The Middle East conflict

[Citybreak1]

Covid-style restrictions must NOT be used to combat energy crisis, pandemic experts warn

Countries around the world have introduced measures rarely seen since lockdowns were enforced

www.gbnews.com

Covid-style restrictions must not be used to combat the energy crisis sparked by the war in Iran, experts involved in the pandemic response argue.

Any thoughts on this? More Covid rules on way?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Any thoughts on this? More Covid rules on way?

Wouldn't have thought so. Fuel rationing (particularly diesel; apparently the UK is a net exporter of petrol so we should be able to manage that OK) isn't wildly unlikely though, as is a considerable reduction in the availability of air travel.

 

[Citybreak1]

Wouldn't have thought so. Fuel rationing (particularly diesel; apparently the UK is a net exporter of petrol so we should be able to manage that OK) isn't wildly unlikely though, as is a considerable reduction in the availability of air travel.

Working from home and shops restaurant closing at 9 caught my eye and free public transport I believe that’s happening right now outside UK

 

[Cdd89]

a considerable reduction in the availability of air travel [isn't unlikely]

In theory yes, but there are huge pockets of opportunity, in that the Gulf carriers are pretty desperate right now. The reduction eastbound is only for people not willing to fly with those airlines.

In my case I've been on two trips since this conflict began, to Singapore and Tokyo, booked at very short notice on Emirates and Etihad, for less than £1000 round trip in business class.

 

[brad465]

I'm willing to bet this story is being suppressed in the US right now, because this would be very embarrassing:

Photos show heavily damaged US radar jet at Saudi base

US Central Command has not yet publicly commented on the incident.

www.bbc.co.uk

Verified pictures show a US command and control aircraft has been destroyed at an air base in Saudi Arabia.
The pictures appear to have been first shared by a Facebook page carrying US military news. They show the E-3 Sentry aircraft appears to have been split in two.
We've confirmed the photos were taken at the Prince Sultan air base about 100km (62 miles) south-east of the Saudi capital Riyadh. Features seen in the pictures, including pylons, storage units and markings on paved areas, matched with satellite imagery.
US Central Command has not yet publicly commented on the incident. The BBC has asked for comment.
On Friday a US official told Reuters that 12 US personnel had been wounded, two of them seriously, in an Iranian military attack on the air base. The Wall Street Journal newspaper reported that at least two US refuelling aircraft were also damaged.
On Sunday Iran's IRGC-linked Fars news agency said a Shahed drone had struck the E-3 aircraft.
BBC Verify has also seen an E-3 in this location in a satellite image captured on 11 March. We cannot say if they are the same aircraft.
In one of the verified pictures the aircraft's tail number is visible. Using this we checked flight-tracking site Flightradar24 which showed it was airborne near the base on 18 March.
A satellite image taken on Friday appears to show a fire on the air base apron, about 1,600m (5,200ft) east of the E-3. It is not clear whether this was part of the same attack in which the aircraft seen in these pictures was damaged.

 

[najaB]

I'm willing to bet this story is being suppressed in the US right now, because this would be very embarrassing:

It is embarrassing, but it has made the mainstream press.

 

[Annetts key]

The problem with invading Iran from Iraq is that it's around 500km from the closest point of the border to Tehran, a good 200km of which is very mountainous. Not the same as the mostly flat desert between Kuwait and Baghdad.

And take Kharg Island? Great, now you're holding an island some 15km from the coast of your enemy, 200km from your closest supply point.

And what waterway does the US Navy have to travel through to get to this island? Oh, that will be the Strait of Hormuz...
Yes, they could go by air, but helicopters would be targets for manpads and whatever air defences Iran has left...

Covid-style restrictions must NOT be used to combat energy crisis, pandemic experts warn

Countries around the world have introduced measures rarely seen since lockdowns were enforced

www.gbnews.com

Any thoughts on this? More Covid rules on way?

GB News hyping up their core brain dead audience?

Elsewhere measures are being taken to conserve energy and therefore conserve natural gas and oil derived fuels, but it's nothing like lockdown or any of the other COVID19 restrictions.

