Posted on 07/29/2008 1:34:38 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Take it from one of those eeeeeevil speculators: Don't look for a major drop in the price of oil until well after the election. We may be down about 15% from the recent peaks, but that is well within normal market fluctuations. I may be small potatoes when it comes to the extent of my speculation in the commodity markets, but I am well attuned to where the big boys are putting their money.
Those insiders are convinced that Israel is not going to stand by and let Little Man Ahmandinijad brings his nuclear weapons dream to fruition. If Obama is elected, the Israelis are guaranteed to act before he takes office on January 20, 2009. They have no faith in Obama's commitment to protect Israel or prevent Iran from getting nukes.
An Israeli strike, whether with or without United States' support or participation, is guaranteed to disrupt oil traffic in the Middle East for anywhere from a couple of weeks to several months. Iran has credibly threatened to shut down the straits of Hormuz if their nuclear facilities are attacked. Don't doubt that they have the means to do it.
Roughly 17 million barrels of oil per day or about 40% of all ocean-carried oil is shipped via tanker through these narrow straits. All of the oil squeezing through the 21-mile strait is well within range of Iranian missiles and aircraft. The sinking of only a few tankers would be sufficient to render those waters impassable.
If Israel is acting with the support of the United States, you can expect the American Navy to try to keep the straits open, but the Iranian response is likely to be intense. It is possible that the Iranian response will also include strikes against its neighbors production facilities. Facing Iran across the gulf and the straits, after all, are Saudia Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Kuwait. (We won't even consider here the 40,000-60,000 missiles aimed at Israel by Iranian proxies in Lebanon and Gaza.)
World producers, consumers and -- yes -- speculators are hedging their bets based upon the expectation that a huge oil stockpile crisis is just around the corner.
While an Obama election guarantees Israeli action between November 4, 2008 and January 20, 2009, a McCain election victory does NOT eliminate the possibility of a strike against Iran, it merely widens the window of opportunity. The Israelis know that they can count on John McCain to support action against Iran's nukes, and therefore, they will not feel compelled to act by January 20, 2009.
Of course, there is also the more remote possibility that Israel is already in possession of information concerning Iran's nuclear progress which makes immediate action necessary. Whether Israel, under such circumstances, would take the risk of being accused of trying to influence the U.S. elections by acting before November 4th is unknown -- most likely remote, but not impossible.
Therefore, the threat of massive disruption of oil supplies is with us today and will be with us AT LEAST until January 20, 2009 if Obama is elected. The risk remains if McCain is elected, but the action deadline will be extended to that time when Israel -- and perhaps the United States -- determines that Iran's nuclear program is approaching the point of no return and must be stopped then and there.
Think about it: If you were a big money producer or consumer in the oil markets wouldn't YOU be hedging your interests right now? Only a fool would not!
Oh, and by the way, only a complete idiot (are you listening Miss Pelolsi) would be thinking about drawing on our strategic oil stockpiles now, when a massive market disruption may be only weeks away?
O’Bama is an empty suit. He will do as instructed.
Obama would considr it a victory if Iran struck Israel.
Obama will mess things up beyond repair. Look what that great idiot Carter did regarding Israel and Iran. With McCain we have the certainty that the Mullahs will get their due.
Could somebody enlighten me on how Iran could hold off the entire world, let alone the USA?
I have no doubt that we (again) can sink the entire pathetic Iranian navy within hours, but I wonder what the effects of wrecks and scuttled ships in the middle of the Strait would have...
Makes perfect sense!
An Israeli preemptive strike without a follow up occupation is likely to accomplish nothing, and I don't see if happening under any circumstances unless Israel is attacked.
Don't be so sure about that. The USN has wargamed the scenario & it did not turn out well. A Marine General played the part of the Revolutionary Guards Commander and he threw the Navy so many curve-balls that they aren't certain that they can prevail at an acceptable price. Of course this is why you hold these kinds of exercises -- to tease out the possible enemy gambits.
How would this NOT be a possibility anyways with both Obama and McCain being leftist politicians on most issues? It’s either going to be McCain or Obama as the next POTUS unless either one of them either dies or both of them die (either by natural causes or by assassination) prior to November 4 or have something else terrible happen to either one of them to the point that they truly can’t function as the next POTUS.
They can't, according to our top brass and latest Iran NIE.
However, the officials said one of the strategic issues discussed in the estimate is whether Iranian military forces have the capability to follow through on threats to close the Strait of Hormuz to oil shipping in the event of a U.S. or Israeli strike on Iran. An estimated 20 to 40 percent of the world's oil passes through the 21-mile strait.
That question was discussed earlier this month by Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who said the Iranian military could threaten the strait with its forces but could not keep it closed in response to U.S. and allied military action to re-open it.
Asked about Iranian Revolutionary Guards' threats to shut down Hormuz, Adm. Mullen told reporters July 2 that:
"The analysis that I have certainly indicates that they have capabilities which could certainly hazard the Straits of Hormuz," Adm. Mullen said July 2. "But ... I believe that the ability to sustain that is not there."
There is pent up demand out there among thugs and juntas to go pound on their enemies. Take a US military response out of the calculus and a lot of things look more rational to a dictator.
Factor in the carrots that an Obama Administration would offer to “make nice” after you clobber your enemies, and there will be a virtual free-for-all.
I recall someone on a Clinton Admin. advisory group panel describing for her spouse that that very day that she had “figured out how evil things were out there”. The following day, Clinton put cruise missiles into Afganistan.
It was well into the administration, but they were just figuring this out. Can you imagine how long it will take Obama and his minions to figure this out?
Could somebody enlighten me on how Iran could hold off the entire world, let alone the USA?
"....All of the oil squeezing through the 21-mile strait is well within range of Iranian missiles and aircraft. The sinking of only a few tankers would be sufficient to render those waters impassable.
(Assuming the author is correct in making this statement. Not holding off, just cutting off passibility through the strait.)
I am sure that Halliburton or some such large military contractor has the capability to clean up the strait after a quick naval battle if money is not an object.
I suspect the author is making a pretty good guess as to what is likely to happen. The Israelis would be stupid to count on Obama for anything and they would be insane to allow Iran to actually develope nukes. And even if the Iranians are still 2,3 or even 4 years away from producing a nuke Israel has to take into account the near certainty that an Obama administration would try and prevent a strike. So the window of opportunity is as stated in the article if Hussein wins.
Obama would be happy to have Israel to strike Iran. It would play to his political sensibilities perfectly. He could claim public “outrage” while secretly be happy that it is a problem he did not have to face. Whatever the result, he would spin it as a victory for his Administration’s point of view.
Just look at how he is treating the surge and his visit to Iraq.
The Townhall article is absolutely spot on. And, yes, I shall be trading crude futures on election night -- count on it.
“Iran has credibly threatened to shut down the straits of Hormuz if their nuclear facilities are attacked. Don’t doubt that they have the means to do it.”
That’s debatable. They may interrupt shipping for a bit but they’ll have a hard time keeping it closed with their entire navy and air force being lost in the first 12 hours of the start of the campaign. Missile and artillery batteries along the shore would be a problem but I think our boys will quickly dispense with the threat.
Well Israel has to act in its own interests. But so do we and they may not be the same. [Eisenhower and Egypt and Israel]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.