Will Iran enter to the war against Israel?

[nibba]

1, not two Turkey is next to Mediterranean, Iraq is next to Turkey

2.) I think Afghanistan is below the equator (or part of) and you probably already know this will happen when they admit Turkey into NATO....


The Russian did tried tho, As for whether or not it would work, maybe, but even if they do, you are talking about serious loss of power to RuAF, which probably moot at this point, I mean if Russia uses all their air power to take down Ukrainian, it would probably worked if they can get Kyiv in a short run, if they are going to loss a lot of combat power over it then it would have been a moot point if the war drag on, and it did drag on.


Not one third actually



View attachment 963148

Oil Production by Country - Worldometer

List of world countries by Yearly Oil Production in million cubic feet (MMcf)

www.worldometers.info

Unless Iran can project Naval power in Red Sea, otherwise even if they went to war, it would just affect Iran only and probably UAE to a degree, Saudi have port on the other side of Gulf of Oman, and the other in top 5 don't depends on Naval Route in the Middle East

And it would not go up to $300 a barrel lol, this is not even the case when Saudi capping their production (Which they already did).

~25% of the worlds oil and 30+% of the worlds LNG passes through hormuz.Not sure what your production table is supposed to prove.

You cant just flip to another port as you see fit.


Oil markets like all markets are paper markets. Why do you think saudi arabia doing gradual cuts after announcing then in advance would have more affect on price than forced closure of a strait. Spot price will hit $300 easily. The futures would provably jump to $600

 

[Parwaz e Ishq]

not two Turkey is next to Mediterranean, Iraq is next to Turkey

I think Afghanistan is below the equator (or part of) and you probably already know this will happen when they admit Turkey into NATO....

NATO Article 5 doesn't enforce all member countries to go to war. It states something like " take measures as deemed necessary"

Turkey will have slightly different definition of "as deemed necessary".

 

[fitpOsitive]

It's not a good time to test nukes by Iran. I think it was till months ago. Iran better test it after the current phase.

 

[jhungary]

NATO Article 5 doesn't enforce all member countries to go to war. It states something like " take measures as deemed necessary"

Turkey will have slightly different definition of "as deemed necessary".

This is article 5 from NATO website

Collective defence and Article 5

The principle of collective defence is at the very heart of NATO’s founding treaty. It remains a unique and enduring principle that binds its members together, committing them to protect each other and setting a spirit of solidarity within the Alliance.

www.nato.int

Article 5

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”

This article is complemented by Article 6, which stipulates:

The issue is NOT whether or not individual country can act when they deem necessarily, but the collective self-defence is the inherit right as per UN Article 51, which ALL MEMBER WILL, not may, not whether or not it can, but WILL, that's definite, assist the party or parties so attacked by taking forthwith.

Yes, if Iran attack US, Turkey may not use force to attack Iran (and not imagine they will) but WILL have to assist with the party that is being attacked. So yes, Turkey WILL need to assist the US, and if US needed to use Turkish base to launch the attack Iran or Iraq from, they WILL have to give them.

 

[jhungary]

~25% of the worlds oil and 30+% of the worlds LNG passes through hormuz.Not sure what your production table is supposed to prove.

You cant just flip to another port as you see fit.


Oil markets like all markets are paper markets. Why do you think saudi arabia doing gradual cuts after announcing then in advance would have more affect on price than forced closure of a strait. Spot price will hit $300 easily. The futures would provably jump to $600

First of all, Saudi can flip to the other port and not exit thru Strait of Hormuz, that thanks to Iran actaully for closing the strait during Iran-Iraq war....

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Saudi Arabia exports the most oil through the Strait of Hormuz, though it can divert flows by using a 746-mile pipeline across the kingdom to a terminal on the Red Sea. The UAE can partly bypass the strait by sending 1.5 million barrels a day via a pipeline from its oilfields to the port of Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman.

As for why they didn't do it, it's simple $$, but then that does not mean if Iran decided to close Strait of Hormuz or even gluf of Oman, they can't divert them.

Second of all, according to eia,<20% of world oil traffic thru Hormuz

Finally, it's suicide for Saudi to cut on their already slashed oil production, I mean, it's already estimating Saudi loss 600 billion of the oil proceed just this year alone out of around 26 trillion oil transaction (again, they cut the production by 10 million barrel a day, and brent crude is between $72-$97 a barrel, you do the maths), it's impossible even with Russia they can upend the oil price into $300 a barrel, Russia need production to sell cheap to India or China or anyone who want to buy cheap, Saudi need production to offset the price, both Russia and Saudi would bankrupt themselves if they try to squeeze the market.

