@aloha-hoosierAny operations plan discussion would have included the near certainty that Iran would disrupt shipping through the strait. They’ve done it in every conflict to date. The President ultimately decides if the risks of going to war are worth going to war.
Seems like a reasonable take, AH, but shockingly there was a serious miscalculation by the Trump administration about the strait and what, if anything, Iran might do to oil supplies.
"On Feb. 18, as President Trump weighed whether to launch military attacks on Iran, Chris Wright, the energy secretary, told an interviewer he was not concerned that the looming war might disrupt oil supplies in the Middle East and wreak havoc in energy markets.
"Even during the Israeli and U.S. strikes against Iran last June, Mr. Wright said, there had been little disruption in the markets. 'Oil prices blipped up and then went back down,' he said. Some of Mr. Trump’s other advisers shared similar views in private, dismissing warnings that — the second time around — Iran might wage economic warfare by closing shipping lanes carrying roughly twenty percent of the world’s oil supply.
"The extent of that miscalculation was laid bare in recent days, as Iran threatened to fire at commercial oil tankers transiting the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic choke point through which all ships must pass on their way out of the Persian Gulf. In response to the Iranian threats, commercial shipping has come to a standstill in the Gulf, oil prices have spiked, and the Trump administration has scrambled to find ways to tamp down an economic crisis that has triggered higher gasoline prices for Americans.
"The episode is emblematic of how much Mr. Trump and his advisers misjudged how Iran would respond to a conflict that the government in Tehran sees as an existential threat. Iran has responded far more aggressively than it did during last June’s 12-day war, firing barrages of missiles and drones at U.S. military bases, cities in Arab nations across the Middle East, and on Israeli population centers.
And here's the topper:
"Mr. Trump has displayed growing frustration over how the war is disrupting the oil supply, telling Fox News that oil tanker crews should 'show some guts' and sail through the Strait of Hormuz."
You can't make this up.
How Trump and His Advisers Miscalculated Iran’s Response to War - The New York Times
https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/2032118372901527884?s=20
They really need to get their messaging straight.
https://twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/status/2031877478193467617?s=20
A good friend will bail you out of jail, but your best friend will be sitting next to you in the cell saying "that was f***ing awesome"
Does anyone know, what happens to the oil being produced in countries that rely on the Gulf if shipping is shut down for too long? My understanding has always been that oil production isn't something that can just be paused. The crude is going to come in at a certain rate, and it has to go somewhere, and that means the refined products need to leave to make room for new production. But eventually, there will be no place to put it. So what happens?
Or do I have that wrong, and in the worst case scenario, they really can just temporarily shut off production?
Oh..peaked for 1 month (not an entire Q2) and rounded up. Why would anyone care what gas prices are in other areas of the country?
Presidents have very little to do with gas prices ....other than when they start wars or do something that leads to disruption in the supply. You act like just because it peaked for a month for a month means anything. You are the same idiot that thinks Biden caused inflation while ignoring the effects of a global pandemic because you're nothing but a partisan simpleton.
The hastily banged out gobbledygook quoted above with it's faulty inferences, ridiculous assumptions and overall lack of even a rudimentary level of skilled debate is why most people don't even bother to engage you here at the cooler. When I suggested that you stay in your lane and that it would serve you well, it was sound advice. Simply put, I don't banter with you because I don't see value in putting forth the effort to hold your hand and dumb down every topic to the lowest common denominator so that you may participate. The next time you read one of my posts and it gets your hackles up, just give it the old thumbs down and move on...I won't engage any further with you.
A good friend will bail you out of jail, but your best friend will be sitting next to you in the cell saying "that was f***ing awesome"
Some are already lowering production and are rapidly running out of storage capacity.
@goat I have seen several stories that say starting back after a stop is not just flipping a switch. The more shut off, the longer it is going to be for full production.
Just watched a clip of Pissed-Off Pete's press briefing/press attack. Like Bondi, he's clearly playing to an audience of one.
The contrast between Pete and General Caine speaking next to him couldn't be more striking. I can't figure out whether Hegseth is actually as angry and emotional as he often appears or whether it's just part of the performance for the prez.
