Iran

[ORAC]

New thread to add to those on Russia, Yemen, Stria etc. Things are getting heated......

Military Leader: Iran Sending Elite Fighters Into U.S., Europe (http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iranian-military-sending-elite-forces-u-s-europe/?utm_source=Freedom+Mail&utm_campaign=4843f969d8-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_11_05&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b5e6e0e9ea-4843f969d8-45610777)

IRGC commander: 'IRGC will be in the U.S. and Europe very soon'

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, the country’s elite military force, is sending assets to infiltrate the United States and Europe at the direction of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, according to recent Farsi-language comments from an Iranian military leader.

The IRGC “will be in the U.S. and Europe very soon,” according to the Iranian military commander, who said that these forces would operate with the goal of bolstering Iran’s hardline regime and thwarting potential plots against the Islamic Republic. “The whole world should know that the IRGC will be in the U.S. and Europe very soon,” Salar Abnoush, deputy coordinator of Iran’s Khatam-al-Anbia Garrison, an IRGC command front, was quoted as saying in an Iranian state-controlled publication closely tied to the IRGC........

“The IRGC is [the] strong guardian of the Islamic Republic,” Abnoush was quoted as saying. “The Fedayeen of Velayat [fighting force] are under the order of Iran’s Supreme leader. Defending and protecting the Velayat [the Supreme Leader] has no border and limit.”....... “Our enemies have several projects to destroy our Islamic revolution, and have waged three wars against us to execute their plans against our Islamic Republic,” Abnoush said.

“The IRGC has defeated enemies in several fronts. The enemy surrendered and accepted to negotiate with us. And now all of our problems are being solved and our country is becoming stronger in all fronts. Some believe the holy defense ended,” the military leader added. “They are wrong; the holy defense continues, and today, it is more complicated than before.”........

[racedo]

Spin nowt else

[Heathrow Harry]

sounds like an SO facing budget cuts....................

[ORAC]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/01/iran-trump-michael-flynn-on-notice

The Trump administration has said it was “officially putting Iran on notice” in reaction to a Iranian missile test and an attack on a Saudi warship by Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, but gave no details about how Washington intended to respond. The threat was made on Wednesday by the national security adviser, Michael Flynn, in his first public statement since taking office.

Speaking in the White House briefing room, Flynn said the medium-range missile launch on Sunday and a Houthi attack on a Saudi frigate on Monday, reportedly by suicide-boat, represented “the latest of a series of incidents in the past six months in which Houthi forces that Iran has trained and armed have struck Emirati and Saudi vessels, and threatened US and allied vessels transiting the Red Sea.

“In these and other similar activities, Iran continues to threaten US friends and allies in the region,” the national security adviser said. He said Iranian actions “undermine security, prosperity, and stability throughout and beyond the Middle East and place American lives at risk”.

Flynn did not specify how the new administration would respond. Asked for clarification, the White House spokesman, Sean Spicer, said that the president wanted to make sure the Iranians “understood we are not going to sit by and not act on their actions”.......

Ali Vaez, an Iran expert at the International Crisis Group in Washington, said: “It’s either an empty threat or a clear statement of intent to go to war with Iran......

[Lonewolf_50]

Ali Vaez is leaving out a lot of middle ground, so he's blowing as much hot air as Flynn.


Just out of curiosity, who funds that site, ORAC?
I'm not sure ... but follow the money is usually a good idea.

[ORAC]

The Guardian? They are an independent newspaper funded by their own long standing trust fund - no external influence or funding.

[SASless]

I guess the Iranians will be putting to good use all that Cash Mr. Obama sent them in the form of Non-Ransom money.

[onetrack]

Perhaps this ties in with Bannon stating the West is in an un-declared War with Islam and its aim of major expansion into Western countries? - and both he and Trump have defined aims of doing something about it?

The Guardian - War on Islam the central Trump doctrine (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/30/war-on-islam-central-trump-doctrine-terrorism-immigration)

[The Sultan]

SAS

All in the directions Putin gave Trumpet. Rattle swords so Iran buys more missles from Russia instead of commercial planes from the US.

This is minor compared to Trumpet s-ing on Australia, sending troops into Mexico, and setting up a war at sea with "Jina."

The Sultan

[Heathrow Harry]

It'll go down well in Saudi Arabia & Israel..................

[Herod]

a clear statement of intent to go to war with Iran......

Here we go again. Another Middle-East war.

[Heathrow Harry]

what would we do without one?

[Fonsini]

I still chuckle about the "highly trained" Iranian operative who was caught making bombs destined for Israeli tourists in Thailand when one of them detonated prematurely blowing the roof off the house he was living in. He emerged into the street covered in blood and with his trousers ripped off and flagged down a passing taxi. When said taxi saw him up close it sped off and the enraged operative proceeded to throw a grenade at it, he then also threw a grenade at arriving police officers only to have it bounce back off a tree and blow his legs off.

Not exactly SAS material.

[Lonewolf_50]

For ORAC:
Please don't try to get cute.
International Crisis Group
I cited that group's spokesman (Ali Vaez) in my post/reply to you.
I know that the Guardian is a newspaper.

[Lonewolf_50]

Here we go again. Another Middle-East war. Suggest you consider the source when you consume information on the internet. Also, a grain of salt should be consumed with each story, many of which are rich with opinion and sparse on fact.

