Tehran warns of fuel disruptions

[bigfootedfred]

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei has warned that fuel shipments from the Gulf region could be disrupted if the US makes a "wrong move".

In a speech on state TV, Ayatollah Khamenei also said accusations
that Iran intended to make a nuclear bomb amounted to a "sheer lie".
He insisted Iran would not give up its right to produce nuclear fuel.
Tehran has agreed to study proposals drawn up by six world powers to defuse the row over Iran's nuclear programme.
The proposals are due to be delivered by the EU's foreign policy head, Javier Solana, within days.
The precise details of the proposals are not known, but they aim to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear work - a step which Iran has repeatedly said it will not take.

Intresting that there laying that card down.
I Remeber they recently recived a list of incentives (and possibly threats)
Either way, just annoucing this will probably have an effect on oil markets.

source

[Mangalore]

I guess this threat is Iran's only trump card and that they repeatedly used it already might be an indication that they know that they rather not want to be at the receiving end of a military "solution" by the US. The uncertainty about this specific situation and the already high oil prices are indeed the only scenario that might be a vital threat to western interests.

However I find this talk not surprising given the pressure they are on, the question is wether both sides of this conflict still find a common ground to find a diplomatic solution.

[leeho730]

Iran probably knows that US cannot afford another major military operation. The unexpected insurgency in Iraq already stretched the resources and manpower, and the last thing US want is to face another insurgency, will will not only affect morale of troops stationed in Iraq and Iran, but also popularity of President Bush and The Republican party in the home country which has been plaqued by political scandals and natural disasters.

Invasion of Iran will also upset majority of Shi'ite population in Southern Iraq which has been so far very peaceful (Southern Iraq under Shi'ite muslims is a very secure place), at least towards US armed forces in Iraq. The last thing US will want is to convert Shi'ite population in Iraq to a breeding ground of insurgency and terrorists, as Iran is a major supporter of Shi'ite muslims (Shi'a Islam is the official state religion of Iran).

Use of nuclear warheads on Iran is a very, very dangerous card that US would probably never play. This will probably upset WHOLE Islamic countries (including Saudi Arabia), not to mention majority of Eurpoean nations and even some of US's close allies and might trigger extreme hostility towards US and Israel in the region which US hopes to influencel rather than destroy (and Iran, of course, knows that).

I believe that the diplomatic solution is the most likely outcome of this conflict, and Iran knows that and that's why Iran is playing such bold political games. Invasion of Iraq was, ironically, the catalyst in Iran's bold movement. It may be even quite safe to say that without invasion of Iraq Iran would not be able to do it.

[Ahiga]

Bravo Iran. If it'll keep us from having Georghis Khan invade Iran, I'm all for it.
I think you are right about the last comment Leeho, that Iraq effectively boldened Iran and caused them to freak out at the sight of us on both their borders. It is safe to say that no military action would come about unless a terrorist attack occurs and Iran is behind it or the Administration Spin's it to be blamed on Iran (I'm not talking about the insane conspiracy theories - I'm talking about them remarking that Saddam had ties to Osama then doing a 180 on that statement as soon as we got in). Military action would come about at a later date if this continues without end, and diplomatic action is the likelyhood.

[akanoez]

glad i don't drive

[bigfootedfred]

Update:

Oil prices rise on Iran's warning

Oil prices have risen above $73 a barrel
after Iran hinted it might cut its crude output if its ongoing nuclear stand-off with the West escalates.
The comments were made by Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,
who warned oil exports could be reduced if the US makes a "wrong move".
The West has threatened Iran with economic sanctions unless the Iranian government halts its nuclear ambitions.
US light sweet crude settled 27 cents up at $72.60 after peaking at $73.10.
Meanwhile, London's Brent crude rose 34 cents to settle at $71.37.

source

They havent even played their oil card yet.
Just hinting of it caused this.

US shares tumble on rates jitters

Fears that the US Federal Reserve could be preparing to raise interest rates for a 17th time prompted a sell-off on Wall Street.
Investors took fright after Fed chief Ben Bernanke warned rates may have to rise to curb "unwelcome" inflation.

A sharp rise in oil prices - a key driver of inflation -
prompted by Iran's warning over its current nuclear stand off with the US also weighed.

The Dow Jones index closed almost 200 points, or 1.8%, down at to 11048.72.
Elsewhere, the technology laden Nasdaq Composite Index fell 2.2% to 2169.62 while the Standard & Poor's 500 fell 1.8%.
"It's all about the price of oil and of course the Federal Reserve," said Peter Cardillo, analyst at SW Bach.

source

[Freddie]

I hope that mad Iranian guy keeps ranting like a toothless tiger because he is creating some good value stock. All the falls on New York will be refelcted in the UK the following tradeing session. :original:

Anways I think there is case for action against Iran but I would prfer it if we finished our business up in Afganistans and Iraq before moving onto the next Axis of evil.