And none of that applies in the U.K. and is not likely to apply. We get the vast majority of our natural gas from other sources (and consumption is falling as summer approaches), there is no problem with petrol. The only problem may be with diesel and fuel oil.

I'm willing to bet this story is being suppressed in the US right now, because this would be very embarrassing:

Photos show heavily damaged US radar jet at Saudi base

US Central Command has not yet publicly commented on the incident.

www.bbc.co.uk

Bit hard to suppress, the pictures and story are all over YouTube. Here's one YouTuber who asks why the aircraft weren’t dispersed across multiple airfields and why hasn’t the US learned anything from the war in Ukraine?...

On March 27th, an Iranian ballistic missile struck Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia. About a dozen Americans were injured. Multiple aircraft were damaged, including something we don’t have a lot of: An E-3 Sentry AWACS.

And when the photos came out… yeah… “damaged” might not be the right word.

The question isn’t whether Iran got a lucky hit.
The question is:Why were high-value assets sitting still long enough to get hit in the first place?
This isn’t a new problem. Ukraine has been dealing with this exact threat for years.
The U.S. Air Force already has a doctrine designed to solve this.

It’s called Agile Combat Employment (ACE).
Disperse your aircraft.
Move them frequently.
Make targeting harder.

So… why weren’t we doing that?

 

[ainsworth74]

Kharg will be a successful misadventure because controlling it will not actually open up the strait, but will be some sort of propaganda boost to see Americans on some Iranian soil. As it stands you can rule nothing out with America's thick as pig**** leadership. This has to be the least talented, least wise administration ever. An entirely optional crisis.

Absolutely. Maybe I'll be wrong but I reckon that if we've not got US forces on Kharg within a few weeks then we've been (and the men and women who would have pointlessly died) have been extremely lucky.

The problem with invading Iran from Iraq is that it's around 500km from the closest point of the border to Tehran, a good 200km of which is very mountainous. Not the same as the mostly flat desert between Kuwait and Baghdad.

Oh for sure. There's a reason Iraq struggled with their invasion of Iran in the 1980s and it wasn't just Iranian perseverance...

But still it's one thing to launch an operation, even a probably doomed one, from land. It's another thing to do it across the sea.

And take Kharg Island? Great, now you're holding an island some 15km from the coast of your enemy, 200km from your closest supply point.

Well yeah is stupendously dumb and will serve to get a good number of American's killed for nothing (along with a good number of Iranians). Still reckon they're going to do it though. For some reason the administration seems to have become obsessed with it.

I'm willing to bet this story is being suppressed in the US right now, because this would be very embarrassing:

Photos show heavily damaged US radar jet at Saudi base

US Central Command has not yet publicly commented on the incident.

www.bbc.co.uk

And yet when eventually most of the RAF's heavy lift and refuelling capacity is destroyed in the open on Akrotiri or Brize Norton it'll somehow still come as a shock to our senior military leadership. After all there were no signs whatsoever that keep these aircraft parked in the open was a bad idea. None at all...

 

[najaB]

And yet when eventually most of the RAF's heavy lift and refuelling capacity is destroyed in the open on Akrotiri or Brize Norton it'll somehow still come as a shock to our senior military leadership

I would agree with you if we lost several aircraft in an attack on Cyprus, but if missiles are raining down on Brize Norton we've got bigger problems to worry about than heavy lift or extending fighter range.

 

[ainsworth74]

I would agree with you if we lost several aircraft in an attack on Cyprus, but if missiles are raining down on Brize Norton we've got bigger problems to worry about than heavy lift or extending fighter range.

Won't require missiles. Just an equivalent of Operation Spiderweb. But even if it was missiles, it's a pretty poor start to the resulting war if the RAF is crippled in the opening salvo simply because we keep parking all our heavy lift in the open and in nice neat rows.

