Forums → WEPR → Iran threatens to close the Straight of Hermuz
| 76 | 23087 |
- 76 Replies
I feel that if Iran takes this drastic step, it could be crossing the "red line" which would provoke a US attack or a joint US/Israel attack. Israel has been dying for the opportunity to strike at Iran's nuclear program, and shutting down a critical shipping line could be the opportunity and provide the justification that they need. Also, because about 1/3 of all crude oil is shipped through the Straight of Hermuz, economic repercussions against western powers could be enormous. I'm talking about $4.50/gallon gas. Countries might have to tap into oil reserves to keep things running smoothly, and the stock market might falter. Hopefully though, the US Navy could keep the Straight open if Iran chooses to take this drastic measure.
In my opinion this is just a threat. I call a bluff.
But if Iran is serious, the US navy almost definitely would be able to keep the strait open. Iran doesn't have a great Navy.
i just hope that when the usa starts the attack again. that they wont drag europe in it again.
if i got it right from the article it's only for 10 days, right?
usa stockpile is enoufg for a few year so 10 days should be no problem.
the US navy almost definitely would be able to keep the strait open. Iran doesn't have a great Navy.
it's not international waters.
the strait is territorial waters of Iran and Oman
the only thing the usa can go against is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. however iran never confirmed this agreement. (oman did)
however iran never confirmed this agreement.
neither did the usa i c now.
the only thing the usa can go against is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. however iran never confirmed this agreement. (oman did)
"In consequence, all ships, whatever their flag, enjoy the right of passage in transit, in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, adopted in 1982, and with the customary international maritime law," the ministry said.
From the article. partydevil, the US would have the right to attempt to enforce this act.
the usa and iran both have only signed the agreement. neither of them have confirmed that they will hold on to it.
iran can give up this agreement (nothing bad will happen for them if so, (turkey for example has never signed it in the 1st place) when they do they do not have to follow those rules in their territorial waters. (wich the straight is.)
i would find it very contradicting of the usa to use this agreement for their police work. when they have not even confirmed it themself all these years.
the customary international maritime law
i'm not sure what is discribet in this law and wich countrys have and havn't agreed whit it. all i wrote was about the other agreement =)
i just hope that when the usa starts the attack again. that they wont drag europe in it again.
Why do you always make it sound like Europe is dragged kicking and screaming to war?
The European countries chose to go to war. You know, oftentimes, the European countries are just as "warmongering" as the USA.
I am personally tired of the whole "America likes war-Europe is peaceful and innocent" charade. Europeans have been involved in almost every single modern war.
Anyhow, maybe the USA are the instigators of wars, maybe not. What's certain though, is that Europe is at least an accomplice and ergo they are just as "guilty".
it's not international waters.
the strait is territorial waters of Iran and Oman
And? Missiles don't exactly recognize borders.
Iran should take a hint from Iraq and Libya. Messing with American oil is a big no-no. I hope Ahmadinejad likes being sodomized by cruise missiles.
they have been dragged because of your whole we safed you from ww2 story. and i often even hear americans say that they gave europe democracy. that whitout them europe would be a pityfull place. like we would be as africa or something. i'm tired about all that BS.
so i will keep rubbing that **** in their faces. so they know how annoying it is.
btw i never denyed that europe went to war. i almost went to war myself even. however. my conclusion is that it is almost always the usa that begins whit the killing of people that they have no juridiction over. (in a military way that is)
Saudi Arabia has promised to compensate any oil blocked by Iran. Their threat won't do anything to the oil trade. It will just mean more restrictions and sanctions on Iran.
And? Missiles don't exactly recognize borders.
uuhhmmm you think usa is god of the planet or what?
if you do that to their border while the laws are in place. that means any1 can do that to any border. thats not what other countrys want. and not what the usa itself wants. ow wait my bad.. only thing they care about is the oil.
iran should take a hint from Iraq and Libya. Messing with American oil is a big no-no
you can still get the oil whit not taking that route. it's only slower, more expensive and less safe. (or just what emperor said.)
also did america not attack libya for the oil last time. (wich europe had to fix for you because you was busy already whit 2 other wars)
and also is it not your oil untill it's sold to you.
also did america not attack libya for the oil last time. (wich europe had to fix for you because you was busy already whit 2 other wars)
For the love of...
The United States did not "mess up" Libya. Newsflash, they had something called a revolution. Yeah, you know, one of those things were the people try to topple a government without outside help? Well, they needed outside help, so guess who led the charge? France. That's right, France. Not America, but France. And other European countries. We practically did zilch but fire missiles. And give some supplies. You guys, not us, flew most of the stories, carried out most of the bombings, and a host of other objectives. Learn your facts before blatantly accusing someone of starting a war and needing "europe fix for you because you was busy already whit 2 other wars"
uuhhmmm you think usa is god of the planet or what?
No, but I still believe sovereign borders are bad stoppers of missiles. Bad stoppers of bombs, too, come to think of it.
you can still get the oil whit not taking that route. it's only slower, more expensive and less safe. (or just what emperor said.)
More expensive and less safe than war? That sounds like a bad idea. I pick war.
also did america not attack libya for the oil last time. (wich europe had to fix for you because you was busy already whit 2 other wars)
So why didn't we aide Syria? Yemen? Because it wasn't about the oil?
and also is it not your oil untill it's sold to you.
Hahahaha... that's what you think....
Its a threat.... Lets just hope this doesnt happen... if it does there goes one of our Great oil suppliers....
You must be logged in to post a reply!