June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Discussion of current events
Jim the Moron
Posts: 1617
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: Backtracking...

Post by Jim the Moron » Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:26 pm

Milo wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:06 pm
neverfail wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:40 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:49 am
Apparently these mines were put on the ships in port. The mines exploded in international waters where the Iranians tried to remove an unexplored mine. Purportedly the ship all dock in Iranian ports.
What for? The only reason why any oil tanker would want to dock at an Iranian port would be in order to load up with oil. Since Iran is currently subject to US sanctions it means that only the tanker ships of sanctions busting states like the PRC would normally enter an Iranian oil port. None of these to my knowledge has been attacked.

Instead, the ships were empty tankers of sanctions observing nations like Japan that were bound for ports on the Arabic side of the Gulf to load up there. It makes no sense for any such ships to put in to an Iranian port first then leaving empty to then visit an oil loading terminal on the other side of the Gulf.

It might well be the Iranians damaging the vessels (even sinking some) for the sake of sending out a very rude diplomatic "message" to the effect "we have the means to cut off the World's main seaborne supply of oil if you push us too far" It is hard to see how the Iranians could plant limpet mines on ships hulls so far out to sea undetected however.

Which is why I still question the credibility of such allegations.
Frankly this incident only makes sense if it was a opp designed to increase American involvement in the region.

But one should not assume that those who give the orders know what they are doing.

It just occurred to me now that good equipment combined with burlesque ineptitude spells classic Saudi Arabia!
More "classic Saudi Arabia . . ."

"Saudi Arabia demands 'decisive' response to Gulf oil tanker attacks"
http://www.dw.com/en/saudi-arabia-deman ... a-49220859

Now, who do you suppose the Saudis wish to deliver decisive response? What about the Saudis taking decisive action? What else are they going to use all their F-15's for - flyovers of public beheadings?

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2151
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Backtracking...

Post by Milo » Sat Jun 15, 2019 10:01 pm

Jim the Moron wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:26 pm
Milo wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 10:06 pm
neverfail wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 7:40 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:49 am
Apparently these mines were put on the ships in port. The mines exploded in international waters where the Iranians tried to remove an unexplored mine. Purportedly the ship all dock in Iranian ports.
What for? The only reason why any oil tanker would want to dock at an Iranian port would be in order to load up with oil. Since Iran is currently subject to US sanctions it means that only the tanker ships of sanctions busting states like the PRC would normally enter an Iranian oil port. None of these to my knowledge has been attacked.

Instead, the ships were empty tankers of sanctions observing nations like Japan that were bound for ports on the Arabic side of the Gulf to load up there. It makes no sense for any such ships to put in to an Iranian port first then leaving empty to then visit an oil loading terminal on the other side of the Gulf.

It might well be the Iranians damaging the vessels (even sinking some) for the sake of sending out a very rude diplomatic "message" to the effect "we have the means to cut off the World's main seaborne supply of oil if you push us too far" It is hard to see how the Iranians could plant limpet mines on ships hulls so far out to sea undetected however.

Which is why I still question the credibility of such allegations.
Frankly this incident only makes sense if it was a opp designed to increase American involvement in the region.

But one should not assume that those who give the orders know what they are doing.

It just occurred to me now that good equipment combined with burlesque ineptitude spells classic Saudi Arabia!
More "classic Saudi Arabia . . ."

"Saudi Arabia demands 'decisive' response to Gulf oil tanker attacks"
http://www.dw.com/en/saudi-arabia-deman ... a-49220859

Now, who do you suppose the Saudis wish to deliver decisive response? What about the Saudis taking decisive action? What else are they going to use all their F-15's for - flyovers of public beheadings?
Well perhaps the occasional carpet bombing of Houthi outposts

neverfail
Posts: 4209
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Not just ornaments for the Saudi crown.

Post by neverfail » Sat Jun 15, 2019 11:10 pm

Milo wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 10:01 pm
Jim the Moron wrote:
Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:26 pm

Now, who do you suppose the Saudis wish to deliver decisive response? What about the Saudis taking decisive action? What else are they going to use all their F-15's for - flyovers of public beheadings?
Well perhaps the occasional carpet bombing of Houthi outposts
Which shows that they have some practical use for those F-15s after all.

