Bush Declines To Exclude Nuclear Strike on Iran

[berry580]

"Washington says it does not want to embargo Iran’s oil and gas industries to avoid creating hardship for the Iranian people. "

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/article_005633.php


What do you think of THAT statement?

[Supe]

What do you think of THAT statement?

Laughable. Embargo Iranian oil - and the hardships will be visited on the West. The statement is beyond incredible. The person who drafted it must have been giggling as they composed it.

As for the topic. It's just political rhetoric. Empty threats.

[Big-E]

Laughable. Embargo Iranian oil - and the hardships will be visited on the West. The statement is beyond incredible. The person who drafted it must have been giggling as they composed it.

As for the topic. It's just political rhetoric. Empty threats.


I disagree with this assesment on the oil embargo. Iran isn't even listed in the top 38 suppliers of oil to the US. America doesn't really have a supply problem, they have a lack of refineries to process the crude. So a minor reduction of excluding Iranian oil imports will have little if any effects on the price of gasoline in the US. As far as the hardships on the West, Japan is the number one importer of Iranian oil, they have already reduced their purchases of oil over the nuclear question. If Japan, the #1 customer, can do it, then the U.S. will have little reservations to proceed with such a threat.

As for the topic, it depends on what Iran does. If they resort to WMD I wouldn't put it past the administration to keep that option on the table.

[Supe]

I disagree with this assesment on the oil embargo. Iran isn't even listed in the top 38 suppliers of oil to the US. America doesn't really have a supply problem, they have a lack of refineries to process the crude. So a minor reduction of excluding Iranian oil imports will have little if any effects on the price of gasoline in the US. As far as the hardships on the West, Japan is the number one importer of Iranian oil, they have already reduced their purchases of oil over the nuclear question. If Japan, the #1 customer, can do it, then the U.S. will have little reservations to proceed with such a threat.


Of course U.S will be affected. It doesn't operate in a vacuum. U.S is interlinked into the global economy so if Japan and China experience large increases in oil prices with resultant consequences to their economy, then at some point that's going to come back around and hit U.S economy.

quoted from the article:

Iran’s defiance of world pressure to halt the program drove oil prices to a record high of $72.64 a barrel, raising fears of a cut in supplies from the world’s fourth biggest crude exporter.


Those oil prices will impact on U.S - even though U.S does not buy oil from Iran.

[Big-E]

Of course U.S will be affected. It doesn't operate in a vacuum. U.S is interlinked into the global economy so if Japan and China experience large increases in oil prices with resultant consequences to their economy, then at some point that's going to come back around and hit U.S economy.

quoted from the article:



Those oil prices will impact on U.S - even though U.S does not buy oil from Iran.

I doubt it would come down to that, China recently signed a multi billion dollar energy deal with Iran so I doubt they would impose an embargo. Japan relies greatly on Iranian oil so they would not do so either. But the reference wasn't to what these countries would do, it was to what the US would do. They would embargo the oil b/c,if they are the only nation doing it, it won't effect them in the least. It won't effect Iran that much either so that might be why they put out the statement b/c a US only embargo on Iranian oil doesn't mean much.

[Rich]

It will affect them If theres a naval and air juggernaught off their shores "saying" there is an embargo. Its pretty well obvious that any statement made by the American President is meaningless without military force to back it up. I think something terrible is going to happen over there. One way or another.

[berry580]

I doubt it would come down to that, China recently signed a multi billion dollar energy deal with Iran so I doubt they would impose an embargo. Japan relies greatly on Iranian oil so they would not do so either. But the reference wasn't to what these countries would do, it was to what the US would do. They would embargo the oil b/c,if they are the only nation doing it, it won't effect them in the least. It won't effect Iran that much either so that might be why they put out the statement b/c a US only embargo on Iranian oil doesn't mean much.Meaning that an embargo on Iran WILL affect the US economy one way or another, in contrary to

Big-E: I disagree with this assesment on the oil embargo. Iran isn't even listed in the top 38 suppliers of oil to the US. America doesn't really have a supply problem, they have a lack of refineries to process the crude. So a minor reduction of excluding Iranian oil imports will have little if any effects on the price of gasoline in the US. As far as the hardships on the West, Japan is the number one importer of Iranian oil, they have already reduced their purchases of oil over the nuclear question. If Japan, the #1 customer, can do it, then the U.S. will have little reservations to proceed with such a threat.

As for the topic, it depends on what Iran does. If they resort to WMD I wouldn't put it past the administration to keep that option on the table.

Ah well................... LOL

Should the US embargo Iran, there's a good chance the world community would condemn the US.
By the time the US embargoes Iran, it would be likely they're ready (militarily, economically and politically) to invade Iran and "save the world from weapons of mass destructions", just like how they saved the world in 2003......

