Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
48 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I think it's likely that Iran is behind the tanker attacks (Original Post) Va Lefty Jun 2019 OP
Bloomberg: Iran Has Little to Gain From Oman Tanker Attacks spanone Jun 2019 #1
I dunno. We should wait for Putin to speak. nt NCjack Jun 2019 #2
Facts. dewsgirl Jun 2019 #28
I'm waiting for Malcolm Nance saidsimplesimon Jun 2019 #3
It wouldn't surprise me if it was a false flag op from the Saudis... Wounded Bear Jun 2019 #4
Entierly possible. Va Lefty Jun 2019 #5
Agreed blueinredohio Jun 2019 #19
... possibly utilising the MEK: Ghost Dog Jun 2019 #21
Doubtful. Scoopster Jun 2019 #6
That's exactly what I think. LuvNewcastle Jun 2019 #47
It doesn't make sense to me that Iran would make a deal with Japan panader0 Jun 2019 #7
Who benefits most from this attack? Saudi Arabia. Claritie Pixie Jun 2019 #8
yep... dhill926 Jun 2019 #25
Absolutely. Saudi Arabia is the troll of planet Earth. Dave Starsky Jun 2019 #30
+1. Aided by Netanyahu dalton99a Jun 2019 #46
And 9/11, Pearl Harbor, H2O Man Jun 2019 #9
Tonkin Gulf burrowowl Jun 2019 #38
Yes, definitely. H2O Man Jun 2019 #48
Tweets from an saidsimplesimon Jun 2019 #10
The tweet doesn't offer any evidence Voltaire2 Jun 2019 #40
Or maybe it's a Gulf of Tonkin ploy to get us into war. burrowowl Jun 2019 #11
Why would Iran attack tankers carrying Japanese cargo, while meeting with Shinzo Abe? SunSeeker Jun 2019 #12
I think it possible that hardliners in Iranian Govt. may have won an argument Va Lefty Jun 2019 #14
What was so embarrassing to Abe in Khomeini's tweet? SunSeeker Jun 2019 #23
I don't think they are that stupid. shanny Jun 2019 #13
No, not buying this at all. nt Celerity Jun 2019 #15
me either bdamomma Jun 2019 #43
This absolutely reeks of being a false flag of some kind Calculating Jun 2019 #16
No uponit7771 Jun 2019 #17
false flag nt EleanorR Jun 2019 #18
I can easily think of six countries sarisataka Jun 2019 #20
What is known about the MEK? Ghost Dog Jun 2019 #22
Interesting group sarisataka Jun 2019 #24
Wouldn't a torpedo do quite a lot more damage as well? Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2019 #27
Typically sarisataka Jun 2019 #32
Isn't it telling, but in a very bad way gratuitous Jun 2019 #26
The US is now part of the problem, not part of the solution. nt SunSeeker Jun 2019 #31
Yep...trump lit the fuse when he pulled out of the Iran Nuclear Deal and imposed more sanctions spanone Jun 2019 #34
oh yes we are bdamomma Jun 2019 #44
No, too convenient. dewsgirl Jun 2019 #29
I think Russia. NutmegYankee Jun 2019 #33
The pitch is too high rictofen Jun 2019 #35
This is a false flag operation WhiteTara Jun 2019 #36
... Scurrilous Jun 2019 #37
I think it's likely it was John "new Pearl Harbor" Bolton. sandensea Jun 2019 #39
Only a fool would take this administration at it's word. spanone Jun 2019 #41
I think trump is desperate for a new war. Paladin Jun 2019 #42
exactly bdamomma Jun 2019 #45

spanone

(135,829 posts)
1. Bloomberg: Iran Has Little to Gain From Oman Tanker Attacks
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:05 PM
Jun 2019
Two oil tankers have been damaged in a suspected attack in the waters between the United Arab Emirates and Iran as they were leaving the Persian Gulf. This is the second incident in four weeks, and raises the question of who gains what from them.