[leeho730]

I hope that mad Iranian guy keeps ranting like a toothless tiger because he is creating some good value stock. All the falls on New York will be refelcted in the UK the following tradeing session. :original:

Anways I think there is case for action against Iran but I would prfer it if we finished our business up in Afganistans and Iraq before moving onto the next Axis of evil.

There's no white and black; there's only gray. Some are whiter, and some are darker then the other.

[danzig]

Iran's economy is almost entirely based on oil...who would lose out the most? They would drive up the cost of oil no doubt but what would endure more their ENTIRE economy or the west's ability to pay more for oil? Remember saying they will threaten supply thru the straits is one thing, actually achieving it is another and such an act would be precieved by quite a few nations that arent directly involved as an act of war. Im not dismissing it as a threat Im simply looking at it from the other side, every threat has a price and would Iran be able to pay that price by basically shutting off their entire economy to teach the US a lesson?

Bravo Iran. If it'll keep us from having Georghis Khan invade Iran, I'm all for it.

Its one thing to be ****** off as US foreign policy, certainly alot to be ****** off about but its another to actively cheering on a repressive regime like Iran in doing so. The US being wrong on Iraq in so many ways does not make Iran right in this.

[leeho730]

There is always a market for crude oil. Very large quantity of oil is sold on over-the-counter basis nowadays, which means that crude oil from Iran can be sold directly to the companies with vague refence to the stock market price and grade. Individuals can even trade crude oil through online trading site.

Increase in price of crude oil will certain cause less demand on Iranian crude oil, but there will always be a damand no matter the price. Iran knows this too well.

[danzig]

There is always a market for crude oil. Very large quantity of oil is sold on over-the-counter basis nowadays, which means that crude oil from Iran can be sold directly to the companies with vague refence to the stock market price. Individuals can even trade crude oil through online trading site.

US isnt stupid however and Iran would still need to get the oil to whoever is buying it and suddenly a few million barrels of oil magically appearing on the market under some dummy company would I imagine be rather easy to find. If Iran did indeed attempt to close the straits we wouldnt be looking at UN Iraq oil type sanctions where every politican got a piece of the pie but real sanctions. As I said for every threat there is a price to pay for that threat. For all its power the US cant simply magically blink and make what it wants to happen happen...so there is certainly no reason to believe Iran could either.

[leeho730]

US isnt stupid however and Iran would still need to get the oil to whoever is buying it and suddenly a few million barrels of oil magically appearing on the market under some dummy company would I imagine be rather easy to find. If Iran did indeed attempt to close the straits we wouldnt be looking at UN Iraq oil type sanctions where every politican got a piece of the pie but real sanctions. As I said for every threat there is a price to pay for that threat. For all its power the US cant simply magically blink and make what it wants to happen happen...so there is certainly no reason to believe Iran could either.

US isn't stupid, but is plaqued by rather poor diplomatic decisions... Vietnam, Iraq, so on.

UN sanction is an extreme measure and it is highly unlikely that Iran will be sanctioned... Iran does not seem to sponsor terrorists (at least openly), does not have definite evidence of possession of WMD, and haven't invaded another country yet. For example, Iraq was under UN sanction for invading Kuwait, North Korea is currently under UN sanction for sponsoring terrorism in Burma.

And with invasion of Iraq US cannot enforce her policy on ME countries to the level pre-2003. With US forces being tied to Iraq and loss of sympathy and respect among European nations (not to mention Russia and China's ambition to increase their influence in ME) and rise of nationalism and anti-US sentiment among muslim populations. In short US is under fierce competition to seek dominance in ME that she hasn't met before, and invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq (whether right or not) certainly caused loss of some diplomatic ground for US. Yes, US is a superpower but she still needed a valid cause to exercise her power, like in Vietnam and Iraq. There's further dreadful problem that invasion of Iran will finally turn the tide of anti-US sentiment to full scale-at least Shi'ite muslims were content with US, compared to Sunni muslims. US simplay do not want, and cannot afford, to have Shi'ite insurgency or terrorists in all front. US certainly needs some allies on ME to seek dominance.

Iran claims it wants nuclear ability to be a stabilizing force in the middle east....In my opinion if Iran wants to be a stabilzing force there then as a trade-off stipulation for nuclear production Iran (being a Muslim country who enforces Muslim peoples) should be required to live up to its desire by the U.N. giving Iran control of Iraq and remove the multi-national forces. This will provide Iran with regional commitment and allow the Muslim people of Iraq to be governed by Muslim people. Let Iran deal with the Islamic extremists in Iraq since Iran is wanting to be the middle eastern world police department.

