Recent site activity

Navigation

Regional‎ > ‎Countries‎ > ‎Iran‎ > ‎A nuclear Iran is a threat to oil‎ > ‎

A nuclear Iran would use oil as a weapon

Background and Context


Reasons to agree:
  1. "An 'Intolerable' Threat". Wall Street Journal. February 3, 2006: "A nuclear Iran could also wield a predominating influence in OPEC. It could disrupt maritime traffic in the Persian Gulf and force the U.S. Navy out of its narrow, shallow waters. It could menace Europe, and eventually the U.S. homeland, as its ballistic missile capabilities develop. It could arm Palestinian terrorists with sophisticated weapons, turning Gaza into a risk not just for Israel but the entire Mediterranean basin." 
  2. The real risks of a nuclear Iran in the region will cause the oil markets to react, raising oil prices significantly out of concern for a sudden crisis that would cut off supplies and disrupt revenues for months or years. These higher oil prices would significantly disrupt the global economy.
  3. The Nonproliferation Policy Education Center argues on 9/13/04 that, "A nuclear-ready Iran could be emboldened to manipulate oil prices upward. It might attempt this either by threatening the freedom of the seas (by mining oil transit points as it did in the l980s or by threatening to close the Straits of Hormuz) or by using terrorist proxies to threaten the destruction of Saudi and other Gulf state oil facilities and pipelines... Iran has already deployed anti-shipping missiles at Qeshm, Abu Musa Island and on Sirri Island, all of which are in range of shipping through the Strait. It has also occupied and fortified three islands inside the shipping lanes of the Strait of Hormuz –Abu Musa, The Greater Tunbs and the Lesser Tunbs. Given that one-fifth of the world’s entire oil demand flows through the Straits (as well as roughly a quarter of America’s supply of oil) and no other nation that has fortified its shores near Hormuz, an Iranian threat to disrupt commerce there would have to be taken seriously by commercial concerns (e.g., insurers and commodity markets) and other nations."
R2A(+): 1       R2AA(+): 0       R2DA(-): 0    
Images that agree
  1.  

Common Interest:
  1.  

Interest of those who agree



Web-pages that agree:



Values that agree:

Alternative proposals



Subpages

Subpage Listing


External links and resources:

    1.  

    Opposing Interest:
    1.  

    Interest of those who disagree
    1.  


    1.  

    Web-pages that disagree:

    1.  

    Web-pages that disagree:

    1.  
    1.  

    1.  


    It is suggested that we consider the belief that: 
    1. "x" is a reason to disagree with the belief that:
    2. "y"
    Setting aside the validity of the 1st point, what percentage of its strength should be used to oppose the 2nd belief?  ______ (Between 0% and 100%)

    Reasons to believe that the current score is too high:

    1.  


    # of reasons to agree: 0
    # of reasons to disagree: -0
    # of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0
    # of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0
    Total Idea Score: 0

    The current price to buy stock in this belief is $0.95 per share
    The Idea Stock Exchange score for this idea is: +3-1=2

    I am trying to brainstorm reasons to agree and disagree. Please help me!

    Join the debate! Just leave a comment, and I’ll add it to the correct location. Once I get some programmers to help me, this will be automatic.
     
    Evaluate the above conclusion (also known as a belief or thesis).
      Comments