• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Iran sends warships to Gulf of Aden - navy

I don't know about that. Essentially it would be a reaction to our attack and it would not be a direct attack upon America and its soil like 9/11 was. Removing a regime for indirect economic warfare that was provoked seems a bit extreme and I don't know of any historical precedent for that.

I didn't say regime change, I said unleash hell upon them. Tomahawks and air strikes for ten days straight. Cripple some of their infrastructure. Leave the regime in tact. Overtly supply the opposition. Let it happen from within.
 
I don't know about that. Essentially it would be a reaction to our attack and it would not be a direct attack upon America and its soil like 9/11 was. Removing a regime for indirect economic warfare that was provoked seems a bit extreme and I don't know of any historical precedent for that.

Thats why the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. We placed an oil embargo on them, in response to the Japanese joining the Axis powers. No they didn't try to effect regime change, but it is an example of an historic military action being taken, because of an economic warfare tactic.
 
Not quite.

Think about it. Strait of Hormuz. Place the four large cargo ships in the strait. Scuttle them. Congratulations, You just shutdown all shipments of oil out of the Gulf. Any predictors of what that will do to world oil and gas prices? Iran's navy damage capacity is a peashooter compared to what it can do with four old cargo ships.

Wow. That's scary. Maybe the US should look for alternate sources of energy to provide our needs before those danged (hmmmm....I left out an "er" in there somewhere) Iranians eliminate their ability to ship oil around the world.

Then again, we don't need alternate anything, we just have to line up all the Democrats in the government against a wall and velcroing them there to keep them out of the way (finally) so the country can get back to doing what the United States does best, beating the pants off everyone else. In this case, it's perfectly stupid to be leaving perfectly good American oil in American soil when lunatics are trying to hold us hostage with their own oil.

Drill our own oil, and tell those countries we don't need their oil so they'll have to figure out what to offer us in trade that we can't get right here at home cheaper.
 
Not quite.

Think about it. Strait of Hormuz. Place the four large cargo ships in the strait. Scuttle them. Congratulations, You just shutdown all shipments of oil out of the Gulf. Any predictors of what that will do to world oil and gas prices? Iran's navy damage capacity is a peashooter compared to what it can do with four old cargo ships.

I would not worry overly about that. At best(worst) it would close the Straits a fairly brief time. The navy has trained for these situations, and should be able to clear out any such in surprisingly short order. It really is unbelievable how much force and how precisely we can apply that force to problems like this, and force is a large part of how it would be handled.
 
That would give us carte blanche to move and secure the straits militarily. They would get one real shot and then we would dismantle their ability to do things like cook with gas, turn on the lights, use a phone, export oil to their customers, cross certain bridges, produce nuclear energy, etc.

Depends on what the Russians and the Chinese do in that event.

How many of you Democrats out there, now that you're becoming aware of the vulnerability of the US to overseas oil, are going to grow up and do the right thing, ie, contacting your Congressthing and your Messiah and demanding that the US immediately start drilling for our own god damned oil?
 
I would not worry overly about that. At best(worst) it would close the Straits a fairly brief time. The navy has trained for these situations, and should be able to clear out any such in surprisingly short order. It really is unbelievable how much force and how precisely we can apply that force to problems like this, and force is a large part of how it would be handled.

Yeah, I figure a single W88 would clear any obstruction the Iranians would put in the Strait of Hormuz in mere minutes.
 
Well sure they will try, but to what end? It just gives us license to unleash hell upon them. Again, Iran in alone in this endeavor in many ways.

No, you people don't get the big picture.

None of the nations selling significant amounts of oil on the world market like us.

Once the Messiah has completed his assigned task of destroying the dollar, and once China has succeeded in transforming world trade off the dollar, it will be relatively easy and painless for our enemies to stop selling us oil.

Y'all too young to remember the 70's, or what? It wasn't all drugs, sucky disco, and polyester. It was gas rationing, inflation, and despair.
 
