blocking the Strait of Hormuz possible or not possible?

H

hamidreza

Active member
Iran always says that blocking the Strait of Hormuz is an option on the table like U.S. that always says that Military invasion is always an option on the table. So the question is that if Iran block the Strait of Hormuz, is it possible for U.S. and her allies to release it and if they can how long it takes? And we should know that it is not necessary to put a gate for blocking the Strait of Hormuz. if any target such as a tanker or a warship be aimed from a far away place, the Strait of Hormuz is blocked.
* Iranian military facilities to block the Strait of Hormuz:
1- High speed boats which Iran has a lot of them and are equipped with naval radars, short and middle range cruise anti-ship missiles.
And the other High speed boats which all of them are made in Iran in اhigh quantity.
2-Submarines which are included three Kilo submarines which have been made in Russia and about seventeen other light and middleweight submarines which have been made in Iran. I think since the deepest place in Persian Gulf is about 93 meters, this kind of submarines are more applicable than very heavy submarines with long even more than 100 meters.
3- Cruise anti-ship missiles which are included short-range missiles (Kosar, 15-20 km range), middle-range missile (Nasr, 35 km range) and long-range missiles (Nor and Ghader 200km range). These missiles can be installed at the depth of 70-150km of Iranian territory and are completely independent and can discovery and attack to target themselves without any help.
4-Ballistic missiles which are included Tondar(150-250km range),khalije-fars (300km range, 3 mach speed and 650kg warhead) and Sejil (2000km range, 8-12 mach speed and 500 kg warhead). It was thought that Sejil is a surface-to-surface missile but recently according to Iranian announcement it can also be used for sea targets. You can find the test movie for these targets on internet.
All of above missiles are made in Iran in high quantity.
5-Air force included manned or unmanned aircrafts which could carry different type of anti-ship or cruise missiles, especially short or middle range missiles to desired points.
6-Iran navy. All of Iranian's warships have been bought before Iran revolution from western countries except Jamaran which has designed and manufactured in Iran.
And the other things. As you know the width of the Strait of Hormuz is very short so each target can be threatened easy even with artillery, rocket launcher or helicopter.
 
Last edited:
Many things are "possible",... but what must be taken into account is, "Is it worth the cost".
Click to expand...
Yes. It is right and this rule is not just for Iran. It is also applicable for U.S and her allies.
 
I doubt that Iran really intends to carry out its threat, but merely wants to remind the West that it could attempt to close the strait if provoked or attacked.

The economic effects of a blockade would hurt Iran more than anyone else. Eighty-seven percent of Iranian imports and about ninety-nine percent of its exports are by sea, and so closure to the Strait will probably impact Iran more severely than any other single nation.

It would make no sense, and will mean war with the U.S., and you don’t want that. Iran has no way of standing up to the U.S. Navy at sea.
 
I doubt that Iran really intends to carry out its threat, but merely wants to remind the West that it could attempt to close the strait if provoked or attacked.

The economic effects of a blockade would hurt Iran more than anyone else. Eighty-seven percent of Iranian imports and about ninety-nine percent of its exports are by sea, and so closure to the Strait will probably impact Iran more severely than any other single nation.

It would make no sense, and will mean war with the U.S., and you don’t want that. Iran has no way of standing up to the U.S. Navy at sea
Click to expand...
I don't say Iran block the Strait without any reason. I think Iran carry out this only in one condition. when Iran be attacked by west and if they do this it is not important how much of our imports or exports are by sea.
I think with about $140,000,000,000 currency reserves, at war condition, Iran can resist for years . and can you guess how much time western countries can stand out without about 40% of world oil?a tiny explosion in one of Saudi Arabia oil pipe increased the price of oil about $5. and how much do you think will be the price of oil when a real war occur in the middle east?
You can see the result of oil sanction which is putting on by US. Iran sold about 13% less than last month but the price of oil increased more than 25%. so how is the winner? and as you know they exempt 11 country recently and they want add more countries to this list. they defaced as their before silly sanction before they performance their sanction completely.

And I want to say Iran is not Iraq or Afghanistan . In this 30 years Iran has learned how to protect his profits.Iran is not alone in the middle east. Iran has a lot of friends in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia's Shiites who are living in the east sensitive oil-rich region and will find friends in Egypt very soon. So Iran can block the the Strait whatever she want.
 
