Morning music
Saturday quiz
Some quite difficult questions again this week. I managed 6/10, thus beating political journalist John Rentoul, who scored 4/10. I knew the answers to questions 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10.
Talking point
I noticed that the following blog post from nearly 7 years ago, which received a few hits yesterday and today, has stood the test of time quite well:
See also:
[“According to The Wall Street Journal, Iran has begun mining the Hormuz Strait — the world’s main oil corridor. U.S. officials have confirmed that Tehran has placed about ten naval mines in this strategically important waterway.
These are specialized munitions that can operate at shallow depths. Some mines are just 90 centimeters below the water surface, while others are anchored to the seabed at depths of up to 50 meters. The warhead of most of these devices contains between 50 and 120 kilograms of explosives — enough to seriously damage a large tanker or surface ship.
The goal of the mine warfare operation is not mass destruction of ships. The mere threat of mines’ presence can paralyze movement through the strait. History shows that this is one of the most effective and cheapest means of pressure on maritime trade. Since World War II, naval mines have caused more damage to U.S. Navy ships than any other weapon.
The paradox of mine warfare is that inexpensive weapons are capable of causing colossal economic consequences. Even a few mines placed in a narrow strait can stop the flow of tankers carrying about 20% of the world’s oil and trigger a global energy crisis.]”
What that says to me is that the Iranian leadership have recognized (how could they not?) the air and sea superiority, indeed supremacy, of the US and its “tail wags dog” “ally”, Israel. The Iranian leadership may therefore be resigned to losing much, perhaps all, of their own oil production and transit as part of the damage from the war, and so have decided to go all-out to close (now, or soon) the Strait of Hormuz, in order to bring down the international economic order.
Should it so decide, Turkey could cut off almost all of Israel’s oil supply.
Apropos of nothing (?), I have never yet met a Kuwaiti that I could, even marginally, like, trust, or respect. Dishonest, unclean-looking, and unpleasant even by the low standards of the Gulf Arabs generally.
While I imagine it would be possible for American forces to take and make a bridgehead on some shore, or offshore island, and possible even keep that area occupied for a considerable time, the USA has not the strength, or the will, and certainly not the airlift capacity, to invade Iran and occupy it, or a large part of it.
Iran is the 17th-largest country by area in the world (Iraq is the 58th-), has about 93M inhabitants (Iraq has about 46M).
The land area alone is vast: about 7x the size of that of the UK, 3x the size of Ukraine and, while of course smaller than that of the USA (Iran is about a 6th of the size of the whole USA), still about the size of Alaska or, to put it another way, 4x the size of California 10x the size of Florida, or 12x the size of the State of New York.
Bottom line— the USA, were it to attempt invasion, would be unable to occupy or hold more than a small part of Iran. Kharg Island, maybe, but only at the cost of constant drone and rocket attack on that island and on all ships in the Strait of Hormuz.
The Iranians seem to be repeating their mistake of 2025, attacking all over the place rather than concentrating their resources on a few key targets (which to me would be the ben-Gurion Airport, central Tel Aviv, and the Dimona nuclear area. That would leave many other potential targets unattacked, but not everywhere can be attacked with sufficient force. It was once said that “to govern is to choose“; same applies.
Ian Robert Millard 