General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI think it's likely that Iran is behind the tanker attacks
This a direct result of tRump's maximum pressure policy on Iran. You can only poke someone with a stick so long before they hit back.
Link to tweet
?s=19
spanone
(135,829 posts)Fingers will certainly be pointed at Iran as the mastermind behind these events. But the potential benefits to the Persian Gulf nation are outweighed by the risks. And even if Tehran isnt responsible, it will still suffer the consequences.
The first tanker to report a problem was the Front Altair. It was reported to be carrying 75,000 tons of naphtha, loaded in Abu Dhabi, to Japan, although it was signaling a destination of Kaosiung in Taiwan when it was damaged. The second vessel was the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous, which was sailing from Saudi Arabia to Singapore with a cargo of methanol.
A person whos heard local radio transmissions between ships in the region told Bloomberg that a torpedo attack is suspected to have caused an explosion and fire on the Front Altair. The managers of the Kokuka Courageous said in a statement that the 21 crew of the vessel abandoned ship after the incident on board which resulted in damage to the ships hull starboard side.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-13/iran-has-little-to-gain-from-oman-tanker-attacks
NYTIMES:
Iranian officials have denied any involvement in attacks on tankers. But in late May, John R. Bolton, President Trumps national security adviser, said that Iran was almost certainly responsible for the earlier attacks, and Mr. Pompeo agreed, saying that they were efforts by the Iranians to raise the price of crude oil.
Officials of other countries have been more cautious about publicly assigning blame. The United Arab Emirates described the attacks as state-sponsored, but did not specify a state.
Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E., both American allies, have long been at odds with Iran, and are backing opposing sides in the civil war in Yemen. But the sharpest recent changes have been in the United States-Iran relationship.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/13/world/middleeast/oil-tanker-attack-gulf-oman.html
NCjack
(10,279 posts)Last edited Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:47 PM - Edit history (1)
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)or David Corn to comment. I don't take bait because I can't swim with the fishes.
Wounded Bear
(58,648 posts)They're the ones wanting to take the Iranians out. Now that Traitor Trump is in power, they are probably getting a green light from the White House.
Va Lefty
(6,252 posts)blueinredohio
(6,797 posts)Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)Scoopster
(423 posts)It makes absolutely no sense that Iran would attack a Japanese tanker at the exact moment that the Japanese PM is in Tehran trying to keep all out war from breaking out between the US and Iran.
What makes more sense is that this was deliberately planned by someone else to piss off Shinzo Abe and frame Iran. My first bet would be Saudi Arabia. My second would be a mercenary group hired by the Trump Administration.
LuvNewcastle
(16,844 posts)I don't want to see this country go to war with anyone, especially with Trump in the White House. Such a war would be very controversial, to say the least, and would cause even more factional distrust and hostility.
panader0
(25,816 posts)and then proceed to sabotage the deal. Many questions here.
Claritie Pixie
(2,199 posts)I think they're behind it. With Trump and GOP blessings of course.
dhill926
(16,337 posts)Dave Starsky
(5,914 posts)They have religious crazies at the top who are in control of most of the money on the planet. They do this stuff for fun.
They were the country that was mostly behind 9/11, for crying out loud.
dalton99a
(81,468 posts)H2O Man
(73,536 posts)and buying yellow cake. Just ask Dick Cheney.
burrowowl
(17,639 posts)H2O Man
(73,536 posts)saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)unknown "source" are not proof of anything, nor are tweets from the current administration occupying our WH.
Without any evidence, your claim supports Bolton and the Chicken Hawks. imo
Voltaire2
(13,023 posts)that Iran did this. Instead it presents an uncontested fact: the RG is an agent of the Iranian state. How that proves that Iran did it is apparently an exercise left to the reader.
burrowowl
(17,639 posts)SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Seems to me Saudi Arabia has the most to gain from ruining the Abe visit, and ultimately, war with Iran. Oil prices spiked over the news today, and Pompeo is sabre rattling on TV, blaming Saudi Arabia rival Iran for everything, without an ounce of proof.
Jared's buddy Prince Salman got away with sawing a WaPo journalist alive in Saudi Arabia's Turkish embassy. I'm betting he thinks a false flag operation would be even easier to get away with.
Va Lefty
(6,252 posts)Link to tweet
?s=19
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)shanny
(6,709 posts)Celerity
(43,333 posts)bdamomma
(63,845 posts)Pompeo isn't honest either. Just another thug for Putin. Or what does he call them "Putin's Patriots".
Calculating
(2,955 posts)...
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)EleanorR
(2,390 posts)sarisataka
(18,632 posts)That would have a reason to do this and the capacity to successfully do it.
Iran is first on that list, the Saudis a close second.
That's funny and the exact opposite of reality. The IRGC will do whatever it thinks is best for the revolution whether or not it is good for Iran.
Now would Ali Khamenei approve attacks on tankers during Abe's visit or would the IRGC do it without asking for his approval, I don't know.
Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)sarisataka
(18,632 posts)But would they have access to technology to pull this op off?
If it was bombs on boards the ship, no problem. Just bribe your way aboard and plant a bomb. Magnetic mines are a bit harder to get, though not for a government sponsor. Placing them would also be fairly simple.
There are some reports of a torpedo which would be the most difficult, needing a submarine. That is going to be very difficult for any independent group and there will be traces. I really question if the torpedo report is accurate however as would be excessive.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)I'm assuming that the ships were only damaged, not destroyed?
sarisataka
(18,632 posts)Yes, very much more.
There are smaller torpedoes and those tankers are RFB, but they are not built to absorb damage like a warship. If it were a torpedo I would expect more damage and noticable listing of the ship.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)That something like this happens, and NOBODY on the planet is looking to the United States for leadership? That's the penalty for not having any credibility.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)spanone
(135,829 posts)Iran had no incentive to trust US
then along came john bolton
Insanity
bdamomma
(63,845 posts)we are outsiders and isolated now. We just have those hostile countries in our corner, who are out to destroy us anyway. tRump made sure of that.
dewsgirl
(14,961 posts)NutmegYankee
(16,199 posts)They have their own oil exports that cant be stopped by a war in the gulf, and getting Iran and the USA fighting would enhance their strategic interests since such a conflict would sap our strength.
rictofen
(236 posts)The torpedo's Russian.
WhiteTara
(29,704 posts)Iran has no incentive and the CIA has Bolton and Pompeo demanding a war somewhere.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)sandensea
(21,627 posts)Causus belli ain't a fancy term for indigestion, you know.
spanone
(135,829 posts)not directed at op.
Paladin
(28,254 posts)Something major to deflect public attention, with the election coming up. I'm getting serious Viet Nam vibes from what's going on, right now.
bdamomma
(63,845 posts)the American people will not tolerate another Middle East war. I guess we will see when the puppet meets with his handler at the G20.
All smiles I bet. Two thugs.