Last edited:
According to a report from the Institute for Energy Research, the United States has 1.4 trillion barrels of recoverable reserves of oil — or more than the entire world has used in 150 years. That’s enough to fuel the United States for the next 250 years. Natural gas and coal resources are in even greater abundance. Energy independence could really and truly be as easy as 1-2-3.

If the Straits are closed for more than a few weeks, worldwide reecession is guaranteed. If Iran did try to blockade the strait, it would be no match for a U.S. fleet accompanied by the Combined Maritime Force protecting Gulf shipping that also includes countries such as Britain, France, Canada, Australia and the Gulf Arab states, under the command of a U.S. admiral.

Iran has been investing for decades now on creating a naval guerrilla force which would have the capability of at least interfering with shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and perhaps closing it, at least temporarily, using a combination of mines, small boats, antiship cruise missiles, submarines, both midget submarines as well as conventional submarines, and most recently ballistic missiles.

But once the United States Navy gets involved in ensuring freedom of navigation, I think it's very clear what the outcome will be, eventually, the destruction of the Iranian Navy and the reopening of the strait.
 
According to a report from the Institute for Energy Research, the United States has 1.4 trillion barrels of recoverable reserves of oil — or more than the entire world has used in 150 years. That’s enough to fuel the United States for the next 250 years. Natural gas and coal resources are in even greater abundance. Energy independence could really and truly be as easy as 1-2-3.
Click to expand...
1,400,000,000,000 barrels!!! They might have found a new continent. I don’t have anything to say and just refer to below links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves
World oil reserves by region:
Middle East: 56%
North America: 16% (most of them are in Canada)
Africa: 9%
Central and South America: 8%
Eurasia: 7%
Asia and Oceana: 3%
Europe: 1%
As you see the US and her allies have just 20% of world oil reserves (North America+ Asia and Oceana+ Europe) while they consume most fraction of the world energy. And it is the main reason they have brought their soldiers to ME, occupied Iraq and have made military bases in some ME countries.
If the Straits are closed for more than a few weeks, worldwide reecession is guaranteed. If Iran did try to blockade the strait, it would be no match for a U.S. fleet accompanied by the Combined Maritime Force protecting Gulf shipping that also includes countries such as Britain, France, Canada, Australia and the Gulf Arab states, under the command of a U.S. admiral.

Iran has been investing for decades now on creating a naval guerrilla force which would have the capability of at least interfering with shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and perhaps closing it, at least temporarily, using a combination of mines, small boats, antiship cruise missiles, submarines, both midget submarines as well as conventional submarines, and most recently ballistic missiles.

But once the United States Navy gets involved in ensuring freedom of navigation, I think it's very clear what the outcome will be, eventually, the destruction of the Iranian Navy and the reopening of the strait.
Click to expand...
As I said before Iran doesn’t block the Strait of Hormuz except that be attacked by US and her allies. And at this condition the world won’t blame Iran. They blame west because they known that attacking to Iran is equal to blockage the Strait of Hormuz and Iran said it before.
 
hamidreza said:
Yes. It is right and this rule is not just for Iran. It is also applicable for U.S and her allies.
Click to expand...
Yes that is very true,... and there lies the difference. In time of a real threat the US could both dish out and absorb many, many times the "punishment" that Iran could. One day the US will wake up that their strength lies in fighting a technological war from afar without ever setting foot on enemy soil

The US Forces main problem is in convincing their Congress to allow them to do it with a free hand.
 
Yes that is very true,... and there lies the difference. In time of a real threat the US could both dish out and absorb many, many times the "punishment" that Iran could. One day the US will wake up that their strength lies in fighting a technological war from afar without ever setting foot on enemy soil

The US Forces main problem is in convincing their Congress to allow them to do it with a free hand.
Click to expand...
Yes, as they are doing in Afghanistan and they did in Iraq. The start of war is in their hands but the end of it No.
 
Last edited:
hamidreza said:
Yes, as they are doing in Afghanistan and they did in Iraq. The start of war is in their hands but the end of it No.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is a very astute judgment and I couldn't agree with you more, but where it differs is the way in which they are executing those wars you speak of. Also,... even though the coalition slunk out of Iraq with their tail between their legs, I know which country suffered the most militarily and economically, and it was not the US.

If the US lands no troops on the ground and prosecute their war from afar destroying all vital infrastructure they effectively could turn Iran into a punching bag, with little ability to even endanger US forces.

