Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,368 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Iran was sending a couple of oil tankers to Venezuela and warned the US not to interfere with the passage or all hell would break loose.
So what did we do? We did not stop and board the ships, instead we got in direct contact with the ship owners and told them that their companies would be sanctioned
No use of US banks or insurance. The ships changed direction and are now headed to Africa.
Trump plays chess while the Ayatollah is still playing checkers.
I love it!

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/us-disrupts-iranian-fuel-deliveries-venezuela-official-says
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,912 Posts
Perfect! Trump is the grand master of manipulating businesses to achieve his goals!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
802 Posts
An excellent application of diplomatic and economic power in pursuit of our national interests. The goal was to prevent delivery of Iranian oil to the Venezuelan regime, a goal that otherwise may have required confrontational measures at great risk to US military personnel and great expense to the American people. The goal was achieved with a few telephone calls explaining the realities to the parties involved (Liberia, the nation of ship registration, and the owners of the ships), and those realities included devastating economic losses (no insurance coverage, no future access to US banking resources, no future contracts for incoming or outgoing goods at US ports).

Very well done! The conflict has been resolved without confrontation, without property damage, and without risk to anyone.

I like it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
Don't get all psyc'ed up about some big diplomatic victory. Consider:
  • Five Iranian oil tankers landed in Venezuela in the last five days. We had US Navy ships onsite and we threatened to stop them, but we backed off. Yet we make a big darn deal about these two.
  • Venezuela has huge oil reserves of its own, they just can't run the pumping and refinery operations on their own. But they have finally agreed to have outside oil companies come in and do it. There are companies jumping at the chance and that will probably happen. There is nothing we can do to prevent that.
  • Oil is a commodity. There are brokers, one broker in particular, who is doing deals for Iranian/Venezuelan oil. So in this case, we force two tankers from Iran to unload their oil in Africa instead of Venezuela. So the broker finds two tankers from somewhere else that were headed for Africa and gets them to divert to Venezuela. Iran still winds up giving away two tankers of oil for Venezuela and Venezuela still winds up getting two tankers of oil. It is a shell game. Only the handling costs go up slightly.
This is only a PR victory that accomplished nothing in the long run.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,368 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Don't get all psyc'ed up about some big diplomatic victory. Consider:
  • Five Iranian oil tankers landed in Venezuela in the last five days. We had US Navy ships onsite and we threatened to stop them, but we backed off. Yet we make a big darn deal about these two.
  • Venezuela has huge oil reserves of its own, they just can't run the pumping and refinery operations on their own. But they have finally agreed to have outside oil companies come in and do it. There are companies jumping at the chance and that will probably happen. There is nothing we can do to prevent that.
  • Oil is a commodity. There are brokers, one broker in particular, who is doing deals for Iranian/Venezuelan oil. So in this case, we force two tankers from Iran to unload their oil in Africa instead of Venezuela. So the broker finds two tankers from somewhere else that were headed for Africa and gets them to divert to Venezuela. Iran still winds up giving away two tankers of oil for Venezuela and Venezuela still winds up getting two tankers of oil. It is a shell game. Only the handling costs go up slightly.
This is only a PR victory that accomplished nothing in the long run.
Why do you have to screw up a perfectly good story with facts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
Why do you have to screw up a perfectly good story with facts.
Yeah, the facts are a bear aren't they? I have played the oil tanker game in the Arabian Sea op area with Iran when I was in the Navy. That was in 1980. We are still playing the same darn game with them 40 years and seven presidents later. Talk about not learning any lessons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
Yeah, the facts are a bear aren't they? I have played the oil tanker game in the Arabian Sea op area with Iran when I was in the Navy. That was in 1980. We are still playing the same darn game with them 40 years and seven presidents later. Talk about not learning any lessons.
And this is why I have no respect for politics.
It is all a game at our expense.
To learn nothing in 40 years is beyond nonsense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,980 Posts
Yeah, the facts are a bear aren't they? I have played the oil tanker game in the Arabian Sea op area with Iran when I was in the Navy. That was in 1980. We are still playing the same darn game with them 40 years and seven presidents later. Talk about not learning any lessons.
I remember when Carter was president and decimated the military more than Obama ever thought about. To his credit he took credit for the botched hostage rescue, but then he crawled into his safe place and never attempted to confront Iran again. I think Iran recognized Reagan as a president of a different color. Sad that "we" haven't learned to stomp into the stone age all of Iran's attempts to intimidate shipping.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,956 Posts
Yeah, the facts are a bear aren't they? I have played the oil tanker game in the Arabian Sea op area with Iran when I was in the Navy. That was in 1980. We are still playing the same darn game with them 40 years and seven presidents later. Talk about not learning any lessons.
Trump is trying with sanctions, does he get any credit for that or is the only answer to blow the ships out of the water.

