Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 01/24/2006 View Mon 01/23/2006 View Sun 01/22/2006 View Sat 01/21/2006 View Fri 01/20/2006 View Thu 01/19/2006 View Wed 01/18/2006
1
2006-01-24 Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iranian official: UN sanctions may lead us to seal off Persian Gulf
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 tipper 2006-01-24 09:47|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Just try it you sorry excuses for terrorists. The eastern shore of the gulf will be nothing but smoking ruin if you so much as think about it.

Posted by mmurray821 2006-01-24 10:17||   2006-01-24 10:17|| Front Page Top

#2 They have a real death wish, don't they!
Posted by Darrell 2006-01-24 10:20||   2006-01-24 10:20|| Front Page Top

#3 A senior Iranian official threatened that Tehran may forcibly prevent oil export via the Straits of Hormuz if the UN imposed economic sanctions due to Iran's nuclear program, an Iranian news Web site said on Monday.

Really?? Iran would forcibly prevent oil export? I'd like to see them take their best shot at it.

These guys are practically asking for a boot in the face.
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-01-24 10:22||   2006-01-24 10:22|| Front Page Top

#4 Would never happen!

You don't think iranians are stupid enough to hand the US the perfect excuse to annihilate the iranian aero-naval forces(if any)...
Posted by frenchfregoli 2006-01-24 10:37||   2006-01-24 10:37|| Front Page Top

#5 Is that the Gulf of Rumsfeld they are talking about?
Posted by SteveS 2006-01-24 11:23||   2006-01-24 11:23|| Front Page Top

#6 Why, yes it is; it borders East Texas Iran...
Posted by Raj 2006-01-24 11:32||   2006-01-24 11:32|| Front Page Top

#7 they shut the straits and they shut their personal cash register.
Posted by bk 2006-01-24 11:33||   2006-01-24 11:33|| Front Page Top

#8 act of war = Bush's unrestrained
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-01-24 11:42||   2006-01-24 11:42|| Front Page Top

#9 It appears Mo Rudaki has a lot of faith in allan and Gen. Salami's airforce. How many planes does the father of asymetric warfare plan to sink in the strait to block it?
Posted by Inspector Clueso 2006-01-24 11:47||   2006-01-24 11:47|| Front Page Top

#10 How ironic. That is probably what we should have done back when Ahmedinejad & Company took over the US Embassy 25 years ago.

Not that Carter would have had the guts to do it, of course. Or the intelligence.
Posted by Desert Blondie 2006-01-24 11:51|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]  2006-01-24 11:51|| Front Page Top

#11 Gotta recycle this line just one more time:

"He's talking like he's gonna get an apendectomy when he's really gonna get an enema."

This one has causus belli written all over it. If the blockade actually occurs, the very first static target we hit should be Kargh Island*. This will cripple Iran's economy and oil export ability for years.

* I recommend severing all feeder pipelines first in case of the government toppling quickly. Then economic order could be restored immediately, if desired. In a protracted scenario, the entire pumping complex should be leveled to substantially cripple Iran's economy.
Posted by Zenster 2006-01-24 11:52||   2006-01-24 11:52|| Front Page Top

#12 In other words, they would like to provide the US Fleet on station there with a target rich environment.
Allan didn't pass out much in the way of brains to the Persians.
Posted by JerseyMike 2006-01-24 11:52||   2006-01-24 11:52|| Front Page Top

#13 When I was a naval officer (ASWO), we ran allot of scenarios dealing with just this situation. Their diesel subs can be a real threat if they are not caught in their pens - they could seal off the straights pretty easy by sinking a couple oil tankers at the right spots and can be a bitch to find since they can shot while sitting on the bottom. Another thing we always were concerned about were the Silkworm installations - but with today's precision airstrikes, they might not be the threat they were 11 years ago. They can really screw things up though with sinking a tanker in the right spot.

Here comes $6 a gallon gas.
Posted by Yosemite Sam 2006-01-24 11:54||   2006-01-24 11:54|| Front Page Top

#14 The Iranians may not be that stupid. But hte way their President is talking, it sounds like he is -- or, like Osama bin Laden, believes that if he starts a big enough fight, Allah Himself will take a hand in the battle.

