Community | December 29, 2011 | 63 comments

Iran-US Stand-off Over Strait of Hormuz Worsens

source: http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=202227445&ht=Iran-US-stand-off-over-Strait-of-Hormuz-wo...

Image
circlesquared
Thursday 29th December, 2011
DUBAI The stand-off between the US and Iran over access to the strategic Strait of Hormuz shipping channel worsened Thursday with Tehran declaring that any threat would be "responded by threat".

The response came after the US 5th Fleet said that Iran's threat to block the 34-mile wide strip of water - separating Oman and Iran - was unacceptable.

The US reaction Wednesday was in response to Iran's vice president warning that the country could block the strait if sanctions are imposed on its exports of crude oil.

France, Britain and Germany have proposed sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme and the US has also threatened to tighten unilateral sanctions.

Senior Iranian Revolutionary Guards commander Hossein Salami said Thursday that the US was not in a position to tell Tehran "what to do in the Strait of Hormuz", state television reported.

Iran's English-language Press TV quoted Salami as saying: "Any threat will be responded by threat ... We will not relinquish our strategic moves if Iran's vital interests are undermined by any means."

The official IRNA news agency quoted him as saying: "Americans are not in a position whether to allow Iran to close off the Strait of Hormuz."

Cmdr. Amy Derrick Frost, spokesperson of the US Navy 5th Fleet, which is based in Bahrain, told reporters Wednesday: "Anyone who threatens to disrupt freedom of navigation in an international strait is clearly outside the community of nations; any disruption will not be tolerated."

Iran's navy chief Habibollah Sayyari has told Press TV that "closing the Strait of Hormuz for Iran's armed forces is really easy ... or as Iranians say it will be easier than drinking a glass of water."

"But right now, we don't need to shut it as we have the Sea of Oman under control and we can control the transit," said Sayyari.

Iran is holding a 10-day military exercise near the strait. The exercises began Saturday and involve submarines, missile drills, torpedoes and drones

In contrast, the US Fifth Fleet consists of 20-plus ships supported by combat aircraft, with 15,000 people on board.

The Strait of Hormuz connects the biggest Gulf oil producers, including Saudi Arabia, with the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. At its narrowest point, it is 21 miles across.

In 2009, 15 million barrels passed through the strait every day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The bulk of the oil exported through the Strait of Hormuz travels to Asia, the United States and Western Europe. About three-quarters of Japan's oil imports and about 50 percent of China's pass through this strait.
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Progressive America,   Community Spotlight,   1 more
  2. tags:
  3.     
    |

63 comments // Iran-US Stand-off Over Strait of Hormuz Worsens

  • JangoFetish
  • AmericanStandard
    • +1
      AmericanStandard  
    • Image

    • On 18 February 2010 the IAEA released a new report on Iran's nuclear program. Ivan Oelrich and Ivanka Barzashka, writing in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, suggested "the media has seriously misrepresented the actual contents of the report" and that "in fact, no new information has been revealed." They wrote that there was "no independent assessment that Iran is engaged in weapons work" and that this was "hardly the first time that the agency has discussed potential evidence of Tehran's nuclear weapons research".[86] Iran's envoy to the UN atomic watchdog criticized Western powers for interpreting the IAEA report in an "exaggerated, selective and inaccurate" manner.[87] PressTV reported that the report verified the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in Iran and that Iran started enriching uranium to a higher level in the presence of IAEA inspectors.[88]

      In an April 2010 interview with the BBC, former IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said Western nations were seeking harsher sanctions "out of frustration". "I don't think Iran is developing, or we have new information that Iran is developing, a nuclear weapon today .. there is a concern about Iran's future intentions, but even if you talk to MI6 or the CIA, they will tell you they are still four or five years away from a weapon. So, we have time to engage," he said. ElBaradei further said the building of trust between the parties would "not happen until the two sides sit around the negotiating table and address their grievances. Sooner or later that will happen

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

    • 5 months ago
  • bailey78
  • jim_b
    • +1
      jim_b  

    • All the ingredients are there except a republican in the White House. This one issue may determine, rather show exactly who President Obama truly is. I'll get the popcorn.

