Iran Super Thread- Merged

[Furniture]

You can make the same points without stomping your feet. It doesn’t make any of what you’re saying stronger or more well founded.

I'm not stomping my feet, I'm mocking the notion that two desperate groups can cause global economic cataclysm via drone and missile strikes.

There simply may not be an easy, quick, or low cost way out of this. There are ways out, I’m sure, but they may be short to mid term painful.

I never said there was, and it's pretty disingenuous to try to frame my points that way.

I simply have stated that if the economic impact is as painful as you and @Altair imagine, there will be a global response.

The rest of the world will only be pushed so far before it reacts.

As for escorting ships, again, it's something even the US navy wont do. And the logistics of it, as far as I have read, is 8 escorts for a convoy of 5 ships. So 100 ships a day, needs what, a around the clock force of 160 warships?

That assumes Iran and the Houthi can maintain a full court press daily... there is no more reason to believe that than there is to believe an escorting force can protect every ship.

It comes down to numbers. How many ships hit vs. How many make it through and keep the world plugging along.

Of course governments will fall. But they would fall regardless of whether they join any effort to open the SOH.

So your sage advise to the world would be, "just let it happen"? Make no effort to confront the problem?

I'm not sure you'd get many followers.

I'm predicting the 3rd world starves and the rich world suffers from astronomical oil prices because Trump decided that he could "make a deal"

So another Monday? Why all the Sturm und Drang on here if your prediction is just the normal state of the world?

 

[Altair]

I'm not stomping my feet, I'm mocking the notion that two desperate groups can cause global economic cataclysm via drone and missile strikes.

The global economy needs oil. 10-20 percent of the global oil supply is currently offline. Global oil reserves are 4-6 weeks away from being empty.

Oil is about to skyrocket in price as scarcity becomes more widespread.

I never said there was, and it's pretty disingenuous to try to frame my points that way.

I simply have stated that if the economic impact is as painful as you and @Altair imagine, there will be a global response.

There will be. It won't be military.

The rest of the world will only be pushed so far before it reacts.

I'll believe it when I see it. Nobody is planning for it. Nobody is talking about it. Nobody is preparing their publics for it. We aren't seeing naval personel being called up. We aren't seeing a coalition forming. These things take time, there would be signs. A unified command. NATO, the UN, someone would take the lead. And most importantly, threats. There would be threats because threats before action is usually how things work. It's a very trump only thing to simply throw the military at a problem like Iran without a plan, not something the rest of the world will do.

And everyone knows we are a month, month and a half away from global oil reserves being exhausted. Yet....

Crickets. Crickets everywhere.

That assumes Iran and the Houthi can maintain a full court press daily... there is no more reason to believe that than there is to believe an escorting force can protect every ship.

I remember people saying this in freaking march.

It comes down to numbers. How many ships hit vs. How many make it through and keep the world plugging along.

Crickets.

So your sage advise to the world would be, "just let it happen"? Make no effort to confront the problem?

I'm not sure you'd get many followers.

I'm not saying that's my sage advice. I'm saying this is what is most likely to happen if trump doesn't back down. But let's face it, he got spooked when everyone told him what oil would spike to last time. He will back down again before we cross that point. And if he doesn't....well, let's see what the global economy does without oil. Might be the biggest catalyst for the green transition we have ever seen.

Fun fact, China is using less oil now than it has in the previous 10 years. Again, China, winners of this. Congrats USA, China first.

So another Monday? Why all the Sturm und Drang on here if your prediction is just the normal state of the world?

Another Monday?

No.

This will be an unprecedented oil shock. Very rarely has the economy had to deal with not enough oil. Like, physically not enough oil. That's going to hit the global economy worse than covid did.

 

[Furniture]

There will be. It won't be military

Bold prediction... When an adversary uses military force to destroy your economy, military force is often the only politically viable option.

I'll believe it when I see it. Nobody is planning for it. Nobody is talking about it. Nobody is preparing their publics for it. We aren't seeing naval personel being called up. We aren't seeing a coalition forming. These things take time, there would be signs. A unified command. NATO, the UN, someone would take the lead. And most importantly, threats. There would be threats because threats before action is usually how things work. It's a very trump only thing to simply throw the military at a problem like Iran without a plan, not something the rest of the world will do.

And everyone knows we are a month, month and a half away from global oil reserves being exhausted. Yet....

Crickets. Crickets everywhere.

In the real world, that's called saving your powder.

The crisis hasn't hit. Any action now would be painted as an over reaction, or as support for Trump. This is where I suspect we agree, Trump made this fight politically unbearable for the West via his actions. The only thing that will change that is the reality of no oil, and no distractions.

When trains, busses and flights are canceled, and people get hungry, nobody will care who started the stupidity.

I'm not saying that's my sage advice. I'm saying this is what is most likely to happen if trump doesn't back down. But let's face it, he got spooked when everyone told him what oil would spike to last time. He will back down again before we cross that point. And if he doesn't....well, let's see what the global economy does without oil. Might be the biggest catalyst for the green transition we have ever seen.

Fun fact, China is using less oil now than it has in the previous 10 years. Again, China, winners of this. Congrats USA, China first.

There is no immediate green transition. The economy will fail before nuclear, solar, and unicorn farts replace oil.

As much as the world will hate that it has to act, any blockade so catastrophic as to impact the developed world in any serious way, will result in action. We can't pivot away from oil on a dime, and Iran knows this. It's the whole point of their game. If switching to other sources of energy was viable, Iran wouldn't be holding Europe hostage.

