Ain't It Awful?

[Cain]

What goes through the Straits equals roughly 17 million barrels a day.

If even one million barrels a day to the US are disrupted, it would be cause for opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (which would only last a maximum of two months anyway).  Two million, and the cost to US economy would be so high, government planners cannot actually model the damage that would be done.  It'd make the 2008 economic crash look like a walk in the park.

If I wanted to take down the US, I'd strike at the Straits of Hormuz as well.  Without the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia cannot hope to prosecute any kind of successful war.  They need US technical expertise, targeting data and diplomatic cover.

[LMNO]

Forecasting into the future, Do you think the US will go all Shock and Awe against Iran at the merest hint of a Hormuz blockade?

[Cain]

That's what the Fifth Fleet are for.

But even signicant fighting is going to reduce the flow.  No-one wants to pilot their oil tanker through a free fire zone.

[LMNO]

Ah, and because the NDRP is essentially there to analyze resource allocation, we'll need to use it when the petrol-based economy shits the bed.  Ok, that's making a lot of sense, now.

[Junkenstein]

I would guess this also ties into some of the renewed interest in Somalia. Equipping a few pirates who are suicidal/stupid enough to take a run at a tanker would be an interesting play. Even if stopped and not causing any real damage it would probably give the US a justified entry into Africa.

Probably just being paranoid.

[Cain]

The US is already in Somalia.  It's the principial backer of the transitional Somali government.

[Junkenstein]

Ah. The more you know then.

I guess that increases the chances of some sort of false flag op considerably.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

I would guess this also ties into some of the renewed interest in Somalia. Equipping a few pirates who are suicidal/stupid enough to take a run at a tanker would be an interesting play. Even if stopped and not causing any real damage it would probably give the US a justified entry into Africa.

Probably just being paranoid.

The US is already in Somalia.  It's the principial backer of the transitional Somali government.

"Paranoia: The state of knowing the facts."
- Dok

[hirley0]

If I wanted to take down the US, I'd strike a

My guess Sept 22 11:19 EDT?

[Cain]

Well, that too.  But am typical of my generation, and prefer near instant gratification, not the endless grind of decades of conflict.

[hirley0]

11:27:00.00

My guess Sept 22 11:19 EDT?

[Doktor Howl]

I suppose it doesn't help that "National Emergency" isn't even remotely defined.

And I also suppose that we have a precedent (thanks to W) for "pre-emptive war", so perhaps we can declare an emergency before it even happens?

Um, the precedent for "pre-emptive war" is about a hundred years old.

[LMNO]

Point taken.

[Cain]

What Bush wanted was "preventative war", probably chosen because the word sounds like pre-emptive, if said fast enough.

Pre-emptive war: you're allowed to attack a nation if it is going to attack you (for instance, Poland would've been justified in attacking Germany in late August 1939).

Preventative war: you're allowed to attack a nation if it looks like it could be a threat in the future (any nation developing WMD or posing some kind of strategic risk, ever).

[LMNO]

I'm gonna go with "that's what I meant to say," whether or not that's really true.