    • 5 months ago
  • bailey78
  • jim_b
  • bailey78
  • wally60
  • CarlosBobthe3rd
  • infiniteblackbox
    • -1
      infiniteblackbox  

    • For those who criticize this action remember that when you bitch about gas going over 4 bucks a gallon and the sky rocketing price of food production. You can not have your cake and eat it too.

    • 5 months ago
  • circlesquared
  • hombre76
    • -1
      hombre76  
    • infiniteblackbox:

      When I "bitch about the price of gas its because I dont want to be and should not have to be using perolium to our cars anymore. It sure as hell does not mean I want to go to war with Iran and China so I can burn some more dirty fuel. we also dont have to be dumping petrolim fertilizer on our crops any more so fuck that BS too.

    • 5 months ago
  • infiniteblackbox
  • hombre76
  • jim_b
  • covelogibbs
  • kbshana
  • oppressed1
    • -1
      oppressed1  

    • Well 1BDE 1CD is waiting in kuwait. If we are going to start this war up lets just do it now. I already missed 1 invasion, I wont be able to deal with missing another.

    • 5 months ago
  • hombre76
  • oppressed1
  • circlesquared
    • 0
      circlesquared  
    • oppressed1:

      brainwashed much lately? Listen to what you are saying...look around...you are talking about the hate and fear your rulers want you to feel. Is it really in your heart to have such enmity for those you've never met? Break the walls to that box if you need to let out a little rage...leave the killing to death.

    • 5 months ago
  • oppressed1
  • Saladin
    • +3
      Saladin  

    • This saber rattling nonsense is completely fucking ridiculous.

      The U.S. cannot afford to have the strait cut off, it cannot afford another stupid fucking war over oil and it would completely ruin our already tarnished reputation.

      How many wars do we have to lose before we understand that big guns and tough talk do not bring you victory? And even that is ignoring that such a mercenary war with Iran would make us the Axis we claim to hate so much.

    • 5 months ago
  • oppressed1
  • 20thsieclefox
  • oppressed1
    • -3
      oppressed1  
    • 20thsieclefox:

      We never lost a battle in vietnam and our search and destroy missions in which we measured victory was in our favor with 12 to 1 kill ratios. So other then the pussy left in the country forfeiting victory things would have been ok.

    • 5 months ago
  • circlesquared
  • oldbanjo
  • Saladin
    • 0
      Saladin  
    • oldbanjo:

      Oh well isn't that a convenient excuse?

      And oppressed, by your definition, the Soviets lost WWII to the Nazis. Which makes it stupid.

      The bottom line is that winning a war is about more than just killing more than you lose. If you don't accomplish your objectives, you lost the war. If your objectives are unachievable, you can't *win* the war. That's the case both in the Vietnam war and with the modern "War on Terror."

      And that's part of the whole point here. What kind of achievable objective could we obtain in a war with Iran? Not invading, probably not even regime change. The best we could hope for is smashing some large portion of their military. All that would do is destabilize the entire region and piss everyone off.

      So, like I said before, how many wars does this country have to lose before it understands how these things work?

    • 5 months ago
  • oldbanjo
    • 0
      oldbanjo  
    • Saladin:

      I am not for any war unless we are attacked and we should fight to win. I agree with you. We should spent our money to find a way of getting off oil and to cure cancer, a cancer cure is badly needed after what is happening in Japan.

    • 5 months ago
  • Saladin
    • 0
      Saladin  
    • oldbanjo:

      There's no such thing as a cure for cancer. It represents a very broad category of diseases, there is no cure for all of them.

      But I do agree that our money is much better spent elsewhere. I wish congress agreed.

    • 5 months ago
  • oldbanjo
  • Paratus
    • -5
      Paratus  

    • As long as we have a leak president we will have these problems. I don't think a military that could not defeat Iraq in what, 9 or 11 years, will be able to hold off the Navy. I don't see a very successful outcome for Iran if they do this. Depends on the ROE the commander on the scene has to operate under.