The Guardian piece covers a good bit of ground. It closes with a point that most people don't understand. In his 2016 book The Field of Fight, Flynn wrote: “We’re in a world war, but very few Americans recognise it, and fewer still have any idea how to win it.” William Lind wrote, a couple of decades ago, a theoretical framework about a thing called 4th generation warfare. It's a reasonable approximation for political conflicts that include non-state actors. Under that framework, and with some updates based on experiences in the last 20 years, there's been a ideological war for sure underway since about 1998 when the first successful attacks on America by Al Queda came off in Kenya and Tanzania. (whether or not the (failed) truck attack on in 1993 the WTC were of a primordial version of Al Qaeda is debatable, but the perps were in fact Muslims).

If you pull your mind out of the Peace of Westphalia assumptions of wars only being possible between nation states, you find that a strange kind of war has been going on for about 20 years that looks nothing like our grandfather's war. As time has gone on, the number of factions and sides has increased and morphed, not remained static. What Bin Laden and his inner circle hoped to achieve was a call to arms under a broad front (which is sort of what Al Qaeda means) to encourage Muslims of all kinds to fight back against the world order/world structure as they saw it. (In that respect they are in an anarchist model of political movements).

With that perspective in mind, Flynn's not raving. He's reporting on history. When you consider the funding funneled into Syrian groups fighting Assad from Saudi and Qatar, among other places, the "many vs many" nature of this new global reality really hits home. It's not going to stop for a very long time, and any fantasy Mr Trump has about destroying ISIS for once and for all demonstrates a clear misunderstanding of the field of play he's confronted with. It's not a soccer match, its a six team 7-man rugby match played with one, two, or three balls depending on the flip of a coin.

[Lyneham Lad]

On Reuters
Iran holds naval war games amid rising tensions with U.S. (http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-iran-navy-wargames-idUKKBN16508J)

[Heathrow Harry]

LoneWolf is correct I think - it's no longer nation states but a war of ideas (or fanatics...)

nation states try and use the perpetrators - as the US did in Afghanistan against Russia - but you don't control them................... they go their own way and it can often rebound on you

[chopper2004]

New thread to add to those on Russia, Yemen, Stria etc. Things are getting heated......

Military Leader: Iran Sending Elite Fighters Into U.S., Europe (http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iranian-military-sending-elite-forces-u-s-europe/?utm_source=Freedom+Mail&utm_campaign=4843f969d8-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2016_11_05&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b5e6e0e9ea-4843f969d8-45610777)

IRGC commander: 'IRGC will be in the U.S. and Europe very soon'

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, the country’s elite military force, is sending assets to infiltrate the United States and Europe at the direction of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, according to recent Farsi-language comments from an Iranian military leader.

The IRGC “will be in the U.S. and Europe very soon,” according to the Iranian military commander, who said that these forces would operate with the goal of bolstering Iran’s hardline regime and thwarting potential plots against the Islamic Republic. “The whole world should know that the IRGC will be in the U.S. and Europe very soon,” Salar Abnoush, deputy coordinator of Iran’s Khatam-al-Anbia Garrison, an IRGC command front, was quoted as saying in an Iranian state-controlled publication closely tied to the IRGC........

“The IRGC is [the] strong guardian of the Islamic Republic,” Abnoush was quoted as saying. “The Fedayeen of Velayat [fighting force] are under the order of Iran’s Supreme leader. Defending and protecting the Velayat [the Supreme Leader] has no border and limit.”....... “Our enemies have several projects to destroy our Islamic revolution, and have waged three wars against us to execute their plans against our Islamic Republic,” Abnoush said.

“The IRGC has defeated enemies in several fronts. The enemy surrendered and accepted to negotiate with us. And now all of our problems are being solved and our country is becoming stronger in all fronts. Some believe the holy defense ended,” the military leader added. “They are wrong; the holy defense continues, and today, it is more complicated than before.”........
Sounds like the late spymaster COlin Forbes thriller 'The Sisterhood' about Tweed's elite SIS team combatting Middle East dictatorship sponsored terror cell predominantly made up of three mysterious female assaisns knocking off key figures in intel and think tank around Europe. All this plus a plot to poison the UK water system with chemical agents and said middle eatern state preparing to invade if not destory Western infrastructure.

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/1587343_zpserhr3ugu.jpg

Book was written and published in the late 90s btw

cheers

[Lonewolf_50]

@LynehamLad


Iran has a Navy. Navies need to do exercises to keep their edge. Iran is doing exercises in waters near their home. It's a non story. Someone is engaging in a bit of spin in that article.

[Lyneham Lad]

Iran has a Navy. Navies need to do exercises to keep their edge. Iran is doing exercises in waters near their home. It's a non story. Someone is engaging in a bit of spin in that article.

Or as a certain tweeter would have it - FAKE NEWS!!! ;)

[Lonewolf_50]

People have been over selling the "meaning" of military exercises for years.


This habit of rhetoric gives, for example, the North Korean regime something to whinge about each year when US and South Koreans practice interoperability as allies do. Our own press are complete (censored) about that (they have to fill air time and pages of "content") so they dutifully feed the spin machine.

[ORAC]

Leave Syria or Be Crushed, USA Tells Iran

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mike-pompeo-warns-iran-to-stop-nuclear-enrichment-and-withdraw-from-syria-305pjkbs0

The United States has vowed to cripple Iran with the “strongest sanctions in history” unless Tehran agrees to a dozen tough conditions, including the complete abandonment of nuclear fuel enrichment, a withdrawal of all its military forces from Syria and an end to aggression against Israel and Saudi Arabia.

“Sanctions are going back in full effect, and new ones are coming,” Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state, warned as he gave the clearest view yet of US policy following President Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal two weeks ago. “Iran will never again have carte blanche to dominate the Middle East. The Iranian regime should know this is just the beginning.”