 

[TravelDream]

I think the warmongers in the US administration seem to think an invasion of Iran would be as straightforward as their invasion of Iraq. A brief look at a map shows this won't be the case. Tehran is 3,500 feet above sea level, for starters. Mountains are great for guerrillas.

As for the Pahlavis, Reza was a CIA and MI6 puppet. When he got too big for his boots and lost his CIA protection in retaliation for the OPEC oil crisis, he was quickly overthrown. The idea that the Iranians would have his son back is laughable.

Surely even the idiots in the US administration know any invasion of Iran would be an unmitigated disaster? Iran/ Persia has been a fortress nation for millennia due to its geography.So it's worse than what you say....

In Iraq, the invasion was easy-ish, but controlling the country was difficult.

In Iran, the invasion itself would be massively more difficult and make controlling Iraq look like a walk in the park.

Your second point is very true. Support for the Shah in Iran must be in the fraction of percent level. The idea he will return to rule is nonsense.

Well yeah is stupendously dumb and will serve to get a good number of American's killed for nothing (along with a good number of Iranians). Still reckon they're going to do it though. For some reason the administration seems to have become obsessed with it.

It's scary how bad this could get. Iran has obviously been building up defences given the US Trump has been announcing this repeatedly.

Won't require missiles. Just an equivalent of Operation Spiderweb. But even if it was missiles, it's a pretty poor start to the resulting war if the RAF is crippled in the opening salvo simply because we keep parking all our heavy lift in the open and in nice neat rows.

An incredibly advanced mission. Does Iran have the capability?
Though perhaps with help from Russia and the like, it might be possible.

 

[AlterEgo]

It's scary how bad this could get. Iran has obviously been building up defences given the US Trump has been announcing this repeatedly.

Iran considers Israel and the USA an existential threat and has been preparing for a war even bigger than this since 1979.

The Iranians are ideologically bonkers but Iran is an educated and advanced society compared to Afghanistan and pre-invasion Iraq. I don't think their competence should be underestimated.

 

[The Ham]

Covid-style restrictions must NOT be used to combat energy crisis, pandemic experts warn

Countries around the world have introduced measures rarely seen since lockdowns were enforced

www.gbnews.com

Any thoughts on this? More Covid rules on way?

I doubt anyone would be overly concerned if they were told that they could WFH 3 or 4 days a week rather than have to go to the office 3 days a week.

I doubt anyone's going to be furloughed.

I doubt we're going to be told not to meet up with people.

I doubt that people would mind if the roads were to be a bit less busy (I'm fairly sure that speeds on motorways have reduced a bit already as people drive more efficiently), with people choosing to reduce their travel to Dave a bit of money.

Bottom line, what are people fearful of to link things back to COVID?

If there's guidance, then it's unlikely to be significant and generally stuff which most people would be reasonably happy to do.

If there's going to be spending, it'll be in far smaller amounts. As I've highlighted in other threads, of the total government spend of £33,000 per year per tax payer to provide all buses for free would cost around £400 (and some of that is already government spending due to existing funding).

It's clearly a click bait story, aimed to annoy those who think that they'd be OK if only the government let everyone do what they wanted and didn't tax them.

 

[najaB]

Won't require missiles. Just an equivalent of Operation Spiderweb. But even if it was missiles, it's a pretty poor start to the resulting war if the RAF is crippled in the opening salvo simply because we keep parking all our heavy lift in the open and in nice neat rows.

Of course anything is possible, but realistically speaking, if any of our enemies can get within drone range then either we've done a piss-poor job of border control or we really annoyed the French.

 

[Harpo]

Covid-style restrictions must NOT be used to combat energy crisis, pandemic experts warn

Countries around the world have introduced measures rarely seen since lockdowns were enforced

www.gbnews.com

Any thoughts on this?

Yes. Don’t link thinking & the GBeebies target audience.

 

[Cdd89]

The US simply won't leave while shipping is de facto blockaded by Iran – I feel this is as close to a certainty as anything can be in this conflict, but I'm interested if anyone else feels otherwise; in particular would Trump decide to abandon and say that Iran blockading the strait is the problem of the world and his 'ungrateful' allies?