However I feel that something like you suggest might make their Congress re-assess their thinking, and what is even scarier, is the fact that at the moment, the US is technically bankrupt,... but there is nothing in the world that will stir up an economy, like a nice big war.

The Iranians may do it,... but I think they would find that it would be a very bad move for them in the end. Virtually all of what you have said is true, but the crunch is, there are no "winners" in a war both sides lose in the end. It's just that I feel that in this case the Iranian people would lose far more than anyone else. There would be no 100s of thousands of dead in the USA, their country would not suffer the devastation and disruption of war.

Just think about it,....... The US may never "win", but Iran would certainly lose. It would be a stupid move.
 
Last edited:
The Strait of Hormuz is not just a strait, it is a lifeline for economies throughout the world. So even the slightest attempt to block it wil evolve in a destructive retaliation. I'm not going to try to explain how that conflict will evolve but what I do know is that Iranian Air Force, airfields and air defences will be destroyed in days. As will be their missile batteries and , en passant, their nuclear sites. There will be surprises. American ships will be hit as will oil installations. Some American planes will be shot down. But when Iranian ships and submarines (if they survive) come back to port for reloading and refeuling they will only find destruction. And no, there will be no American infantry in Iran besides some special forces on special assignments. A conflict about the Strait of Hormuz is a conflict against time. It will be quickly over.
 
Yes, that is a very astute judgment and I couldn't agree with you more, but where it differs is the way in which they are executing those wars you speak of. Also,... even though the coalition slunk out of Iraq with their tail between their legs, I know which country suffered the most militarily and economically, and it was not the US.

If the US lands no troops on the ground and prosecute their war from afar destroying all vital infrastructure they effectively could turn Iran into a punching bag, with little ability to even endanger US forces.

However I feel that something like you suggest might make their Congress re-assess their thinking, and what is even scarier, is the fact that at the moment, the US is technically bankrupt,... but there is nothing in the world that will stir up an economy, like a nice big war.

The Iranians may do it,... but I think they would find that it would be a very bad move for them in the end. Virtually all of what you have said is true, but the crunch is, there are no "winners" in a war both sides lose in the end. It's just that I feel that in this case the Iranian people would lose far more than anyone else. There would be no 100s of thousands of dead in the USA, their country would not suffer the devastation and disruption of war.

Just think about it,....... The US may never "win", but Iran would certainly lose. It would be a stupid move.
Click to expand...
Yes I agree and I have a better suggestion for US politicians. Is it good the US president find a country for example in ME and says to him:
You have two choices. You have to give us 2 billion dollars or we attack you with our B2, Cruise and strategic missiles from here and damage you more than 20 billion dollars in one week.
And the leader of that country says: absolutely the first choice is More advantageous. So give me your bank account quickly.
 
Last edited:
The Strait of Hormuz is not just a strait, it is a lifeline for economies throughout the world. So even the slightest attempt to block it wil evolve in a destructive retaliation.
Click to expand...
If Iran be attacked by US and her allies, the center of this war will be in Persian Gulf and then no tanker will dares to cross there. So The Persian Gulf will be blocked automatically before Iran want to or not. So the responsibility of blockage will be on US shoulders and the world countries blame west for that.
I'm not going to try to explain how that conflict will evolve but what I do know is that Iranian Air Force, airfields and air defences will be destroyed in days. As will be their missile batteries and , en passant, their nuclear sites. There will be surprises. American ships will be hit as will oil installations. Some American planes will be shot down. But when Iranian ships and submarines (if they survive) come back to port for reloading and refeuling they will only find destruction. And no, there will be no American infantry in Iran besides some special forces on special assignments. A conflict about the Strait of Hormuz is a conflict against time. It will be quickly over.
Click to expand...
Yes it is possible. Destroying Air-Force in the morning, Navy in the noon and the army at night, and the next day sunbath in Kish Island. But in Hollywood movies with iron mans or transformers. Not in a real war. As I heard from one of Iranian Revolutionary Guards commanders, at least 30000 of US soldiers will be killed in the first day of war. Their bases around us are the best target for our missiles.
 
