Is control of the Strait of Hormuz more powerful than any weaponry or armies the US possesses?

[msc545]

For those who have been living under a rock the past year, the Strait of Hormuz is responsible for the transit of 20% of the world's crude oil to refineries. Clearance through this area is the key to providing an ongoing flow of crude oil to the rest of the world. Iran controls the Strait at this point and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Nothing the US can do, apparently, will affect this. As it turns out, that is a good thing.

[RavVid]

Geography is not weapon but more a force multiplier I would say. Related but not the same. It is odd the US (Trump) did not blow as many of their speed boats and pens as he could before pausing the kinetics is my thinking.

A lesson for next time.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

@RavVid it wouldn't have influenced things much. The threat on shipping was the problem, not anything in Iran's arsenal. The Truml administration clearly though a blockade and limited counter strikes would force them to the table. He might not have wanted to risk opening it due to his precious deal. I think he was right in a way, but it turned a military victory into a diplomatic stalemate. Would have been better to force the strait open.

[RavVid]

@FrodoSkywalker007 It has turned into a diplomatic stalemate. In part it has been Iran has been willing to absorb punishment with a view of out lasting Trump. I think you have to consider the ability to bring weapons to bear on shipping was a factor.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

Certainly I agree their ability to launch drones at shipping made the cost too high for that industry. It isn't the first time Iran has done this. In the 1980s they did the same thing and it required American intervention. I think the only folly of this war as Trumps desire to get a deal. It may make the political outcome less favorable.

[msc545]

I suspect he didn't do it because I believe that the Iranians have that area basically zeroed in by artillery and missile launchers, and God knows what. I don't think that Trump wanted to start an all-out battle with those people because, clearly, he would have lost.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

I doubt that is true. That is pure pessimism from you. Recently, PM Carney was interviewed at the G7. He claimed to be one of the few that saw the MOU. He said it was a "game changer" and that it would prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon. Carney even said the conflict was worth it. This is high praise from someone who has been a staunch critic of Trump.

[Pohjolan]

Nah military prowess just isn't a substitute for bad leadership and poor negotiating.

Leaks suggest that USA wasn't as much defeated as played like a fiddle.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

@Pohjolan I think Trump said himself "Iran has never won a war, but never lost a negotiation" that seems fair. Iran was defeated in the war, but the negotiations seem to be a stalemate.

[msc545]

@FrodoSkywalker007 I think that, reasonably speaking, Iran was the winner of the negotiations. Trump could not negotiate his way out of a wet paper bag.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

Possibly? It's really hard to say with differing claims. I think it's very possible both parties will leave with having felt they accomplished what they wanted.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

I don't believe so. It had little impact on the US, and the counter blockade was costly for Iran. For many weeks Iran was unwilling to even discuss its nuclear program and made some serious demands. Now they seem willing , and if Pakistan's statements are correct, they may receive their frozen assets dependent on the progress of talks. I do believe Trump turned a military success into a political stalemate. It gives both sides the ability to declare victory. Trump gets what he wanted, and Iran can claim it survived. People will take sides on what they think the outcome is, but we won't know for some time. It may very well be that the talks collapse and the war resumes. Personally, I think it was a mistake to emphasis diplomacy as opposed to continuing military operations.

[thegreenyogi]

I would imagine so. Iran literally has the world at its feet economically at least. But i guess it's the initial stage of a new world order so I'm not sure how powerful of a weapon it is.

[msc545]

Being able to control 20% of the world's oil, including completely cutting it off, is one hell of a weapon.

[katiesmuff]

It wouldn't need to be considered a weapon if incompetent morons like trump who believes he is GOD and can do anything attacks Iran for no particular reason other than he had a feeling. Fuck him and his thug administration which are also real brain trusts along with the slimy cowards of the house and senate.

[msc545]

Until we run out of oil, which hopefully won't be all that soon, Iran is going to be very powerful based on its geographical position.

[msc545]

Thank God, or that God or somebody arranged for Iran to be situated right next to the Strait of Hormuz. Can you imagine what life would be like if Trump were in control of it?

[msc545]

@katiesmuff we need to get rid of this guy before he kills all of us. He's come close several times, and one time he's gonna miscalculate, and the whole thing's gonna go to shit.

[MrChinaski]

Nah. The US could easily invade Iran. So long as the American people are willing to tolerate a hundred body bags coming home every week forever. Strangely, the US people are smarter than that.

[MrChinaski]

Glass cannon.

[msc545]

The US could invade Iran, and Iran could destroy all of its oil refineries, pumps, facilities, and everything else having to do with them. That would have the same effect essentially as blocking the Strait of Hormuz.

[msc545]

Only a lot more permanent.