Well, to my considerable (genuine) surprise, it sounds like this is exactly what Trump may be planning.

Per this WSJ article from today:

President Trump told aides he’s willing to end the U.S. military campaign against Iran even if the Strait of Hormuz remains largely closed, administration officials said, likely extending Tehran’s firm grip on the waterway and leaving a complex operation to reopen it for a later date.

In recent days, Trump and his aides assessed that a mission to pry open the chokepoint would push the conflict beyond his timeline of four to six weeks. He decided that the U.S. should achieve its main goals of hobbling Iran’s navy and its missile stocks and wind down current hostilities while pressuring Tehran diplomatically to resume the free flow of trade. If that fails, Washington would press allies in Europe and the Gulf to take the lead on reopening the strait, officials said.

 

[The Ham]

Well, to my considerable (genuine) surprise, it sounds like this is exactly what Trump may be planning.

Per this WSJ article from today:

Pressing allies (last bit of the article quoted) to help hasn't gone so well for him so far, I doubt it'll change much in the foreseeable future.

Indeed, with much of Europe looking like it's deviating from the US (Spain is closing it's airspace to US aircraft involved in the war, France looking to separate itself from US software and almost everywhere looking at renewables and not "drill baby drill" for it's energy; as well as many of not all considering how their strategic defence might work apart from the US), I'm not sure that any amount of pressing is likely going to help get the outcome he wants.

A more statesman like president who hadn't done things like threatened to take land from another alley, was supporting Ukraine and wasn't reducing sanctions on Russia may have got a more favourable response.

As it is, maybe many in the US have the president they deserve (unfortunately that still leaves a lot feeling like they've just have to wait 2 years for things to improve enough so that it's not getting any worse)

 

[edwin_m]

I'm willing to bet this story is being suppressed in the US right now, because this would be very embarrassing:

Photos show heavily damaged US radar jet at Saudi base

US Central Command has not yet publicly commented on the incident.

www.bbc.co.uk

The BBC is being charitable with "heavily damaged", it's a total write-off although some of the equipment may be salvageable. And being based on the obsolete 707 airframe it's not easily replaceable either.

Ukraine has hit at least one of the Russian equivalents.

Iran/ Persia has been a fortress nation for millennia due to its geography.

Britain and the USSR took conquered Iran during WW2 to prevent Germany getting the oilfields, and installed Reza Pahlavi in place of his less pliable father. Notably however this was a land invasion from Iraq and from the north, whereas the US would have to go in from the coast.

.

In August 1941, Britain and the Soviet Union invaded neutral Iran to secure vital oil supplies and open the Persian Corridor—a key Lend-Lease route to the Soviet Union during WW2.

This video covers the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran, including Reza Shah, German influence, the Trans-Iranian Railway, and the rapid collapse of Iranian resistance. It also explores how Iran became the “bridge to victory,” funnelling thousands of vehicles and supplies to the Eastern Front.

A crucial but often overlooked WWII campaign, with lasting consequences for Iran’s political future.

0:00 - Intro
0:25 - Why was Iran Important?
4:27 - The Allies Turn the Screw
7:48 - Iran Joins the Allies (whether it likes it or not)
11:14 - The Bridge to Victory

 

[Yew]

In Iran, the invasion itself would be massively more difficult and make controlling Iraq look like a walk in the park.

I'm honestly unsure, I feel that a lot of normal people in Iran are fed up with the Ayatollah and would welcome democracy, but I fear that Trump wants a US-Corporation friendly puppet. Similarly, dropping bombs is a great way to help the undecided to decide against you.

Your second point is very true. Support for the Shah in Iran must be in the fraction of percent level. The idea he will return to rule is nonsense.

Indeed, I think it's unlikely that there is any meaningful support for him, even as a powerless figurehead.

 

[jon0844]

Pressing allies (last bit of the article quoted) to help hasn't gone so well for him so far, I doubt it'll change much in the foreseeable future.