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 isn’t 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 who’s 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 ship’s hull starboard side.”


https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-13/iran-has-little-to-gain-from-oman-tanker-attacks


NYTIMES:

Despite Mr. Pompeo’s assertion, it was not immediately clear how the most recent incidents unfolded or who was involved, just as the circumstances of last month’s attacks remain murky. The two ships that were struck on Thursday appeared to have been more seriously damaged than those hit in May.

Iranian officials have denied any involvement in attacks on tankers. But in late May, John R. Bolton, President Trump’s 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

saidsimplesimon

(7,888 posts)
3. I'm waiting for Malcolm Nance
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:07 PM
Jun 2019

or David Corn to comment. I don't take bait because I can't swim with the fishes.

Wounded Bear

(58,648 posts)
4. It wouldn't surprise me if it was a false flag op from the Saudis...
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:08 PM
Jun 2019

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.

Scoopster

(423 posts)
6. Doubtful.
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:12 PM
Jun 2019

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)
47. That's exactly what I think.
Fri Jun 14, 2019, 09:00 AM
Jun 2019

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)
7. It doesn't make sense to me that Iran would make a deal with Japan
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:14 PM
Jun 2019

and then proceed to sabotage the deal. Many questions here.

Claritie Pixie

(2,199 posts)
8. Who benefits most from this attack? Saudi Arabia.
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:18 PM
Jun 2019

I think they're behind it. With Trump and GOP blessings of course.

Dave Starsky

(5,914 posts)
30. Absolutely. Saudi Arabia is the troll of planet Earth.
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 05:10 PM
Jun 2019

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.

saidsimplesimon

(7,888 posts)
10. Tweets from an
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:20 PM
Jun 2019

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)
40. The tweet doesn't offer any evidence
Fri Jun 14, 2019, 08:45 AM
Jun 2019

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.

SunSeeker

(51,550 posts)
12. Why would Iran attack tankers carrying Japanese cargo, while meeting with Shinzo Abe?
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:24 PM
Jun 2019

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.

bdamomma

(63,845 posts)
43. me either
Fri Jun 14, 2019, 08:52 AM
Jun 2019

Pompeo isn't honest either. Just another thug for Putin. Or what does he call them "Putin's Patriots".

sarisataka

(18,632 posts)
20. I can easily think of six countries
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 03:49 PM
Jun 2019

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.

The IRGC does not go rogue in the strategic arena

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.

sarisataka

(18,632 posts)
24. Interesting group
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 04:37 PM
Jun 2019

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)
27. Wouldn't a torpedo do quite a lot more damage as well?
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 04:51 PM
Jun 2019

I'm assuming that the ships were only damaged, not destroyed?

sarisataka

(18,632 posts)
32. Typically
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 05:25 PM
Jun 2019

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)
26. Isn't it telling, but in a very bad way
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 04:48 PM
Jun 2019

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.

spanone

(135,829 posts)
34. Yep...trump lit the fuse when he pulled out of the Iran Nuclear Deal and imposed more sanctions
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 05:43 PM
Jun 2019

Iran had no incentive to trust US

then along came john bolton

Insanity

bdamomma

(63,845 posts)
44. oh yes we are
Fri Jun 14, 2019, 08:54 AM
Jun 2019

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.

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
33. I think Russia.
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 05:37 PM
Jun 2019

They have their own oil exports that can’t 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.

WhiteTara

(29,704 posts)
36. This is a false flag operation
Thu Jun 13, 2019, 06:27 PM
Jun 2019

Iran has no incentive and the CIA has Bolton and Pompeo demanding a war somewhere.

sandensea

(21,627 posts)
39. I think it's likely it was John "new Pearl Harbor" Bolton.
Fri Jun 14, 2019, 02:29 AM
Jun 2019

Causus belli ain't a fancy term for indigestion, you know.

Paladin

(28,254 posts)
42. I think trump is desperate for a new war.
Fri Jun 14, 2019, 08:48 AM
Jun 2019

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)
45. exactly
Fri Jun 14, 2019, 08:56 AM
Jun 2019

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.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I think it's likely that ...