Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elmatador who wrote (5278)	4/4/2006 11:16:51 AM
From: Metacomet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217617

Even without thess "gee whiz" weapons, the Straits of Hormuz are an obvious strategic choke point, easily controlled by Iran. Obviously, if they are so inclined, they can plug that channel and no amount of US "Shock and awe" will open it. The problem remains the ignorant SOB's we have calling the shots on our behalf. They have learned nothing and will continue to sacrifice American blood and treasure to try and do the undoable. Iran is a problem for the world in general and the oil based mideast in particular. It is incumbent on the oil producing states to figure out how to control their Persian brothers, even with the co-operation of Israel if possible. They are looking at financial ruin if the channel is closed. We are looking at higher gas prices. Whose job is it to assure the "gee whiz" stuff is neutralized?

To: elmatador who wrote (5278)	4/4/2006 2:08:23 PM
From: Slagle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217617

Elmat, I saw a short clip of the "super modern flying boat" and honestly the contraption looked like something that was built in a home garage somewhere and resembled some of the fairly crude WWII era small Japanese flying boats. And I believe that the "rocket torpedo" has no guidance system? Could it be that the Iranians are just making lots of noise to keep the price of oil high? Couple that with their president making all those negative statements about the Jews. There is nothing in the world that will get a bigger media response than that. Do you suppose that just might have been the main objective? If so it has surely worked well till now. Slagle

To: elmatador who wrote (5278)	4/4/2006 4:23:10 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217617

Could be? <They say Iran could be* testing arms in the Strait of Hormuz, a key tanker nexus, to dissuade Israel and the United States from taking military action against Tehran's nuclear programme*> That's a certainty, not a could be. In 1984, I was looking after bitumen for BP New Zealand and I had to allow for the Straits of Hormuz being closed and it was a great hassle which I could do without. The mere threat of war is enough to send most ships scrambling for cover and insurance premiums through the roof. Iran wouldn't need to actually sink anything to shut the place. That would bring quite a lot of military activity down on them, so it wouldn't be a great idea, but it's a way of showing they do have some cards to play in the confrontation over them developing nuclear weapons. Nukes would enable them to control the straits even better. They won't be allowed those. Mqurice

To: elmatador who wrote (5278)	4/4/2006 6:54:21 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217617

Elmat, here are some of Iran's goodies ... china-defense.blogspot.com china-defense.blogspot.com ... all seems defensive in nature but can certainly take out a whole lot of oil tankers in a hurry, as long as they are close to the coast. Unless, unimpeded, and with enough talent and oil money, Iran can always aim for such an unique janes.com system - then not so close to coast any more. In all cases, a tanker war could of course be a win-win-win in some broken-window sense, as China/Korea can build more tankers for the world, and India can work to break hulks to recycle material for same. An interesting win-win-win loop :0) Recommendation: buy oil, even though it may correct, but not to the extent Maurice imagines it would, as in USD 2/barrel Chugs, J