It's a heck of a lot more than Bush or Obama did, unless I missed something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
Trump is trying with sanctions, does he get any credit for that or is the only answer to blow the ships out of the water.

It's a heck of a lot more than Bush or Obama did, unless I missed something.
It is more than Bush or Obama did, although Clinton put a lot of sanctions against Iran. Several other countries, including the UK, Israel, Japan, India, S. Korea, Australia, Switzerland and Canada have sanctions against Iran. The UN has a whole list of sanctions. None of those have done any good and these current sanctions will do no good.

Why does it matter whether Trump deserves credit? Shouldn't foreign policy be about results and not credit? This has been going on for 40 years with no improvement. At this rate, it will wind up lasting longer than the Cold War. Shouldn't we expect more out of a foreign policy?

I say we need to look at what we are trying to accomplish, whether it can reasonably be accomplished and whether it is worth it to try to accomplish it. Our goals are:
  • Freedom of Navigation in the Straits of Hormuz. We have kept the Straits open for 40 years with our presence. We should keep that up. That we can do without shots fired.
  • Iran's Nuclear Program. This is a joke. Iran has continued its program unabated for all that time. They probably do have nukes already. They have been working on them for nearly 20 years. The only way to stop it is to destroy their nuclear capabilities and the repercussions are not worth it.
  • Iran's support for terrorism. We know it is happening, but we can't prove it, so we just need to fight the terrorism where it becomes a threat. Taking the fight to Iran will not work.
  • Iran's support for Venezuela. This is just not in the US' best interests. Yes, Venezuela is a crap-hole in every way, but it does not affect us much. And there are a lot of crap-holes in the world and we can't fix them all. In theory, the situation in Venezuela may affect oil prices, bit not right now. Oil prices are in the dumper. We should just ignore this.
So no, we do not need to blow any ships out of the water. We should ignore the ships unless they directly threaten the US.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,169 Posts
Yeah, the facts are a bear aren't they? I have played the oil tanker game in the Arabian Sea op area with Iran when I was in the Navy. That was in 1980. We are still playing the same darn game with them 40 years and seven presidents later. Talk about not learning any lessons.
Most will assume that you're referring to Iran not learning any lessons. I believe that it is the USA that hasn't learned any lessons. Iran, like some other countries have a plan to build their power and world standing that spans decades if not generations (China). The USA has plans that span 4-8 years and changes almost every time there's a change in administration. All they have to do is wait it out until the next change and keep following their plans. Iran has had a Islamic Theocratic government since 1979. Their government has had the same goals, the same focus, and the same plan for over 40 years.

When a Democrat is in office, Iran is emboldened and steps up their endeavors. When a Republican is in office, they temper their actions accordingly...but they keep going.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,956 Posts
It is more than Bush or Obama did, although Clinton put a lot of sanctions against Iran. Several other countries, including the UK, Israel, Japan, India, S. Korea, Australia, Switzerland and Canada have sanctions against Iran. The UN has a whole list of sanctions. None of those have done any good and these current sanctions will do no good.

Why does it matter whether Trump deserves credit? Shouldn't foreign policy be about results and not credit? This has been going on for 40 years with no improvement. At this rate, it will wind up lasting longer than the Cold War. Shouldn't we expect more out of a foreign policy?

I say we need to look at what we are trying to accomplish, whether it can reasonably be accomplished and whether it is worth it to try to accomplish it. Our goals are:
  • Freedom of Navigation in the Straits of Hormuz. We have kept the Straits open for 40 years with our presence. We should keep that up. That we can do without shots fired.
  • Iran's Nuclear Program. This is a joke. Iran has continued its program unabated for all that time. They probably do have nukes already. They have been working on them for nearly 20 years. The only way to stop it is to destroy their nuclear capabilities and the repercussions are not worth it.
  • Iran's support for terrorism. We know it is happening, but we can't prove it, so we just need to fight the terrorism where it becomes a threat. Taking the fight to Iran will not work.
  • Iran's support for Venezuela. This is just not in the US' best interests. Yes, Venezuela is a crap-hole in every way, but it does not affect us much. And there are a lot of crap-holes in the world and we can't fix them all. In theory, the situation in Venezuela may affect oil prices, bit not right now. Oil prices are in the dumper. We should just ignore this.
So no, we do not need to blow any ships out of the water. We should ignore the ships unless they directly threaten the US.
OK, we do nothing except keep the Straits open...I'm fine with that.