Of course, it doesn't look like bin Laden had Allah's personal private phone number. But he is a Sunni extremist, so perhaps President A. doesn't see that example as relevant to his own situation. But then, so few politicians are elected for their ability to see deeper into a stone than the rest of us.
Posted by trailing wife 2006-01-24 11:59||   2006-01-24 11:59|| Front Page Top

#15 Would not such an action constitute an act of war by Iran against ALL the nations of the Gulf of Arabia (Iraq, Kuwait, KSA, Qatar, UAE etc.? Would it not make possible a much broader coalition than Bush the elder assembled in GWI?
Would it trigger a broad Sunni-Shia war? On which side would Iraq fall? What about the masses of marginalized Shia in KSA - would they rise up? It strikes me that Iran may be interested in a lot more than just bearding the western dragon.
Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore  2006-01-24 12:00||   2006-01-24 12:00|| Front Page Top

#16 Frenchfregoli -

They tried it once before during the Tanker War of the mid 80s. It's a shame our communal memory is so short, otherwise we'd remember that the Iranian Navy actually tried to take on the USS Enterprise CVBG and got its clock cleaned with at least two frigates sunk, one seriously damaged, and a bunch of oil field outposts blown away the old-fashioned way by naval gunfire. Now IIRC they have mobile and fixed SS-N-2 Silkworm mounts up and down the Straits. Look for them to be gone real quick if the MMs decide to get froggy.
The threat alone will do horrendous economic damage (picture the cost per gallon going up $3-4 in a day again like after Katrina) and if they actually do sink a tanker, that'll be it - $10/gallon, anyone?

Mike
Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2006-01-24 12:06||   2006-01-24 12:06|| Front Page Top

#17 The Navy has been searching for a role for a long time and holding the Persian Pershing Gulf seems a suitable challenge.
Posted by Jake-the-Peg 2006-01-24 12:09||   2006-01-24 12:09|| Front Page Top

#18 Also, without oil exports of their own, how can they keep their allies like China in the game ?
This strategy is a self destruct lunacy, exactly what Allan's followers gravitate toward.
It also brings our Navy and Air Force into the fray. It's senseless, which is why they are leaning that way.
Posted by wxjames 2006-01-24 12:17||   2006-01-24 12:17|| Front Page Top

#19 Mike and yosemite san,

maybe,and it's a big maybe, in case of a miltary attack, iranians could wound or sink an american ship by a mixture of luck and bravado(be it silkworm, a lucky hit by a sub or RPG mounted zodiacs).
Then what?
The beauty of modern US warfare doctrine, is that gradual response is not in fashion.Hit an american miltary vessel, and in 48 hrs you won't be having any naval or airforce to be able to repeat it.
As for the price of oil, well, we 've handled the spikes in the past, and actually, since no country can afford a big hike, there will be a global consensus to get rid of the threat quickly and once for all.
The "strenght" of the iranian position is in the bluff. the moment they really act, they will be finished.
And that's exactly why they won't...
Posted by frenchfregoli 2006-01-24 12:25||   2006-01-24 12:25|| Front Page Top

#20 The Iranians have allot of missiles, subs, aircraft, and attack boats that could reek havoc, BUT that will be short lived and if the US hits first very limited if at all.

This capability mixed with Iran's open declarations that if they see war as imminent they will hit first is exactly why I think our attacking them first with no telegraph is crucial. The alternative albeit a PR boom is just very costly. Even if they do hit US firs the LLL's will just scream we forced them to do it like Japan blah blah blah you just cant win with the hardcore LLL's blind Bushilter hatred.

I think we are going to wake up one day to Bush on TV announcing our attack on Iran not the people but the gov, WMD, military, terrorist, and their leadership. Months of aerial bombardment followed by a no-fly-zone all over Iran and opportunity strikes with SOF insertion and support to any western friendly groups that pop up in the nation.

Until then we get to watch the EU/UN get punked out by the Iranian's on a daily basis
Posted by C-Low 2006-01-24 12:25||   2006-01-24 12:25|| Front Page Top

#21 The X-ray band satellites make finding diesel subs in shallow water in a confined area fairly simple.

I would rather doubt those tubs would get off a shot.
Posted by anymouse">anymouse  2006-01-24 12:45||   2006-01-24 12:45|| Front Page Top

#22 Iran maybe crazy like a fox. If this simply isn't a threat for China etc to avert their eyes to Iran's nuclear weapons program, then Iran is deliberately trying to start an external confict...why? A rally round the flag effect at home?
Posted by Jomoter Flatch4739 2006-01-24 12:46||   2006-01-24 12:46|| Front Page Top

#23 The beauty of modern US warfare doctrine, is that gradual response is not in fashion.

