dennislmay

Expectations of World War

198 posts in this topic

Dennis wrote:

The US is totally unprepared for a large urban strike. The food chain will collapse and people will panic.

end quote

It would be as bad or worse than 911 which completely shut America down for a day, though I seem to remember McDonalds and the grocery stores staying open. Post event security would be horrendous. Trucks were being pulled over and searched everywhere for months after the Twin Towers and Pentagon attacks. We must be better prepared and the creation of Homeland Security will prove how sensible its creation was, with new protocols in place in the event of what Obama calls, “a man made disaster.”

On a lighter note than apocalypse, I don’t see how we can avoid being “in on” a strike against Iran. We WILL keep the Strait of Hormuz open, but the Iranians will try to mine it. It would take one tanker blowing up to cause a huge spike in prices, with a corresponding down turn in the world’s economies. Iran will attack our Fleet. Our Fleet as noted below will be cocked and loaded for Iranian grizzly bear. Without coordination with Israel we risk running into each other.

Peter Taylor

24/7 The Wall:

Strait of Hormuz

About 20% of the crude oil produced in the world is shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran has threatened to shut down shipping traffic through the Strait. At its narrowest, the passage is 30 miles wide, so there is a realistic case that a conflict could close it. Iran has already been isolated as a trade partner by U.S. and EU sanctions. The regime in the country has made a number of threats about what it might do if its “national interests” were threatened. If Iran follows through with its threats, the period the passage is closed could be very brief if the U.S. Navy, which has a carrier group in the region, moved to reopen the lane. But it is not clear that the American government would make that decision without the open support of allies or the United Nations. A closure of the passage, or any escalation that would make a closure more likely, will drive oil prices higher — and

Supply Risk

In December 2011, OPEC members produced nearly 31 million barrels a day, cutting the cartel’s spare capacity capability from 3.18 million barrels per day to 2.85 million. Saudi Arabia accounts for 2.15 million of those daily barrels of spare capacity.

Whether this data is accurate is arguable. What is not arguable is that starting to pump the spare capacity will take time, which will not be very helpful in the event that the Strait of Hormuz is closed or some other geopolitical risk is realized.

Then there is Russia, the world’s first or second largest producer, depending on which day you look at the data. The OECD is counting on Russian production to make up for some of the short supplies and to grow by 1.4% to 10.72 million barrels a day in 2012. Russia grew its production by 1.2% in 2011. An additional gain of 17% in 2012 could signify that the OECD is hoping that Russian production can grow even more. There is no guarantee that Russia will deliver.

Supply from Canada, the U.S., Australia and Brazil is expected to rise in 2012, though North Sea production is expected to fall. The OECD estimates global demand in 2012 of 90 million barrels a day and global supply essentially equal to projected supply. Nothing about that state of affairs should lead anyone to a conclusion that prices will fall.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dennis wrote:

The US is totally unprepared for a large urban strike. The food chain will collapse and people will panic.

end quote

It would be as bad or worse than 911 which completely shut America down for a day, though I seem to remember McDonalds and the grocery stores staying open. Post event security would be horrendous. Trucks were being pulled over and searched everywhere for months after the Twin Towers and Pentagon attacks. We must be better prepared and the creation of Homeland Security will prove how sensible its creation was, with new protocols in place in the event of what Obama calls, “a man made disaster.”

On a lighter note than apocalypse, I don’t see how we can avoid being “in on” a strike against Iran. We WILL keep the Strait of Hormuz open, but the Iranians will try to mine it. It would take one tanker blowing up to cause a huge spike in prices, with a corresponding down turn in the world’s economies. Iran will attack our Fleet. Our Fleet as noted below will be cocked and loaded for Iranian grizzly bear. Without coordination with Israel we risk running into each other.

