Thread: Iran Intervention and Break-UP

What is interesting is that all Tehran has to do is threaten to close the straights of Hormuz without actually having any intention of doing so, to Cost the U.S Taxpayer Hundreds of Millions if not Billions in deployment costs and inconvenience leave patterns for 10's of thousands of men....

Originally Posted by Chunder

What is interesting is that all Tehran has to do is threaten to close the straights of Hormuz without actually having any intention of doing so, to Cost the U.S Taxpayer Hundreds of Millions if not Billions in deployment costs and inconvenience leave patterns for 10's of thousands of men....

Technically the deployment costs are ongoing already (Iraq/Afghanistan). The Carrier groups would have been sailing anyways and are already outfitted so their marginal readiness costs to already ones being paid is not as big.

I think we are being lulled into a perception that all these deployments and posturing are because of Iran. The real expectations are seeming to align to completely revamp the geopolitical structure of the region.

My sense is that the world is tired of this inter ethnic manipulation that goes outside the region due to non-physical intervention (ergo economic interaction between regimes and the world as a whole). All of these covert shadow wars supporting rebel groups based on advertised affiliations of one sort or another is to some degree forcing a blank slate approach to put the impetus on internal deconstruction within these states. So in a sense physical borders becoming more aligned with non-proliferation of ambitions based on ethnic/sect or other ties. In Europe the constant re-setting of border to shifting population migrations through wars from 1800-1920s sort of intensified in the Mid east it seems to have emerged from a stupor of colonial inducement of atrophy by external aspects.

Why break-up Iran?

Originally Posted by Tronic

Why break-up Iran?

Regime change, stratification of oil and gas resources and pipelines.

Caspian Oil development and Pipelines from Mid-East via Turkey to Europe. Control of flow into the market via ports. etc... More countries with smaller populations easier to "induce" compliance.

Also political safety reasons Iran funds a lot of groups that it sees as vengeance for global political actions against it thus it would remove their retaliation via shadow network funding.

Another classic from cypoke

Iran is larger and more populated then Afghanistan - a nation we will be leaving tails between legs and our military has already shown they are unable to control the violence there. Only a complete and utter idiot (OP has shown he fits the bill) would think it would be a good idea for our heavily in debt nation to march our army into Iran and break the place up giving us another decade at war and flushing hundreds of billions down the toilet.

There are no troops, there is no international support, there is no domestic support, etc...

Don't quit your day job - if you have one.

Bit rude... But if you disagree please tell us how you expect any attack on Iran to unfold troung. Perhaps you are not concerned over a nuclear Iran? If you are then presumably you see there will arise a necessity for action. What then?

I actually was thinking that Iran will fail from inside out due to food costs going intro stratosphere and population rising up. This can actually be achieved very simply by spending a few hundred million dollars perhaps a billion over two to three years. {Very simple exercise to be quiet honest buy up all the 'exportable' wheat that is produced in Kazakhstan over Two years and ship it out of the region} On the margin this will double or tripple bread prices in Iran, even if Russia ships excess grain. Technically the US can resell it at a mild loss elsewhere ergo Japan/China at pacific shippoints in Russia after it is shipped out. (Russia produces lots of wheat but Kazakh wheat is more bread quality not forage[for animals] so food wise more impactful on Iran since that is the major buyer of it in the region)

But zerohedge is convincing since the carrier groups are being moved.

Iran Increase Bread Prices by as Much as 33%, IRNA Reports - Bloomberg

Iranian authorities increased the price of traditional breads by as much as 33 percent in the capital, Tehran, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported, citing a Tehran province official.

A Sangak loaf will now cost 6,000 rials (49 cents), said Nematollah Torki Tehran’s governor deputy for planning. Barbari, Taftoun and Lavash loaves will cost 5,000, 3,000 and 1,600 rials respectively, he said in the report published late yesterday.

The new prices will apply in Tehran bakeries from today, he said, according to the report.

Bit rude... But if you disagree please tell us how you expect any attack on Iran to unfold troung. Perhaps you are not concerned over a nuclear Iran? If you are then presumably you see there will arise a necessity for action. What then?

Is there are option that we won't be attacking them for the foreseeable future?

We would NOT be putting ground troops in there and our interests are not helped by Balkanizing that nation.

