say the Suez Canal has troubles/closes. How hard would it be for us to go in and re-open it? - Page 2

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - say the Suez Canal has troubles/closes. How hard would it be for us to go in and re-open it? (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 1/30/2011 1:08:21 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Serious question, I don't know much about what it would entail for us to step in and get things moving again.

I really don't think it would be that hard for us to do it...who would try to stop us and could they really pose a serious threat?

You know it's not our canal, right?

Maybe we should change that. If it really came down to it and Egypt went into the shitter I'd be fine with annexing the canal zone and letting the Israelis get whatever parts of the Sinai we don't want.

Who's paying for that?

Posted: 1/30/2011 1:18:41 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Serious question, I don't know much about what it would entail for us to step in and get things moving again.

I really don't think it would be that hard for us to do it...who would try to stop us and could they really pose a serious threat?

You know it's not our canal, right?

Maybe we should change that. If it really came down to it and Egypt went into the shitter I'd be fine with annexing the canal zone and letting the Israelis get whatever parts of the Sinai we don't want.

Who's paying for that?

The troops.

Posted: 1/30/2011 1:20:24 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why does everyone assume that it's going to be the US that does it??? It's the Europeans that stand to lose the most if the Canal gets shutdown. If anything, they'll be the ones intervening.

Ironic, considering the last time France and Britain tried that Americans prevented them from carrying their plan through (Eisenhower was afraid of the Soviet response). No European country is going to get stuck in that mess again, particularly after America stabbed its European allies in the back last time around.

Seriously? A whole lot of history has happened since then, from the formation and evolution of NATO, to the fall of the Soviet Union, the the growth of global Islamic terrorism. You might was well argue the UK would not support the US in some issue because we fought against them for independence in the 18th century.

The Suez crisis did not take place in the 18th century, but in 1956.
You would be surprised how fresh that memory still is in White Hall and Quay d'Orsay. It was only very recently widely debated in the UK media, after certain documents relating to the crisis were made public.
Just because you don't know history doesn't mean everybody else doesn't either.

Early cold war politics will have very little influence on any national decisions made my any government today. Period. There is just so much more at stake and that has happened in so many other areas. It might make good TV, but that's it.

Au contraire. Not only do 20th century politics play pivotal role in today's decision-making in Europe, but even much older historical precedents. Political discourse in Europe is rife with references to distant past. If you had been in Europe during the late unpleasantries in Jugoslavia, you would have become thoroughly familiar with the rich and diverse repercussions of the year 1389, for instance. Compared to that the Suez crisis was very recent, and a major international embarrassment to both France and the UK. Any European military intervention there would be doomed to carry the 'Suez stigma' from day one, which would be the kiss of death in particular to Sarkozy and his dreams of another term in the Elysee. Neither would another adventure in the Suez do much good to Cameron, who would be instantly likened to Anthony Eden.

Posted: 1/30/2011 1:21:14 PM EDT

[#4]

Suez Canal isn't as valuable as it once was. To small for super tankers. It's closure would hurt Europe more than us. It would hurt Egypt worst of all.

If we were stupid enough to try and take it would fairly simple to sink a block ship in it. Pointless exercise.

Incredibly dumb idea.

Posted: 1/30/2011 1:25:25 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
We need to build a new Suez Canal, through Israel.

IDf got across the Suez Canal in the Yom Kippur War. Give it back to them

Posted: 1/30/2011 1:32:49 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why does everyone assume that it's going to be the US that does it??? It's the Europeans that stand to lose the most if the Canal gets shutdown. If anything, they'll be the ones intervening.

Ironic, considering the last time France and Britain tried that Americans prevented them from carrying their plan through (Eisenhower was afraid of the Soviet response). No European country is going to get stuck in that mess again, particularly after America stabbed its European allies in the back last time around.

Seriously? A whole lot of history has happened since then, from the formation and evolution of NATO, to the fall of the Soviet Union, the the growth of global Islamic terrorism. You might was well argue the UK would not support the US in some issue because we fought against them for independence in the 18th century.

The Suez crisis did not take place in the 18th century, but in 1956.
You would be surprised how fresh that memory still is in White Hall and Quay d'Orsay. It was only very recently widely debated in the UK media, after certain documents relating to the crisis were made public.
Just because you don't know history doesn't mean everybody else doesn't either.