Peter Taylor

24/7 The Wall:

Strait of Hormuz

About 20% of the crude oil produced in the world is shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran has threatened to shut down shipping traffic through the Strait. At its narrowest, the passage is 30 miles wide, so there is a realistic case that a conflict could close it. Iran has already been isolated as a trade partner by U.S. and EU sanctions. The regime in the country has made a number of threats about what it might do if its “national interests” were threatened. If Iran follows through with its threats, the period the passage is closed could be very brief if the U.S. Navy, which has a carrier group in the region, moved to reopen the lane. But it is not clear that the American government would make that decision without the open support of allies or the United Nations. A closure of the passage, or any escalation that would make a closure more likely, will drive oil prices higher — and

Supply Risk

In December 2011, OPEC members produced nearly 31 million barrels a day, cutting the cartel’s spare capacity capability from 3.18 million barrels per day to 2.85 million. Saudi Arabia accounts for 2.15 million of those daily barrels of spare capacity.

Whether this data is accurate is arguable. What is not arguable is that starting to pump the spare capacity will take time, which will not be very helpful in the event that the Strait of Hormuz is closed or some other geopolitical risk is realized.

Then there is Russia, the world’s first or second largest producer, depending on which day you look at the data. The OECD is counting on Russian production to make up for some of the short supplies and to grow by 1.4% to 10.72 million barrels a day in 2012. Russia grew its production by 1.2% in 2011. An additional gain of 17% in 2012 could signify that the OECD is hoping that Russian production can grow even more. There is no guarantee that Russia will deliver.

Supply from Canada, the U.S., Australia and Brazil is expected to rise in 2012, though North Sea production is expected to fall. The OECD estimates global demand in 2012 of 90 million barrels a day and global supply essentially equal to projected supply. Nothing about that state of affairs should lead anyone to a conclusion that prices will fall.

The festering Somolia pirates problem could raise its ugly head if tankers have to travel around Africa. Choke points are old news and there is bad news at a number of oil choke points.

Dennis

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gad! Talk about a "Doomsday" thread! Look, I was depressed enough today after hearing about Andrew Breitbart's unexpected (healthwise) demise.

Then, I log onto OL and find this "the living will envy the dead" thread, which in my mind, sounds like Andrew Breitbarts' the lucky one. (I am not making light about his death, which is a tragic loss.).

The "doomsday" World War III (or is it now, 4 or 5?) scenarios discussed sound plausible. But so was nuclear war between the West and the Soviet Union. Despite some very close calls, it did not happen. Of course, the Soviet leaders did not expect to have 72 virgins meet them after they got vaporized by American H-bombs, so maybe that affected their reluctance to pull the trigger.

The Iranian Moslem leaders fully expect to receive their virginal reward. And so did all the suicide bombers and 9-1-1 terrorists, so our (or Israel's) nuclear stockpile may not seem to be a hindrance.

Coinciding with the Iranian nuclear bomb threat, we have a large number of survivalists and "2012-ers" who think the world is going to come to an end by some other catastrophe or catastrophes. Most of the 2012-ers scenarios sound delusional to me, or in some cases, "wishful thinking" (I'm thinking here about those who have admitted that the idea of shooting their pillaging neighbors sounded downright enjoyable). According to the "news documentaries", these people are building bomb shelters, buying-up decommisioned ICBM missile silos, stockpiling spam and other necessities, and arming to the teeth.

Well, somehow, we made it through forty-plus years of the Cold War without blowing each other up. Of course, we were dealing with atheists, then.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gad! Talk about a "Doomsday" thread! Look, I was depressed enough today after hearing about Andrew Breitbart's unexpected (healthwise) demise.

Then, I log onto OL and find this "the living will envy the dead" thread, which in my mind, sounds like Andrew Breitbarts' the lucky one. (I am not making light about his death, which is a tragic loss.).

The "doomsday" World War III (or is it now, 4 or 5?) scenarios discussed sound plausible. But so was nuclear war between the West and the Soviet Union. Despite some very close calls, it did not happen. Of course, the Soviet leaders did not expect to have 72 virgins meet them after they got vaporized by American H-bombs, so maybe that affected their reluctance to pull the trigger.

The Iranian Moslem leaders fully expect to receive their virginal reward. And so did all the suicide bombers and 9-1-1 terrorists, so our (or Israel's) nuclear stockpile may not seem to be a hindrance.