In any event, POP said we don't need to worry about the Strait of Hormuz. It's not safe for the Navy to escort tankers through the strait, but we don't need to worry about it.
If only the crews of the commercial vessels would "show some guts" and just sail through the strait (mines and missiles be damned!), as our president proposed yesterday, the problem would be solved.
Does anyone know, what happens to the oil being produced in countries that rely on the Gulf if shipping is shut down for too long? My understanding has always been that oil production isn't something that can just be paused. The crude is going to come in at a certain rate, and it has to go somewhere, and that means the refined products need to leave to make room for new production. But eventually, there will be no place to put it. So what happens?
Or do I have that wrong, and in the worst case scenario, they really can just temporarily shut off production?
I would rely on AI to know better than anyone on this board. Here is ChatGPT:
If the Strait of Hormuz were blocked, the ability of Gulf producers to keep pumping oil depends on three constraints:
-
Export alternatives (pipelines)
-
Storage capacity
-
How fast production can be reduced
The timeline would likely unfold roughly like this.
Phase 1: Immediate Shock (Days 0–3)
About 20% of global oil consumption normally moves through the Strait of Hormuz.
Major exporters affected include:
-
Saudi Arabia
-
Iraq
-
Kuwait
-
United Arab Emirates
-
Qatar
Collectively they export roughly 17–18 million barrels per day through the Gulf.
Immediately after closure:
-
Tankers already inside the Gulf become stuck.
-
Ports stop loading.
-
Oil prices would likely spike dramatically within hours.
But production would not stop immediately.
Phase 2: Export Workarounds (Week 1)
Some Gulf oil can bypass the Strait via pipelines.
Major bypass routes
Saudi Arabia
-
East–West Pipeline
-
Capacity: ~5 million barrels/day
-
Runs from the Gulf to the Red Sea port of Yanbu
UAE
-
Habshan–Fujairah Pipeline
-
Capacity: ~1.5 million barrels/day
-
Terminates outside the Strait at Fujairah
These pipelines allow roughly:
6–6.5 million barrels/day
to bypass the Strait.
But the Gulf normally exports nearly 3× that amount.
So most production would still have nowhere to go.
Phase 3: Storage Filling (Week 1–3)
Countries store oil in:
-
tank farms near fields
-
export terminals
-
pipelines
-
offshore tankers
Approximate storage capacity in the region:
| Country | Estimated Storage |
|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | ~80–100 million barrels |
| UAE | ~40–50 million |
| Kuwait | ~30 million |
| Iraq (Basra area) | ~20–30 million |
Total regional storage: roughly 200–250 million barrels.
At Gulf production levels (~20 million bpd), that storage fills in:
10–14 days if exports stop.
Using tankers as floating storage could add another 1–2 weeks.
Phase 4: Forced Production Cuts (Weeks 2–4)
Once storage fills:
Countries must rapidly reduce production.
Typical order of cuts:
-
High-cost or marginal wells
-
Fields that are easier to shut in
-
Gradual reduction at giant fields
Major producers could likely reduce output by:
| Country | Normal Production | Possible Reduction |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | ~9–10 mbpd | Cut by ~6–7 mbpd |
| Iraq | ~4.5 mbpd | Cut by ~3–4 mbpd |
| UAE | ~3 mbpd | Cut by ~2 mbpd |
| Kuwait | ~2.5 mbpd | Cut by ~2 mbpd |
Within 2–4 weeks, Gulf output might fall from:
~20 million bpd → ~6–7 million bpd
(the amount that can bypass the Strait).
Phase 5: Global Market Response (Weeks 3–8)
Other supply sources would kick in.
Strategic reserves
Countries release emergency oil from reserves like the
U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
The U.S. alone can release:
~4 million barrels/day temporarily
Other IEA countries hold similar reserves.
Shale ramp-up
Producers in places like:
-
Permian Basin
-
Bakken Formation
could increase drilling over months, but not instantly.
The Real Timeline (Simplified)
| Time | What Happens |
|---|---|
| Day 0 | Strait closes |
| Days 1–3 | Oil still flowing into storage |
| Week 1 | Pipeline exports continue |
| Weeks 2–3 | Storage fills |
| Weeks 3–4 | Production cuts begin |
| Month 1+ | Global supply adjusts |
The Key Insight
Oil production can be reduced, but it takes weeks, not hours.
