June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:46 pm

June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Post by Alexis » Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:55 am

Two oil tankers have been attacked in the Gulf of Oman today:
- Front Altair with dead weight tonnage (DWT) 110,000 t
- Kokuka Courageous with DWT 27,000 t

Both crews have been evacuated to Iran and are safe. The ships are on fire, probably lost.

Given total DWT of the global oil tankers fleet of circa 960 millions tons, about 0.014% of global tanker fleet has been eliminated today.

Not so much of course... on the other hand, one wouldn't want such events to be repeated too often :|

User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:46 pm

Map of the attack site

Post by Alexis » Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:00 am

It isn't yet clear how the tankers were attacked. Words about "torpedos" as well as "surface attacks" have been spelt.

One thing is clear: this is a serious attack, not an incident. Nobody can mistakenly fire on two different targets in succession.

Here's a map. Note that Front Altair's trajectory includes a sharp change of direction. Did they attempt escaping an incoming attack? Is it just the ship deriving because its motors have been stopped?

Image

User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:46 pm

Four possible culprits

Post by Alexis » Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:08 am

I can mention four hypotheses at this stage about the identity and sponsors of the attackers... starting with the remark that people in charge are not always in control :|

1. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards or the rest of Iran's clientele want to send a "message" to the opposite side, at the risk of provoking a confrontation, or even they are seeking confrontation for itself

2. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of US services or the rest of the United States' clientele - Israel, Saudi Arabia - want to provoke a war between the United States and Iran that they deem in their own interest and have organised a false flag attack

3. Khamenei has decided to send a "signal" that the US oil blockade against Iran will provoke retaliation, in application of the hard line he outlined by explicitly approving this remark by Iranian President Rouhani in July 2018 "if Iran's oil export is blocked, no other country in the region can export oil either".

4. Trump decided that a confrontation with Iran is necessary and ordered a false flag attac to prepare it, with idea for example that economic pressure on Tehran will not produce a sufficiently rapid result or that a war in an election year would be too dangerous, it is better to do so before


Personally, Scenario 4 would rather surprise me, it doesn't look like the Donald's ways. As for the other three... they are all relatively likely, I would say. :|

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 2932
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Four possible culprits

Post by Sertorio » Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:12 am

Alexis wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:08 am
I can mention four hypotheses at this stage about the identity and sponsors of the attackers... starting with the remark that people in charge are not always in control :|

1. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards or the rest of Iran's clientele want to send a "message" to the opposite side, at the risk of provoking a confrontation, or even they are seeking confrontation for itself

2. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of US services or the rest of the United States' clientele - Israel, Saudi Arabia - want to provoke a war between the United States and Iran that they deem in their own interest and have organised a false flag attack

3. Khamenei has decided to send a "signal" that the US oil blockade against Iran will provoke retaliation, in application of the hard line he outlined by explicitly approving this remark by Iranian President Rouhani in July 2018 "if Iran's oil export is blocked, no other country in the region can export oil either".

4. Trump decided that a confrontation with Iran is necessary and ordered a false flag attac to prepare it, with idea for example that economic pressure on Tehran will not produce a sufficiently rapid result or that a war in an election year would be too dangerous, it is better to do so before


Personally, Scenario 4 would rather surprise me, it doesn't look like the Donald's ways. As for the other three... they are all relatively likely, I would say. :|
I fully agree with your thinking on this. Whatever the true explanation may be, I hope people will realize the dangers of a confrontation with Iran. It isn't worth it.

neverfail
Posts: 4234
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Four possible culprits

Post by neverfail » Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:34 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:12 am
Alexis wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:08 am
I can mention four hypotheses at this stage about the identity and sponsors of the attackers... starting with the remark that people in charge are not always in control :|

1. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards or the rest of Iran's clientele want to send a "message" to the opposite side, at the risk of provoking a confrontation, or even they are seeking confrontation for itself

2. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of US services or the rest of the United States' clientele - Israel, Saudi Arabia - want to provoke a war between the United States and Iran that they deem in their own interest and have organised a false flag attack

3. Khamenei has decided to send a "signal" that the US oil blockade against Iran will provoke retaliation, in application of the hard line he outlined by explicitly approving this remark by Iranian President Rouhani in July 2018 "if Iran's oil export is blocked, no other country in the region can export oil either".

