"Blocking" the Strait is far from "taking" the Strait.
Trump has little to no control of it. That's why he's bitched, at various times, that: 1) commercial vessels should "show some guts" and just sail through it; 2) other countries need to step up and take it back; 3) the US doesn't need the Strait; 4) The US desperately needs the Strait.
This is all relative. The U.S. doesn't desperately need the Strait. China desperately needs it. He took away Iran's last trump card. The only question is how much pain it will cause Americans and it's not looking like it will get much worse here. For comparisons the price of crude would have to jump another 50% to get back to Obama era gas prices. And Trump is ok with losing the midterms (he made that decision when he chose to go to war).
https://twitter.com/thejbullmarket/status/2043266275749638565?s=46
No, we desperately need the straight open. Most of our power is derived from the economic system we built, maintain, and defend. Trump knows this: see the tariffs. Accepting there are international waters in which US-friendly nations can’t trade freely is unthinkable.
This seems like more short-term gunslinging w extreme downstream negatives
@franz-znarf Maybe nations should buy oil from us.
They are buying oil and natural gas. The problem is logistics and it can take years for that catch up. You have to actually build the stuff. For example, the travel time of tankers is like 50 days instead of 20 days (to Middle East) to the U.S. So, you need a lot more tankers to make up the travel time, which people estimate will take 2-5 years. Who knows the exact number, but they'll eventually get built because the cost of doing business through Hormuz has went up drastically. No countries want to be reliant on Iran for their oil now.
@franz-znarf Maybe nations should buy oil from us.
They are buying oil and natural gas. The problem is logistics and it can take years for that catch up. You have to actually build the stuff. For example, the travel time of tankers is like 50 days instead of 20 days (to Middle East) to the U.S. So, you need a lot more tankers to make up the travel time, which people estimate will take 2-5 years. Who knows the exact number, but they'll eventually get built because the cost of doing business through Hormuz has went up drastically. No countries want to be reliant on Iran for their oil now.
The other option is for the cowardly Europeans and others to join us in removing the genocidal Iranian regime.
"Blocking" the Strait is far from "taking" the Strait.
Trump has little to no control of it. That's why he's bitched, at various times, that: 1) commercial vessels should "show some guts" and just sail through it; 2) other countries need to step up and take it back; 3) the US doesn't need the Strait; 4) The US desperately needs the Strait.
This is all relative. The U.S. doesn't desperately need the Strait. China desperately needs it. He took away Iran's last trump card. The only question is how much pain it will cause Americans and it's not looking like it will get much worse here. For comparisons the price of crude would have to jump another 50% to get back to Obama era gas prices. And Trump is ok with losing the midterms (he made that decision when he chose to go to war).
https://twitter.com/thejbullmarket/status/2043266275749638565?s=46
This seems like more short-term gunslinging w extreme downstream negatives
I agree with this statement directed towards the Iranians. Long term, they're screwed. Every country in the world is going to try and reroute every barrel of oil they can from traveling through the Strait of Hormuz. And other regions will produce more oil as costs rise to meet demand. Oil will cost slightly more long term, but it will be preferred by the market because being beholden to a crazy Theocratic nation with nuclear ambitions is bad for business and has a price afterall. That's how markets work.
Their redlines will never be agreed to. They're no go demands.
This is all relative. The U.S. doesn't desperately need the Strait. China desperately needs it.
China will get its oil. They will pay huge amounts to American oil companies, see story about empty tankers coming this way. More countries buying American oil does what to American oil prices?
https://www.thehill.com/homenews/administration/5826953-donald-trump-us-oil-tankers-iran-war/
Corporate farms won't mind the diesel and fertilizer costs, the "family farm" is screwed.
And the unanswered question, what if China escorts tankers to Iran to get oil if they desperately need it?
Those ships have the best air defense systems in the Navy, and there will be CAP overheard. They're not "sitting ducks."This is Trump trying for the easy win. These ships are sitting ducks with Iranian missiles most likely trained on them waiting for the peace talks in Pakistan to break down and Israel to launch its next attack.Trump needs to stop playing political tiddlywinks and trust his military commanders.
Sounds like the cheapest easiest solution is to destroy Iran’s oil infrastructure. Eliminate Iran’s economic engine. Then there’s no need to block Hormuz anyway. Other ME countries will re-route all their exports. Strait of Hormuz can go to the manatees."Blocking" the Strait is far from "taking" the Strait.
Trump has little to no control of it. That's why he's bitched, at various times, that: 1) commercial vessels should "show some guts" and just sail through it; 2) other countries need to step up and take it back; 3) the US doesn't need the Strait; 4) The US desperately needs the Strait.