So a prolonged Hormuz closure would likely produce:
-
a massive price spike
-
temporary oversupply inside the Gulf
-
rapid global production adjustments
💡 Interesting historical example:
During the 1990 Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, roughly 4–5 million barrels/day of supply disappeared overnight — and oil prices more than doubled.
A full Hormuz closure would remove 3–4× more supply.
If you're interested, there’s also a counterintuitive geopolitical reason why a long-term closure of Hormuz would hurt Iran more than almost anyone else. It's a fascinating strategic paradox.
Just watched a clip of Pissed-Off Pete's press briefing/press attack. Like Bondi, he's clearly playing to an audience of one.
The contrast between Pete and General Caine speaking next to him couldn't be more striking. I can't figure out whether Hegseth is actually as angry and emotional as he often appears or whether it's just part of the performance for the prez.
In any event, POP said we don't need to worry about the Strait of Hormuz. It's not safe for the Navy to escort tankers through the strait, but we don't need to worry about it.
If only the crews of the commercial vessels would "show some guts" and just sail through the strait (mines and missiles be damned!), as our president proposed yesterday, the problem would be solved.
Sounds like there is a reason the new leader hasn't been on video
https://www.axios.com/2026/03/13/hegseth-iran-war-supreme-leader-wounded-disfigured
Pentagon is saying it wasn't shot down, so I wonder what happened. It seems like the tempo is non-stop,so I wonder if fatigue played a role (either pilot and crew or ground crew) or if a 60+ year old plane just can't stay in the air like this without an increase in maintenance that couldn't be supported?
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
This is the crux of the matter for both the US/Israel and Iran. Either negotiations start b/c of and center around the reopening of the strait or the US puts every Iranian ship at the bottom of the gulf while targeting every possibly missle/drone lauch point along Iran's southern coast within striking distance of the strait while sweeping up the mines the Iranians will inevitably deploy. Would, I assume, take a while for all of the latter to be resolved and I'm not sure the insurance companies are going to insure any tankers until it's done.
Pentagon is saying it wasn't shot down, so I wonder what happened. It seems like the tempo is non-stop,so I wonder if fatigue played a role (either pilot and crew or ground crew) or if a 60+ year old plane just can't stay in the air like this without an increase in maintenance that couldn't be supported?
Wasn't it a mid-air collision during refueling? Pretty sure a second aircraft also went down, but the pilot(s) weren't seriously injured. Or maybe I am mixing up incidents.
It wasn’t explicit, but a good guess is it was a refueling mishap and the other plane was the receiving plane. Mishaps are thoroughly investigated and all the details will be known before too long.Pentagon is saying it wasn't shot down, so I wonder what happened. It seems like the tempo is non-stop,so I wonder if fatigue played a role (either pilot and crew or ground crew) or if a 60+ year old plane just can't stay in the air like this without an increase in maintenance that couldn't be supported?
Wasn't it a mid-air collision during refueling? Pretty sure a second aircraft also went down, but the pilot(s) weren't seriously injured. Or maybe I am mixing up incidents.
Oh..peaked for 1 month (not an entire Q2) and rounded up. Why would anyone care what gas prices are in other areas of the country?
Presidents have very little to do with gas prices ....other than when they start wars or do something that leads to disruption in the supply. You act like just because it peaked for a month for a month means anything. You are the same idiot that thinks Biden caused inflation while ignoring the effects of a global pandemic because you're nothing but a partisan simpleton.
The hastily banged out gobbledygook quoted above with it's faulty inferences, ridiculous assumptions and overall lack of even a rudimentary level of skilled debate is why most people don't even bother to engage you here at the cooler. When I suggested that you stay in your lane and that it would serve you well, it was sound advice. Simply put, I don't banter with you because I don't see value in putting forth the effort to hold your hand and dumb down every topic to the lowest common denominator so that you may participate. The next time you read one of my posts and it gets your hackles up, just give it the old thumbs down and move on...I won't engage any further with you.
Latest Post: How do you deal with Islam? Our newest member: Ben Wiggins Recent Posts Unread Posts