4. Trump decided that a confrontation with Iran is necessary and ordered a false flag attac to prepare it, with idea for example that economic pressure on Tehran will not produce a sufficiently rapid result or that a war in an election year would be too dangerous, it is better to do so before


Personally, Scenario 4 would rather surprise me, it doesn't look like the Donald's ways. As for the other three... they are all relatively likely, I would say. :|
I fully agree with your thinking on this. Whatever the true explanation may be, I hope people will realize the dangers of a confrontation with Iran. It isn't worth it.
I would like to add my voice to Sertorio's in endorsement too, Alexis. Great analysis!

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2165
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Four possible culprits

Post by Milo » Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:39 pm

neverfail wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:34 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:12 am
Alexis wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:08 am
I can mention four hypotheses at this stage about the identity and sponsors of the attackers... starting with the remark that people in charge are not always in control :|

1. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards or the rest of Iran's clientele want to send a "message" to the opposite side, at the risk of provoking a confrontation, or even they are seeking confrontation for itself

2. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of US services or the rest of the United States' clientele - Israel, Saudi Arabia - want to provoke a war between the United States and Iran that they deem in their own interest and have organised a false flag attack

3. Khamenei has decided to send a "signal" that the US oil blockade against Iran will provoke retaliation, in application of the hard line he outlined by explicitly approving this remark by Iranian President Rouhani in July 2018 "if Iran's oil export is blocked, no other country in the region can export oil either".

4. Trump decided that a confrontation with Iran is necessary and ordered a false flag attac to prepare it, with idea for example that economic pressure on Tehran will not produce a sufficiently rapid result or that a war in an election year would be too dangerous, it is better to do so before


Personally, Scenario 4 would rather surprise me, it doesn't look like the Donald's ways. As for the other three... they are all relatively likely, I would say. :|
I fully agree with your thinking on this. Whatever the true explanation may be, I hope people will realize the dangers of a confrontation with Iran. It isn't worth it.
I would like to add my voice to Sertorio's in endorsement too, Alexis. Great analysis!
Good analysis.

I say the US could swat Iran like a fly, while fighting two other wars.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 3496
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Four possible culprits

Post by Doc » Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:43 pm

Milo wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:39 pm
neverfail wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 1:34 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:12 am
Alexis wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:08 am
I can mention four hypotheses at this stage about the identity and sponsors of the attackers... starting with the remark that people in charge are not always in control :|

1. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards or the rest of Iran's clientele want to send a "message" to the opposite side, at the risk of provoking a confrontation, or even they are seeking confrontation for itself

2. Both Khamenei and Trump don't want to risk war. But "hard" and poorly controlled elements of US services or the rest of the United States' clientele - Israel, Saudi Arabia - want to provoke a war between the United States and Iran that they deem in their own interest and have organised a false flag attack

3. Khamenei has decided to send a "signal" that the US oil blockade against Iran will provoke retaliation, in application of the hard line he outlined by explicitly approving this remark by Iranian President Rouhani in July 2018 "if Iran's oil export is blocked, no other country in the region can export oil either".

4. Trump decided that a confrontation with Iran is necessary and ordered a false flag attac to prepare it, with idea for example that economic pressure on Tehran will not produce a sufficiently rapid result or that a war in an election year would be too dangerous, it is better to do so before


Personally, Scenario 4 would rather surprise me, it doesn't look like the Donald's ways. As for the other three... they are all relatively likely, I would say. :|
I fully agree with your thinking on this. Whatever the true explanation may be, I hope people will realize the dangers of a confrontation with Iran. It isn't worth it.
I would like to add my voice to Sertorio's in endorsement too, Alexis. Great analysis!
Good analysis.

I say the US could swat Iran like a fly, while fighting two other wars.
So which of the usual suspects have limpet mines that apparently were used?
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

neverfail
Posts: 4234
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Four possible culprits

Post by neverfail » Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:35 pm

Doc wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:43 pm
So which of the usual suspects have limpet mines that apparently were used?
Everyone! You could likely buy them on the illegal arms market.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 3496
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Four possible culprits

Post by Doc » Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:18 pm

neverfail wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 6:35 pm
Doc wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 3:43 pm
So which of the usual suspects have limpet mines that apparently were used?
Everyone! You could likely buy them on the illegal arms market.
There are media reports that the US has an Iranian boat on video removing one of the mines that did not explode. IE removing the evidence.
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

neverfail
Posts: 4234
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Four possible culprits

Post by neverfail » Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:37 pm

Doc wrote:
Thu Jun 13, 2019 8:18 pm

There are media reports that the US has an Iranian boat on video removing one of the mines that did not explode. IE removing the evidence.
If the US Coast Guard were to discover an unexploded mine floating off your coastline, would it not go to pains to remove it?

Post Reply