Thats why the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. We placed an oil embargo on them, in response to the Japanese joining the Axis powers. No they didn't try to effect regime change, but it is an example of an historic military action being taken, because of an economic warfare tactic.

The American decision to stop supplying the Japanese war machine with oil wasn't an economic warfare tactic. Those claiming otherwise are lending credence to the silly notion that Japan wasn't 150% to blame for starting their war with the United States.

Whatever. That's getting off topic. What is important is that if Americans want to avoid a conflict in the Middle East of possibly biblical and global proportions, the US needs to get off its dead ass and drill our own immense oil reserves and to hell with the communist and terrorist nations currently providing our liquid energy needs.
 
Last edited:
Hopefully nothing. This is none of our business.

WRONG.

When Iran threatens to block oil shipments ... it's time for a foot to go up some Iranian ass.

We can sink their entire naval fleet and destroy all of their sea ports. Iranian interference with oil shipping WILL NOT be tolerated.

The Ayetolietbowl had better recognize!
 
I'd agree with this. The moment Iran gets hit, the straight will go down and then it's economic hell on both Israel and the US. That's a pretty powerful trump card Iran's holding. And a good incentive to reduce our need for oil as well as natural gas, as NG's prices are tied to crude.


Any Irania blockage of the Strait of Hormuz would result in attacks on Iranian sea ports by Israel, British, and American forces. The result of which would be Iran's navy lining the bottom of the Strait of Hormuz.
 
Depends on what the Russians and the Chinese do in that event.

How many of you Democrats out there, now that you're becoming aware of the vulnerability of the US to overseas oil, are going to grow up and do the right thing, ie, contacting your Congressthing and your Messiah and demanding that the US immediately start drilling for our own god damned oil?

Seriously. Your status as an independent. Change it. Your agenda and political lean is Nivea clear.
 
The American decision to stop supplying the Japanese war machine with oil wasn't an economic warfare tactic. Those claiming otherwise are lending credence to the silly notion that Japan wasn't 150% to blame for starting their war with the United States.

Sure it was. But it was a justified tactic. I never claim we were wrong for doing it. They still fired the first shot, and reaped the consequences of our response.
 
Depends on what the Russians and the Chinese do in that event.
True, and I think they will do nothing but vocally condemn us.

How many of you Democrats out there, now that you're becoming aware of the vulnerability of the US to overseas oil, are going to grow up and do the right thing, ie, contacting your Congressthing and your Messiah and demanding that the US immediately start drilling for our own god damned oil?
Why do you have to take good point of discussion and **** it all up with your stupid hyper partisan bull****? You're no independent.

Just askin'.
 
No, you people don't get the big picture.
I promise you I "get the big picture", and unlike you...I actually understand it.

None of the nations selling significant amounts of oil on the world market like us.
I would agree, but they like our dollars.
Once the Messiah has completed his assigned task of destroying the dollar, and once China has succeeded in transforming world trade off the dollar, it will be relatively easy and painless for our enemies to stop selling us oil.
Partisan flavored speculation. Here is the bottom line, we are the worlds biggest customer for exported oil. That won't change. They will continue to sell to us. China's economic infrastructure is not as stable as you would like to think it is.

Y'all too young to remember the 70's, or what? It wasn't all drugs, sucky disco, and polyester. It was gas rationing, inflation, and despair.
Why would you ask that? Oh yeah, you think your point of view is the only correct one (it's not, trust me, you get wrong more times than not).
 
Last edited:
True, and I think they will do nothing but vocally condemn us.

Be careful in the assumption that the U.S. is so strong and important that only vocal condemnation will be our reward. If conflict arises with Iran, they must appear the aggressors or China and Russia may very well put economic pain on the U.S., besides of the fact that we need them to deal with North Korea.
 
The American decision to stop supplying the Japanese war machine with oil wasn't an economic warfare tactic. Those claiming otherwise are lending credence to the silly notion that Japan wasn't 150% to blame for starting their war with the United States.