This is all relative. The U.S. doesn't desperately need the Strait. China desperately needs it. He took away Iran's last trump card. The only question is how much pain it will cause Americans and it's not looking like it will get much worse here. For comparisons the price of crude would have to jump another 50% to get back to Obama era gas prices. And Trump is ok with losing the midterms (he made that decision when he chose to go to war).
https://twitter.com/thejbullmarket/status/2043266275749638565?s=46
No, we desperately need the straight open. Most of our power is derived from the economic system we built, maintain, and defend. Trump knows this: see the tariffs. Accepting there are international waters in which US-friendly nations can’t trade freely is unthinkable.
This seems like more short-term gunslinging w extreme downstream negatives
This is all relative. The U.S. doesn't desperately need the Strait. China desperately needs it.
China will get its oil. They will pay huge amounts to American oil companies, see story about empty tankers coming this way. More countries buying American oil does what to American oil prices?
https://www.thehill.com/homenews/administration/5826953-donald-trump-us-oil-tankers-iran-war/
Corporate farms won't mind the diesel and fertilizer costs, the "family farm" is screwed.
And the unanswered question, what if China escorts tankers to Iran to get oil if they desperately need it?
The price of oil has went up and will probably go up even more in the near term. However, we will still pay less than other nations and eventually it will drop as the market works it out. That's what happens to commodities. Higher prices is a signal. There will certainly be short term pain, but long term the U.S. does benefit the most.
Sounds like the cheapest easiest solution is to destroy Iran’s oil infrastructure. Eliminate Iran’s economic engine. Then there’s no need to block Hormuz anyway. Other ME countries will re-route all their exports. Strait of Hormuz can go to the manatees."Blocking" the Strait is far from "taking" the Strait.
Trump has little to no control of it. That's why he's bitched, at various times, that: 1) commercial vessels should "show some guts" and just sail through it; 2) other countries need to step up and take it back; 3) the US doesn't need the Strait; 4) The US desperately needs the Strait.
This is all relative. The U.S. doesn't desperately need the Strait. China desperately needs it. He took away Iran's last trump card. The only question is how much pain it will cause Americans and it's not looking like it will get much worse here. For comparisons the price of crude would have to jump another 50% to get back to Obama era gas prices. And Trump is ok with losing the midterms (he made that decision when he chose to go to war).
https://twitter.com/thejbullmarket/status/2043266275749638565?s=46
No, we desperately need the straight open. Most of our power is derived from the economic system we built, maintain, and defend. Trump knows this: see the tariffs. Accepting there are international waters in which US-friendly nations can’t trade freely is unthinkable.
This seems like more short-term gunslinging w extreme downstream negatives
Ok! I just hope it’s 100% failproof because Iran will try.Those ships have the best air defense systems in the Navy, and there will be CAP overheard. They're not "sitting ducks."This is Trump trying for the easy win. These ships are sitting ducks with Iranian missiles most likely trained on them waiting for the peace talks in Pakistan to break down and Israel to launch its next attack.Trump needs to stop playing political tiddlywinks and trust his military commanders.
Eh — we won’t be able keep this up for very long. The cost will be outrageous.
IMO some of you guys are really missing the bigger picture here. Iran can shut down Hormuz for just thousands of dollars and with absolute certainty. They don’t have to defeat the US navy. They just have to create enough of a threat to keep any sane shipping company or insurer away. We can spend billions (more) and still not keep it open with any certainty. We can kill several batches of their leadership and they can still shut it down. It’s their golden lever. This is why every administration played ball w them until now; it wasn’t weakness.
There is no golden lever. The free market will find workarounds and produce more oil in other regions. Iran screwed themselves long term. The percentage of global supply of oil running through the Straight of Hormuz won't reach February levels ever again (at least in our lifetimes). The reason other administrations played ball is because they didn't want to pay the political price of losing an election or two.
The Persian Gulf has been a hot spot for my whole lifetime. The free market would have rerouted long before now if it could have. Even if the US could blockade the whole region for an extended period of time and stabilize the shock to the world economy, you'd still have a huge simmering pot right there at one of the world's central trade corridors. You can say that's more China and India's problem but the markets have spoken and they sure don't see it that way.
Not sure I get the election bit. You're saying this admin is falling on this political sword to free the world of this Iranian regime? Not sure i buy that. Ya, they are bad dudes but the ME and the world flourished around their backward asses the last 40 years. this reeks of hubris.
Reuters is about as right down the middle as any news media is. They always show up in the middle on the bias charts, like this one:Show me the articles from Reuters about all of the fraud and fraud investigations on California Medicare and Hospice and then tell me that they don't lean left. Good luck finding any!
Took me literally 30 seconds to find these.
I'm not wasting any more time with you. You're a bad faith poster.
You are making progress, though. You've gone from labeling Reuters "radical" left to "lean left." They're centrist, recognized globally for reliable and fact-based reporting.
US accuses California insurer of misspending $300M in Medicaid funds | Reuters
We have people on my side who are allergic to actual factual reporting. They practically break out in hives. They're whine about the bias of all news media like little bitches.
I've pointed out liberal bias in the news media for a couple decades, but did it honestly, and recognized when organizations actually do try to be unbiased with their reporting. Like Reuters does.