We stand at a turning point, but as is common at such a juncture, nobody knows exactly what is going to come next. By bombing Iran's nuclear facilities, the United States is now at war, but what that will mean going forward is really anyone's guess right now.

So far, the consequences have been muted. [Editorial note: We are purposely avoiding using the word "fallout" here, because in the context of bombing a nuclear facility that word has to be reserved for its original literal meaning.] Iran launched a counterattack today, but on such a small scale that it didn't do any damage. Is this the opening shot in a larger campaign, or is it a face-saving ploy by the Iranian regime designed mostly for the benefit of their own citizens (to show that they're "fighting back")? They're in the midst of a larger war with Israel right now, but U.S. military targets are a lot closer to their shores than Israel -- meaning they can use short- and medium-range missiles that can't reach Israeli soil to attack us. Militarily, the United States is a distraction for Iran's war with Israel, but that doesn't mean they will back down.

Oil prices are remarkably stable right now, at least in the immediate aftermath of the American attack on Iran. The price of oil went up a bit this weekend, but then came down today after the Iranian attack was so ineffective. The oil market seems to be betting on not much blowback from the situation in Iran. This could always change, though. Iran could, for example, start targeting oil production facilities in other countries, just to destabilize the markets.

The biggest outstanding question is whether Iran will attempt to shut down the Strait of Hormuz or not. This would be a lot more significant than lobbing missiles at a U.S. base in the region, because it would affect 20 percent of the world's oil deliveries. There was news over the weekend that the Iranian legislature had approved shutting down all shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, but this has to be approved by the leaders of Iran before it actually happens. By some estimates, shutting this waterway down could almost double the price of a barrel of oil, so this would mean much more significant consequences for the world economy.

However, shutting down the Strait of Hormuz is not a painless choice for the Iranians to make. It would be somewhat economically suicidal for them, in fact, since all the oil they sell to China has to pass through the Strait. If they mine it or otherwise make it impossible for tankers to pass through, they will be cutting off a huge chunk of their own country's income. Since they're already in the middle of a war, this could be absolutely devastating and the economic unrest it might unleash in Iran would be tough for them to weather. It might even result in the people rising up and overthrowing their government (although this is just speculation, I should add). Even if things don't get that drastic, it would be far from painless for Iran to make this move.

They might go ahead and do so anyway, because it would hurt everyone else too -- including us. Donald Trump is already worried that gas prices might spike, but he has no real way of preventing it. He sent out a message on social media today trying to browbeat America's oil companies into keeping prices down, but that will have little effect if the price of oil goes up. It's not like the gas companies are going to suddenly start selling gasoline at a loss, after all. If the Strait of Hormuz is shut down -- even for a short period -- there will be direct consequences for everyone at the gas pumps. And while it's easy for Americans to support Trump's war right now (before such consequences happen), it will be a lot more complicated if it hits drivers in the pocketbook. It'll be obvious to everyone that any price hikes are the direct result of Trump's decision to go to war with Iran, so support for that decision could go way down if gas prices go way up. Right now, though, most people (including the oil markets) are betting that Iran is only going to launch small-scale symbolic attacks on American forces, and that they won't shut the Strait down. But in a war, things can change quickly.

The bigger picture in all of this is what will happen to Iran's nuclear program. Although Trump is blustering about having "obliterated" the targets we struck, nobody knows whether that is true or not. Did we completely destroy the underground facilities? Were they heavily damaged? Will they ever be able to be used again? We simply don't know, at this point.

Another unanswered question -- even if we did completely destroy the targeted facilities -- is whether or not we destroyed their stockpiles of enriched uranium or not. The uranium in question was described over the weekend as being "able to fit in the trunks of 10 cars." It's not all that bulky, in other words. And it might have been removed from the facilities where it was being kept before the attacks, and moved to a secret location. Nobody knows whether that is true or not -- the enriched uranium might not have been moved, and might have been destroyed in the U.S. attacks. The same questions are being asked about the centrifuges required to enrich uranium as well -- had they been relocated before the attack, or were they destroyed? These questions are important because the answers to them could either mean Iran has suffered a massive setback in their nuclear program or whether they're essentially just as close to making actual weapons as they were before the attack.

This was the main reason for the attack, after all -- to degrade Iran's nuclear program. They could respond by deciding it's not worth the effort after all and negotiate an end to all their enrichment and other movement towards attaining nuclear weapons. They could also respond by doubling down and moving even further towards producing bombs than they ever have before. If they did successfully remove the enriched uranium and the centrifuges, they'd probably have to prepare new sites but they would still be roughly where they were before the attacks began. And this time, they might decide that playing the game of "Will we or won't we?" over producing a bomb got them nowhere, whereas actually having nuclear weapons would change the military equation in their favor.

There are a lot of unanswered questions, obviously. Things could work out for the best -- Iran might not launch any more attacks and might keep the Strait of Hormuz open. They could even agree to completely and permanently dismantle their nuclear program once and for all. But that's the best-case scenario. There are other outcomes that could equally happen, some of which would be far worse. The next few days and the next few weeks will (hopefully) bring some clarity to the situation, but for now we'll all have to watch the developments as they happen.

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant