Iranian Alert - January 24, 2006 - Efforts to Bring Iran before the UN Security Council in Trouble?

Regime Change Iran ^ | 1.24.2006 | DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

Posted on 01/23/2006 10:43:23 PM PST by DoctorZIn

Top News Story

Efforts to Bring Iran before the UN Security Council in Trouble?

• The Washington Post reported that the United States has been unable to win international support to officially report Iran to the U.N. Security Council.

More Warnings from Iran and Friends.

• The Scotsman reported that Iran warned Israel it would be making a "fatal mistake" if it took military action against Tehran's nuclear program.
• Reuters reported that firebrand Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has assured Iran that his Shi'ite Muslim militiamen will support the Islamic Republic if it comes under attack.
• Terry Keenan, New York Post discussed how Iran is plotting to use its oil weapon against the US.

 

EU Business Sending Mixed Signals.

• Forbes.com reported that Swiss banking giant UBS AG said it has stopped doing business with Iran.
• DW-World.de reported that German firms are seeking a lower profile in Iran since they have huge investments there.

 

The Options on Iran.

• David E. Sanger, The New York Times argued that while the US can execute a devastating attack on Iran's nuclear program the problem is managing the aftermath.
• Reuel Marc Gerecht, The Weekly Standard offered a frank discussion as how to head off the imam bomb. Must Read.
• The Jerusalem Post reported on the Herzliya Conference where differing views on the degree to which Iran's nuclear program poses a threat to Israel and the effective strategies for combating that threat were on display.

 

Here are a few other news items you may have missed.

• Saul Singer, The Jerusalem Post examined a disturbing comment made by Senator John McCain on Iran.
• Victor Davis Hanson, Washington Times examined the end-of-days worldview of Ahmadinejad.
• And finally, ReleaseGanji.net published a letter from the wife of Iranian dissident Akbar Ganji on the 2100th day of his imprisonment.

 

 

[DoctorZIn]

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

[Reborn]

FREE GANJI NOW!

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/674159.html

Last update - 09:26 24/01/2006
Iranian official: UN sanctions may lead us to seal off Persian Gulf
By Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondent

A senior Iranian official threatened that Tehran may forcibly prevent oil export via the Straits of Hormuz if the UN imposed economic sanctions due to Iran's nuclear program, an Iranian news Web site said on Monday.

This is the first time an Iranian official makes military threats in a public statement on Tehran's recent disagreements with the West.

The news site, affiliated with the radical student movement in which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was once a member, quoted Mohammed-Nabi Rudaki, deputy chairman of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission.

According to the report, Rudaki said that "if Europe does not act wisely with the Iranian nuclear portfolio and it is referred to the UN Security Council and economic or air travel restrictions are imposed unjustly, we have the power to halt oil supply to the last drop from the shores of the Persian Gulf via the Straits of Hormuz."

25% of the world's oil production passes through the Straits of Hormuz, which connect the Persian Gulf with the Indian Ocean. The meaning of Rudaki's threat is that not only will Tehran stop its oil production from reaching the West, it may also use force to prevent the other oil prodoucers in the region (the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait) from exporting to the West.

Raduki also warned that his country might quit from its membership in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

[nuconvert]

Regime blocked BBC Persian web page

[travlnmn41]

I wonder if the Iranians truly understand how close they are to being toast. Do they think we're going to sit on our hands like the idiots at the UN if they nuke Israel?

[Travis McGee]

bttt

[Robert357]

...Do they think...

No they are not "thinking" as it is normally practiced in a free society and that is the problem.

One of the real problems that dictatorships have is something called "group think." This is where the dictator says I think that "A" will cause "B" to one subordinate. The subordinate will tell another peer, and that person will tell it to another peer. Then pretty soon they all get together in a single meeting and the last person on the chain says out loud that "A" will cause "B." The dictator and his first subordinate look at each other and say they suspected but didn't completely know that was true, so if this intelligent guy is saying it, it must be true.

That is how tight groups that have limited communications and don't actively question their own information sources, end up doing really stupid things.

People with nuclear weapons doing really stupid things is not good for society. Luckily, we are a long way from Iran. I am sure that concern within the middle east is much higher, just as concern near the North Korean boarders is much higher with that country's wacko leader on the nuclear button.

I hope that someday, the MSM reexamines W's speech were he called N. Korea, Iran and Iraq the axis of evil. The MSM is too busy portraying Bush as the village idiot to give him credit for the insights he has publicly made that were profound.

[PureTrouble]

Right now, every time Iran says something, oil traders equate that as risk to the oil supply, so Iran gets paid more.

Iran has figured out that if they cause trouble they will get paid more, and by ratcheting up the tensions, they can probably get better concessions from the world body to end the "crisis"

[Uncle Miltie]

Doc: I have a question.

Suppose the Security Council does nothing because Russia and China have been bought by the Mullahs.

Then, we (with or without the Israelis) bomb every nuke facility in the country, and do nothing else.

What would the Mullahs do?

Would they attempt to shut down the Straights of Hormuz to Kuwaiti oil because we bombed a nuke facility in Natanz?

Would they have a ballistic missile exchange with Israel regardless?

[lesser_satan]

Would they attempt to shut down the Straights of Hormuz to Kuwaiti oil because we bombed a nuke facility in Natanz?

It's been speculated on other Iran threads that Iran isn't militarily capable of closing the straights of Hormuz. I wonder if they could do it through non-military means, ie scuttling some large tankers or other big ships in the navigation channels. I guess it depends how deep it is there. Anybody know?

[No Blue States]

Here is a map of the Straight of Hormuz, with water depths.
It appears the shipping lanes are about 100' deep.

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/iran_strait_of_hormuz_2004.jpg

[lesser_satan]

Thanks!

[No Blue States]

Youre welcome.

Eyeballing the map it looks as if the width of the shipping lanes is about 10 miles.
(although I read someone else here say the actual lanes are about a mile wide)

Im no expert, but I would think it would take quite a few scuttled tankers to block traffic there.
But what would be the consequences of even deceased traffic to avoid them?
We may soon long for the days of $70 oil.
(not that the price of oil compares to the importance of Irans nuke threat)

[DoctorZIn]

At the moment the Iranian regime has the initiative.

They have many options before them and could prove very costly to the US.

If we bomb Iran and leave the regime in place like we did earlier in Iraq it would likely have a similar effect the 9/11 did on America.

Iran has threatened that if referred next week to the UN Security Council, they may close the St of Hormuz.

Then all hell would break loose.

[Uncle Miltie]

"Iran has threatened that if referred next week to the UN Security Council, they may close the St of Hormuz."

I think that would be best, then. The "International Community" will not like having military action taken against it when diplomacy was still underway. We could build a consensus for action around the Iranians closing the straits. The Korean War (Russia and China abstaining) example comes to mind.

Thanks for your thoughts.

[DoctorZIn]

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

[Robert357]

My economic theory taught me that if price gets too high the market will cause substitutions. Higher mileage cars will sell better or oil tar sands and oil shale research will get jump started. Likewise better old well oil recovery schemes will be put forward. Who knows maybe some off limits drilling sights will get drilled?

Yes, Iran can make a fuss and that will raise the oil price in the short run. In the long run, if the price is too high, change will happen and Iran will loose as will Saudi Arabia and a lot of other middle eastern countries.