China can have all the energy in the world. It doesn't solve their problem of needing to sell stuff to others. If the rest of the world is oil poor, they can't buy stuff from China, meaning China faces an economic disaster. China wins nothing if they collapse because of a failing economy due to a collapse in overseas trade.

Another Monday?

No.

This will be an unprecedented oil shock. Very rarely has the economy had to deal with not enough oil. Like, physically not enough oil. That's going to hit the global economy worse than covid did.

People in far away places have been dieing due to famine and war since long before I was a child, and they will continue to do so as long as people exist. That is just another Monday, regardless of how impassioned the latest prophet of doom sounds.

If the world hits an unprecedented oil shock because a few religious wackos in the ME want an apocalyptic war, the world is likely to oblige. I know none of the fine upstanding people I know are good with letting some dictator win if it means their kids starve or freeze.

We aren't there yet, because this latest ME war is like the last few. The military goes to war, and the civilians go to the mall/Costco... When the civilians actually start to feel it, get ready for a call to "do something", even if that something is young Western troops dieing far away. That's the pattern of history, and I fail to see why this particular example is different.


For context, Italy became fascist in 1922, Germany in 1933... global events don't usually happen in 4-6 months.

 

[brihard]

I'm not stomping my feet, I'm mocking the notion that two desperate groups can cause global economic cataclysm via drone and missile strikes.


I never said there was, and it's pretty disingenuous to try to frame my points that way.

I simply have stated that if the economic impact is as painful as you and @Altair imagine, there will be a global response.

The rest of the world will only be pushed so far before it reacts.

Oh, ok. You didn’t come across the way you intended.

If it’s disingenuous to suggest you seem to be looking for an easy button, it’s disingenuous to suggest I’m saying nothing ought be done at all. I’m simply being pragmatic and saying this is a tough nut to crack, and that the objectives of opening the SoH and potentially BaM may elude being achieved by force.

That assumes Iran and the Houthi can maintain a full court press daily... there is no more reason to believe that than there is to believe an escorting force can protect every ship.

It comes down to numbers. How many ships hit vs. How many make it through and keep the world plugging along.

Respectfully, no, I think you’re still assessing this incorrectly. You’re speaking about it as if it were North Atlantic convoys where most get through and some will be lost. That works if the circumstances are state owned (or at least underwritten) merchant ships with a heavy building program to furnish replacements. But countries aren’t sailing SoH (or BaM though it’s the smaller deal here). Countries don’t buy oil, ship it, or underwrite the insurance. Companies do. Iran nor the Houthis needn’t win great military victories against convoys. They need only create enough risk that the maritime insurers will choose not to eat it.

Now, what you are saying could be true if states did procure fleets of tankers and take on the responsibility of getting oil at least past the SoM. That would be risky and expensive but could be borne as a public cost if they abandon the current market approach. Against that I’ll just say that this whole time we’ve only seen the U.S. sail naval vessels through the strait a single in and out, and they haven’t tried to repeat it since. Might be it got hairy enough that even the navy doesn’t want to risk. So maybe Iran is assessed as retaining enough capability that they have considerable ability to escalate strikes on shipping if pushed harder. TIL now it seems they’re calibrating their hits to be just enough.

I’ll quickly add that the Houthis and BaM are a much less big deal. Though a pain in the ass, they can be bypassed around Africa. They merely add costs and time. Which, on top of the rest of this, does suck a lot. But the real crisis remains Iran’s ability to keep the hose mostly linked in Hormuz. The actual shortage of physical oil is the greatest economic risk to everyone, and will force further market distortive responses like releasing strategic reserves. And it is a major threat; we know that because Trump already partially caved to an absurdly one sided framework once over this. I think, rather than face the risk to the economy, that he’ll cave again, and Iran will try to hold him more fully to the agreed upon MoU terms to move negotiations forward.

The U.S. can and will keep bombing stuff, but that hasn’t worked yet and it’s been months.

 

[Altair]

Even Peter Zeihan says no US ally is going to touch this with a ten foot pole.

AI ASSISTED
In this video, geopolitical analyst Peter Zeihan explains why U.S. allies have not joined the military conflict against Iran in the Persian Gulf. He outlines several structural and political reasons for this lack of support:


1. Lack of Naval Projection Capabilities (0:22 - 1:47):
Most countries do not maintain naval forces capable of rapid, long-range power projection. Since World War II, the U.S. has maintained a global security role, and most allies have limited their navies to coastal defense. Only the United Kingdom, Japan, and France possess significant long-range capabilities, but they are not easily mobilized for this specific conflict.


2. Flawed Intelligence and Diplomatic Failure (1:49 - 4:42):
Zeihan argues that the conflict was initiated based on a "pitch" from Benjamin Netanyahu to Donald Trump (1:55) rather than verified intelligence or consultation with U.S. allies. Unlike typical U.S. military operations, there was no coalition building or intelligence sharing with NATO partners, leaving allies unwilling to participate in a war they did not support.


3. Strategic Risks and Diplomatic Disarray (4:44 - 7:40):


Energy Security: Iran has demonstrated the capability to target critical infrastructure in the Persian Gulf, threatening a global energy crisis (4:52).


Lack of Diplomacy: The Trump administration has sidelined the Department of State and the National Security Council, preventing the technical, expert-level negotiations necessary to manage the conflict and engage with allies (5:56 - 6:53).


Ally Hesitancy: Allies are understandably reluctant to develop military capabilities for a war that actively harms their own economies and follows a diplomatic process that lacks experienced professionals.