are being watched extremely carefully now and have the disadvantage of not knowing when the strike will come. Once it comes, they won't be allowed out of port alive, let alone anywhere near the shipping lanes.
Posted by: Darrell   2006-04-27 10:06  

#5  Iran is quite capable of blocking the Strait without doing anything other than threaten. Commercial shipping is very risk-averse--they won't do anything not approved by their insurance underwriters.

That is why if the US wants to keep the traffic flowing, they would have to promise not only to underwrite insurance on all ships, but to also pay for any other financial losses accrued during the "blockade", including replacement ships, and heavy bonuses to ship crews for sailing in a war zone.

Ironically, this money would not only go to the shipping companies, but to the markets supporting their product *and* quite possibly to their oil customers--mostly China.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2006-04-27 10:00  

#4  I personally don't think George Bush gives a tinker's damn about what people think of him. He's in the last act of his political career, his family has more than enough money, and he sees the MMs for what they are: a bunch of homicidal maniacs just waiting for the opportunity to commit mass murder. I think he's going to take them out and I think he's going to do it quickly and with a very large loss of Iranian life. I think they've screwed with the wrong man and, if he kills millions of them, all I can say is "they begged for it and he gave them what they asked for."
Posted by: mac   2006-04-27 09:11  

#3  With the US navy short on minesweepers it would only take a couple of commercial ships sunk by cheap mines & the resultant international furore to seriously erode the political will neccessary for continuing a naval blockade of Iran.
Posted by: pihkalbadger   2006-04-27 06:01  

#2  Didn't stop Reagan then, and won't stop Dubya now. Wid US-Allied milfors all around it, the Mullahs only strategic line of retreat/withdrawal is thru Central Asia where US-Allied forces are again. Since the WOT = forcing SOcilaism and OWG on America, plus given the general decline of Muslim + Socialist worlds, the question then becomes - are the Mullahs, and MadMoud of the Apocalypse, as leaders of one of the Failed/ANgry Left's cannon fodder, "line(s) in the sand", expendable nations for the PC destabilization and defeat of America, willing to detonate one or more nuke devices on their own soil, against their own people and cities for the sake of destabilizing America and empowering PC Internat hatred against America???
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-04-27 00:27  

#1  Iran is unable, but the panic on the oil future market would be far greater damage than any Iran could inflict.
Posted by: DarthVader   2006-04-27 00:25  

00:00