Trump gets hammered constantly by critics (not saying you're a critic). I don't expect them to agree with everything, or even 10% of what he does, but it would be nice if they would acknowledge a success now and then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
Most will assume that you're referring to Iran not learning any lessons. I believe that it is the USA that hasn't learned any lessons. Iran, like some other countries have a plan to build their power and world standing that spans decades if not generations (China). The USA has plans that span 4-8 years and changes almost every time there's a change in administration. All they have to do is wait it out until the next change and keep following their plans. Iran has had a Islamic Theocratic government since 1979. Their government has had the same goals, the same focus, and the same plan for over 40 years.

When a Democrat is in office, Iran is emboldened and steps up their endeavors. When a Republican is in office, they temper their actions accordingly...but they keep going.
Spot on, that's exactly where I was coming from. We haven't learned any lessons. And you're are right. They take the long view and we take the short view. And we can't stick to a policy for more than eight years at a time. I think that is why we get our elections interfered with by foreign powers. They don't really care which side is in office, they just want turnover. Our enemies don't want us to ever be able to implement a long-term strategy, no matter what it is.

Our enemies have been playing us like a fiddle for four decades. And we get all impressed when we divert two oil tankers...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,956 Posts
What would you have Trump do? He's been in office 3 1/2 years. Sanctions, real sanctions that are enforced, are a start.

We all know what hasn't worked, now I'd like to hear what our long term strategy should be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,509 Posts
I don't want to be a spoiler but it has been more than 40yrs, I was there in 58 and 59 and we had the chance to pull the seedlings from the sand and throw them in the trash barrel but we were ordered to pull out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
What would you have Trump do? He's been in office 3 1/2 years. Sanctions, real sanctions that are enforced, are a start.

We all know what hasn't worked, now I'd like to hear what our long term strategy should be.
Again, it is not about Trump per se. We have been screwing up with Iran since the late 50's and we have to commit to stop making things worse there. They had a democratically elected government that nationalized the oil production facilities. So with Britain, we launched Operation Ajax, a joint CIA/MI6 operation to overthrow that government and put the Shah in place. He was a brutal dictator, but he played ball with the West. The Iranians still resent us for that and I don't blame them.

Things got so bad under the Shah that public support developed for an Islamic revolution under the Ayatollah. The Ayatollah initially reached out to the Carter administration to set up normalized relations, to find a way to get along. Carter spurned them. The new regime was so insulted, they did the Hostage Crisis thing, which could have been avoided. Ever since, we have been blaming them for that. Now they are supporting terrorism, developing nuclear weapons and threatening the oil supply, which is not good for us.

So the situation is so messed up now, which is at least 50% our fault, that it is hard to tell if any strategy would work.There are only two possibilities: First, take them out completely, like we did with Iraq. Militarily we could do it, but I think it would be a mistake. We would get embroiled there long term, and/or create a worse state of affairs, giving rise to something like ISIS on steroids.

So if we are not going to do that, the better idea is to start to find ways to coexist. It would not be easy. There is so much hate and distrust between them and us now, it would be really hard. We will never be friends with them and we should never trust them. But we could get to some sort of detente. This constantly provoking each other makes us more like two rival gangs than sovereign nations. There are worse countries we get along with. We can't keep this decades-long feud going anymore and we can't keep changing policies with every administration.

It is interesting to me that Trump seems to be on the detente path with N. Korea and that is to his credit. But he takes the opposite tack with Iran. That is ironic, because I think that while Iran may be equally evil to N. Korea, the Iranian leadership is much more sophisticated and intelligent than Rocket Boy. They may be terrorists, but you can negotiate with terrorists. You can't negotiate with a psychopath.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
961 Posts
America fails when it comes to foreign policy. Should of stuck to the original plan.

Smedly Butler figured it out. Ehh but what did he know? He only won two medal of honors.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top