Early cold war politics will have very little influence on any national decisions made my any government today. Period. There is just so much more at stake and that has happened in so many other areas. It might make good TV, but that's it.

Au contraire. Not only do 20th century politics play pivotal role in today's decision-making in Europe, but even much older historical precedents. Political discourse in Europe is rife with references to distant past. If you had been in Europe during the late unpleasantries in Jugoslavia, you would have become thoroughly familiar with the rich and diverse repercussions of the year 1389, for instance. Compared to that the Suez crisis was very recent, and a major international embarrassment to both France and the UK. Any European military intervention there would be doomed to carry the 'Suez stigma' from day one, which would be the kiss of death in particular to Sarkozy and his dreams of another term in the Elysee. Neither would another adventure in the Suez do much good to Cameron, who would be instantly likened to Anthony Eden.

Almost ALL political discourse is rife with references to the past. It is WHICH past narrative come to play and WHEN that is key. I simply disagree in your assertion in this regard, due to the unique nature of those early UN/Cold War years, the very different world we live in now, and the parties who would stand to gain most.

Posted: 1/30/2011 1:36:30 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:

The Suez Canal provides a large amount of capital to Egypt. It's not likely it would be closed, and my sense is that the Egyptian armed forces would preclude this as it would lead beyond a regime change to a failed state.

Thank you for posting something that makes good sense.

Posted: 1/30/2011 2:08:47 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The Suez Canal provides a large amount of capital to Egypt. It's not likely it would be closed, and my sense is that the Egyptian armed forces would preclude this as it would lead beyond a regime change to a failed state.

Thank you for posting something that makes good sense.

Expect cost of living price increases for passage.

Posted: 1/30/2011 2:26:22 PM EDT

[#9]

OP - you are just wishing.

The operation of that canal or any canal requires engineers and maintenance people who will show up on the job. Are going to pull them out of a hat? Are you going to guarantee, in some fashion, safety for locals if other locals don't want them to go to work?

The last time that the canal was blocked, it took only a dozen sunk ships. Yeah, I know, our navy is so mighty that taking care of Somali pirates was not a problem and putting arms and men on every merchant vessel will be no problem.

Taking an objective and maintaining control of an objective are two completely different matters. When you start running supplies into a war zone, you end up with IEDs aimed at the supply trucks.

OP, this country is lucky as hell. When the Turks yanked permission for our invasion fleet to land, cross part of Turkey and attack, the US had two choices. Choice 1 was to put your tail between your legs and bring home the troops, ships and material. Choice 2 was to send the invasion fleet west and south through the Suez Canal, go around the south of the Arabian Penn and come back up to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. You are lucky as hell that Saddam did not bomb/destroy/block the canal or the US would have been defeated before it even got into combat.

The WWII vets are dead. The Korean War vets are retired. Ditto for those of us who served in the 1960s. The First Gulf War soldiers are gone. So, yeah, we re-institute the draft and send over troops in about 6 months to re-open the Suez Canal.

Posted: 1/31/2011 12:51:02 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The Suez Canal provides a large amount of capital to Egypt. It's not likely it would be closed, and my sense is that the Egyptian armed forces would preclude this as it would lead beyond a regime change to a failed state.

Thank you for posting something that makes good sense.

Expect cost of living price increases for passage.

Maybe, but not much. The figure I heard today was that only ~8% of the worlds maritime traffic uses the Suez.

Posted: 1/31/2011 1:28:23 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The Suez Canal provides a large amount of capital to Egypt. It's not likely it would be closed, and my sense is that the Egyptian armed forces would preclude this as it would lead beyond a regime change to a failed state.

Thank you for posting something that makes good sense.

Expect cost of living price increases for passage.

Maybe, but not much. The figure I heard today was that only ~8% of the worlds maritime traffic uses the Suez.

"only"??

The Suez canal is extraordinarily important to oil traffic. http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/world_oil_transit_chokepoints/Suez.html

http://community.nasdaq.com/News/2011-01/watch-the-suez-for-impact-on-shipping.aspx?storyid=55462

Posted: 1/31/2011 1:34:11 PM EDT

[#12]

Difficult but feasible.

Figure out that French and British troops almost managed to do it in 1956, so why not a proper US task force?

Ah yes. Too bad that president Eisenhower stopped British-French in their attempt to take over the channel at that time...