Don't count on it. The PC mentality infects more people than one might think, and the ones to be concerned with are members of the civilian leadership.
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2006-01-24 13:21||   2006-01-24 13:21|| Front Page Top

#24 I suggest this threat is directed primarily at China. But I truly doubt it is a very good idea to do so. By taking the long view, and allowing a more reasonable regime to occur in Iran, would be to ensure the long-term flow of oil to China.

Image hosting by Photobucket
Posted by  Anonymoose 2006-01-24 13:22||   2006-01-24 13:22|| Front Page Top

#25 In addition to the domestic issues, take a look at the price of oil. Rattling scimitars pays off twice for the Iraqis; higher revenue, credit with allies for jerking the evil Americans around. And it undermines the confidence of everybody, especially the GCC, when they jerk us around and the donks rush to their support by bashing BusHitler. It is actually great brinksmanship and should make everyone reconsider the lunatic talk about A-jad. He's crazy like a fox.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-01-24 13:23||   2006-01-24 13:23|| Front Page Top

#26 Good comment NS, but brinksmanship is a dangerous game. It demands that everyone perform the dance steps with absolute care lest someone's toes gets stepped upon. I am concerned that there are some non-fox crazies in the Iranian henhouse that might not have the skill to play the game.
Posted by remoteman 2006-01-24 13:39||   2006-01-24 13:39|| Front Page Top

#27 gotta love an Iranian coastal town called Sink - the new Atlantis after we're through. Goes along with Bam in an earthquake zone
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-01-24 13:41||   2006-01-24 13:41|| Front Page Top

#28 I also forgot to mention their mine capability - had to look it up to refresh my memory - been a while but here you go...

They have over 3,000 EM-52. The EM-52 is operational in deep water such as the Persian Gulf. When the hull of a ship passes over the device the mine is triggered and a rocket is fired at the hull. Placed in choke points such as the Strait of Hormuz, this device could be devastating. I can be laid by either surface ship or their 3 Kilo class subs.
Posted by Yosemite Sam 2006-01-24 13:45||   2006-01-24 13:45|| Front Page Top

#29 Yosemite Sam, can our dophin corps do anything about the mines?
Posted by trailing wife 2006-01-24 13:54||   2006-01-24 13:54|| Front Page Top

#30 When the hull of a ship passes over the device the mine is triggered and a rocket is fired at the hull.

Fabricate some really big iron-hulled flat bottom barges filled with compartmentalized flotation devices. They could take a hit without sinking. Better yet, use extremely compact ultra-high-gauss emitters on Zodiacs to trigger the mines. Use either of these configurations as sweeping and activation drones.

What's more, if Iran begins laying mines, immediately hole all vessels involved in such activities as and act of war. I doubt there'd be much brou-ha-ha from surrounding exporters.
Posted by Zenster 2006-01-24 14:10||   2006-01-24 14:10|| Front Page Top

#31 Nimble Spemble is right. All they have to do is rattle some sabre's, and they get more for the only thing they really have the west wants. Just hope for both our sakes, they realize they have to back off. Maybe as long as Europe is in front, they know they are safe.
Posted by plainslow 2006-01-24 14:15||   2006-01-24 14:15|| Front Page Top

#32 Perhaps the Iranians are concerned about global warming?

Really,$100 a barrel oil makes ALOT of things that dont look terribly economical, look economical. Everything from universal broadband for telecommuting, to mass transit, to large scale ethanol, to fuel from waste, etc, etc. This is a good way to shoot the long term interests of ALL oil exporters in the foot.
Posted by liberalhawk 2006-01-24 14:31||   2006-01-24 14:31|| Front Page Top

#33 What a stupid threat. Amateurs.....
Posted by TomAnon 2006-01-24 14:33||   2006-01-24 14:33|| Front Page Top

#34 trailing wife
I honestly don't know. When I was active our plans and war games never included dolphin corps - we "used" allot of mine sweepers continuously patroling the straits like they did durning the tanker wars of the late 80's. My gut tells me no though and I'd assume the Iranians would stick to the plans from when I was active and mine the hell out of the straits of Hormuz because it was simple and effective.
Posted by Yosemite Sam 2006-01-24 14:51||   2006-01-24 14:51|| Front Page Top

#35 A good opportunity to show Chavez, Jong Il, Morales, and name-your-favorite power-crazed hyphenated-blowhard the consequences of saber-rattling.
Posted by Hyper">Hyper  2006-01-24 14:52||   2006-01-24 14:52|| Front Page Top

