Election Year or Fear!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

‘2 different UK news outlets’ who just happen to be Starmer’s leading critics, The Sun and The Daily Telegraph. Entirely coincidental of course.

---

I think on balance I am happy to see Starmer not following the warmnonger Blair's strategy in joining in with the offensive actions against Iran, but that doesnt seem to have stopped Iranian counter strikes on British installations in Cyprus. Now it seems he's agreed to allowing US to use our airbases in their actions, in common with many other European countries, notably Greece.

iIs a delicate balance to try to achieve, especially in view of our non EU status and the relatively new trade deals with US and Starmer is doing OK in my view in this respect, trying to walk the tightrope - but for how long I dont know. Seems the Chinese are lining up behind Iran (no surprise there as its all about Chinese aceess to Iranian oil) and this escalation will heap more pressure on NATO.

Am struggling to see a good ending here as IMO its not about Iranian regime change per se, its about the bigger battle for economic dominance between US and China and cutting off Chinese access to energy by destabilising their biggest supplier, having just taken tighter control over their second biggest supplier in Venezuela. Can see maybe the Chinese moving in on Taiwan whilst the other two major powers focus on their own battles, but they for sure cannot sit back and watch their oil suppliers get consumed in this way.

Much as I think regime change in Iran is a laudable objective, I really dont think its the main point here, and Starmer is right to stand back from this for now - something I have to say through gritted teeth :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Well there is another route that can and will be used if the conflict continues, so prices will rise which might temper demand but doubt it will slump.

---

Well tradewinds reports that Hormuz has just been closed trapping 3200 ships inside the gulf. I will let them know your details so you can advise these alternative routes that shipowners and charterers clearly arent aware of

Clarksons suggest 112 crude carriers stuck amongst the 3200 which is 4% of the world fleet. Loadsa money to be made Swale in solving their problem

Interesting when Trump was saying Obama would attack Iran, which he didn't, Farage was posting saying we should stay out of other people's wars and it was wrong to bomb Iran. Now hes all for it.

They call starmer flip-flop but Farage changes his mind about as often as he changes his pants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SithHappens

Interesting when Trump was saying Obama would attack Iran, which he didn't, Farage was posting saying we should stay out of other people's wars and it was wrong to bomb Iran. Now hes all for it.

They call starmer flip-flop but Farage changes his mind about as often as he changes his pants.

---

I have no insight into the frequency of his pant changing or personal hygiene, but welcome to politics !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

Well tradewinds reports that Hormuz has just been closed trapping 3200 ships inside the gulf. I will let them know your details so you can advise these alternative routes that shipowners and charterers clearly arent aware of

Clarksons suggest 112 crude carriers stuck amongst the 3200 which is 4% of the world fleet. Loadsa money to be made Swale in solving their problem

---

The primary alternative to the Red Sea route is diverting vessels around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, which adds 10–14 days and roughly 3,500 nautical miles to Asia-Europe voyages. This rerouting increases fuel consumption, operating costs, and shipping rates.

There solved it for you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

I think on balance I am happy to see Starmer not following the warmnonger Blair's strategy in joining in with the offensive actions against Iran, but that doesnt seem to have stopped Iranian counter strikes on British installations in Cyprus. Now it seems he's agreed to allowing US to use our airbases in their actions, in common with many other European countries, notably Greece.

iIs a delicate balance to try to achieve, especially in view of our non EU status and the relatively new trade deals with US and Starmer is doing OK in my view in this respect, trying to walk the tightrope - but for how long I dont know. Seems the Chinese are lining up behind Iran (no surprise there as its all about Chinese aceess to Iranian oil) and this escalation will heap more pressure on NATO.

Am struggling to see a good ending here as IMO its not about Iranian regime change per se, its about the bigger battle for economic dominance between US and China and cutting off Chinese access to energy by destabilising their biggest supplier, having just taken tighter control over their second biggest supplier in Venezuela. Can see maybe the Chinese moving in on Taiwan whilst the other two major powers focus on their own battles, but they for sure cannot sit back and watch their oil suppliers get consumed in this way.

Much as I think regime change in Iran is a laudable objective, I really dont think its the main point here, and Starmer is right to stand back from this for now - something I have to say through gritted teeth :-)

---

Its difficult to establish what the aim is, but undoubtedly the "hawks" who are now in Trump's administration have long wanted to attack Iran, plus the view that Trump listens to the last person who speaks to him, then yes there is a possibility that its a wider strategy against China, but equally possible that Trump is rather fond of being an imperialistic super power throwing its weight around and removing leaders he doesn't like.

