Iran Issues Stark Warning on Oil Price

It's a hollow threat. We get almost no oil from Iran. Their oil goes to China and India. Plus, oil is their economy, they can't afford not to sell oil. The US could go much, much longer without buying oil than Iran could go without selling oil.

 

A direct strike from Iran via missile is a very remote threat. Narrowly looking at the issue from that perspective is dangerously naive.

Iran providing terrorists a bomb to bring in by ship or suicide airplane is a very real threat. That would give the Iranians more than enough plausible deniability to prevent the French, Russians, or Germans from supporting a military retaliation.

 

Not unlike that fateful decision point... are we willing to take the risk that the worst case scenario isn't the truth?

If a strange dog shows up in your back yard foaming from the mouth and growling... do you use force to control him or wait to see if he actually bites someone?

 

Do we kill every nation which might be a threat?

Simpler to give 48 hour notice and nuke Jerusalem and Mecca then there will be nothing to fight over.

 

Of course not... we restrict it to those who have effectively declared and waged war against us.

One of the things I dislike about Bush's approach is that for political reasons he has mischaracterized the enemy. It isn't just the terrorists that consider us the enemy... the average "man on the street" in Islamic countries seems to hate the US.

We waged war on Germany... not the Nazis... not Hitler. It is time to realistically realize that terrorists are not independent from the governments and nations that provide them sanction and sanctuary.

 

As long as Iran keeps selling their oil to someone that would be okay since oil is fungible. But if Iran stopped selling their oil altogether then all oil consumers would be in big trouble. </font>[/QUOTE]And if they did that they would be bankrupt in a heartbeat. Thus it's an idle threat. #1, they can't afford to be without the income. #2, they're not going to not sell to China or India.

 

Same rhetoric that was used to justify invading Iraq - rhetoric which proved to be oh so wrong. </font>[/QUOTE]You are employing the same rhetoric employed before WWII by Chamberlein et al... that proved to be oh so wrong... not to mention costing 60 million lives and untold wealth.

 

As long as Iran keeps selling their oil to someone that would be okay since oil is fungible. But if Iran stopped selling their oil altogether then all oil consumers would be in big trouble. </font>[/QUOTE]That's true. Oil is a worldwide market commodity. Any drop in oil production will cause a rise in prices. Today just the threat of a disruption in Nigerian oil caused the price to skyrocket... and I don't think Nigeria has the reserves or production capacity of Iran.

 

If Iran breaks the UN seal on nuclear facilities then it has defied the UN. Since the UN will never do anything about this, since it is a paper tiger, are you advocating that nobody else should either?

Nuclear non-proliferation is supposedly supported by several governments not just the US. Why do you act like we are alone? If Iran is TELLING you that they are pursuing this, then what other evidence do you want?

Oh and by the way, you are projecting your own way of thinking on a maniac in Iran. From his point of view, America is weak with no clear will to do anything about this. They see power as the clear rule from the top. All of the political catfighting over Iraq would just convince them that we have no political will to fight another adversary.

Sorry, but their world view is not the same as ours. Try studying theirs before you try to predict whether they will think they can succeed with nukes or not.

 

3-page warning: This thread will be closed no sooner than 2:30 a.m. ET by one of the Moderators.

Lady Eagle,
Moderator

 

Closed per previous warning.

LE