#36 Regarding the threat of blocking the Strait of Hormuz by sinking tankers in the shipping lanes: going by the map in post 24, there is at peast 25 miles width of water 50 meters plus deep. I make the width of the lanes about 2 miles. If tankers were sunk in the lanes, the offensive threat would be swiftly dealt with, and then there is plenty of scope to simply move the lanes.
If Iran doesn't have the naval assets to control the Gulf, and it doesn't, it will not be able to block the Straits of Hormuz.
Posted by Grunter 2006-01-24 15:05||   2006-01-24 15:05|| Front Page Top

#37 Liberalhawk - If the Iraninnies are concerned about global warming, we can help there. Remember how in the Eighties we were all supposed to be scared of nuclear winter? Nukes block out the sun and cool the atmosphere. Two birds with one stone, if you catch my drift...
Posted by Jake-the-Peg 2006-01-24 15:05||   2006-01-24 15:05|| Front Page Top

#38 A sunken tanker might be quickly cleared by a nuke, and I'm sure we're watching for the first and last mine to be laid. Oh, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Mohammed-Nabi Rudaki will likely be dead in six months, one way or another.
Posted by Neutron Tom 2006-01-24 15:09||   2006-01-24 15:09|| Front Page Top

#39 Re: Desert Blondie #10 comment. The US military was going to create total confusion and chaos in Iran during the hostage rescue in 1979 or there abouts. They were ready to go with the warplanes. Only the helicopter hitting the Herc at night, starting the fire at Desert One resulted in a scrubbed mission.
Posted by Alaska Paul">Alaska Paul  2006-01-24 15:13||   2006-01-24 15:13|| Front Page Top

#40 Also, without oil exports of their own, how can they keep their allies like China in the game ?

Now we know why China was in such a hurry to fill their strategic reserves.
Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford  2006-01-24 15:17|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/]  2006-01-24 15:17|| Front Page Top

#41 Grunter
That sounds like of room but to tankers its not. It takes approx. 4 miles to stop a tanker going 15knts thats 800' long and displaces around 200,000 tons.

But then again, the world wants oil bad so they'd probably find a way to get it through and I honestly don't think any of this will really come into play.
Posted by Yosemite Sam 2006-01-24 15:18||   2006-01-24 15:18|| Front Page Top

#42 What a fantastic opportunity for the MSM. Come on, all together now, "Quagmire!"
Posted by Perfessor 2006-01-24 15:50||   2006-01-24 15:50|| Front Page Top

#43 Looking at the map in #24, that's all pretty flat land on the Arabian side, isn't it? You could dig a canal right through the Emirates and bypass the Straits completely. It would be expensive, and take a while to complete -- but it's far less digging than the Panama Canal, across easier terrain, with 100 years of advancement in earthmoving technology on your side.

Just a wild idea.
Posted by Mike 2006-01-24 15:52||   2006-01-24 15:52|| Front Page Top

#44 The mines are the only serious scary here. Keep an eye out for the potential layers, it won't be the Kilos.
Posted by 6 2006-01-24 16:04||   2006-01-24 16:04|| Front Page Top

#45 Why dig, just lay the pipe on the ground. The world will hate Iran by then and they will be chastised and isolated. This threat makes no sense. They are beginning to resemble a spoiled brat misbehaving for attention.
Posted by wxjames 2006-01-24 16:10||   2006-01-24 16:10|| Front Page Top

#46 Grunter is right. The Philip Channel, Singapore Strait is about half the width and carries twice as much traffic. Lanes could be created around one sunk tanker it would take 2 or 3 in the right location to block the Hormuz Strait.

Otherwise, I say we liberate the occupied North Omani territories.
Posted by phil_b">phil_b  2006-01-24 16:31|| http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/]">[http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/]  2006-01-24 16:31|| Front Page Top

#47 I go to bed, wake up and lookie here! I have a feeling Iran is getting really old in lots of oil dependent capitols right about now. This will focus everyone attention.

Iran doesn't get it. The oil must flow. Everyone one is quite willing to pay for it. If it doesn't flow their are plenty who will quite willing to take it. I don't think China will react as everyone thinks it will. It has a huge population that wants motor bikes, cars tv and conditioned air. You know the things that make a modern life. While China may block a UNSC referal or resolution there are things it can do to make the MM lives short and painful.

Blocking the Straits of Hormuz would give everyone the excuse they are waiting for.