In a hawkish speech that is likely to exacerbate tensions with European allies, Mr Pompeo said that the US was ready to increase diplomatic, military and economic pressure on Iran. He said: “We will ensure freedom of navigation on the waters in the region. We will work to prevent and counteract any Iranian malign cyber-activity. We will track down Iranian operatives and their Hezbollah proxies operating around the world and crush them.”.

Under the Iran nuclear deal (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/iran-deal-explained-trump-decision-agreement-uk-russia-china-france-germany-jc86c0rch), which was finalised in 2015, Tehran consented to curbs on its nuclear programme in return for the lifting of sanctions. Today Mr Pompeo dismissed the nuclear pact — which was agreed by Britain, Germany, France, China and Russia — as a gamble that had backfired. “The bet was a bad one for the US, for Europe, and for the world. Iran’s leaders saw it as a starting gun for the march across the Middle East,” he said.

He listed a dozen US demands, including:

● Iran must completely abandon uranium enrichment. At present it is allowed to enrich to 3.67 per net — far below the 90 per net needed for a bomb.

● It must give the International Atomic Energy Agency instant access to inspect military sites.

● It must end its ballistic missile programme.

● It must release all US citizens and “citizens of our partners and allies detained on spurious charges or missing in Iran”.

● Iran must withdraw “all forces under Iranian command from Syria”.

● It must end threatening behaviour against neighbours, including its threats to destroy Israel and firing missiles in Saudi Arabia.

In his first major speech as secretary of state, Mr Pompeo also warned Britain, Germany and France that the Trump administration was looking beyond Europe to build an international coalition to confront Iran. “We understand our re-imposition of sanctions and the coming pressure campaign on the Iranian regime will pose financial and economic difficulties for a number of our friends,” he said. “But you should know that we will hold those doing prohibited business in Iran to account.”........

[Octane]

The US "Administration" has lost the plot. Not surprising considering the misfits running the show...

[The Old Fat One]

The US "Administration" has lost the plot. Not surprising considering the misfits running the show...

There's no plot. Roughly two thousand years ago the human race turned left when it should have turned right. It's been chaos ever since. :)

[minigundiplomat]

It's easy to portray the Yanks as gung ho, but Trump's intransigence has bought NK to the table. However, John Bolton makes my p1ss boil - never been downrange but quite happy to send in the troops at the drop of a hat. I can live with so called 'hawks' that know what the outcome looks like, but he seems happy enough to experience warfare from a textbook whilst others get dirty.

[Octane]

And the draft dodging Clown in Chief who said Sen. John McCain is not a hero because he got shot down... How does one respond to that?

[A_Van]

This ultimatum sounds like the one addressed by the Austro-Hungarian empire to Serbia in 1914: the "sending party" knows in advance that the "receiving party" will not "comply" with it, but it is not the goal. The latter is to legitimize (in the opinion of their allies) the actions to follow. Besides the obvious fact that any ultimatum should be reasonable, it should also contain verifiable clauses only. And at this point politicians often fail because they are mostly the guys with no technical/math education and speak slogans and propaganda-like statements making claims unverifiable. E.g. "spurious charges", "threatening behaviour" and some other words could be interpreted in millions of ways. Also words such as "firing missiles in Yemen" sound vague. The Iranians can say that these are Yemen forces, not them. And proving that this is a lie can only be done if somebody captures the Iranian crew operating the launch complex on the spot in Yemen.Looks strange because according to his bio Mike Pompeo acquired great engineering skills at West Point and thus should be aware of what verification is.

[glad rag]

And the draft dodging Clown in Chief who said Sen. John McCain is not a hero because he got shot down... How does one respond to that?

How did Bill Clinton get into all this...:E

[Arclite01]

I think that the thing the US fails to understand now is that there are alternative partners for these countries to go to - including China and Russia, both of whom have no scruples about who they partner with or on what terms (Military involvement in Syria and Financial 'Investments' in Africa prove that), if there is a longer term benefit for them either in economic or political/military terms. The actions of Trump may have worked as a policy 50 years ago but now not so much I think.

The 19th Century belonged to Britain, the 20th Century to the USA, the 21st Century either India or China but certainly not the other 2..................

IMHO

Arc

[West Coast]

including China and Russia,

Not sure why folks list Russia as some economic and trading counterweight to the US, Canada has a larger economy than Russia. Certainly ties to an economy smaller than Italy’s is good but it’s not all that despite your efforts to convince readers of such.

[pr00ne]

Arclite01,

Old fashioned obsolete thinking. The age of Empires is long gone., and will never return. 21st Century will NOT belong to either India or China. It won't BELONG to any country.

[A_Van]

Not sure why folks list Russia as some economic and trading counterweight to the US, Canada has a larger economy than Russia. Certainly ties to an economy smaller than Italy’s is good but it’s not all that despite your efforts to convince readers of such.



1. If it's all about trade turnover with Iran measured in some USD 10 billion, then it does not matter whether the economy of the "other side" is 2 or 20 trillion. It is anyway big enough.

2. Regarding ranking of economies, measuring them in dollars, sterlings, etc. is a wrong approach. PPP matters (purchasing power parity). And in this list
https://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=100&v=65 (https://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=100&v=65)
China is number 1 and Russia is number 6, way ahead of Italy and Canada.

However, coming back to the main topic: as correctly mentioned above by Lonewolf, Russia seems to have little or no influence on Iran with regard to presence of Iranian forces in Syria. Just read a detailed analysis in some Russian media this morning where it was written that some "under carpet" talks between Russia and Iran about withdrawing Iranian forces yielded no result. Analysts assumed that these talks were undertaken in the frame of US-Russia negotiation on Syria.