[MrChinaski]

Iran is the origin of only 10 or so per cent of oil that would normally ship through hormuz.

[msc545]

So that's interesting data. If that's true, then why does Iran have so much equipment in place to handle oil?

[MrChinaski]

The numbers are pretty murky because of sanction avoidance, but if it's 10-15 % of oil trade through hormuz, that's still a heck of a lot of oil.

[msc545]

You know that's a substantial amount of oil. If you need an eruption, that supply would be a big problem.

[blackeagle007]

Invading that country would be worse than going into Iraq

[msc545]

@blackeagle007 yes

[MrChinaski]

@blackeagle007 Agreed.

[msc545]

Yes, pretty much a glass cannon. I assume you are referring to the U. S. and not to the Iranians who are dug in all around that area and have all sorts of ornaments in place. The invasion of Iran, or the Strait of Hormuz, or anything else in that area by the U. S. would not be easy, by any means. There would be massive casualties. People often make the mistake that air power is the answer to that kind of problem, and it's not. Air power is too fragile, and it's too easy to defend against these days.

[msc545]

What you need for this kind of problem is boots on the ground. Boots on the ground means lots of dead soldiers, given that environment.

[MrChinaski]

Russia has the world's second most powerful air force. It has been almost entirely absent in Ukraine. The cost of losing a plane hugely exceeds the expected damage against entrenched infantry positions.

[blackeagle007]

Where do we go from here then. There’s this 60 day talk?

[msc545]

@blackeagle007 interminable delay and empty promises from Trump.

[Telekinetic-Potato]

By itself, yea. But it's kinda like saying is it better to have all the ingredients and the best kitchen or is it better to have the best cake.

Weapons give you a chance to change who controls what. But the one in control is the one in control. In the case of the straight, I'd say it's not quite black and white but Iran was able to maintain formiddible control against a powerful enemy.

Though this situation might not be exactly over yet.

[katiesmuff]

Only because of a completely insane President are we even having this situation.

[msc545]

Don't forget the insane electorate that refuses to remove him. Also the insane Republican congressmen that refuse to vote for impeachment or convict him.

[katiesmuff]

Oh yes will not forget them either. Just a bunch of well paid cowards who are not supporting those who put them in office.

[msc545]

Yeah, exactly. Too well paid, too cowardly, and no support whatsoever for anybody but themselves.

[SeekerOfTruth007]

No. We only had 2 aircraft carriers in the region out of ten active carriers. That doesn't count what the USA possessses State side.

Anyone claiming we were "out of ammo" from the Iran war is a moron. We used some out-dated munitions that needed to be spent anyway.

[ThisSiteSux]

Lol. No. Not even close. It's powerful but American armory could topple every nation on this planet in minutes. We just don't want to use it and show our hand. We literally conquered Venezuela in 4 hours, killed thousands of troops and didn't lose a single soldier or piece of equipment.

[abc3643]

Trump is incompetent. The ONE time I wanted to succeed and he runs away like kicked puppy.

[FrodoSkywalker007]

@abc3643 nothing like a military success turned into a diplomatic stalemate. He isn't that great at negotiating, that is for sure.

[abc3643]

* The ONE time I wanted ____him____ to succeed...

[lilBigPotato]

No, the US could have taken control if they really wanted too, but the price for it was too high.

So it's powerful but only to a certain extent.

[msc545]

You don't know what the US could or could not have done. Once again. That's just speculation.

[lilBigPotato]

It's not. The US has thousands of nukes and could blow off Iran into a bazillion pieces. And even without those the US could destroy them and take control if they wanted. To pretend that controlling the straight could stop that if the US would go all in is just silly.

I am absolutely against this war and I do think that Iran won it, and the straight of Hormuz played an essential role in that, but this is also because the US administration was not willing to pay the very high price to change it. Even the orange monkey in the white house knew that it would end in a disaster and the they would lose a lot more then they could win with that victory.

[lilBigPotato]

Typos... You can keep them 🙃

[msc545]

Even the U. S., bloodthirsty as it is, recognizes the fact that the use of one nuclear weapon will lead to the use of many more and basically the end of the world, or close to it. It's interesting that the U. S. government understands this problem and you apparently do not.

[Snakeyes7]

I think this whole thing over the strait if hormuz is simply to make a deal, which I think is ultimately a waste of time because we are just negotiating with terrorists.

[robocop666]

USA is wasting time in Iran. accomplishing nothing. Trump is an idiot.

[888theGreat]

no, not to America , but it hurts other countries a lot. Imports and exports.

[_Jenny_]

I’m sure it will be under control soon

[Sal_Monella]

A fair opinion. We shall see.

[236color]

Yes it is

[NotSomeUserName]

Water is just wet.