Found a great article that explains the gravity of this news event that most people barely notice. I’ll have more on the Pandora’s Box of a nuclear-armed Iran later. Till then, this is WELL WORTH THE READ!
An Israeli raid would be complicated – it’s over 1000 miles from Israel to Iran, and their planes would need permission to overfly Iraq, Saudi Arabia or Syria, refuel in the air and destroy several targets which are not only scattered throughout the country but also hardened. And even if successful, an Israeli attack would be unlikely to wipe out Iran’s nuclear program.
What would happen next? Iran has already announced it would retaliate by attacking US and Israeli targets in the region and blockading the Straits of Hormuz, which would be considered an act of war against the United States. An Israeli attack on Iran, with or without American cooperation, would trigger an Iranian response which could turn the Middle East into a ‘fireball’, according to UN nuclear weapons chief Mohammed El Baradei.
But wait – it gets worse. Forty percent of the world’s oil goes through the Straits of Hormuz, which is just 21 miles wide with shipping lanes only two miles wide. Blockade, sabotage, terrorist incidents – all of these are possible and any of them could halt the flow of oil. Even if the Straits remain open in such a crisis, insurance rates would be prohibitive. Gas rationing would be a given, and $5 gallon a gas just a fond memory. The economies of several countries would literally collapse.
Author of “Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War
Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War: Malensek, Scott: 9798864028674: Amazon.com: Books
I don’t think Iran’s Navy would last 24 hours if they attempted a blockade. I can’t think of an arena where our technology gives us greater military advantage than in the open water.
The Straits of Hormuz are not open water and asymmetrical threats would be difficult to counter.
What concerns me the most is the time.
The Straits are only 21 miles, but shipping lanes only 2 miles. It doesn’t take a lot to close 2 miles of shipping lane. A few burning tankers would provide all the cover needed. It’s hardly an “open water” scenario.
But back to the TIME.
Think about the events involved in military (including asymetric) action, and the political reaction as well as military (including asymetric) reaction.
Takes hours for Israeli Air Force to get to Iran, and start dropping bombs. That’s a long time to go undetected in a very tightly watched region.
Once the attack is detected or announced by bombing, how long before politicians get the word and react, and how long before military reactions take place? How long before terrorists are sent to war? Once a military reaction starts, given the way the Gulf is packed with ships, the region is packed w US bases, and the short range….man, as soon as the first bomb hits, it could be minutes before 1000 ballistic missiles start launching at Israel (even w conventional 1ton warheads…that’s a lotta LOTTA damage). It could be minutes before US ships get attacked, and subsequently seconds before US ships start sinking Iranian ships etc. It’s like a shootout in a phone booth. Meanwhile, on the other side of the globe, McCain and Obama staff get the word via supporters/channels and their spin doctors have to decide immediately what to say, what to support, what to oppose, if to oppose, if to support, etc.
No bs, if an Israeli strike happens before the election in Nov, and they actually make it to their targets, the biggest, most shaping events of the war could take place between commercial breaks (7-10 minutes).
TIME is what concerns me. There’s not a lot of decision making time-military or political.
I was wondering whether the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (historically kind of a peacenik/leftish organization) had actually updated the Doomsday Clock as a result of this news. But no, i see you’ve just decided to borrow their gimmick. They last updated their clock in 2007 (see press release here). Notice they’ve decided to start getting all worked up about climate change, presumably in an attempt to stay current.
Whether you’re wrong on the issues is sort of a separate matter; personally I consider your worries to be pure hysteria. But regardless of that I think ripping off the lefty Doomsday Clock is lame – get your own catchy idea and stop riding on theirs.
According to this story, Iraq has allowed a mass of Israeli planes on U.S. bases. Those planes are now 5 minutes from their targets.
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1215330937574&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
This is not a bad or complicated set of circumstances. First of all, we have an army right in Irans back yard, fully equiped and ready to go, with the troops of Iraq and other nations in place to take up some of the slack should US soldiers be redeployed to Iran. Clearing the Straights of Hormuz would not be the most difficult task in the world. It would just require the will and the doing. And as for oil disruption?? We are sitting on a huge supply in Iraq. I would tell them that they had just begun to repay the United States for our service in dispatching Saddam and the rest of the bad guys. The tab?? Oh, a few million barrels a day…we’ll let you know. Neither Israel nor the US can allow this little piss ant terrorist to acquire nukes. The thought is ridiculous! If the left gets upset, I am sure that the vast majority of Israelis and Americans would have the same two words for them. Why in hell should any thinking human being worry about offending people like Chuck Schumer, when a 5’2″ Islamic nut wants to nuke us??!! Non-leftist types, both in and out of Washington D.C., need to man-up and worry about their lives and families, rather than the reaction of the NY Times.
I don’t think invading Iran is a good idea, a possibility, or even logistically possible. US military action’s gonna be limited to airstrikes, missile attacks, naval power, and raids. These are all still VERY powerful military options, but invading….nah.
Funny that I brought up my opine on this on your Israel/Iraq thread, Scott. So I’m cross posting some of it here, where it’s more applicable. And I agree no invasion of Iran is a good idea.
I don’t see Israel or the US going after them. I do, however, see their own citizens taking their government down (with external aid). The Iranian economy is in the toilet, and Ahmadinejad’s popularity is swirling the edges of the toilet bowl for public opinion. France backed out of oil development there in the past day or two… the 3rd oil investor to do so.
The missile launches, IMHO, are primarily to jack up oil prices to rise to protect their oil revenue, which is declining. Especially since the add’l oil investment/drilling has backed off.
But frankly, I just don’t see the world leaping willy-nilly into conflict with Iran. What they could do to the cargo traffic alone, starting from the Persian Gulf, could set the world into an economic tail spin. But I do see finding ways to have it fall from within. The times and citizenry – quite western in the youth, who are rapidly the majority – are ripe for internal change.
Just another perspective…. but only time will tell what actually transpires, eh?