Israeli Strike on Iran Could Hike Gas to $7 a Gallon

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago
israeli strike on iran could hike gas to 7 a gallon

If you believe Iran will abandon its nuclear ambitions in the face of economic sanctions, there’s nothing to see here. If you believe there’s no way deny Iran The Bomb short of a military strike, the question becomes who and when? It’s hardly likely the Bush administration will want to engage in yet another military “adventure” before the next guy to accompany the football takes office. On the other hand, Bernard Baumohl thinks the Israelis want to get this thing done before Barack or John assumes the position (so to speak). ABC News reports that the Economic Outlook Group’s Chief Global Economist says a strike would disrupt oil prices (surprise!), one way or another. “It all depends on the success of the Israeli strike. If it was a quick, successful strike and Iran doesn’t block the Strait of Hormuz — a key oil route in the Persian Gulf — Baumohl sees a quick spike in oil prices and then a steady decline. He says that within three days of the strike oil could costs $175 to $225 a barrel. The record of $147.27 a barrel was reached back in July and oil today closed at less than $108. But within three months the price would fall because Iran’s nuclear weapons program would be destroyed or crippled. Oil would cost $70 to $85 a barrel. Of course, Baumohl has a more-dire scenario with oil prices between $200 and $300 a barrel. This happens if the strike fails, triggers a bigger war and the flow of oil is disrupted. In that case, the price of gas in America would climb to $5 to $7 a gallon.”

Join the conversation
4 of 35 comments
  • Lynn Ellsworth Lynn Ellsworth on Sep 08, 2008
    Both sides may use religion to justify their cause, but they would still be fighting over the land even if they were both atheists. The root cause is two groups that want to occupy the same plot of land, and neither one wants to be ruled over by the other. But if they were all atheist how would they distinguish between each other? By their football jerseys or by whether they were Ford or Chevy owners? We men are so stupid we could probably start a nuclear war over who had the best tennis racket so I guess we have to expect men to fight over who has the best imaginary friend as the comedian Carlin said.

  • Jkross22 Jkross22 on Sep 08, 2008

    RF, Considering the topic, this thread is amazingly free of nutjob and wingnut comments. Perhaps this is where McCain and Obama agree the most - we should get ourselves off the foreign oil asap. The sooner we stop paying those that loathe us, the better.

  • RedStapler RedStapler on Sep 08, 2008

    Reading all the comments on this make me hope the day comes soon(er) that we can all drive around in our Plug-in 80mpg cars and the transportation sector runs off of algae based bio-diesel. We would have some version of energy independence. The crappy governance and wars of the middle east would get the same mehpage 3 treatment that Africa now receives.

  • Jkross22 Jkross22 on Sep 09, 2008

    @ whatdoiknow: Iran appears to be a somewhat rational player, meaning they respond to incentives and punishment the way any other nation might. The hate speech of their leader has not been seriously challenged, and that has caused the fear most have of what he and the mullahs want to do. The problem is that there is little direct action we can take to limit Iran's nuclear expansion without causing a broader conflict. There are some indirect actions that might be used, though. With Russia's actions in Georgia, it would seem that the Russians would not want us, the Europeans or Israelis to arm the Georgians with advanced weapons to fight them with. Perhaps this can be used to help convince the Russians to end their support of Iran's nuclear program. Would have to wonder, though, what the reaction would be if the Russians destroy the Georgian pipeline and what it would to oil prices. Where's the Goracle with our solution, dammit?