[Just a spotter]

Former General Wesley Clarke speaking in 2007;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

JAS

[Lonewolf_50]

The war of words gets turned up a notch (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/iran-is-at-peak-of-power-and-ready-if-us-strikes/ar-AAxHK9o?ocid=spartandhp).
America is a disloyal, atrocious, criminal, isolated, angry enemy with disloyal, corrupt leaders whose salaries are paid by the Zionists and the MKO [People's Mujahedin of Iran] terrorist group," Bagheri said, according to the official Iranian National News Agency (http://www.irna.ir/en/News/82923788). "This is while, Iran as a big nation, is faithful to its promises and remains committed to the international laws," adding that, "Today Iran has reached its peak of power" and would not wait for permission to pursue its domestic and regional interests. It's rather easy to talk smack when you aren't in any danger of being attacked. What will be interesting to see, over the waters of the Persian Gulf, is whether or not the Iranian aircraft will try to play tag with American aircraft on patrol the way that the Russians do.

Was interested to see another aerospace related story (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/deep-in-the-desert-iran-quietly-advances-missile-technology/ar-AAxG3fZ?ocid=spartandhp), about a missile test facility that was news to some people, in the Iranian desert.

[beardy]

1. If it's all about trade turnover with Iran measured in some USD 10 billion, then it does not matter whether the economy of the "other side" is 2 or 20 trillion. It is anyway big enough.

2. Regarding ranking of economies, measuring them in dollars, sterlings, etc. is a wrong approach. PPP matters (purchasing power parity). And in this list
https://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=100&v=65
China is number 1 and Russia is number 6, way ahead of Italy and Canada.
.
An interesting concept PPP which as a dollar - equivalent measure is difficult to value when the currency is continually sliding against the dollar. For inflation I always used the Mars bar equivalence, x number of Mars bars to buy a car etc. .. the trouble is nowadays they alter the size of Mars bars depending on economic conditions to keep the profit margin. Also of use is the ipad equivalence or the big mac equivalence.

​
The point is that in a wealth of metrics you can choose one to support your case.

[West Coast]

1. If it's all about trade turnover with Iran measured in some USD 10 billion, then it does not matter whether the economy of the "other side" is 2 or 20 trillion. It is anyway big enough.

2. Regarding ranking of economies, measuring them in dollars, sterlings, etc. is a wrong approach. PPP matters (purchasing power parity). And in this list
https://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=100&v=65
China is number 1 and Russia is number 6, way ahead of Italy and Canada.

However, coming back to the main topic: as correctly mentioned above by Lonewolf, Russia seems to have little or no influence on Iran with regard to presence of Iranian forces in Syria. Just read a detailed analysis in some Russian media this morning where it was written that some "under carpet" talks between Russia and Iran about withdrawing Iranian forces yielded no result. Analysts assumed that these talks were undertaken in the frame of US-Russia negotiation on Syria.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/04/the-worlds-biggest-economies-in-2018/

Russia isn’t a replacement as a trade partner for the US unless the volume of trade isn’t much. The gent that opined about alternatives wasn’t specific to Iran, nor was my reply.

[Brat]

To some it would appear that the US is now speaking the sort of language that Iran, N Korea, use on an every-day basis...and understand.

Sadam Hussein used it all the time.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/iran-builds-new-missile-factory-in-syria-under-russian-defence-shield-70g5g8j78

Iran builds new missile factory in Syria under Russian defence shield

Iran is building a new missile factory in Syria under the cover of a Russian defence umbrella and sending ballistic missiles to its allies in Iraq, according to new reports which raise fears of an expanding confrontation with Israel.

Satellite images show what appear to be a new base and factory taking shape in northwest Syria near the town of Baniyas. The base is in an area covered by a Russian S-400 aerial defence system set up to protect Moscow’s military operations in the Syrian civil war, which would make it a tricky target for an Israeli airstrike. Separately, it was reported that Iran had sent ballistic missiles with a range long enough to hit Tel Aviv or Riyadh to militias operating in Iraq.

Israel has promised to attack missile transfers by Iran, and has done so regularly in recent months in Syria, but has not so far struck Iran-allied militias in Iraq. With Iraq torn between its western and Iranian alliances, an Israeli strike would cause further instability......

The new missile factory in Wadi Jahannam near Baniyas was spotted by Imagesat International (ISI), an Israeli-based firm. It said the base’s layout was reminiscent of Parchin, Iran’s major and highly secretive missile development centre. The base would be covered by the Russian S-400 defence system, which is regarded as a threat to US aircraft, let alone Israeli ones. Moscow has refused to supply the system to the regime but operates it there to protect its own forces.

In Iraq the Iranian missile build-up, first reported by the Reuters news agency citing Iranian and western sources, is not nearly so far advanced. It quoted officials saying that “only a few dozen” short-range missiles were involved. The Iranian sources appeared to play down notions that they were specifically aimed at Israel. “The logic was to have a backup plan if Iran was attacked,” one senior Iranian official said.

However, the Zelzal, Fateh-110 and Zolfaqar missiles have a range of up to 700km (430 miles) putting them within range of Tel Aviv as well as Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia, Iran’s great regional rival.

The sources also said there were three sites where new missiles were being built. The three included a repurposed Saddam Hussein-era factory at al-Zafaraniya, east of Baghdad, one at Jurf al-Sakhar, north of Karbala, and a third, alarmingly, in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan region, supposedly a western ally but one whose second party, the PUK, has close ties to Iran.

