Archived material Access restricted Article

Today's Front Page   View All of Mon 03/13/2006 View Sun 03/12/2006 View Sat 03/11/2006 View Fri 03/10/2006 View Thu 03/09/2006 View Wed 03/08/2006 View Tue 03/07/2006
2006-03-13 Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran faces petrol dilemma
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Steve 2006-03-13 13:02|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [6533 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 But diplomats and political analysts have said the West would probably shy away from slapping sanctions on petrol sales to Iran because that could spark political volatility.

So you have a way to deal with the M²s and you refuse to consider it? This attitute makes the word "enabling" seem tame. The M²s are painting themselves into a corner. They have created an artificial demand based upon subsidized ---really subsidized---energy. They have huge ambitions for being a nuclear power, etc etc. In short they are spending their cash flows on their own dreams and not on the needs of the people. There is a great opportunity here to topple these madmen without a big military operation. At least, I hope that it is being considered. 9 cents a litre is equal to 34.1 cents/ US gallon. There is one big achilles heel to wack.
Posted by Alaska Paul back home again">Alaska Paul back home again  2006-03-13 13:45||   2006-03-13 13:45|| Front Page Top

#2 So you have a way to deal with the M²s and you refuse to consider it? This attitute makes the word "enabling" seem tame.

Makes the idiocy of "soft power" apparent, doesn't it?
Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford  2006-03-13 13:52||]">[]  2006-03-13 13:52|| Front Page Top

#3 Makes the idiocy of "soft power" apparent, doesn't it?

If, by "apparent" you mean a neon day-glo, UV, phosphoescent, million candle power BGO (Blinding Glimpse of the Obvious), I'd have to agree with you. In the very near future, I expect to see "soft power" listed in the Thesaurus as a synonym for "wanking".
Posted by Zenster 2006-03-13 15:17||   2006-03-13 15:17|| Front Page Top

#4 Rule #1, don't ever tell your enemy something they are doing is stupid and doesn't work, or give them helpful and friendly advice, or incentive, on how to fix it.
Posted by Anonymoose 2006-03-13 15:25||   2006-03-13 15:25|| Front Page Top

#5 Six months? They believe the world will end before then.
Posted by Jake-the-Peg 2006-03-13 15:37||   2006-03-13 15:37|| Front Page Top

#6 Ninety percent of their imports have to go through those same Straits of Hormuz they 'intend' to block. These folks are about as stable as a snowball in the Sahara in the summertime. We, of course, can help their self-destruction by smashing a couple of pipeline complexes while we're taking out their nuke infrastructure, and watch the fun. BTW, two can play that game of blockade, and we have tons of experience. I also hope this time we also have the cojones to take out a few "friendly" ships that want to break that blockade, regardless of country of origin.
Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot  2006-03-13 16:17||]">[]  2006-03-13 16:17|| Front Page Top

#7 There is no need to do anything at the straits of Hormuz. The US can track merchant ships anywhere and intercept them anywhere. A pro-forma declared blockade, with a few destroyers in the general area, will deter pretty much everyone. If any vessels try they can be intercepted at sea in the Indian ocean or in the Persian gulf and seized, or just ordered to other ports. If any petrol tankers sneak through they can be sunk in harbor or at the terminal, but that shouldn't really be necessary.

Escalation would involve bombing internal pipelines while avoiding any permanent serious damage to infrastructure. That will stop production without burning any bridges.

Political volatility may not describe the problem. A possible reason is that a gasoline/diesel blockade will be blamed on the US and may spark a "rally round the flag" effect.

This will die away after a while when the population faces true hardship, but then there will be a negative propaganda impact of that hardship. You may recall how the Serbs and Saddam Hussein exploited these things.
Posted by buwaya 2006-03-13 18:11||   2006-03-13 18:11|| Front Page Top

#8 They're building an A bomb, but can't/will not build a refinery?
Posted by gromgoru 2006-03-13 19:39||   2006-03-13 19:39|| Front Page Top

#9 They're building an A bomb, but can't/will not build a refinery?

They're using the North Korean economic model.
Posted by Zenster 2006-03-13 19:56||   2006-03-13 19:56|| Front Page Top

#10 Actually, nothing a few calls to the insurance companies won't fix.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-03-13 20:16||   2006-03-13 20:16|| Front Page Top

#11 I'm no naval strategist but if Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz won't the gas have trouble getting to them?
Posted by JAB 2006-03-13 21:13||   2006-03-13 21:13|| Front Page Top

#12 ...if Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz won't the gas have trouble getting to them?

A rather crucial point, methinks. Of course, if they run short, we could always airlift some in. Careful with that stuff, guys! Its really flammable...Oops!
Posted by SteveS 2006-03-13 22:02||   2006-03-13 22:02|| Front Page Top

#13 Steve S, I hear there is a way to make a jelly out of the gasoline so it is safer to deliver by air. Maybe we would have to try that.
Posted by JAB 2006-03-13 22:52||   2006-03-13 22:52|| Front Page Top

11:42 Just Curious
23:53 JosephMendiola
23:53 The Flipper
23:41 JosephMendiola
23:27 JosephMendiola
23:22 Frank G
23:20 JosephMendiola
23:19 Frank G
23:15 JosephMendiola
23:09 JosephMendiola
22:55 JosephMendiola
22:54 Hupaviper Flaique8373
22:53 BA
22:52 Frank G
22:52 JAB
22:51 Brett
22:50 Jan
22:35 JosephMendiola
22:31 BA
22:18 bombay
22:17 Frank G
22:16 Frank G
22:11 doc
22:07 DMFD

Search WWW Search