Coinciding with the Iranian nuclear bomb threat, we have a large number of survivalists and "2012-ers" who think the world is going to come to an end by some other catastrophe or catastrophes. Most of the 2012-ers scenarios sound delusional to me, or in some cases, "wishful thinking" (I'm thinking here about those who have admitted that the idea of shooting their pillaging neighbors sounded downright enjoyable). According to the "news documentaries", these people are building bomb shelters, buying-up decommisioned ICBM missile silos, stockpiling spam and other necessities, and arming to the teeth.

Well, somehow, we made it through forty-plus years of the Cold War without blowing each other up. Of course, we were dealing with atheists, then.

It is usually difficult to tell exactly how or when large scale military conflict will erupt because surprise is an important tactic. Announcing time frames for war is either a tactic attempting to dissuade or the acts of a traitor. In my view the many close calls during the Cold War have not been digested by the public. I don't even think most people with a military background understand how lucky we were during the 1945-1991 time frame.

There are more factors at work today than during the Cold War. The Soviets helped to keep Islamic terrorists at bay - in effect the US being a partial free rider - by using excessively brutal tactics [effective but uncivilized]. I have not heard much about those tactics once the Soviet Union collapsed. The US and the entire Western world is on the verge of economic collapse at the same time Islamic radicals are on the rise. Oil and food related to oil prices can be interrupted causing a world-wide firestorm.

The US is disarming and its military exhausted just as the conflict is about to start. None are good signs but it was all very predictable.

Dennis

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US would never launch a ground war or an air war on Syria and I doubt very much that Israel or the US would attack Iran openly. They know what would happen in both cases and they're not prepared for those consequences.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LM,

I hope you're right but I suspect you're not.

I don't think anyone knows what would happen. But I think we're going to find out.

Michael

The talking heads are trying to decide if the preemption will start before or after the election. Nearly all are saying before. I don't hear anyone but the administration saying sanctions will work.

Dennis

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US would never launch a ground war or an air war on Syria and I doubt very much that Israel or the US would attack Iran openly. They know what would happen in both cases and they're not prepared for those consequences.

They really aren't prepared for any consequences, including the consequences from not doing anything. The hots for war now is seemingly being dissipated which actually increases the possibility of war. Israel does not want to pre-announce an attack.

--Brant

just a mess to beat all messes

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rush had a caller today, Maryann from Lewes, Delaware who questioned the wisdom of tapping into the strategic oil reserve. Rush pronounced her town Loos, but it is pronounced LOOis. We will need to repurchase the oil at the prevailing rate, so the politics of using the reserve to lower the gas price now is dumb. It is a 36 day reserve which means if the Strait of Hormuz is closed by mines we would need that reserve then, so don’t use it now. Since it is only a 36 day supply we could expect even and odd days to buy gas based on the last digit of your license plate which happened under Jimmy Carter and which is rationing.

Rush wondered, why not use the Keystone Pipeline as our Strategic Reserve? Our contract with Canada, which they in turn would then have in writing on China or India’s oil futures contracts would stipulate that in the event of an emergency the U.S. gets the first chance at the Canadian oil. It sure makes sense, as does the sexy Sarah Palin saying, “Drill, Baby. Drill!” I’m for that. Very quickly oil would be spurting.

A local natural gas company is renting about three acres from a relative to park their machinery and pipes on. The rental price was agreeable. Their pipeline is about two miles from her property at this time, and runs along the State owned right of way. I sat in on the preliminary meeting and was impressed. I think the Keystone people would be as friendly and lucrative – and strategic, as these folks were. I thought Obama was the ultimate political animal, but Obama is a fool.

Peter Taylor

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John McCain’s and Obama’s plan to strike Iranian proxy, Syria appears to have been scrapped. That plan could have lead us into spearheading a strike against Iran if an aggressive no fly zone was established over Syria, since Iran was supplying Syria via commercial air transports. That practice may have been halted because of McCain’s plan.

Israel’s continuing strikes against neighboring terrorists is a dress rehearsal to see what can be thrown against them when they begin to neutralize Iran. Striking locally now, also has the advantages of testing Israel’s anti missile defense system, getting re-supplied before a campaign against Iran, and to preemptively destroy Iran’s proxies in neighboring territories. This strategy also suggests that Israel will go it alone with conventional weapons. That conclusion, if true, means Israel plans on winning the war.