It would be highly embarrassing for Britain and America, which has poured huge resources into Iraq, firstly after the invasion of 2003 and then in the fight against Islamic State, if it were to be used as a launching pad for attacks against Israel or other allies such as Saudi Arabia........

[Harley Quinn]

Perfect opportunity for Israeli F35s to do their thing, don't you think?

[KenV]

1. If it's all about trade turnover with Iran measured in some USD 10 billion, then it does not matter whether the economy of the "other side" is 2 or 20 trillion. It is anyway big enough.No, that's not what it's about. Trump's goal is to "reduce Iran’s oil exports “down to zero (https://uk.reuters.com/article/usa-iran/us-aims-to-reduce-irans-oil-revenue-to-zero-state-department-official-idUKS0N1RU029)” which will have a massive deleterious effect on their economy, which is already in a very wobbly state. And it is hoped that an economic collapse will also result in further domestic unrest and ultimately regime change.

[KenV]

Iran builds new missile factory in Syria under Russian defence shield
Iran is building a new missile factory in Syria under the cover of a Russian defence umbrella....The Russian defence umbrella is there to protect Russian military assets, not Iranian assets. Israel has already made multiple attacks on Iranian controlled sites in Syria, and US air power has even been used to kill Russian mercenaries not associated with the Russian military. Russia does not like the Iranian presence in Syria much more than the US does and will not use its forces to protect Iranian assets.

[ORAC]

https://www.snafu-solomon.com/2019/01/israeli-minister-of-intelligence.htmlIsraeli Minister of Intelligence declared that Israel is now in “an open confrontation with Iran”…

[ORAC]

Looks like the USA is about to declare the IRGC a terrorist organisation, with all that entails - and Iran will retaliate.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-guards-idUSKCN1RJ07UIran will retaliate in kind if U.S. designates Guards as terrorists: MPsReuters) - Iran will take reciprocal action against the United States if Washington designates the elite Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) as terrorists, a majority of Iranian parliamentarians said on Sunday, according to state news agency IRNA.

The United States is expected to designate the Revolutionary Guards a foreign terrorist organisation, three U.S. officials told Reuters, marking the first time Washington has formally labelled another country’s military a terrorist group.

"We will answer any action taken against this force with a reciprocal action," a statement issued by 255 out of the 290 Iranian lawmakers said, according to IRNA.

[racedo]

Looks like the USA is about to declare the IRGC a terrorist organisation, with all that entails - and Iran will retaliate.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-guards-idUSKCN1RJ07UIran will retaliate in kind if U.S. designates Guards as terrorists: MPsReuters) - Iran will take reciprocal action against the United States if Washington designates the elite Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) as terrorists, a majority of Iranian parliamentarians said on Sunday, according to state news agency IRNA.

The United States is expected to designate the Revolutionary Guards a foreign terrorist organisation, three U.S. officials told Reuters, marking the first time Washington has formally labelled another country’s military a terrorist group.

"We will answer any action taken against this force with a reciprocal action," a statement issued by 255 out of the 290 Iranian lawmakers said, according to IRNA.
Bet they worried but hey US happy to do business with Al Qaeda and IS in Syria and were happy to give Taliban millions in 2001 in Afghanistan.

If only they had allowed Iran go into Afghanistan in 1998 after Herat and sort the crap out then world would be a different place but US said no.

Just like they told Gadaffi he couldn't arrest Osama for murdering German intelligence agents and then the Islamic fundies he wanted to wipe out headed to Iraq so US Troops could go home in Body bags.

One wonders what they screw up in the next decade will be, bet it will be Saudi's as Libya is this decades.

[Lonewolf_50]

I personally don't see the point of doing this. The "Axis of Evil" rhetoric blew up in the US face about a decade ago.
The US was aware that a variety of foreign entities and governments, to include the Saudis, give a variety of help and support to some terrorist organizations. But they have not declared them as terrorist organizations.

That entity, the IRGC, has official status within the Iranian polity and is an arm of Iranian government and policy - regardless of how they are or are not a group of people who make the US policy aims difficult in that region.
That doesn't make them terrorists, nor a terrorist organization.
They are one of host of problems to deal with.

[ORAC]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/8/donald-trump-designates-iran-irgc-terrorists/

Trump designates Iran's Guard as terrorists

President Trump (https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/donald-trump/) on Monday designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (https://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/islamic-revolutionary-guard-corps/) as a terrorist organization, saying its sponsorship of terror in Iraq and elsewhere is unacceptable and that he needed to send an “unprecedented” message that it won’t be tolerated.

It is the first time the U.S. government has designed a segment of a foreign government as a foreign terrorist organization, or FTO. The designation is designed to warn individuals or companies off doing businesses with the corps, including its Quds Force, because doing so would be considered a criminal offense by the U.S.

This action sends a clear message to Tehran that its support for terrorism has serious consequences,” Mr. Trump said in a White House statement. “We will continue to increase financial pressure and raise the costs on the Iranian regime for its support of terrorist activity until it abandons its malign and outlaw behavior.”

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned that global banks and businesses “have a clear duty” to not work with the organisation....... Mr. Pompeo cited the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 American military members, and the organization’s support to Syria’s Assad regime in the designation. He also said that IRGC Gen. Qasem Soleimani was responsible for killing 603 U.S. troops during the Iraq war........

Administration officials said the Iranians “forced our hands” in designating the IRGC as a foreign terrorist organization, citing actions in Iraq that have killed Americans and its work as the “central banker” and chief state sponsor of terror around the globe.