 

[HGV]

This statement sounds very ominous...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1714570943706566723

if this "big secret" was actually important it probably wouldn't be coming from Iran's ambassador to Armenia

First of all, Saudi can flip to the other port and not exit thru Strait of Hormuz, that thanks to Iran actaully for closing the strait during Iran-Iraq war....

As for why they didn't do it, it's simple $$, but then that does not mean if Iran decided to close Strait of Hormuz or even gluf of Oman, they can't divert them.

Relying on one massive overground 1200km pipeline, there is definitely nothing Iran or the Houthis could do to impede that (in extremis) ...

 

[LeGenD]

if they used it it would have worked , but i wonder do you consider Russia used its air-force in the war a correct statement ?

https://www.rand.org/blog/2023/08/the-uncounted-losses-to-russias-air-force.html

 

[Sineva]

1, not two Turkey is next to Mediterranean, Iraq is next to Turkey

I think Afghanistan is below the equator (or part of) and you probably already know this will happen when they admit Turkey into NATO....


The Russian did tried tho, As for whether or not it would work, maybe, but even if they do, you are talking about serious loss of power to RuAF, which probably moot at this point, I mean if Russia uses all their air power to take down Ukrainian, it would probably worked if they can get Kyiv in a short run, if they are going to loss a lot of combat power over it then it would have been a moot point if the war drag on, and it did drag on.


Not one third actually



View attachment 963148

Oil Production by Country - Worldometer

List of world countries by Yearly Oil Production in million cubic feet (MMcf)

www.worldometers.info

Unless Iran can project Naval power in Red Sea, otherwise even if they went to war, it would just affect Iran only and probably UAE to a degree, Saudi have port on the other side of Gulf of Oman, and the other in top 5 don't depends on Naval Route in the Middle East

And it would not go up to $300 a barrel lol, this is not even the case when Saudi capping their production (Which they already did).

I did say sea traded (I guess you missed that part),which is actually the way that the bulk of global hydrocarbons are transported.

 

[jhungary]

I did say sea traded,which is actually the way that the bulk of global hydrocarbons are transported.

Again < 20% of global hydrocarbons are transported thru the Strait of Hormuz, and as I explained before, Saudi have a 746 mile pipeline and divert it to the red sea, and Saudi itself probably have 90% of that <20% traffic.

It wouldn't do anything if Iran close Hormuz, everyone, including the Saudi had known and prevented that ever happened again since Iran-Iraq war in the 80s.

Relying on one massive overground 1200km pipeline, there is definitely nothing Iran or the Houthis could do to impede that (in extremis) ...

Well, if they wanted war with Saudi again, be my guest.

The Saudi already losing money hand over feet capping oil production, they slashed 10 million barrel a day and instead of going up to $130 they hoped for, it's stays on average $81 (average 72 - 97) the entire 2023, if anything happened to those pipeline and Iran closes the strait, Saudi will not be a happy camper.....

 

[Sineva]

First of all, Saudi can flip to the other port and not exit thru Strait of Hormuz, that thanks to Iran actaully for closing the strait during Iran-Iraq war....

In theory they could,but there are a couple of "small" problems with that,first the pipeline can only carry around 5 million bpd,which is only a quarter (at best) of what goes through hormuz,and secondly the pipeline is rather long and vulnerable {to put it mildly}.
Its not a solution to the problem of a hormuz blockade.

 

[jhungary]

In theory they could,but there are a couple of "small" problems with that,first the pipeline can only carry around 5 million bpd,which is only a quarter (at best) of what goes through hormuz,and secondly the pipeline is rather long and vulnerable {to put it mildly}.
Its not a solution to the problem of a hormuz blockade.

Yeah, but it wouldn't push the price into $2-300 a barrel like you said, because you still have 1/3 to half the output.

In fact, I am pretty sure even if Saudi output is 0, it still wouldn't push Brent Price to that level.

 

[LeGenD]

This thread is on page 10 while Iran has not fired a shot at Israel or an American ship. I am disappointed.

Amir Abdollahian can be credited for pitting you all against each other on PDF though.

 

[delta2]

Hormuz will be shut down with what?

I dont think iran has the capability to sustain that

Will you captain a container-cargo ship through Hormuz after Iran destroys one USN ship? Or just even one cargo ship?

Hormuz will be shut down with what?

I dont think iran has the capability to sustain that

Luckily for the USA the treacherous mullahs ruling Iran only do things that harm Iran and the region both in short and long term.

 

[AZMwi]

Never

 

[Stryker1982]

This thread is on page 10 while Iran has not fired a shot at Israel or an American ship. I am disappointed.

This war just started mate, not ending anytime soon. And theirs no indication their is even an off ramp here. A train without brakes and who knows where it will end up.

Regardless of that, the only thing that matters, is that Iran does not fire the first shot. If Israel wants to punish Iran for opening new fronts against them, that's fine, but Iran should and will wait to be hit first.