One ship was headed from Iran to Gaza, what about the one being held in Greece, headed to Iran, with components to manufacture surface-to-surface missiles?

And, by the way, why is Iran (with Russia’s help) moving quickly to use nuclear power for domestic electricity production, when they have sufficient oil reserves for themselves? Hold that thought, I believe, while focusing on the oil transport issue, stumbled across a major puzzle piece of a war plan here.

And don’t forget the push to develop a “domestically produced” nuclear weapon…

How will the President react, in the face of the Iranian leadership that shows it has no apologies for it’s efforts to strategically change the face of international relations? How will the UN react? Not to mention, Iran has laid out this threat before, with no significant response from the rest of the world.

One reaction already we can count on: Obama ‘demands’ a 10% military budget cut.

This is a major game changer, as is the recent launch of a satellite by Iran (demonstration of the ability to employ tactical/strategic ballistic missiles).

In the case of the Susanna, the delivery of parts to make missiles in the category of the Exocet/Silkworm/Harpoon will allow the Iranians to do what it has been attempting to for many decades: Control the flow of seaborne traffic in an international strait.

The UN Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), which the US never signed, objecting to the provisions to share in the mining of sea bed minerals with all countries, is still followed for issues such as the free transit of commerce and warships of straits less that 24 NM wide, and respecting the distance of territorial waters as being 12NM from the coasts of countries.

The Strait of Hormuz is one such strait, bordered by Oman to the south and Iran to the north. Strategically, in my former profession, we called this a “choke point.” The sea traffic must, by geography, be funneled in such a manner as to make it vulnerable to attack from land bases. If this is to be the choice of the offensive on the World’s oil based economy, then Iran is smart is importing more parts for missiles. They will have to have a credible, survivable (via protection, or mass quantity) arsenal keep the world rocked back on it’s heels. Shooting up a few tankers is a nasty disruption, but a recoverable condition, if the World masses the forces and eliminates a small inventory of weapons ashore.

Add to the issue that between 20 to 40% of the World’s crude oil transits this strait.

At the same time President Obama is re-imposing bans on offshore drilling (while Cuba and China line up to take out resources), and the Department of the Interior closes 77 land parcels in Utah (Oh, yes, they went for John McCain in 2008) to exploration and drilling for oil resources, Iran is stepping up its military capabilities. Net result, if they are allowed to continue with this buildup? Economics 101: The price of a barrel of oil will rise, sharply, merely at the threat of the ability to destroy, or bottle up shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Or, the other reaction, as a result of, or to preempt, International Relations 101: The military as a tool of diplomacy will be brought to bear on the situation.

This is an issue, where decisions of domestic policy, in this case regarding energy and the use of natrual resources can directly interplay with our foreign policy.

In this case, where I project the Iranians will employ international blackmail, they are, unlike the current terrorist movement, a sovereign nation with borders, a capital and established, recognized leadership, which puts us back into a regime of the Laws of Warfare, which is where our understanding is best, far better than how to combat a stateless movement with almost impossible to understand goals and demands. As some background, this desire of the Iranians to “manage” the price of oil is nothing new. Beginning in 1984, they employed military tactics in in the “Tanker War”. As recently as this past year, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard has harassed US Navy ships in the Strait. If you recall, during the early and middle parts of 2008, oil prices rose to well over $120/bbl, with this issue being in the forefront of the economic markets.

A conflict with Iran, of a military nature, for us, or other nations is actually being encouraged by the decisions. or non-decisions, by President Obama.  If we enter the conflict, we will be in the very position President Obama told the world we were wrong for doing:  Dictating.  He will necessarily have to tell Iran what they will or will not do.  On the other hand, I wonder if he “listened” to the snub he received from the Iranian leadership, after news of a letter to open relations was in the works?

If President Obama declines to get his hands dirty, explaining away his lack of “America First” capabilities by telling us it would be wrong to direct how an nation, a single nation, takes control of a large part of the World’s energy economy, will the populace accept this “leadership,” while our cars sit idle in the driveways and industry grinds to a halt and power companies serve up brown and black outs, in winter and soummer high demand months?  Will he demands “rationing” while not even entering a war to secure resources, or wll he relent and turn inwards, tossing the “Global Warming” crowd under the bus, while letting us us what resources we have under our feet and near our shores?

Back to “peaceful” nuclear power. If Iran accumulates/develops the ability to employ a massive offensive surface-to-surface missile capability in the Strait of Hormuz and effectively shuts off up to 40% of the crude oil market, and, in preparation, has built a set of nuclear reactors for energy, they will hold a significant trump card, when we attack. We will, by our domestic policy decisions, be left crippled for energy use, which will affect our ability to effectively employ military power. If they have also built protected launch sites and forward observation capabilities (necessary to effectively strike the correct targets over the horizon), it will be a war of attrition, with us using up a now finite amount of energy. That will possibly bring us to another brink of nuclear warfare, as the ICBMs sit ready to launch, their potential energy already committed.

It seems at least one of the two major players in this game understand the need for “energy independence,” and not the one who thinks Congress can take over the design of domestically produced cars.

By the way, our “allies” are getting nervous, and looking for some, any approach by our leadership. Will “he” listen or refuse to be dictated to?

The magnitude of the tests, even in his third week in office are reaching gigantic proportions.  He had better be up to it, or the Stimulus will not be necessary…we’ll just be cut up and “sold” off to the highest bidding nation, like a corporation gone bankrupt.