Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


Unfortunately, given geography and the relative military strengths in the neighborhood, Iran doesn't necessarily need nukes to engage in MAD, or at least attempt it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


a very large, very young, very unemployed male population which can't get brides unless something changes. This is a nation which lost circa one million men in a fruitless war against Iraq. Human wave attacks. And the economy, post-Shah, was relatively much stronger than it is now after decades of mismanagement. Men without women do really stupid things. Men without women infused with religious fervor, a sectarian fervor which teaches martyrdom and has been repressed since the seventh century, are extra dangerous.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Why risk war when it will more than likely happen anyway?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

I think the more interesting question is Israel. They're in a very tough spot, as arguably the Israeli geopolitical position has degraded in the past five plus years. If we take them at their word that they will strike, it becomes a very interesting question of whether to do so before or after the US elections. I also have a hunch that the IDF knows of its limited capabilities at the ranges we're taking about, and thus that they have something a little more interesting up their sleeves than "fly a bunch of F-16s over the desert and hope they hit everything."

Can't get into this without going political. But it's an interesting question of what we owe a close ally when our means and ends differ so dramatically.

I don't think Iran can close the Straits for more than 48 hours, but they have many other options than that as pointed out in this thread. Scary times we live in.

They don't need to close them to close them. Insurance does that for longer than 48 hours. Capabilities are a great deal different on both sides since Praying Mantis.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lcp Purcell

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


a very large, very young, very unemployed male population which can't get brides unless something changes. This is a nation which lost circa one million men in a fruitless war against Iraq. Human wave attacks. And the economy, post-Shah, was relatively much stronger than it is now after decades of mismanagement. Men without women do really stupid things. Men without women infused with religious fervor, a sectarian fervor which teaches martyrdom and has been repressed since the seventh century, are extra dangerous.

Hmm it's been my experience that poor people get married quicker than the upwardly mobile... so I was going challenge it, but as it turns out you are dead on right about the marriage rates

http://dornsife.usc.edu/conferences/iran/documents/IranEgel_9_1_09.pdf

quote:

This paper is from 2009 and uses older data. Things have gotten dramatically worse for Iranian young people in the past two years under sanctions. They have an unsustainable unemployment rate, one of the youngest populations is in the world due to social effects after the Iran-Iraq War, and a culture which requires the male to show ability to support a wife before he can seriously court. It's a powder keg.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

"Iran assessment (no politics please)"

Discussing Iran without letting politics creep into the conversation?

Isn't that like talking about Pamela Anderson without mentioning her boobs?

quote:

ORIGINAL: The Gnome

Jeff "Skunk" Baxter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lcp Purcell

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

impossibility of running a modern country with a 100.0% reduction in one's main / exclusive (?) cash export

a person would expect Saudi Arabia to have a far more sophisticated manufacturing center and military industrial complex than Iran, they are richer, they are better educated, they have unfettered access to import advanced technology but they don't have a better industrial complex. Because they have no need to. In 1979 we started an ongoing embargo against Iran, they could not get spare parts for their military equipment, so they figured out how to make those spare parts themselves, 30 some years of sanctions has left them fairly self reliant, while Saudi Arabia buys all their spare parts from us. Iran does not have a modern economy, they have a 19th century economy the kind we had when import tariffs ran 25%-50%

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lcp Purcell

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58


Unfortunately, given geography and the relative military strengths in the neighborhood, Iran doesn't necessarily need nukes to engage in MAD, or at least attempt it.

true, true... you know if someone blows up your nuclear reactor the natural response would be to blow up theirs. truth is Iran does not need a A-bomb to nuke Israel, they just need to get some GPS guidance into their missiles (which they most likely already have) .....

Full stop. as I was doing a bit of digging to further this post I ran across this bit of ominous news.

Iranian war fears spark closure of Israel reactor THE AUSTRALIAN, January 09, 2012 ISRAEL is preparing to shut its nuclear reactor at Dimona, where it makes nuclear weapons, because of the site’s vulnerability in a war with Iran.

The decision, taken by the Israel Atomic Energy Commission and the
country’s civil defence authorities, follows a realisation that the
facility could be vulnerable to a missile attack.

The Haaretz newspaper quoted officials last week as saying they had
concluded the reactor was no longer impenetrable in the event of war.

Deactivating the reactor in the southern Negev desert would minimise
the dangers of nuclear fallout in the area “should it be targeted by
missiles from as far away as Iran”.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

I think the more interesting question is Israel. They're in a very tough spot, as arguably the Israeli geopolitical position has degraded in the past five plus years. If we take them at their word that they will strike, it becomes a very interesting question of whether to do so before or after the US elections. I also have a hunch that the IDF knows of its limited capabilities at the ranges we're taking about, and thus that they have something a little more interesting up their sleeves than "fly a bunch of F-16s over the desert and hope they hit everything."

I don't think Iran can close the Straits for more than 48 hours, but they have many other options than that as pointed out in this thread. Scary times we live in.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

This thread is extremely USA centric and as a result is overlooking some extremely important ramifications.

1. In the event of military conflict the oil supply line would be completely severed. Landing American forces (and that is a very low possibility anyway) to secure the chock point at Hormuz would not reopen the oil supply line. For as long as Iran had any capability at all to possibly damage, not even sink just damage an oil tanker, shipping insurance rates would rise to completely unbearable levels.

2. Both China and Japan are completely dependent on oil shipments passing through the Straits of Hormuz. Within hours both would turn against the USA. Of the two the greatest harm would come from China, both in the UN (where it would be fully backed by Russia) and by its direct military and economic support it would then give to Iran. It is very hard to see how America could interdict the Chinese lifeline which would traverse Pakistan. Which is not to overlook the damage China could inflict to the American economy by judicious use of its economic "assets".

3. The Pakistani domestic situation, plus the need to maintain solidarity with its international friends, would see Pakistan creating great mischief to American interests.

4. There would be zero NATO support, not even from the UK, for American preemptive military action.

5. The damage caused to the Iranian economy would not be that relevant for the damage to the advance industrial economies would be severe. That includes the American economy which would be almost certainly tipped over into a prolonged stagnation, if not outright decline.

The stakes would be very high with a matching price to pay. Perhaps the cost would be worthwhile but there would be a very high price for Americans to pay.

Alfred