What sort of casualties can Israel expect? An Israeli video of first responders practicing a chemical rocket attack indicates that Iran does not yet have nukes or a dirty bomb but may, in vengeance, use chemical weapons as WMD’s. I remember when Iraq was shooting scuds into Israel that the Israelis worried about chemicals sinking into their underground civilian shelters. I hope that problem has been lessened or eliminated.

Iran is being cut off of the world wide financial market, tomorrow, Saturday March 17th. However they are already doing test runs of money laden speed boats to neighboring Arab banks to conduct business as usual though it will be slower. This is another point where our Navy in the area will probably stop them, by sinking them. I think boarding and confiscating the cash would lead to charges of American piracy and bombs being set off once the Seals come aboard.

Hostilities may begin soon. Buy some gas, and keep your tanks topped off. Iran is promising to strike inside America and they will try to do the most damage possible, perhaps to our gas supply lines.

Peter Taylor

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John McCain’s and Obama’s plan to strike Iranian proxy, Syria appears to have been scrapped. That plan could have lead us into spearheading a strike against Iran if an aggressive no fly zone was established over Syria, since Iran was supplying Syria via commercial air transports. That practice may have been halted because of McCain’s plan. Israel’s continuing strikes against neighboring terrorists is a dress rehearsal to see what can be thrown against them when they begin to neutralize Iran. Striking locally now, also has the advantages of testing Israel’s anti missile defense system, getting re-supplied before a campaign against Iran, and to preemptively destroy Iran’s proxies in neighboring territories.

Israel can't destroy Iran's proxies, they've been trying since the 80's and have failed miserably with an outright defeat when they attacked Lebanon in 2006. Furthermore, it appears that Israel is again trying to draw the US into a war by using their Mossad agents to recruit terrorists to launch attacks inside Iran and all the while telling those terrorists that they are working for the CIA, not Mossad. I think the US has caught wind of this and I believe that the Iranians know that Israel is doing this and are therefore exercising restraint and not responding against the Americans.

This strategy also suggests that Israel will go it alone with conventional weapons. That conclusion, if true, means Israel plans on winning the war.

This means nothing really, they can intend to fly to the moon but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll be able to. In fact one could almost guarantee that if Israel attacks Iran it will face a military response that it can not handle.

What sort of casualties can Israel expect? An Israeli video of first responders practicing a chemical rocket attack indicates that Iran does not yet have nukes or a dirty bomb but may, in vengeance, use chemical weapons as WMD’s. I remember when Iraq was shooting scuds into Israel that the Israelis worried about chemicals sinking into their underground civilian shelters. I hope that problem has been lessened or eliminated.

I think this is really preposterous. Iran would never use chemical or radiological weapons against Israel or anywhere else. Anyone who suggests that they would should produce some type of evidence that Iran demonstrated the intention to do so. If anything, history shows that Iran is very anti WMD as during the Iran Iraq War the Iraqis were using British and US supplied Chemical weapons against Iranian cities and the Iranians didn't respond with Chemical weapons.

Iran is being cut off of the world wide financial market, tomorrow, Saturday March 17th. However they are already doing test runs of money laden speed boats to neighboring Arab banks to conduct business as usual though it will be slower. This is another point where our Navy in the area will probably stop them, by sinking them. I think boarding and confiscating the cash would lead to charges of American piracy and bombs being set off once the Seals come aboard. Hostilities may begin soon. Buy some gas, and keep your tanks topped off. Iran is promising to strike inside America and they will try to do the most damage possible, perhaps to our gas supply lines. Peter Taylor

I think people are freaking out a little too much over the prospect of war, I honestly don't think that the US or Israel will actually attack Iran openly.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next week three US aircraft carrier groups will be in position respecting Syria and Iran. The USS Enterprise is beginning her last deployment before being retired in seven months after 50 years of service.

To win a war the other side must be destroyed or come to such an agreement with you to stop fighting. Iran is at war right now with whomever wants to be at war with it. The question is how much ramp up in the fighting there will be, by and with whom in particular. The entire situation could blow up in the faces of oil importing and exporting countries giving their economies a mighty shock.

--Brant

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't think that the US or Israel will actually attack Iran openly.