User avatar
lzzrdgrrl
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:18 pm
Location: Okie Doke

Re: June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Post by lzzrdgrrl » Mon Jun 17, 2019 8:49 pm

Chronic Conflict in the Global World: Right at Your Doorstep or on Your Computer

Image
Fears that the Gulf of Oman will be the new Gulf of Tonkin are unlikely to come true. It is much more probable that Iran's decades-long low-intensity war with the U.S. will continue as usual. Iran killed 600+ U.S. troops during OIF, a fact downplayed by the previous administrations. But if that fact didn't drive Trump to go openly kinetic, a few more attacks on third-country tankers are unlikely to.
https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/th ... of-shadow/
I have a certain notoriety among the lesser gods........

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 3483
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Post by Doc » Mon Jun 17, 2019 9:09 pm

It is pretty much a given that the Iranians are the guilty party here. Word is that Trump is more interested in giving Iran a bloody nose rather than all out war.
“"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

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2151
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Post by Milo » Mon Jun 17, 2019 9:17 pm

Doc wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 9:09 pm
It is pretty much a given that the Iranians are the guilty party here. Word is that Trump is more interested in giving Iran a bloody nose rather than all out war.
The real concern is not the conflict or the casualties, it's that the strait is only 70 miles wide in places. If you blew up the right things the right way oil prices could spike. Nuclear contamination could make that spike last a long time.

neverfail
Posts: 4209
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Post by neverfail » Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:23 pm

lzzrdgrrl wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 8:49 pm
Chronic Conflict in the Global World: Right at Your Doorstep or on Your Computer

Image
Fears that the Gulf of Oman will be the new Gulf of Tonkin are unlikely to come true. It is much more probable that Iran's decades-long low-intensity war with the U.S. will continue as usual. Iran killed 600+ U.S. troops during OIF, a fact downplayed by the previous administrations. But if that fact didn't drive Trump to go openly kinetic, a few more attacks on third-country tankers are unlikely to.
https://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/th ... of-shadow/
The claim that Iran killed 600+ U.S. troops during OIF appears to be a lie. The sort of distortion of the truth that low, dirty, underhanded, turd politicians routinely use to try to bring opponents into disrepute.

You see Izz, I did some further delving by deriving a subsidiary link to yours (above).

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your ... agon-says/

The only relevant (truthful) sentence published in that otherwise insinuating smear article is:

The Pentagon is upping the official estimate on the number of U.S. troops in Iraq who were killed by Iranian-backed militias, now putting that number at at least 603.

To clarify:

Iranian backed militias does not mean that any Iranian soldiers were active in Iraq during the years following that ill advised, mismanaged invasion inaugurated by Bush/Cheney. It means that they were Iraqi militias that received some sort of (possibly) logistical support and/or training from Iranians, along with moral support. It does not necessarily mean that the military command in Tehran even gave them orders to kill Americans. Once armed and on the loose back in Iraq Tehran likely washed their hands on all involvement in their planning details.

At least 60% of Iraq's population is Shia Muslim: that's the same sect of Islam followed in Iran. So between the Iraqi Arab Shias and the Iranians would be a super-national spiritual bond that would probably prompt one to help the other.

Apart from the fact that both wanted the Americans out of Iraq creating a shared solidarity of interest.

The slanted, insinuating choice of words in both articles would otherwise mislead any uninformed casual reader to the effect that Iran is to blame for those 600 + American deaths.

No! America was to blame for those deaths for being in Iraq uninvited in the first place.

The price of imperialist arrogance is the death of innocents.

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

In the old time, liars were more skillful

Post by Alexis » Tue Jun 18, 2019 2:46 am

According to some rumors, the US may be thinking about going kinetic over the tankers' attack.
According to the officials, since Friday, the White House has been holding incessant discussions involving senior military commanders, Pentagon representatives and advisers to President Donald Trump.

The military action under consideration would be an aerial bombardment of an Iranian facility linked to its nuclear program, the officials further claimed.