Originally Posted by cyppok

I actually was thinking that Iran will fail from inside out due to food costs going intro stratosphere and population rising up. This can actually be achieved very simply by spending a few hundred million dollars perhaps a billion over two to three years. {Very simple exercise to be quiet honest buy up all the 'exportable' wheat that is produced in Kazakhstan over Two years and ship it out of the region} On the margin this will double or tripple bread prices in Iran, even if Russia ships excess grain. Technically the US can resell it at a mild loss elsewhere ergo Japan/China at pacific shippoints in Russia after it is shipped out. (Russia produces lots of wheat but Kazakh wheat is more bread quality not forage[for animals] so food wise more impactful on Iran since that is the major buyer of it in the region)

But zerohedge is convincing since the carrier groups are being moved.

Iran Increase Bread Prices by as Much as 33%, IRNA Reports - Bloomberg

The ayatollahs falling does not equal to Iran disintegrating.

Interesting piece in strafor.com this week; the situation in Syria is actually affecting Iran in a negative way. If & when Syria falls (and gambling people are betting that it WILL), Iran will pretty much have NO allies left in the region; China & Russia may be "supporting" Syria at the present time, but both countries also have their own agenda, and neither one is planning on Syria being around much longer in it's present state. China & Russia might be idelogical, but they're not stupid, either; both countries are currently "hedging thier bets" against Assad's fall.

Consequences of the Fall of the Syrian Regime | Stratfor

Originally Posted by Stitch

Interesting piece in strafor.com this week; the situation in Syria is actually affecting Iran in a negative way. If & when Syria falls (and gambling people are betting that it WILL), Iran will pretty much have NO allies left in the region; China & Russia may be "supporting" Syria at the present time, but both countries also have their own agenda, and neither one is planning on Syria being around much longer in it's present state. China & Russia might be idelogical, but they're not stupid, either; both countries are currently "hedging thier bets" against Assad's fall.

Consequences of the Fall of the Syrian Regime | Stratfor

Iran and Hezbollah will both be pretty lonely, and all those chemical weapons in Syria will look pretty tempting to Hezbollah as the regime nears the end.

Originally Posted by Stitch

Interesting piece in strafor.com this week; the situation in Syria is actually affecting Iran in a negative way. If & when Syria falls (and gambling people are betting that it WILL), Iran will pretty much have NO allies left in the region; China & Russia may be "supporting" Syria at the present time, but both countries also have their own agenda, and neither one is planning on Syria being around much longer in it's present state. China & Russia might be idelogical, but they're not stupid, either; both countries are currently "hedging thier bets" against Assad's fall.

Consequences of the Fall of the Syrian Regime | Stratfor

I partly agree the reality with the hedging is there.
The problem is that Iraq is already more or less under Iranian influence, remember that shia cleric Muqtada from Baghdad, and the majority Shia in the region, ya. The problem with Assad falling is that it creates a sectarian conflict. Iraq is both sectarian and ethnic with Kurds/Arabs.

If the US succeeds in making pan-arab secularism build on Iraq-Syria dynamic post regime change it would be a very interesting region with majorities and minorities and anti-Iran in nature since their trade ties to US, Europe and world wide would take precedence against 'trade gravity' payoff wise.

The delusion in the article is that Iraq is less and less dependent while the reality is since it is trade viable most of trade gets routed to Iran via cross border arbitrage. Ergo things that go to Basra get to Iran via trucks and other ways for common people making money. This is destabilizing in a way as it creates an economic dependence in the region for goods and cash flows that set in patterns that are hard to reverse. The beauty of this strategy is that it creates a productivity malaise in Iran since the goods being moved cross border will have lower and uncompetitive prices for Iranian producers due to lack of depth/breadth of production.

Downside is thus if oil cash flow falters due to production prices for goods become far more sensitive than usual. Ergo when 1000 units of pants go through the border and cost $4 dollars and 500 units go and cost 5 dollars while simultaneously Iranian forex falls (by 10-20%) in value due to cash flow variability the actual prices for goods could be variable above 50%+. In real life ofcouse those that already shipped the 1000 would dump them at prices that make them break even or better causing Iranian producers of pants to go broke as capital extracted by cross border trade destroys Iranian capital...

The reality would be is Iran would be very tempted to force equal trade parameters but even that wouldn't fix the goods arbitrage going via one port disseminated through the border.