Because you think America is cowed by a great enemy?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel and the U.S. will commence the overt war against Iran in September. The idea will be to help Obama get re-elected. Israel needs the U.S., but the U.S. doesn't need Israel to do this, so the U.S. may do it alone. Regardless, this gives the U.S. the ability to dictate the actual date.

--Brant

my speculation

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel and the U.S. will commence the overt war against Iran in September. The idea will be to help Obama get re-elected. Israel needs the U.S., but the U.S. doesn't need Israel to do this, so the U.S. may do it alone. Regardless, this gives the U.S. the ability to dictate the actual date.

--Brant

my speculation

If we are still at peace on Oct 1, that means you are wrong.

Ba'al Chatzaf

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel and the U.S. will commence the overt war against Iran in September. The idea will be to help Obama get re-elected. Israel needs the U.S., but the U.S. doesn't need Israel to do this, so the U.S. may do it alone. Regardless, this gives the U.S. the ability to dictate the actual date.

--Brant

my speculation

If we are still at peace on Oct 1, that means you are wrong.

Ba'al Chatzaf

If war breaks out on Oct 3 you'll call me a "genius!"

--Brant

head for the shelter!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Israel and the U.S. will commence the overt war against Iran in September. The idea will be to help Obama get re-elected. Israel needs the U.S., but the U.S. doesn't need Israel to do this, so the U.S. may do it alone. Regardless, this gives the U.S. the ability to dictate the actual date. --Brant my speculation
If we are still at peace on Oct 1, that means you are wrong. Ba'al Chatzaf
If war breaks out on Oct 3 you'll call me a "genius!" --Brant head for the shelter!

What qualifies for "war breaking out"?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel and the U.S. will commence the overt war against Iran in September.

LW predicts September or October, 2012 and he claims inside knowledge. But with Alex Jones shining the spotlight on them cockroaches, they probably will change their plans.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Israel and the U.S. will commence the overt war against Iran in September. The idea will be to help Obama get re-elected. Israel needs the U.S., but the U.S. doesn't need Israel to do this, so the U.S. may do it alone. Regardless, this gives the U.S. the ability to dictate the actual date. --Brant my speculation
If we are still at peace on Oct 1, that means you are wrong. Ba'al Chatzaf
If war breaks out on Oct 3 you'll call me a "genius!" --Brant head for the shelter!

What qualifies for "war breaking out"?

Extensive if not prolonged bombing.

--Brant

the pre-war war is already well underway

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL I'd be so surprised if a war did break out. From what I can see, the US is desperately trying to avoid it and in fact, Israel seems to be doing everything they can to make it happen, even by posing as the CIA and getting groups from Baluchis in Iran and Pakistan to attack Iranian targets with terrorist attacks, same with the Kurds.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL ... and in fact, Israel seems to be doing everything they can to make it happen...

LM,

For all your knowledge, you don't have the slightest idea.

One false principle, and all your knowledge falls flat.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it your contention that Obama dreads an election in which he loses big time to the point where he seeks to engage us in a WWIII in order to postpone the election altogether, declare himself president for life or the like. Even during WWII FDR ran in an election here and was re elected.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL ... and in fact, Israel seems to be doing everything they can to make it happen...

LM,

For all your knowledge, you don't have the slightest idea.

One false principle, and all your knowledge falls flat.

I have a very good idea actually. Israel, reluctant to go to war against Iran by themselves or be seen as starting the war has been sending in the MOSSAD pretending that they're the CIA to get groups to launch attacks on Iran blowing up mosques and government facilities in the hope that Iran would lose patience and strike out against the US, thus pulling the US into a war.

It's the typical story of one weak loud mouthed punk that has a bigger and stronger friend and then tries to start a fight between his friend and some random person he doesn't like.

Iran is completely justified even now in attacking the US if we use the same ridiculous standards that the US has in the past to launch wars against other nations, but Iran doesn't want a bar of it, they're wanting to avoid war at all costs and for good reason. It will not be pretty for anyone involved.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh, man. I'm not sure if I want to sympathise with that innocent

ignorance of yours, or combat your terrible cynicism.

It is obvious you're a victim of your own propaganda.

One question: Why would Israel seek war with Iran?

Put another way: How would it be in their self-interest?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now