    • 5 months ago
  • Saladin
    • +5
      Saladin  
    • Paratus:

      A leak president? Did you mean weak? And what the hell would a "strong" president be doing differently? Keep in mind, the quagmire in Iraq and Afghanistan were both entirely Republican constructions and every successful war, with the exception of Desert Storm, were conducted by "weak" Democrats.

      Any military action in this situation would be a complete fucking disaster. We can't afford or sustain another war.

    • 5 months ago
  • infiniteblackbox
    • +2
      infiniteblackbox  
    • Paratus:

      Just for the record.
      You are calling Bush a weak president also.
      Obama has not been in office 9 0r 10 years.
      Keep up your partisan bullshit.
      It is exactly what will kill this country.
      Ignore the real problem which is your addiction to oil.
      Go ahead and blame everybody but yourself.
      I expect that from conservatives.

    • 5 months ago
  • jim_b
  • mjsmith11
    • -2
      mjsmith11  

    • Iran will see how fast its friends disappear. With a year left of the Obama Presidency, Iran will make the most of it. Expect an "about face" from Iran as soon as our next President takes Office. The same thing happenened when our weak President towards Iran, Jimmy Carter left and President Reagan was sworn in. Iran immediatly let the United States hostages free. I understand President Obama tried talking with Iran and a few other ways of dealing with this enemy government. I do not expect a President with absolutly no experience zero qualifications to have the slightest clue on how to do anything effectivly in these matters.

    • 5 months ago
  • circlesquared
  • Paratus
    • -3
      Paratus  
    • circlesquared:

      The hostages were released just after Reagan was sworn in. If you are trying to tell me that the hostages were detained all during Carters administration then, for some reason, magically released when he didn't win re-election because of Carters efforts, or more accurately his non efforts, I'm not buying it. Don't rewrite history. Carter was a eunuch in that little debacle. He was a eunuch in many other areas as well, the economy for instance. Face it the guy is intelligent (Naval Academy nuke grad), a nice guy, but a complete disaster as a president.

    • 5 months ago
  • JustZ
    • +4
      JustZ  
    • Paratus:

      That's pure right wing crap Paratus. Just because you repeat a lie over and over again... doesn't make it true.

      It's a well known fact, Jimmy Carter's administration arranged for the release of the hostages around the same time as the election. But our hostages continued to be held by Iran until Reagan was in office...to take credit.

      Try watching something other than FOOLS NEWS once in a while. You might actually learn what the rest of the world knows.

    • 5 months ago
  • circlesquared
    • +4
      circlesquared  
    • Paratus:

      Carter couldn't bring himself to delegate and it was his downfall...the hostages were on their way home when RR was being inaugurated so he took credit...was there and remember well the circumstances.

    • 5 months ago
  • sugarmountian
    • +3
      sugarmountian  
    • Paratus:

      Eunuch, yeah right. When they weren't sure 3 Mile-Island wouldn't kill everyone on the east coast, Jimmy Carter was in the control room of that reactor lending a hand. That was rather ballsy for a eunuch.
      As far as a disaster for a president, if he would have had another term this country would be a better place for all of us and not just the rich. Ronnie Ray Gun ruined this country.

    • 5 months ago
  • jim_b
    • +3
      jim_b  
    • mjsmith11:

      You have conveniently forgotten the treasonous pre-arrangement Bush Sr had made with Iran in order to support the overthrow of the Carter administration. Our new President will be the same as our current President, count on 4 more years.

    • 5 months ago
  • dudefromtherock
  • circlesquared
  • alexandrek
  • Vierotchka
    • +3
      Vierotchka  
    • alexandrek:

      So long as Iran doesn't have a handful of nuclear warheads and the means to deliver them to Israel, it won't touch Israel - the Iranians are perfectly aware of the fact that Israel has over 300 nuclear warheads and the means to deliver them. Once Iran does have a few nuclear warheads and the means to deliver them, these will be a most effective deterrent against any Israeli nuclear attack on Iran. The Iranians are neither stupid nor suicidal.