Last edited:
VDKMS said:
The Strait of Hormuz is not just a strait, it is a lifeline for economies throughout the world. So even the slightest attempt to block it wil evolve in a destructive retaliation. I'm not going to try to explain how that conflict will evolve but what I do know is that Iranian Air Force, airfields and air defences will be destroyed in days. As will be their missile batteries and , en passant, their nuclear sites. There will be surprises. American ships will be hit as will oil installations. Some American planes will be shot down. But when Iranian ships and submarines (if they survive) come back to port for reloading and refeuling they will only find destruction. And no, there will be no American infantry in Iran besides some special forces on special assignments. A conflict about the Strait of Hormuz is a conflict against time. It will be quickly over.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you. In the short term, the strait 'may' be partially blocked by Iran, however, as you said, when the ships etc return to port for replenishing, they will only find complete devastation. During America's Civil War, Sherman mounted a scorched earth policy that would appear as a walk in the park compared to what would be the response to any attempt to block the strait by Iran. The sea highway that extends through the strait supplies way too much commerce to way too many countries for Iran to get away with a blockade of the strait. The forces that attack Iran afterwards, would be so great that Iran would have to claw their way back from the stone age. There wouldn't be even one single city of any size remaining after two or three days of allied bombing, rocket and missile attacks and shelling from off-shore.

Blockading the strait will only result in the complete and utter destruction of Iran.
 
Yeah....And "there are NO Americans in Iraq".. As that blubbering Iraqi idiot said on national TV while the Baghdad Int. Air port where crawling with coalition troops..

Seriously..Why do some people never learn?

I see this thing playing out like Seno explained it to you.
Iran will survive UNTILL the shooting starts.. After that..Not so much.
Should the US play it smart it wouldn´t cost that many lives either..Just dollars.
Bad enough, but well dollars can be replaced..

The great tradgedy would be what would happen to the Iraian civilians.
Their leaders wouldn´t give a **** and the west couldn´t afford to gamble on the straights being "closed".
That would be a severe endgame in the Iranaian sticks..

KJ sends..
 
KJ said:
Yeah....And "there are NO Americans in Iraq".. As that blubbering Iraqi idiot said on national TV while the Baghdad Int. Air port where crawling with coalition troops..

Seriously..Why do some people never learn?

I see this thing playing out like Seno explained it to you.
Iran will survive UNTILL the shooting starts.. After that..Not so much.
Should the US play it smart it wouldn´t cost that many lives either..Just dollars.
Bad enough, but well dollars can be replaced..

The great tradgedy would be what would happen to the Iraian civilians.
Their leaders wouldn´t give a **** and the west couldn´t afford to gamble on the straights being "closed".
That would be a severe endgame in the Iranaian sticks..

KJ sends..
Click to expand...

Every town and hamlet over 5,000 people, will be nothing but rubble 2-3 days after Iran uses force to blockade the strait. That is one you can take to the bank.

BTW - it won't just be Americans who will be pounding Iraqi targets. Every country that depends on the shipping that uses the strait will be putting in their two cents worth. They can't allow the blockade to interfere with the shipping that they depend on.
 
The result of war will be more terrible for them than they estimate. They need to forget that they can attack and then escape quickly. We are ready for the worst scenario and I am sure if they dared to attack Iran, it would be their first choice not last one. And I recommend you don’t run faster than your politicians or commanders. I heard from them hundreds times that they could attack to Iran but its consequences is unspecified and they might not be able to control it. Haven’t you heard?
 
Last edited:
hamidreza said:
The result of war will be more terrible for them than they estimate. They need to forget that they can attack and then escape quickly. We are ready for the worst scenario and I am sure if they dared to attack Iran, it would be their first choice not last one. And I recommend you don’t run faster than your politicians or commanders. I heard from them hundreds times that they could attack to Iran but its consequences is unspecified and they might not be able to control it. Haven’t you heard?
Click to expand...

I don't know what the heck you are trying to say.

IF Iran were to block the strait .. then the response of the rest of the free world and most of the countries that depend on the strait for their very survival, would be decisive and terrible.

Iran as a power in that part of the world would be at an end and they would have to claw their way back from a stone age level.

Anybody that thinks that Iran could survive an all out war with America, the rest of the allied countries and the countries that depend on the goods etc that are necessities for their very lives, are only lying to themselves.
 
The next Fred Flintstone movie would be made ​​in Iran.
The scenes would already be present.

I wonder if its not just about “Empty (Oil)barrels make the most noise”.
:rockin: :rockin: :rockin:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top