Congressional Republicans applauded Mr. Trump’s move, citing their longtime support for cracking down on the force.

“A formal designation and its consequences may be new, but these IRGC butchers have been terrorists for a long time,” Sen. Ben Sasse, Nebraska Republican, said. “This would be an important step in our maximum-pressure campaign against Iran, the largest state-sponsor of terror and the biggest chaos agent inside the Middle East. This would greatly expand our ability to roll back Iran’s ability to fund and export terror abroad.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, said he “completely” supports the decision and said the announcement is “another example of [the administration’s] commitment to reigning in the destructive and murderous Iranian regime.”

[racedo]

Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, said he “completely” supports the decision and said the announcement is “another example of [the administration’s] commitment to reigning in the destructive and murderous Iranian regime.”


Missed his views on the peaceful Saudi's in Yemen

[ORAC]

Didn’t look very far?

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/12/senate-rebukes-saudi-arabia-yemen-war-khashoggi-murder-181213004802358.html

[Lyneham Lad]

Article in today's WSJ.

New intelligence suggests allied interests and American forces could be imperiled (https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-deploys-forces-to-mideast-to-deter-iran-11557106795?shareToken=stfeff1d3f9f9b4d08a8aaca111aa79c04)Ex tract:-
WASHINGTON—The U.S. is deploying a carrier strike group and a number of bombers to the Middle East to serve as a deterrent to Iran based on new intelligence that suggests allied interests and American forces could be imperiled, multiple U.S. officials said.

The Pentagon is sending a carrier and its accompanying ships as well as what is known as a bomber task force to the region in coming days in response to “a number of troubling and escalatory indications and warnings,” National Security Adviser John Bolton said in a statement Sunday.

[pr00ne]

Methinks John Bolton is using happenstance to ramp up a false rhetoric. The carrier Group was scheduled for deployment months ago as part of a normal rotation and the "bombers" have been deployed in theatre for decades but the B1's were rotated out to enable servicing and a stand down some time ago, so are just being returned, again as part of a normal scheduled deployment.

[tartare]

Intelligence and the Trump administration?
Mutually exclusive.
Specifically, what new intelligence?
Bolton is as full of it as his boss.
Anyone with half a brain will look at this and see it for the posturing that it is.
Friends have just returned from two week holiday in Iran.
Friendly, lovely people - even if some of their leaders are @rsholes.

[Lyneham Lad]

Brief article in The Times today. (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-alert-over-iran-s-ballistic-missiles-at-sea-pt0r7778h?shareToken=39f95d5ed63ce053b6b2d62fa3ab7d09)

Extract:-

Iran has placed short-range ballistic missiles aboard ships in the Persian Gulf, prompting the US military to deploy an aircraft carrier group and B-52 bombers to the region, the Pentagon said last night.

[pr00ne]

Short range BALLISTIC missiles on ships?

Good luck aiming those...


And the carrier group and bombers were scheduled to go months ago as part of normal force rotation cycles, so were prompted by nothing.

[racedo]

And the carrier group and bombers were scheduled to go months ago as part of normal force rotation cycles, so were prompted by nothing.

Which is exactly what Iranian news agency said but Western Media prefer the rush to war viewpoint pushed by some.

[Lyneham Lad]

Article in today's WSJ.
Pentagon to deploy Patriot antimissile system, assault ship as officials say Tehran shows no signs of changing posture (https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-to-send-antimissile-battery-to-gulf-to-counter-iran-11557520326?shareToken=ste2829593b7a14f9cb94e2675d17c8201)

[Asturias56]

Why should they? It's the US that pulled out of the deal..............................

[flyhardmo]

http://intelnews.org/2019/05/09/01-2544/

The sudden decision by the United States to deploy significant firepower to the Middle East was partly in response to intelligence that was given to Washington by Israeli officials, according to a report. On Wednesday, the US announced that the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group had received instructions to sail to the Middle East. The aircraft carrier is reportedly (https://www.businessinsider.com/us-military-iran-firepower-show-of-force-info-pictures-details-2019-5) sailing alongside a cruiser and four destroyers, while an unspecified number of B-52 heavy long-range bombers have been ordered to fly to a US military base in Qatar.

Commenting on this last-minute development, US National Security Adviser John Bolton warned Iran that it would face “unrelenting force” if it threatened American interests in the Middle East and beyond. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford, said (https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-deployment-triggered-by-intelligence-warning-of-iranian-attack-plans-11557180106) that the move aimed to “deter Iran […] so that there would be no ambiguity about our preparedness to respond to any threat against our people or partners in the region”. Speaking in Congress, the US Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan said that the decision to move a significant amount of firepower to the Middle East came in response to intelligence showing that Iran had “made plans to target US forces in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East”. According (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/intelligence-iran-prompted-us-carrier-move-friday-afternoon/story?id=62911955) to ABC News, the intelligence suggested that “Iran or its proxies were planning attacks against US forces in Iraq, Syria and at sea”. But there was no further information reported about the precise nature of the alleged warnings.

Meanwhile, the American news and information website Axios said on Monday that the intelligence that caused Washington’s response was given to the US by Israeli officials. Citing “senior Israeli officials”, the website said (https://www.axios.com/israel-warned-trump-of-possible-iran-plot-bolton-34f25563-c3f3-41ee-a653-9d96b4541984.html) that the intelligence given to the US had been gathered “primarily by the Mossad”, Israel’s main external intelligence agency. It added that the information about possible Iranian attacks against the US or its allies in the Middle East was “raised two weeks ago” during closed-door talks at the White House between a US team led by Bolton and an Israeli delegation headed by his Israeli counterpart, Meir Ben Shabbat. The intelligence, said Axios, showed that the US or its allies, including the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia, would be targeted by Iran. The information is “understood to be part of the reason for Bolton’s announcement” this week, said Axios.