The problem is as you have suggested, is that China will see this behaviour and use it as an excuse to attack Taiwan, becuase the US, though often on rather shaky ground re invading other countries and attemptng regime change, generally hasn't gone about it without a reasonable excuse.

There is unfortunately a dangerous precedent being set here and with an increasingly unhinged and impetuous Trump no knowing quite where it will all end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SithHappens

Interesting when Trump was saying Obama would attack Iran, which he didn't, Farage was posting saying we should stay out of other people's wars and it was wrong to bomb Iran. Now hes all for it.

They call starmer flip-flop but Farage changes his mind about as often as he changes his pants.

---

Ah but now its his "mate" doing it, Farage has to suck up to him!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

The primary alternative to the Red Sea route is diverting vessels around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, which adds 10–14 days and roughly 3,500 nautical miles to Asia-Europe voyages. This rerouting increases fuel consumption, operating costs, and shipping rates.

There solved it for you!

---

Well done that solves a problem of avoiding Houthi attacks heading for the Red Sea (which havent restarted yet but are hugely likely to judging by the quadrupled war risk rates for Red Sea transits), but that does nothing to help get out of the Persian Gulf if Hormuz is closed. Look at the map next time. Youve solved a problem that was solved by the market about 2 years ago when it first arose - and isnt today's problem. Well done.

There isnt an option to prevent a trapping/blocking of ships in the Persian Gulf, which means they cant even get to the Red Sea still less consider diverting round the Cape.

At the moment Hormuz is no longer technically blocked but virtually nothing is going through it, so everything is backing up and inbound tankers are adopting a wait and see tactic. The odd vessel might try to run the straits at night AIS off and spoofing if they get desperate, or paid enough, and the Iranians are loading a few tankers at Kharg Island so they arent planning to mine anything (they need to keep exporting via dark fleet to keep economy rolling and the Chinese happy - who are the biggest market for sanctioned exports)

Normally 20 million bpd go out through Hormuz - currently bugger all apart from a few chancers maybe. Some oil stocks could be shunted down pipelines to Fujairah (via ADCOP) or Yanbu (via East-West) - but these only have capacities of 2m bpd and 0.8m bpd respectively - nothing like the capacity to handle the volumes and are probably in full use already.

So anyway, now you've solved a problem the market solved ages ago, any chance of addressing the one that I identified and matters today? An overland camel train might be inadequate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

The primary alternative to the Red Sea route is diverting vessels around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, which adds 10–14 days and roughly 3,500 nautical miles to Asia-Europe voyages. This rerouting increases fuel consumption, operating costs, and shipping rates.

There solved it for you!

---

Well done that solves a problem of avoiding Houthi attacks heading for the Red Sea (which havent restarted yet but are hugely likely to judging by the quadrupled war risk rates for Red Sea transits), but that does nothing to help get out of the Persian Gulf if Hormuz is closed. Look at the map next time. Youve solved a problem that was solved by the market about 2 years ago when it first arose - and isnt today's problem. Well done.

There isnt an option to prevent a trapping/blocking of ships in the Persian Gulf, which means they cant even get to the Red Sea still less consider diverting round the Cape.

At the moment Hormuz is no longer technically blocked but virtually nothing is going through it, so everything is backing up and inbound tankers are adopting a wait and see tactic. The odd vessel might try to run the straits at night AIS off and spoofing if they get desperate, or paid enough, and the Iranians are loading a few tankers at Kharg Island so they arent planning to mine anything (they need to keep exporting via dark fleet to keep economy rolling and the Chinese happy - who are the biggest market for sanctioned exports)

Normally 20 million bpd go out through Hormuz - currently bugger all apart from a few chancers maybe. Some oil stocks could be shunted down pipelines to Fujairah (via ADCOP) or Yanbu (via East-West) - but these only have capacities of 2m bpd and 0.8m bpd respectively - nothing like the capacity to handle the volumes and are probably in full use already.

So anyway, now you've solved a problem the market solved ages ago, any chance of addressing the one that I identified and matters today? An overland camel train might be inadequate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

The primary alternative to the Red Sea route is diverting vessels around the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, which adds 10?–14 days and roughly 3,500 nautical miles to Asia-Europe voyages. This rerouting increases fuel consumption, operating costs, and shipping rates.

There solved it for you!

---

You need to ease off on the politics and get your O level Geog books back out