By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 13:52 - Jun 13 by giant_stow
Zombie's link mentioned a torpedo as a possibility while the CNN blog says a mine (like you suggest) or even a two shells (on one ship).
Wasn't this the plot of at least one Jame s Bond film? ie. ship gets sunk to start a war? Has anyone asked Specta what it was doing at the time in question?
[Post edited 13 Jun 2019 13:53]
do you mean SPECTRE, or SMERSH.
[Post edited 13 Jun 2019 14:40]
1
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 14:41 - Jun 13 with 1835 views
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 14:48 - Jun 13 by Bluesquid
"Iran is the only country bordering the Gulf whose navy has submarines and the Revolutionary Guard have a couple of (surface) torpedo boats."
No other countries submarines have access to the Gulf then?
They do, but of the direct protagonists, only Iran does. As I said, I think a torpedo is unlikely. Neither do I think the Iranian navy would be likely to carry out such an attack (the IRG are very much a law unto themselves).
My money is on a non-deliberate mine strike. Or possibly a Houthi missile attack (both sides in Yemen have fast attack craft) attempting to disrupt Saudi/Gulf oil trade.
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 15:21 - Jun 13 by Guthrum
They do, but of the direct protagonists, only Iran does. As I said, I think a torpedo is unlikely. Neither do I think the Iranian navy would be likely to carry out such an attack (the IRG are very much a law unto themselves).
My money is on a non-deliberate mine strike. Or possibly a Houthi missile attack (both sides in Yemen have fast attack craft) attempting to disrupt Saudi/Gulf oil trade.
"the IRG are very much a law unto themselves"
Yes i've seen you mention that before, what do you actually mean by that?
Could you cite a few examples?
[Post edited 13 Jun 2019 15:39]
0
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 15:43 - Jun 13 with 1737 views
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 07:50 - Jun 13 by footers
Just in time for OPEC next week...
The US Shale oil breakeven price is 46-50 dollars. Current price is 51 dollars per barrel. Now who would want the oil price to go up? OPEC have deliberately set the oil production quotas so that the price hovers around 50dollars per barrel. As always, follow the money.
Don't believe a word I say. I'm only kidding. Or am I?
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 15:35 - Jun 13 by Bluesquid
"the IRG are very much a law unto themselves"
Yes i've seen you mention that before, what do you actually mean by that?
Could you cite a few examples?
[Post edited 13 Jun 2019 15:39]
Their command structure and polical control are completely independent of the Iranian armed forces, or even government to a large extent. It has its own economic interests, as well as military and political. Probably only the Supreme Leader, Khamenei, has real, direct authority over them.
Events like the seizure of the British navy boats and their crews in 2007. The bloodthirsty threats regularly issued by senior IRG personnel against potential adversaries. The alleged smuggling activities.
They are an ideological force, not operating under the kind of restraints one would expect for normal diplomacy and military activity.
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 23:35 - Jun 13 by Guthrum
Their command structure and polical control are completely independent of the Iranian armed forces, or even government to a large extent. It has its own economic interests, as well as military and political. Probably only the Supreme Leader, Khamenei, has real, direct authority over them.
Events like the seizure of the British navy boats and their crews in 2007. The bloodthirsty threats regularly issued by senior IRG personnel against potential adversaries. The alleged smuggling activities.
They are an ideological force, not operating under the kind of restraints one would expect for normal diplomacy and military activity.
"Events like the seizure of the British navy boats and their crews in 2007. The bloodthirsty threats regularly issued by senior IRG personnel against potential adversaries. The alleged smuggling activities."
I think the UK would have done the same had Iranian marines strayed into or very near UK waters. Alleged smuggling activities? yes of course, alleged.
And that's it? Some threats as well and that makes them a real law unto themselves?
Dear oh dear.
Anyway, 'Rapture' Mike says that Iran were responsible without presenting any evidence of course.
Mike Pompeo, the former CIA director, proudly admitted that he’s a liar, a cheater and a thief.
But we’re supposed to believe him today as him and his neocon buddies beat the drums for war with #Iran? Hard pass. pic.twitter.com/Jpc2scRiOv
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 23:51 - Jun 13 by Bluesquid
"Events like the seizure of the British navy boats and their crews in 2007. The bloodthirsty threats regularly issued by senior IRG personnel against potential adversaries. The alleged smuggling activities."
I think the UK would have done the same had Iranian marines strayed into or very near UK waters. Alleged smuggling activities? yes of course, alleged.
And that's it? Some threats as well and that makes them a real law unto themselves?
Dear oh dear.
Anyway, 'Rapture' Mike says that Iran were responsible without presenting any evidence of course.
Mike Pompeo, the former CIA director, proudly admitted that he’s a liar, a cheater and a thief.
But we’re supposed to believe him today as him and his neocon buddies beat the drums for war with #Iran? Hard pass. pic.twitter.com/Jpc2scRiOv
How many times does the US have to fabricate grounds for a war before people realise this is their MO? Look up the Romans, they were always doing it too. Cassus belli.