​​​​​​​

[racedo]

http://intelnews.org/2019/05/09/01-2544/

The sudden decision by the United States to deploy significant firepower to the Middle East was partly in response to intelligence that was given to Washington by Israeli officials, according to a report. On Wednesday, the US announced that the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group had received instructions to sail to the Middle East. The aircraft carrier is reportedly (https://www.businessinsider.com/us-military-iran-firepower-show-of-force-info-pictures-details-2019-5) sailing alongside a cruiser and four destroyers, while an unspecified number of B-52 heavy long-range bombers have been ordered to fly to a US military base in Qatar.

Commenting on this last-minute development, US National Security Adviser John Bolton warned Iran that it would face “unrelenting force” if it threatened American interests in the Middle East and beyond. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford, said (https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-deployment-triggered-by-intelligence-warning-of-iranian-attack-plans-11557180106) that the move aimed to “deter Iran […] so that there would be no ambiguity about our preparedness to respond to any threat against our people or partners in the region”. Speaking in Congress, the US Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan said that the decision to move a significant amount of firepower to the Middle East came in response to intelligence showing that Iran had “made plans to target US forces in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East”. According (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/intelligence-iran-prompted-us-carrier-move-friday-afternoon/story?id=62911955) to ABC News, the intelligence suggested that “Iran or its proxies were planning attacks against US forces in Iraq, Syria and at sea”. But there was no further information reported about the precise nature of the alleged warnings.

Meanwhile, the American news and information website Axios said on Monday that the intelligence that caused Washington’s response was given to the US by Israeli officials. Citing “senior Israeli officials”, the website said (https://www.axios.com/israel-warned-trump-of-possible-iran-plot-bolton-34f25563-c3f3-41ee-a653-9d96b4541984.html) that the intelligence given to the US had been gathered “primarily by the Mossad”, Israel’s main external intelligence agency. It added that the information about possible Iranian attacks against the US or its allies in the Middle East was “raised two weeks ago” during closed-door talks at the White House between a US team led by Bolton and an Israeli delegation headed by his Israeli counterpart, Meir Ben Shabbat. The intelligence, said Axios, showed that the US or its allies, including the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia, would be targeted by Iran. The information is “understood to be part of the reason for Bolton’s announcement” this week, said Axios.​​​

The carrier deployment was previously announced and Mad Hatter Bolton is trying to make it into a Gulf of Tonkin as he desires a war.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ships-sabotaged-as-iran-warns-it-is-ready-to-fight-grnvn7gxl

Ships sabotaged as Iran warns it is ready to fight

Four merchant ships were targeted in a “sabotage operation” off the coast of the United Arab Emirates yesterday, the government said, as tensions rise between Iran and the United States. The foreign ministry of the UAE, a US ally, said that “four commercial, civilian trading vessels of various nationalities suffered acts of sabotage” off its eastern coast in the Gulf of Oman. It gave no indication of who might be responsible......

The UAE authorities had denied reports in Lebanese media, which is seen as sympathetic to Iran’s local proxy, Hezbollah, that there had been several explosions at the Fujairah port oil terminal. The reports were widely circulated by Iranian and Russian news sites and on social media.

Fujairah is in a key location near the Strait of Hormuz, a critical corridor for the global energy market that Iran has repeatedly threatened to block. Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh, head of the Iranian parliament’s national security committee, said reports of “explosions” showed that the security of Gulf states was “like glass”........

[ORAC]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/12/uae-four-merchant-ships-reported-sabotaged

Saudi oil tankers show 'significant damage' after sabotage attack, says Riyadh

Two Saudi oil tankers have suffered “significant damage” in an apparent sabotage attack off the coast of Fujairah, part of the United Arab Emirates (https://www.theguardian.com/world/united-arab-emirates), the Saudi energy minister has said.......

One of the two vessels was on its way to be loaded with Saudi crude oil bound for customers in the US, state news agency SPA reported. The attack did not lead to any casualties or an oil spill but caused significant damage to the structures of the two vessels, said Saudi energy minister Khalid al-Falih on Monday.

On Sunday, the UAE foreign ministry said four commercial vessels were targeted by “sabotage operations” near its territorial waters but gave no details of the nature of the sabotage.......

[Asturias56]

One thing is for sure - the Iranians are very unlikely to go head to head with the USN unless they have to

Something like the odd "terrorist" raid on tankers - just enough to drive up insurance rates and spook a few shippers is much more their style

And of course they can "encourage" a lot of people to cause problems elsewhere.................. the US has interests EVERYWHERE - the Iranians - not so much................

[racedo]

One thing is for sure - the Iranians are very unlikely to go head to head with the USN unless they have to
.

US knows that, Iran knows that and while you get morons like crew of USS Vincennes itching to start a war, most do not wish that to occur.

Unfortunately you may get someone who is following orders but not orders from USN Chain of Command to start something.