It absolutely was economic warfare, to say otherwise is to say you don't understand the dynamics of World War II at all.

Dean Acheson authored the economic sanctions that were imposed upon Japan by FDR due to their expansionist policies in China/Indochina (which emulated western expansionism to a tee). It cut them off from key U.S. exports they needed for survival of their empire. Japan offered to withdrawal from China and Indochina, save for a protection buffer against Russia, in return for oil exports to be restored. The U.S. refused the offer because it reminded them too much of the appeasement policies of Munich. The result was the decision by Japan to seize the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies. They believed we had already declared war on them by the embargo and as such, they struck at the only military capability they thought a threat to their ultimate survival...the fleet at Pearl Harbor. And we all know what happened there.

Of course our decision to completely and utterly destroy Japan, once an ally after World War I, wasn't necessarily the best course of action. Hindsight being what it is, we should have found a way to negotiate an actual settlement with Japan. It would have been their troops containing the spread of communism in the Korean Peninsula and Vietnam instead of ours.
 
Last edited:
Be careful in the assumption that the U.S. is so strong and important that only vocal condemnation will be our reward. If conflict arises with Iran, they must appear the aggressors or China and Russia may very well put economic pain on the U.S., besides of the fact that we need them to deal with North Korea.

I understand and agree with you, however the economic sword cuts two ways. You try to cripple us economically and the rest of the world will feel the pain equally.
 
Be careful in the assumption that the U.S. is so strong and important that only vocal condemnation will be our reward. If conflict arises with Iran, they must appear the aggressors or China and Russia may very well put economic pain on the U.S., besides of the fact that we need them to deal with North Korea.

The United States is too large a market. China and Russia would only protect their oil investments. They wouldnt try and prevent the US from warring with Iran but would likely oppose an occupation.
 
I understand and agree with you, however the economic sword cuts two ways. You try to cripple us economically and the rest of the world will feel the pain equally.

The United States is DEEP in recession. The failure of the US market to hold up the world market already has the rest of the world hurting. After 9/11 the whole world was on ur side. Now after a failed War on Terror and a new administration cutting all links to said war, this is one of the worst time to fly the Stars and Strips.
 
The United States is too large a market. China and Russia would only protect their oil investments. They wouldnt try and prevent the US from warring with Iran but would likely oppose an occupation.

I have to agree with you here. If we proposed occupying Iran like we did Iraq then I think that would stimulate a pronounced and direct response (they won't let us gain a hegemony in the oil fields of the middle east). However, they would be hard pressed to engage in economic or armed conflict over us retaliating against Iran for trying to destabilize the world economy.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with you here. If we proposed occupying Iran like we did Iraq then I think that would stimulate a pronounced and direct response. However, they would be hard pressed to engage in economic or armed conflict over us retaliating against Iran for trying to destabilize the world economy.

They would oppose the occupation regardless of "who poked who first". The Chinese and Russians don't want the US to control such large oil reserves. Nor does OPEC. This cuts US dependency on them for oil.
 
They would oppose the occupation regardless of "who poked who first". The Chinese and Russians don't want the US to control such large oil reserves. Nor does OPEC. This cuts US dependency on them for oil.

I absolutely agree.

I edited my post to add the denial of the oil hegemony while you were still posting by the way. I'm with you on this.
 
They would oppose the occupation regardless of "who poked who first". The Chinese and Russians don't want the US to control such large oil reserves. Nor does OPEC. This cuts US dependency on them for oil.

This is one of the reasons that the Shanghai Corporation Organization was developed by China and Russia. It is planned for Asian nations to work together to balance the power of the U.S. in the region and to protect the interests of the region.
 
This is one of the reasons that the Shanghai Corporation Organization was developed by China and Russia. It is planned for Asian nations to work together to balance the power of the U.S. in the region and to protect the interests of the region.

So you now agree with me and lerx?
 
Back
Top Bottom