    • 5 months ago
  • artemis6
  • thinkingfree
    • +2
      thinkingfree  

    • Iran blocking the straight? right, that would be like shooting fish in a barrel for the navy. The only real problem will be how to think up a Gulf of Tonkin excuse to start shooting.

    • 5 months ago
  • Vierotchka
    • +4
      Vierotchka  
    • thinkingfree:

      It would actually be extremely easy for Iran to block the Strait of Hormuz - all it needs do is sink a few ships in the two channels which are relatively shallow as it is. It could even conceivably bring in a few of its own older cargo ships and sink them, thus not sinking any ship from other countries. Then, it is well-equipped with its large amount of re-engineered shkval torpedoes that can sink American ships and submarines in the area should it be attacked. These torpedoes can be launched from ships, from subs, and even from secret bases on the Iranian islands in the Strait. These supercavitated torpedoes move so fast that by the time they are detected by the targeted ships and subs it is too late to counter them or evade them.

    • 5 months ago
  • circlesquared
  • oldbanjo
    • 0
      oldbanjo  
    • circlesquared:

      They don't have to close the Strait they can stop shipping in their waters. With the other nations voting to financially ruin their Country I can understand their point. The US voted against ruining their Country.

    • 5 months ago
  • nikonwilly
  • artemis6
  • Vierotchka
    • +3
      Vierotchka  
    • Image

    • An overland pipeline from Iran to China is in the works and very feasable, more economic than shipping oil through the Strait of Hormuz.

    • 5 months ago
  • Vierotchka
    • +4
      Vierotchka  

    • From 2006:

      http://www.iicic.com/IranChina/Economic.htm

      Economic Relations:

      As China's booming economy has turned the country into one of the biggest oil and gas consumers in the world, Iran, as OPEC's second-largest crude oil supplier, can only be a natural partnerfor China.

      China, which has become the world's second largest oil importer over the past decade, currently gets 13.6% of its oil imports from Iran. Beijing also wants to step up imports of Iran's natural gas. Trade between the two countries hit a record of $7.6 billions in 2004 that Iran's export worth $4 billions and they expect to reach $9.5 billions in 2005.

      Iran has an estimated 26.6 trillion-cubic-meter gas reservoir; the second largest in the world. At present a comprehensive development including exploration and drilling, petrochemical and gas industries, pipelines and other services, is expected in the fields related to oil industries.

      In the long term, Beijing also hopes to secure a pipeline project in Iran taking oil 386 kilometers to the Caspian Sea where it could link with another planned pipeline from Kazakhstan to China.

      China and Iran are currently cooperating on 100-odd different projects. Meanwhile Iran's increasing appetite for consumer goods is bound to provide huge opportunities for Chinese companies eager to expand overseas. Chinese firms are active in Iran in the fields of metro, electricity dam building, cement plants, steel mills, railway, shipbuilding, transport, oil and gas and refinery.

      The Chinese firms are also cooperating with Iranian partners to develop ports, jetty, airport and metro in six Iranian cities and mines development projects. Iranian economy is growing and the government backs foreign investment in various sectors by guaranteeing the capital invested in different projects as well as the associated proceeds of foreign capital. It should be noted that with new legislation Iran has accelerated process of foreign investment.

      The new geopolitical situation in the region urges both countries to cooperate for more security and development in West and Central Asia.

      Tehran-Beijing relations are at an excellent level and senior officials of Iran and China are holding regular consultation on bilateral, regional and international cooperation.

    • 5 months ago
  • circlesquared
  • COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
    • +3
      COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM  

    • Note to Obama & MIC/Oil Complex, not with our money! Let the Oil Industry hire Halliburton to protect the oil lanes in the Strait. No more dead Americans and stolen American money for oil profit. We choose to spend our money on alternative energy development / oil companies independence!

    • 5 months ago
  • circlesquared
  • circlesquared
    • +3
      circlesquared  

    • our news media won't cover this, but people need to be aware we are getting serious with Iran...which means Russia and China as well will most likely be involved.

    • 5 months ago
  • KB723
  • trut
  • circlesquared
more from Community:
from the community

top videos