[Big-E]

Meaning that an embargo on Iran WILL affect the US economy one way or another, in contrary to

I see your trying to make it look like I'm contradicting myself but if people will follow the conversation they will see my point is about a U.S. only embargo. The reference to Japan was only to enhance the argument that if the #1 user of Iranian oil is willing to cut orders then the US will have no qualms to do so. You make it sound like that if the U.S. leads the others must follow but countries do have wills of their own.

Ah well................... LOL

Should the US embargo Iran, there's a good chance the world community would condemn the US.
By the time the US embargoes Iran, it would be likely they're ready (militarily, economically and politically) to invade Iran and "save the world from weapons of mass destructions", just like how they saved the world in 2003......

If the U.S. embargoes Iran after all the U.N. resolutions I really doubt the world will condemn them. They would probably applaud them and sit back wishing they weren't so dependent on Iranian oil to help and thankful the U.S. hasn't started air-strikes. It is not feasable at this time for the U.S. to invade Iran until the withdrawal from Iraq is complete. President Mahmood Ahmadinejad knows this and thats why he is rattling his saber so hard. The situation is a bit different than in 2003, the U.S. led "coalition of the willing" was rather weak. Only the UK and AU turned out to be America's best allies. The case in Iran is alot stronger than in Iraq. We are talking about nuclear weapons that can hit any part of Eurasia once they get North Korea's missle tech. The U.S. is not worried about an Iranian IBM hitting D.C., Those nations in Europe and Asia should be more concerned. It would be nice if the effort would be led by a nation other than the US.


......

[Scorpius]

you guys are talking like as if they already got nuclear weapons.
they haven't and they don't want to.they aren't stupid like Saddam.Its Ahmadinejad who's talking crap,but Iran got a supreme leader Khameini who has already said they won't be producing weapons.
Also there is no proof they have nukes.But then again who the hell am I to stop the world police to liberate another nation from an oppressive ruler.

[Big-E]

you guys are talking like as if they already got nuclear weapons.

With Bush's policy of pre-emeption he will act long before it happens making this debate relevant.

[adsH]

I disagree with this assesment on the oil embargo. Iran isn't even listed in the top 38 suppliers of oil to the US. America doesn't really have a supply problem, they have a lack of refineries to process the crude. So a minor reduction of excluding Iranian oil imports will have little if any effects on the price of gasoline in the US. As far as the hardships on the West, Japan is the number one importer of Iranian oil, they have already reduced their purchases of oil over the nuclear question. If Japan, the #1 customer, can do it, then the U.S. will have little reservations to proceed with such a threat.

As for the topic, it depends on what Iran does. If they resort to WMD I wouldn't put it past the administration to keep that option on the table.

its alright with us if the US wan't to stop buying iranian crude! more for us i'm completely happy with that since the UK would then be able to secure that portion of oil. ;)

Hint there isn't much excess Oil available on the international market. Demand is going crazy


Ok People lets strictly stick to the topic thats the Nuke Strike!

[Big-E]

Ok People lets strictly stick to the topic thats the Nuke Strike!

I guess him putting that headline energy exports is a double-edged sword with you mods LOL!

Back to the nuke strike. Won't happen unless Iran nukes or chemicals Isreal, then its a different ballgame.

[long live usa]

if iran continues to try to develop nuclear weapons(we all know thats what there trying)if America doesent strike first then isreal wont just lay on thier backs they will hit thier nuclear facilates much like they did iraq,further more nuclear weapons are purely political weapons and have little use on the battle field,if iran is hit with nuclear weapons(how unfortunate we would'ent be able to hear only two nuclear weapons have been used in anger:( ),but if they were hit by nuclear weapons i fear it may be like lighting a powder keg

[Scorpius]

if iran continues to try to develop nuclear weapons(we all know thats what there trying)
oh were you watching CNN when they mistranslated(deliberately,yeah we all know that) nuclear technology for nuclear weapons? *rolls eyes*

I want to see facts here! your'e getting on my nerves

[long live usa]

oh were you watching CNN when they mistranslated(deliberately,yeah we all know that) nuclear technology for nuclear weapons? *rolls eyes*
what are you trying to say?it is obvious that they are developing nuclear weapons they have de constructed nuclear sites before to avoid inspection,read up on the facts

Hold onn there please don't disrespect others i've edited your reply!

[amqb_az]

in order to overthrow the iranian regime you dont need to use a nuclear power.

worried about the iranian nukes? order an air strike and bomb the targets where do you believe the nukes are. need a base for your planes ? Here are some places that you can easily use ;

Kurdamir air-base in Kurdamir Azerbaijan
Turkan air-base in Baku Azerbaijan


If the Turks say no to use the Adana - Incirlik air-base than go ahead and use the Azerbaijani air-bases. You can aslo start an air strike from Prsian Gulf by using the USS Nimitz.