"The bombing will be massive but will be limited to a specific target," said a Western diplomat.
If this comes to pass (that's an "If", these may be mistaken rumors)... well we'll see what the consequences are.


What is surprising here is the lack of skill on the part of US leadership.

According to the US government, Iran used limpet mines against the Japanese tanker.
:arrow: On the other hand, according to the company operating that tanker and based on testimony of its sailors, it was struck by flying objects.

According to the US government, Iran targeted a MQ-9 Predator with modified SA-7 Strela man portable missile.
:arrow: On the other hand, according to technical data from MQ-9 Predator and SA-7 Strela, the latter is efficient only to 1.5 km altitude, while the former cruises at 7.5 km altitude

There used to be a time when US governments lied more competently.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 3483
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Post by Doc » Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:01 am

Milo wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 9:17 pm
Doc wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 9:09 pm
It is pretty much a given that the Iranians are the guilty party here. Word is that Trump is more interested in giving Iran a bloody nose rather than all out war.
The real concern is not the conflict or the casualties, it's that the strait is only 70 miles wide in places. If you blew up the right things the right way oil prices could spike. Nuclear contamination could make that spike last a long time.
Who would contaminate the straits with nuclear material? A) Outside the US and Russia No one. They could be shut down long term by conventional means but there would be little interest in that either.
“"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

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 3483
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: June 13th Oil tanker attacks in the Gulf

Post by Doc » Tue Jun 18, 2019 11:26 am

Is Trump laying the ground work for treason charges against Obama, John Kerry and others?

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 ... oup-cabal/
Fitton: Emails Show Obama State Department’s Role in Anti-Trump Coup Cabal

ohn Kerry, President Obama’s secretary of state, seems to be having trouble staying within the legal bounds of the Logan Act, so it’s not surprising that his State Department lieutenants were getting their hands dirty in the conspiracy to bring down Donald Trump.

Judicial Watch now has received more evidence of this anti-Trump conspiracy. With The Daily Caller News Foundation, they just released 16 pages of documents revealing senior State Obama officials – Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and Special Coordinator for Libya Jonathan Winer – coordinated with incoming House Majority Whip Steny Hoyer’s (D-MD) national security advisor, Daniel Silverberg, to work on Russia dossier information provided by Christopher Steele.

Steele was surreptitiously paid by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to create the infamous anti-Trump dossier used to justify a series of FISA spy warrants targeting Carter Page. Winer is a former Obama State Department deputy assistant secretary who was implicated in working with Steele and Clinton associate Sidney Blumenthal to circulate the anti-Trump dossier.

Judicial Watch obtained the documents in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on April 25, 2018, on behalf of ourselves and The Daily Caller News Foundation against the State Department after it failed to respond to three separate FOIA requests (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:18-cv- 00968)). The lawsuit seeks:

All records of communications between State Department officials, including former Secretary of State John Kerry, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, on the one hand, and British National Christopher Steele and/or employees or contractors of Steele’s company, Orbis Business Intelligence, on the other hand.
All records and/or memoranda provided by Christopher Steele and/or his firm Orbis Business Intelligence or by others acting on Steele’s/Orbis’s behalf, to State Department officials.
Any and all records in the custody of the State Department related to the provision of documents to British national Christopher Steele and/or his firm, Orbis Business Intelligence, or the receipt of documents from Steele or his firm. Time period is January 20, 2009 through the present.
All records created in 2016 by Jonathan M. Winer relating to research compiled by Christopher Steele.

Here is some of what we learned from these documents.

In an email exchange on September 19, 2016, Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS asks Winer if he is “in town?” Winer replies “For a couple of hours.”

In an email exchange on September 26, 2016, Winer emails Nuland asking for “15 minutes of your time today if possible,” to discuss a “Russia related issue” from his “old O [Orbis Business Intelligence] friend.” Orbis was co-founded and run by Russia dossier author Christopher Steele. Nuland’s assistant suggests a secure call for the discussion and Winer asks his aide to postpone a meeting he was to have with the State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) to accommodate.