Not to mention large slices of Iraqi territories... Iran is certainly not a fool, and they're playing diplomatic game in right timing, with arch-rival Iraq diminished in power.

[danzig]

US isn't stupid, but is plaqued by rather poor diplomatic decisions... Vietnam, Iraq, so on.

UN sanction is an extreme measure and it is highly unlikely that Iran will be sanctioned... Iran does not seem to sponsor terrorists (at least openly), does not have definite evidence of possession of WMD, and haven't invaded another country yet. For example, Iraq was under UN sanction for invading Kuwait, North Korea is currently under UN sanction for sponsoring terrorism in Burma.

And with invasion of Iraq US cannot enforce her policy on ME countries to the level pre-2003. With US forces being tied to Iraq and loss of sympathy and respect among European nations (not to mention Russia and China's ambition to increase their influence in ME) and rise of nationalism and anti-US sentiment among muslim populations. In short US is under fierce competition to seek dominance in ME, and invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq (whether right or not) certainly caused loss of some diplomatic ground for US. Yes, US is a superpower but she still needed a valid cause to exercise her power, like in Vietnam and Iraq. There's further dreadful problem that invasion of Iran will finally turn the tide of anti-US sentiment to full scale-at least Shi'ite muslims were content with US, compared to Sunni muslims. US simplay do not want, and cannot afford, to have Shi'ite insurgency or terrorists in all front. US certainly needs some allies on ME to seek dominance.

Well your speech is very nice and all but has little to do with how Iran can use its oil if such a conflict DID happen without causing more harm to itself then it would inflict.

[leeho730]

Well your speech is very nice and all but has little to do with how Iran can use its oil if such a conflict DID happen without causing more harm to itself then it would inflict.

Your point is taken, but the probability of such occurance is very slim, if not nigh impossible. Invasion or UN sanction of Iran would be almost a diplomatic suicide for US in ME region (and US certainly is not planning to have Qadhafi-like figure again).

And the point was Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's comment that "If [US] make a wrong move regarding Iran, definitely the energy flow in this region will be seriously endangered (and he didn't comment on how the energy flow would be disrupted)." It's other way round: US makes a move against Iran, then energy flow will be disrupted. If US-led economic sanction is carried out, several political consequences can happen in and out of Iran, which can be destructive to Iran (like Iraq) but also to US, who is the biggest importer of crude oil in the world (why, you might see $4-5/litre for unleaded 91).

Actually Iraq is governed by Muslim people, though there may be one or two Christians...

There seem to be more than one government. But the problem perceived by Shi'ite government is that US placed advisors in every public sector, to control Iraq behind the curtain.

[MizuTahanaman]

Iran claims it wants nuclear ability to be a stabilizing force in the middle east....In my opinion if Iran wants to be a stabilzing force there then as a trade-off stipulation for nuclear production Iran (being a Muslim country who enforces Muslim peoples) should be required to live up to its desire by the U.N. giving Iran control of Iraq and remove the multi-national forces. This will provide Iran with regional commitment and allow the Muslim people of Iraq to be governed by Muslim people. Let Iran deal with the Islamic extremists in Iraq since Iran is wanting to be the middle eastern world police department.

[Farnan]

Iran claims it wants nuclear ability to be a stabilizing force in the middle east....In my opinion if Iran wants to be a stabilzing force there then as a trade-off stipulation for nuclear production Iran (being a Muslim country who enforces Muslim peoples) should be required to live up to its desire by the U.N. giving Iran control of Iraq and remove the multi-national forces. This will provide Iran with regional commitment and allow the Muslim people of Iraq to be governed by Muslim people. Let Iran deal with the Islamic extremists in Iraq since Iran is wanting to be the middle eastern world police department.

Actually Iraq is governed by Muslim people, though there may be one or two Christians...

[MizuTahanaman]

Keystone Soldier, Iraq is not organized enough to say it can rule itself-whereas an already established government that is Muslim could change quite abit, would insurgents continue their daily deadly bombings if they knew they would be killing Iranian troops and have to deal with another Islamic nation in war rather than killing US soldiers and their allies along with Iraqis ofcourse....

[Kara Kolyo]

So in this case lets hope that Havier Solana will make some magic today in the talks with Mottaki and the things would ease alittle

[Kaweh]

i dont know about australia and british but i am 100 % sure tht dutch french and italian will never do any war against iran if they block the straits of hormuz

Exactly what I meant.
Maybe a bit off topic, but whatch this video "Let's bomb Iran!" : http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...2250833&q=iran

K.K

[Carach]

meh, europe arent fit to have any discussions with dodgey nations.

They are NEVER prepared to back it up.

All comes down to america, and they are damned if they do damned if they dont all the time aswell...