You're getting into a shady area here that i can't allow here! therefore the edit!

[Temoor_A]

With Bush's policy of pre-emeption he will act long before it happens making this debate relevant.
Well!

Mr. Bush's act of pre-emption did not materialize in case of NK! ;)

NK is far bigger threat to US interests then IRAN (which has no record of attacks on other nations in 20th century and even now).

If IRAN wants to use Nuclear Tech for cheap electricity then what's so bad about it?

Of-course they will have to enrich uranium for that.

Alright the comments about a third country is irrelevant, please refrain from comments such as those I've edited your reply!

[berry580]

its alright with us if the US wan't to stop buying iranian crude! more for us i'm completely happy with that since the UK would then be able to secure that portion of oil. ;)

Hint there isn't much excess Oil available on the international market. Demand is going crazy


Ok People lets strictly stick to the topic thats the Nuke Strike!You've got an extremely good point there.
If the US decides to embargo Iran's oil and not "liberate" Iran in the same time (the American way), then it's super good news for the world. Oil prices would probably drop considerably, although probably skyrocket in the US..........:duel

[berry580]

worried about the iranian nukes? order an air strike and bomb the targets where do you believe the nukes are. need a base for your planes ? Here are some places that you can easily use ;

Kurdamir air-base in Kurdamir Azerbaijan
Turkan air-base in Baku Azerbaijan


If the Turks say no to use the Adana - Incirlik air-base than go ahead and use the Azerbaijani air-bases. You can aslo start an air strike from Prsian Gulf by using the USS Nimitz.
With the number of stealth bombers that the US have, they can do ALOT with or without Iran's neighbour's permission.

[Black Legion]

For your information ppl the US doesn't import oil from Iran since 1979....if the US tries to push through the UN Security Council for an oil embargo on Iran it will most definitley crash, China and Russia wouldn't allow it. The real threat from the possible war is that Saudi main oil instalations are on the shore of the Persian gulf, in range of Iran's Shihab missiles....and with the US launching planes on Iran from S.Arabia the Iranians wouldn't think twice on doing that. Not to mention the oil tankers that would be in credible danger during the conflict, and with the Iranian oil export disrupted you would have the price of oil up to $100 per barrel - in short: global economic chaos.

With regards to the Bush's decline to exclude nuclear strike on Iran, it's either an empty threat aimed to scare the Iranians; or is it because of the unknown fact how well and deep are facilities like in Natanz burried and will the GBU 28 be sufficient to do the task, if not, then will Bush authorize the use of the B61 nuclear bunker buster remains unknown to us.

[Big-E]

You've got an extremely good point there.
If the US decides to embargo Iran's oil and not "liberate" Iran in the same time (the American way), then it's super good news for the world. Oil prices would probably drop considerably, although probably skyrocket in the US..........:duel

US imports of Iranian oil are so minimal they aren't even listed. The only oil the US gets from Iran is back channeled through subsidiary companies to launder the dirty crude.

[Big-E]

Well!

Mr. Bush's act of pre-emption did not materialize in case of NK! ;)

NK is far bigger threat to US interests then IRAN (which has no record of attacks on other nations in 20th century and even now).

If IRAN wants to use Nuclear Tech for cheap electricity then what's so bad about it?

Of-course they will have to enrich uranium for that.

Remember all the lies about WMD's in IRAQ before that war started and even now nothing of that level have been found.

1) You know better than that. Bush's doctrine had a fundametal shift after 9-11. It switched from any rogue states to Islamic only rogue states. It doesn't take a genius to see what his strategy has been all along. Surround Iran and prep for invasion. Just look at a map of Iran, Iraq shares a huge border along with Afghanistan, the only problem was he didn't think he would have this much trouble getting Iraq under control.

2) Iran is a much bigger threat than NK b/c Kim Jong il isn't suicidal, Mohammad Khatami has vowed death to Isreal and he knows Isreal has enough nukes to blow Iran into the dark ages on top of the fact he supports Al Queda which will put a bomb at a US port. Iranian nukes mean NYC and Tel-Aviv are glowing red.

3) Iran doesn't need nuclear reactors for cheap electricity, they have enough natural resources that would be cheaper to use than running nuclear power plants. Come on dude!

4) I know the lies about the WMDs, I complain about it every week but some people just won't listen. But if you are saying Iran isn't really going to build a bomb then your coo-coo. I remember Pakistan said the same thing back in 82' President Zia told the Foreign Policy Association on December 9, 1982:

"I would like to state once again . . . that our ongoing nuclear program has an exclusively peaceful dimension and that Pakistan has neither the means nor, indeed, any desire to manufacture a nuclear device. I trust that this distinguished gathering will take note of my assurance, which is given in all sincerity and with a full sense of responsibility."

Last time I checked Pakistan had nucs so if you want to sling the slop a little further go ahead... no one is going to buy it.