AQ and the MMs are coordinating on this. This is just not a coincidence.
Posted by Sock Puppet O´ Doom 2006-01-24 16:33||   2006-01-24 16:33|| Front Page Top

#48 we could pipe it along the (old) Iranian coast - assuming it's elevated to keep it from radioactivity - just suggesting....
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-01-24 16:35||   2006-01-24 16:35|| Front Page Top

#49 If you squint just right the island labeled 'Jazireh-ye Qeshm' looks a lot like a giant aircraft carrier.

Just sayin', that's all. {;^)
Posted by Parabellum 2006-01-24 16:47||   2006-01-24 16:47|| Front Page Top

#50 The Iranians may be able to seal off the Persian Gulf for awhile, but only until US aircraft can destroy the Chinese-manufactured "Silkworm" anti-ship missile batteries that have been deployed into semi-hardened facilities all along the Straits of Hormuz and the southern end of the Gulf. I think this is the area where Iran wants to deploy all those new surface-to-air missile systems they're trying to get from Russia. All Russia has to do is say "no" to those, and Iran will be in a world of hurt.

Tankers are big targets. The first time one gets taken out either by an anti-ship missile, the entire Persian Gulf will become a US lake. Today's the time to start hammering them - not after they've got all their ducks in a row.
Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot  2006-01-24 18:35|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]  2006-01-24 18:35|| Front Page Top

#51 semi-hardened = Moab proving grounds
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-01-24 18:41||   2006-01-24 18:41|| Front Page Top

#52 What George Bush should do right now is to go to Congress and ask for authority to call up the entire Retired Reserve force for 180 days. Issue every single person a military weapon and ammunition. Have the retirees take over ALL stateside operations, as well as deploying them along the northern and southern borders and in beachfront towns. The US military would immediately jump from 2 million to 12-15 million armed troops, free up every recruiter, trainer, honor guard, and whatever other "overhead" forces there may be that are needed for fighting. Put the nation on a war footing, and tell Iran to either back down or be booted down. The best way to deal with this is to call their bluff. Recalling the retired reserve, activating ALL the National Guard and Reserve forces, and putting troops on standby for deployment anywhere they need would send a rather stern message to a bunch of wannabe warriors.
Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot  2006-01-24 18:55|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]  2006-01-24 18:55|| Front Page Top

#53 No way, OP. Iran would back down and then be right back at it again as soon as we reduced forces. Meanwhile, those centrifuges would still be spinning. No, this one is going to require that Ahmadinejad and Rudaki and the MMs be vaporized.
Posted by Darrell 2006-01-24 19:41||   2006-01-24 19:41|| Front Page Top

#54 Tankers are very difficult to sink, it's unlikely a single Silkworm (or for that matter a Harpoon) would do any more than freak out the owners of the ship. Mines and torpedos are a different story. Would'nt worry too much about torpedos since the Iranian Navy will have a short yet exciting life if conflict breaks out. Mines, keep an eye out.
Posted by 6 2006-01-24 19:43||   2006-01-24 19:43|| Front Page Top

#55 Lest they forget...
Operation Praying Mantis, 1988
Posted by Darrell 2006-01-24 19:55||   2006-01-24 19:55|| Front Page Top

#56 Go Ahead, Make My Day...

Posted by doc 2006-01-24 21:31||   2006-01-24 21:31|| Front Page Top

#57 Tankers of oil go out, but how does the food come in?

Posted by anonymous2u 2006-01-24 21:59||   2006-01-24 21:59|| Front Page Top

#58 Iran is self-feeding IIRC
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-01-24 22:02||   2006-01-24 22:02|| Front Page Top

#59 Thanks, Alaska Paul. Was a little squirt back then, so that's my excuse for not knowing those details. ;)
Posted by Desert Blondie 2006-01-24 23:11|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]">[http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com ]  2006-01-24 23:11|| Front Page Top

23:48 Fred
23:42 3dc
23:40 2b
23:35 Alaska Paul
23:17 Sock Puppet O´ Doom
23:11 Desert Blondie
23:09 3dc
23:05 Desert Blondie
23:02 Desert Blondie
23:00 Desert Blondie
23:00 3dc
22:47 Master of Obvious
22:40 Steve White
22:36 ex-lib
22:35 Frank G
22:33 ex-lib
22:33 mmurray821
22:32 ex-lib
22:31 Penguin
22:30 ex-lib
22:23 ex-lib
22:14 Omavilet Glereper9991
22:09 Snump Flaviper5941
22:07 Mike









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com