In an exchange beginning in November 2016, Hoyer top-aide Silverberg emails a “thank you” to Nuland, calling her a “warrior on these issues” and stating that he looks forward to pursuing “some of the things we discussed yesterday, albeit on the system integrity side.” Nuland forwards this email to Winer who adds that he wants to talk about “some new info.”

From: Silverberg, Daniel [mailto:Daniel.Silverberg@mail.house.gov]
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:57 PM
To: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Thank you

Toria,

It was a delight to speak today, notwithstanding the context. You’ve been a warrior on these issues, and I look forward to speaking further to preserve and wherever possible strengthen the important work you have done. I’ll follow up regarding a possible working group meeting.

On Nov 29, 2016, at 10:07 AM, Nuland, Victoria J <nulandvi@state.gov> wrote:
Thanks, Daniel. I look forward to continuing our collaboration in whatever capacity life brings. Copied here is Jonathan Winer, who has some legal ideas that may be of interest to you and Cong. Hoyer.

From: Nuland, Victoria J
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 10:08 AM
To: Winer, Jonathan
Subject: RN: Thank you

They want to pursue some of the things we discussed yesterday, albeit on the system integrity side.

From: Winer, Jonathan
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 10:12 AM
To: Nuland, Victoria J
Subject: Re: Thank you

Want to talk briefly further. Some new info want you to be aware of. [Redacted] Phone call ok sometime this am? Five minutes is enough.

From: Nuland, Victoria J <nulandvj@state.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 10:23 AM
To: Winer, Jonathan <WinerJ@state.gov>
Subject: RE: Thank you

Of course, [redacted] Send me good number and time.

From: Silverberg, Daniel
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 10:52 AM
To: Nuland, Victoria J
Cc: Winer, Jonathan
Subject: Re: Thank you

Great. Jonathan, I am all ears.

From: Winer, Jonathan
Sent: Saturday, December 10, 2016 2:10 PM
To: Silverberg, Daniel <Daniel.Silverberg@mail.house.gov>
Subject: Re: Thank you

I’ve reached out per our call yesterday. Please call me to talk further at your early convenience. Weekend best but can also talk Monday.

In a November 2016 exchange with the subject line “Would like to catch up on something at your convenience,” Winer reaches out to Nuland for a meeting, which gets booked in the Truman building on November 28.

In an email exchange dated December 12, 2016, Winer requests a brief meeting with Nuland saying, “Something new has come up of which I want you to be aware.” Nuland replies, “Ok,” and adds her assistant to the exchange. Winer’s assistant then emails Nuland’s assistant looking for a time to meet.

In February 2018, Winer wrote an op-ed claiming anti-Trump dossier author Christopher Steele and Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal approached him with separate dossiers. Winer wrote: “In the summer of 2016, Steele told me that he had learned of disturbing information regarding possible ties between Donald Trump, his campaign and senior Russian officials.” Also, “While talking about that hacking, Blumenthal and I discussed Steele’s reports. He showed me notes gathered by a journalist I did not know …”

Christopher Bedford, editor in chief of The Daily Caller News Foundation, had this to say about these documents: “Every day of digging reveals more and more political collaboration on this hit job, and at the highest levels. While so much of the media is content to chase Russian conspiracies, The Daily Caller News Foundation and the fantastic lawyers at Judicial Watch are going to keep doing the hard work of holding power accountable.”

Here’s what else we’re pursuing in this area:

Judicial Watch recently released 43 pages of documents from the State Department revealing that its “Special Coordinator for Libya,” Jonathan Winer, played a key role in facilitating Steele’s access to other top government officials and prominent international business executives. Winer was even approached by a movie producer about making a movie about the Russiagate targeting of President Trump.

Judicial Watch previously released two sets of heavily redacted State Department documents showing classified information was researched and disseminated to multiple U.S. senators by the Obama administration immediately prior to President Donald Trump’s inauguration. The documents reveal that among those receiving the classified documents were Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), and Sen. Robert Corker (R-TN).

We are also suing the State Department for communications between Nuland and employees of Fusion GPS, as well as top ranking Department of Justice, FBI, and State Department officials.

These new documents further confirm that the Obama State Department was a way station for Steele’s smear dossier and other anti-Trump activism.
“"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

Post Reply