Indeed, with much of Europe looking like it's deviating from the US (Spain is closing it's airspace to US aircraft involved in the war, France looking to separate itself from US software and almost everywhere looking at renewables and not "drill baby drill" for it's energy; as well as many of not all considering how their strategic defence might work apart from the US), I'm not sure that any amount of pressing is likely going to help get the outcome he wants.

A more statesman like president who hadn't done things like threatened to take land from another alley, was supporting Ukraine and wasn't reducing sanctions on Russia may have got a more favourable response.

As it is, maybe many in the US have the president they deserve (unfortunately that still leaves a lot feeling like they've just have to wait 2 years for things to improve enough so that it's not getting any worse)

The EU is now pushing 'pay by bank' as a means of making payments online, doing away with a lot of the reliance on Visa and MasterCard for mobile and online payments.

They're also starting to work on reducing or removing their usage of American tech firm services like Microsoft Office (365) and so on.

Europe has made it quite clear it is making plans to go it alone and not rely on or even ask for help from the USA - and that will also mean not helping the USA either.

 

[JamesT]

The BBC is being charitable with "heavily damaged", it's a total write-off although some of the equipment may be salvageable. And being based on the obsolete 707 airframe it's not easiily replaceable either.

The US has been prevaricating over replacing the E3s for many years. There is a 737-based system, the E7, which is in use with several countries already (including the UK). Perhaps this might be the push to start ordering it. Or if they want a quick fix, they started retiring E3s in 2023. There might be one in the boneyard that can be patched up back into service.

 

[Tetchytyke]

In theory yes, but there are huge pockets of opportunity, in that the Gulf carriers are pretty desperate right now. The reduction eastbound is only for people not willing to fly with those airlines.

I think @Bletchleyite was more making the point that shortages of aviation fuel would mean fewer flights. An airline can be desperate for passengers but if there's no fuel they're not going anywhere.

Any thoughts on this? More Covid rules on way?

Sounds like GBeebies trying to stoke up their braindead audience.

If there are fuel shortages then there will be rationing. And this, in turn, will mean that shops may shut earlier, workplaces may ask people to work from home, etc.

FWIW I don't think there'd be much shortage of electricity, it's more road fuel that would be the issue. Many of us are old enough to remember the fuel protests of the early 2000s. It caused chaos but people weren't locked up in their homes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think @Bletchleyite was more making the point that shortages of aviation fuel would mean fewer flights. An airline can be desperate for passengers but if there's no fuel they're not going anywhere.

Yes, this. I could see for instance BA stopping operating domestics to keep fuel for the long hauls as a first step (as the rail/coach/car alternatives are much more available in this case).

 

[scarby]

I doubt anyone would be overly concerned if they were told that they could WFH 3 or 4 days a week rather than have to go to the office 3 days a week.

I am sure those running and working for businesses that rely on people to be out and about would disagree.

After the past years with the effects of Brexit, an appallingly-handled pandemic and the war in Ukraine, just to mention a few, what lots of us are crying out for is a serious period of stability and strong economic growth.

 

[The Ham]

I am sure those running and working for businesses that rely on people to be out and about would disagree.

After the past years with the effects of Brexit, an appallingly-handled pandemic and the war in Ukraine, just to mention a few, what lots of us are crying out for is a serious period of stability and strong economic growth.

Up to a point I would agree with you, however:
- if people are saving money by not having to go into the office everyday they might use that money when they are in/at other times (personally I'd rather spend money on something for me than something for my car)
- the other factors listed are likely to be a much more significant issue

However the main point was that in comparison to a "COVID type lockdown" the impact would basically be zero.

 

[brad465]

What the actual...

Trump says US will leave Iran 'whether we have a deal or not'

The president says any deal with Tehran is "irrelevant" to when the US leaves the conflict, claiming that day could come in two to three weeks.

www.bbc.co.uk

'Go get your own oil!' Trump says as he tells countries 'just take it' from Strait of Hormuz​

US President Donald Trump says countries "like the United Kingdom" who can't get jet fuel because of the restrictions around the Strait of Hormuz should “build up some delayed courage, go to the Strait, and just TAKE IT".

