How long could Iran blockade the Strait of Hormuz?

I think with boats, subs and rocket delivered mines they could shut it down for perhaps a day.... until the US destroys the delivery platforms and any launch sites. The US could probably place picquet ships along the straights coast, and escorts in the shipping lanes, to clean up anything else looking to cause trouble. If Iran goes with the threat and starts sinking it has proved to the world it cannot be trusted to act like an adult for such a valuable piece of real estate... so then I think the US should occupy the land north of the Strait's, build a new base and move the 5th fleet there instead.

 

Actually, this scares the (*)(*)(*)(*) out of me. we have a president who has apologized to the Arab states and shows no sign of standing tall.

The State Secretary shows no signs of standing up to her president and, frankly, I have a feeling both won't be able to think past drones as a solution.

My only hope is that the straits have been a recognized international waterway for several hundred years and international law is against Iran.

Having said that international law hasn't stopped them in the past. This is not simple saber rattling...

 

Explain to us how you define international law in terms of Israel- the primary cause of the looming war with Iran.

 

Ah so the Israeli blockade of Gaza is illegal then.

I have no doubt the French and Germans would not be supporting Iran as what happens. It's what the Russians and Chinese do that matters.

 

Don't worry... we've had Ohio-class "boomers" running picket, silent and deep, off the coast of Iran for many years -- in international waters, of course....

I wish the Iranians would interdict shipping through the Straits of Hormuz. We could get this whole diseased Islamo-idiocy in Iran dealt with, once and for all. And if anyone is tinkling in their trousers with worry about what the Russians or the Chinese would do, think again!

What could the Russians do? Putin has plenty of problems of his own, and the continuous threat of Islamo-terrorists on his southern flank has been such that he might secretly thank us for removing Iran as a potential danger to anyone. The Chinese? All we have to do is guarantee them that they'll continue to get all the oil they want from Iran, no matter who is in charge there, and they'll be happy to sit back and mind their own business... a thing they've been good at for thousands of years of their history....

 

Uncle Ferd says dat means gas prices gonna go up...

Oil Prices Surge as Iran Ups Threats
01/03/12 - Oil prices surged Tuesday as Iranian missile test-fires and new threats added to concern that tension in the Strait of Hormuz may disrupt the delivery of crude oil to the U.S. and Europe.

 

It could be done easily enough if the Administration is willing to engage the Iranians militarily.

That's kind of a big If.

But if Iran was idiotic to try it, and the administration had the balls to do something about it, it would provide a great opportunity to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities.

 

whoa, a whole lot of ignorance here on blockades....Iran won't close the straights with navy/ships they'll do it with mines covered by shore based cruise missiles

estimated number of mines required to close the straights is 300 and Iran has thousands...once the mines are in place sweeping them out becomes problematic when surface ships are targeted by cruise missiles...any ship in the straights is a sitting duck and taking out the cruise missiles will be time consuming and difficult even Saddam's primitive scuds were never contained...


Iran claims it can close the straights at any time and the USA will claim it can keep them open, lots of big talk from both sides the truth is somewhere in between...

 

Iran mined the straits in 1988 too. Once their Navy is out of the way, the mines are just a clean up job.

 

Supertankers can absorb several mine hits without heavy damage. This happened in 1988 when the tanker Bridgeport was sent AHEAD of U.S. Navy ships to soak up mines after it hit one.

And firing cruise missiles into the Straits would be an invitation to all out war as the U.S. would be fully justified in conducting extensive and prolonged airstrikes to eliminate the threat.

And U.S. navy ships have proven abilities to down cruise missiles.

 

I would say a week only because I don't believe the navy would just sail in blasting. There would be a little bit of planning and assessing done in order to minimize civilian casualties as well as minimize our own casualties.

 

Answer: Until the U.S. Navy sneezes.

 

The ship wasn't called the Bridgeport it was the Bridgeton. It hit a mine damaging 2 forward storage tanks 24th July 1987 and was forced to head for Kuwait for repairs, it didn't return to the Gulf during the conflict. The brave American Navy decided they would follow it.

Most of the ships using the straits are not super tankers, they are smaller ships carrying refined products. With the Bridgeton on that day was the Gas Prince carrying 46,000 tons of liquid propane. If the Gas Prince had hit that mine it would have been a different story.

Following the July 24 mining of M.V. Bridgeton Admiral Crowe ordered a halt to convoy operations until sufficient mine countermeasures platforms could be put into place.

 

A couple of scuppered supertankers sunk in the strait and the US is going nowhere.

 

The US doesn't get its oil from the ME anymore. This would have an impact on Europe and China not the US. The USA gets the vast majority of its oil from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela...

 

beside, sinking those supertanker, which Iran doesn't own, would be a defacto declaration of war against the countries who own and operate them. This would amount to the same end result, no more Iranian navy...

 

So you must agree that the neoZionist boarding of non-Israeli ships in international waters- not to mention murdering their passengers- was an illegal act.

 

forget both of them. Worry about OBAMA and his Civilian Army!

 

what countries own supertankers? these are corporate ships covered by insurance...and most of the worlds shipping is registered in third world countries, Liberia, Panama, Philippines etc. and not a threat to Iran militarily....

 

Irans mini-subs are virtually undetectable...laying mines closes the straights to commercial traffic as insurance companies will not cover losses due to mine strikes, the effect to global economy will be crippling...

 

Ship are flagged... When you attack a flagged ship you are attaking that country.

 

No they ain't...

They have limited range and their port of call are well known. They would be tracked the moment they leave the dock or sunk before even attempting to do so.

 

Liberia and Panama are countries Iran should fear?...and minning isn't a direct attack it's closure, a no go zone, don't go there and there is no harm, damage isn't directed at any particular country...

 

ahh yes they are, diesel-electric subs are silent...

the mini-subs subs are coastal defense they don't need long range in the Persian gulf.... attacking a ship/sub at port when not at war? how does that work?

 

Diesel electric doesn't mean silent. Propellors aren't silent.
You watch too many movies...

And beside the waters aren't deep enough to hide them from detection, especially if a sunken ship can render the passage impraticable.