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 07:45 - Jun 14 by BackToRussia
How many times does the US have to fabricate grounds for a war before people realise this is their MO? Look up the Romans, they were always doing it too. Cassus belli.
The US have released footage today claiming to show an Iranian Republican Guard boat removing a mine which failed to explode from one of the tankers.
I am sure posters can fit it into their own narrative:
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 07:45 - Jun 14 by BackToRussia
How many times does the US have to fabricate grounds for a war before people realise this is their MO? Look up the Romans, they were always doing it too. Cassus belli.
"I know we've done it literally hundreds of times before, but not this time, no way. And we've go the video evidence to prove it. So there."
footers KC - Prosecution Barrister - Friend to all
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 23:51 - Jun 13 by Bluesquid
"Events like the seizure of the British navy boats and their crews in 2007. The bloodthirsty threats regularly issued by senior IRG personnel against potential adversaries. The alleged smuggling activities."
I think the UK would have done the same had Iranian marines strayed into or very near UK waters. Alleged smuggling activities? yes of course, alleged.
And that's it? Some threats as well and that makes them a real law unto themselves?
Dear oh dear.
Anyway, 'Rapture' Mike says that Iran were responsible without presenting any evidence of course.
Mike Pompeo, the former CIA director, proudly admitted that he’s a liar, a cheater and a thief.
But we’re supposed to believe him today as him and his neocon buddies beat the drums for war with #Iran? Hard pass. pic.twitter.com/Jpc2scRiOv
"I think the UK would have done the same had Iranian marines strayed into or very near UK waters."
"A year later, a British investigation report[2] was released which stated that the area in which the incident took place was not covered by any formal agreement between Iran and Iraq."
No they wouldn't. There is a difference from being "near" UK waters an "in" UK waters. They certainly wouldn't have paraded them on TV.
You're anti-western bias is astonishing for someone enjoying life in the west.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
0
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:01 - Jun 14 with 1603 views
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 07:58 - Jun 14 by footers
"I know we've done it literally hundreds of times before, but not this time, no way. And we've go the video evidence to prove it. So there."
Did the US fire a missile at a Saudi airport yesterday then? It's naive to think that no-one else in the region has agency and everything is nefarious US plot.
And that's not incompatible with stating that John Bolton has never seen a war he didn't want to be involved him and would clearly love another one.
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:01 - Jun 14 by Steve_M
Did the US fire a missile at a Saudi airport yesterday then? It's naive to think that no-one else in the region has agency and everything is nefarious US plot.
And that's not incompatible with stating that John Bolton has never seen a war he didn't want to be involved him and would clearly love another one.
It was the Iranians by proxy who fired a missile at the Saudi airport.
This website is full of anti-Western apologists though. No idea why.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
0
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:03 - Jun 14 with 1598 views
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 07:58 - Jun 14 by footers
"I know we've done it literally hundreds of times before, but not this time, no way. And we've go the video evidence to prove it. So there."
That's poor form mate, everything should be taken on merit, not be based on things from 50 years ago which is the narrative certain posters use on here.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
0
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:04 - Jun 14 with 1595 views
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:01 - Jun 14 by Steve_M
Did the US fire a missile at a Saudi airport yesterday then? It's naive to think that no-one else in the region has agency and everything is nefarious US plot.
And that's not incompatible with stating that John Bolton has never seen a war he didn't want to be involved him and would clearly love another one.
I'm just saying that ruling them out when they have such an impressive track record in these matters is questionable. Could have been anyone, including the US.
But it wasn't me.
Swear down.
footers KC - Prosecution Barrister - Friend to all
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:03 - Jun 14 by StokieBlue
That's poor form mate, everything should be taken on merit, not be based on things from 50 years ago which is the narrative certain posters use on here.
SB
Haven't said it was the US, but I'm not going to blindly exonerate anyone without evidence. Seems fair to me. Best to keep an open mind.
footers KC - Prosecution Barrister - Friend to all
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:07 - Jun 14 by footers
Haven't said it was the US, but I'm not going to blindly exonerate anyone without evidence. Seems fair to me. Best to keep an open mind.
Your post wasn't really doing that though, it was backing up a fallacious argument from BTR about it essentially being the US. He's certainly made his mind up, nothing open there.
Did you see the video I posted just now? That will be spun whichever way the individuals narrative goes.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
0
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:12 - Jun 14 with 1576 views
Iranian media claiming two tankers attacked in Gulf on 08:09 - Jun 14 by BackToRussia
Ah so this'll be the one genuine war in their history. Makes a change. Blow them to kingdom come, then.
You don't think the war of Independence, the Civil war, WW1, WW2 were genuine wars then? Since you don't seem to mind how long ago things happened they should surely be included.
Why do you actually hate the US so much? You literally take the side of whoever they are having an argument with on every subject. They are certainly far from perfect but it's not always their fault.
I accept it often is their fault but this jumping to blame before there is any evidence based of historical preadolescence is a deeply flawed argument.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