In a post on Truth Social, he writes countries will “have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us," addressing countries "which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran".

"Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done," the post adds, ending with: “Go get your own oil!”

 

[RichJF]

I'm convinced Trump is not actually told what's happening - aka Putin in Ukraine.

Either that he's so senile that he imagines thing in his junk food fed dreams then wakes up & thinks they're actual reality!

 

[Cloud Strife]

The Iranians are ideologically bonkers but Iran is an educated and advanced society compared to Afghanistan and pre-invasion Iraq. I don't think their competence should be underestimated.

What we're seeing now is that they're much more organised than the Americans thought they were. Their command structures haven't collapsed, they're clearly in a position to continue keeping Hormuz blocked indefinitely, and the pain that they're inflicting on America and her allies is quite significant.

IMO, the end result of this will be an agreement between Iran, the Gulf states and Europe that Hormuz will be reopened as long as there's no supply to America or American companies that way. America's isolation will continue as a result, the Gulf states will likely look to Europe as defence partners, and I could see the American forces in the Middle East being politely told to leave after they failed to protect their interests. Qatar came out today and said that the Straits of Hormuz are a "regional matter", which is fascinating.

I'm convinced Trump is not actually told what's happening - aka Putin in Ukraine.

I have the feeling that he's being deliberately misinformed about the actual chances of victory, that is, no-one is daring to tell him that the Iranians won't surrender and that their forces are intact. That idiot in the Pentagon is now talking about "regime change" in Iran, but there's no sign whatsoever of such a thing actually happening.

 

[Three-Nine]

What the actual...

Trump says US will leave Iran 'whether we have a deal or not'

The president says any deal with Tehran is "irrelevant" to when the US leaves the conflict, claiming that day could come in two to three weeks.

www.bbc.co.uk

Would this be a good time to remind Mr. Trump that the last time the UK asked for US help in one our little wars it took two years for them to get up off their a… posteriors?

(I am fully aware that there was a lot of co-operation before official US involvement in WWII, American volunteers in Fighter Command, etc etc. I am merely applying the same amount of consideration to my reply as Mr. Trump… )

 

[Tetchytyke]

Qatar came out today and said that the Straits of Hormuz are a "regional matter", which is fascinating.

Qatar are in a funny position. They've generally been the most pragmatic in their approach to Iran, certainly compared to the UAE and Saudi Arabia. It's partly what caused all the diplomatic issues between Qatar and the UAE/Saudi about ten years ago.

But Qatar are, apparently, absolutely raging that Iran thanked them for this by blowing up their gas plant.

Islamabad talks signal emergence of new four-nation bloc in Middle East

Unlikely grouping of Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey steps up efforts to broker ceasefire and curb dominance of Iran and Israel

www.theguardian.com

From the above article, Turkey's statements are more interesting:

At the weekend, Hakan Fidan, Turkey’s foreign minister, and İbrahim Kalın, the director of Turkish intelligence, urged the Gulf states to see the war’s wider context and realise the risks they were running if they encouraged an outcome in which Israel emerged stronger.

Kalın said: “Among the intended objectives of this war is not only elimination of Iran’s nuclear capability but something more dangerous, the laying of the groundwork for a conflict that could last decades among the region’s foundational nations – Turks, Kurds, Arabs and Persians. It would pave the way for a prolonged civil war and blood feuds,” he said.

“We know very well that those who started this war are trying to create new facts on the ground in Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinian territories and elsewhere through policies of destruction, annexation and occupation. Attacks by Iran on Gulf countries are unacceptable,” Kalin stressed. “But we must never forget who started the war.”

Fidan, in a lengthy interview with A Haber TV on Friday, argued Israel’s goal was for Islamic countries to fall out with one another, allowing it to broaden the anti-Iran coalition. “Unfortunately, the region is being drawn step by step into a game scripted by Israel,” he said. “Gulf countries should not fall for Israel’s game.”