Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by JosephMendiola 2012-04-14 01:25||
#2 No mention, not even speculation, about what sinking just a single oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz would mean for the world economy, renders the discussion moot. I suppose the US could render Iranian naval forces and artillery equivalents non-functional while leaving oil transport unimpeded. That seems unlikely to happen.
I still like the idea of airdropping a vast supply of pistols and ammo into Iran as a gift to those opposing the mullahs.
Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2012-04-14 02:54||
#3 I still like the idea of airdropping a vast supply of pistols and ammo into Iran as a gift to those opposing the mullahs.
RPGs, man. Don't forget the RPGs. :-)
But I'll bet they'd listen to reason if they truly feared for their lives. Decapitation strikes, a warning MOAB near a couple of key infrastructure points, families of mullahs threatened, napalm any place that might provide cover for a missile launch, laying waste to their entire navy in an afternoon (including their stupid subs), bombing the crap out if Republican Guard barracks and key logistics centers, a couple of fake cluster bomb alpha strikes in key population centers (maybe use yellow Nerf balls with the words "If this had been a cluster bomb, your child would be dead now, so don't do anything stupid to make us use them. Tell your neighbors." written on it), sonic booms all through the night, radio broadcasts promising $100,000 rewards for informantion leading to the hamburgerization of key government and military officials, etc., etc.. And of course tactical nukes to take out their precious nuke sites. No boots on the ground. And take out Syria and the Norks.
And then get nasty if they get stupid.
Maybe offer control of their oilfields to China.
Posted by gorb 2012-04-14 03:29||
#4 As a first step: INVITE CHINA to make a military road from China across Afghanistan to the Iranian border.
Posted by Water Modem 2012-04-14 05:47||
#5 Guerrilla tactics are somewhat ineffective against airborn targets. The US would be smart not to put boots on the ground, except perhaps advisors and contacts working with Iranian rebels.
Posted by rjschwarz 2012-04-14 10:23||
#6 Anguper Hupomosing9418, a number of tankers were sunk during the Iran/Iraq tanker war. I'm sure they've modeled it out very well. The real fear is the speculators send the price up, but that can be controlled.
Posted by rjschwarz 2012-04-14 10:24||
#7 THAT is what the SPR is for.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2012-04-14 10:34||
#8 Depends on what business you're in, "nation building" or "nation destroying".
With Iran, I'd prefer the latter.
Posted by tu3031 2012-04-14 12:12||
#9 I am sure there are plans to mine all Iranian harbors. Speedboats would be destroyed at their bases. If shtf, then action important. Getting inside MM OODA loop is paramount.
Posted by Alaska Paul 2012-04-14 12:28||
#10 a number of tankers were sunk during the Iran/Iraq tanker war. I'm sure they've modeled it out very well
Like our economists modeled the housing bubble crash? If that is the case, we are already sunk. The world has changed a great deal since. If sovereign interest rates merely returned to the levels current during the last Iran/Iraq war, multiple national economies would collapse.
Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2012-04-14 13:23||
#11 The thing is, Iran is due to run out of oil it can pump in eight years, if I understand correctly. So nation destroying isn't necessary, except as a lesson to similarly ambitious nations. Likewise, Israel needn't utterly destroy Iran's nuclear industry, merely set it back enough, often enough, that weapons aren't accomplishable before economic melt-down is achieved. Afterward, Iranians of fighting age should be too busy caring for their grandparents and trying desperately to strive off starvation to trouble themselves about sending war beyond their borders.
Posted by trailing wife 2012-04-14 16:32||
#12 So nation destroying isn't necessary, except as a lesson to similarly ambitious nations.
Well, Barry is fond of "teachable moments"...
Posted by tu3031 2012-04-14 16:35||
#13 Like our economists modeled the housing bubble crash?
Posted by Pappy 2012-04-14 16:37||
#14 Like our economists modeled the housing bubble crash?
Actually the housing crash was modeled very nicely. Having worked in the mortgage banking industry for many years, I can tell you that people cringing as the tsunami approachedwaiting for it to hit.
Back to Iran: The Iranians probably want to repeat the Iraqi insurgency only 3 - 5x bigger. There are 3 problems with that strategy:
1) The US already has experience defeating a Muslim insurgency.
2) The Sunni Arabs are not about to help out a radical Shia insurgency (like they did in Iraq).
3) The Iranian insurgents will not have a foreign sanctuary next door.
Certainly a conflict with Iran would be messy, but I am convinced we would win.
Posted by Frozen Al 2012-04-14 19:07||
#15 DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > IRAN TELLS UAE: [We are Strong +] WE WILL CRUSH ANY AGGRESSION. UAE should NOT make a serious mistake + underestimate Iran like the Zionist US + Israel.
* SAME > SAUDI AMBASSADOR TO EGYPT THREATENS IRAN WID MILITARY ACTION.
* SAME > BAHRAINI FORCES [Govt-Security] ATTACK MOURNERS AT MANAMA, attending the funeral of slaim Jounalist Ahmed Ismail al-Samadi.
Also, SAME = [AL-Jazeera]PAKISTANI TROOPS AID [Saudi-backed?]BAHRAINI CRACKDOWN, agz local Shias.
FYI thats NUKE-WANNABE IRAN'S BFF NUCLEAR PAKISTAN doing that to Bahraini Shias.
YEMEN + UAE + BAHRAIN = ARISE, BASE-TOO-FAR QATAR, ARISE??? OMAN wants to feel the love.
Posted by JosephMendiola 2012-04-14 22:39||
#16 Frozen Al - Who is "we"? The answer to that is the key to "our" problem.
Posted by Halliburton - Mysterious Conspiracy Division 2012-04-14 22:43||