[Green Flash]

Oh oh, here we go, Tankers 'sabotaged' (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-48245204)

[Green Flash]

Or maybe a warning to the Lincoln group to keep out of the Straits?
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/27969/oil-tankers-supposedly-sabotaged-in-the-persian-gulf-as-u-s-carrier-group-approaches

[Asturias56]

I really don't think a CBG will go into shallow, close waters near any potential enemy - they'll be somewhere south of Oman

[jolihokistix]

Well, despite the vague nature of the Drive article above, we have all seen the jagged hole at the waterline in the stern of one of these ships. (See Andrea Victory, Bergen, in BBC article above) There was a similar attack a couple of years ago I remember where some craft managed to creep up undetected to a (Japanese?) tanker and hit it mysteriously.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/unitedarabemirates/7929823/Japanese-oil-tanker-was-hit-by-terrorist-attack-in-the-Gulf-of-Hormuz.html

[jolihokistix]

Al Jazeera article with some background perspective in a video interview.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/05/saudi-oil-tankers-sabotaged-ships-uae-coast-190513055332524.html


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/828x584/87f71223_59de_40c5_9afe_5517d92fa7ce_d700f7f21660a4e77004e14 74be129088961b607.jpeg

[tartare]

Read the tweets of one Ilan Goldenberg - three years on the Iran desk at the Pentagon.
The deployment of one Patriot Battery, a CVA (planned) and four B-52s and pretty pictures of F-15s and F-35s is not a game changer.
Multiple Patriot Batteries, forty B-52s, B-2s and B-1s etc - then you've got my attention.
This is over hyped rubbish.

[racedo]

Bolton now pushing for 120,000 US troops to be deployed to Middle East.......... I think Trump will slap him down very quickly on this. Sending a message is one thing, putting an Invasion force on the lawn is another thing.

Much is being made in the media about targeting of 2 tankers destined for the US, now being a simple soul I would look at a Tanker at anchor and wonder where it is going as it is not like a bus with "US" on a light at the front telling where it is heading.

But if it was Iran then their teams are very good because they managed to cripple 4 ships and not do any damage to their cargo. Good job they had the details plans of exactly where to hit and only use a minimum amount of explosives.

[tartare]

Joanna Lumley's Silk Road journey through Iran on TV here tonight.
Worth a watch - astonishing.
And Bolton wants to bomb these people?
Walks away shaking head in disbelief...

[pax britanica]

Iran seems to be one of those coutries trapped under abad regime, I have spoken with half a dozen people who have been their recentlya nd they all say how firnedlya nd helpful iranian people are.

they are not alone in thesis predicament , both UK and UA could be portrayed as having dysfunctional governments at the moment and if anyone's navy has a right to be in the Persian Gulf and Straits of Hormuz it is Iran. Of course while thy have such a bizare government they need to be contained and watched over in the event thy get more into terrorism but as several people here have pointed out B52s are not much use without targets.

I wonder if this has anything to do with UK Foreign Minister Jeremy *unt saying Britain needs to spend more on its military so it can continue 'hard power protection' this from a man who brought us the three week wait for a GP health service and a country whose road network resembles parts of Africa
We need to spend on defence but the spooky techie kind not redundant strike aircraft and nuclear subs which are most likely US surrogates anyway.

[jolihokistix]

Having to agree here.
It's unpleasant people with attitude and a mouth who control things there.

[BEagle]

It's unpleasant people with attitude and a mouth who control things there.

You mean in the USofA, surely?

[jolihokistix]

BEagle, just recently in the USA, no?

[racedo]

Having to agree here.
It's unpleasant people with attitude and a mouth who control things there.

You met Gavin Williamson.........

[racedo]

You mean in the USofA, surely?

Looks like Trump has put Bolton back in his box on idea of sending 120,000 troops.

Trump has had to bring in sh*theads like Bolton to counter their attempt to get rid of him, but he is giving them enough rope to slap them down. In event Trump re elected i forecast Bolton is exiting.

[phil9560]

When I was a skinter young person I wanted to vist Iraq (Nimrud) , Syria (Palmyra) and Teheran.But couldn't afford it


Suppose I'd better get to Teheran sharpish before that becomes a lawless hellhole where Westerners are persona non grata..

[flyhardmo]

[SPhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/16/trumps-iran-policy-is-rooted-lies-kind-that-got-us-into-iraq-war/?utm_term=.23ca0d79ad13Trump’s Iran policy is rooted in lies. The kind that got us into the Iraq War.Failing to see his dishonesty for what it is could have devastating consequences.Ben RhodesPresident Trump speaks to the press on the White House South Lawn Tuesday. (Al Drago/Bloomberg)Ben

Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser during the Obama administration, is author of "The World as It Is."
May 16 at 6:40 AMThe Iraq War showed us all what happens when exaggerations and lies are weaponized to justify an ideological push for war: In 2002 and 2003, a relentless series of ominous, overblown public statements (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/oct/08/iraq.usa) and bogus intelligence reports (http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/14/sprj.irq.documents/) were used to justify an invasion — part of a deliberate campaign to make an offensive military action look defensive: “Should Saddam Hussein choose confrontation,” President George W. Bush said, “the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war.”

It wasn’t true. Yet Bush made the case that the United States had to attack before Hussein could use weapons of mass destruction that Iraq didn’t really have. Now a similar cycle of deception may be repeating itself with President Trump’s increasingly belligerent posture on Iran.

Trump’s Iran policy has long been rooted in falsehoods. In 2017, his administration refused (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-to-set-new-conditions-for-us-to-stay-in-iran-nuclear-deal-tossing-issue-to-congress/2017/10/13/39ac3894-af82-11e7-9e58-e6288544af98_story.html?utm_term=.6bfc35d153a4) to certify the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — the Iran nuclear deal — on the premise that Iran wasn’t complying with the terms. That wasn’t true. Earlier that year, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-iaea/iran-sticks-to-key-limits-of-nuclear-deal-u-n-watchdog-idUSKCN1BB1T2) Iran’s compliance; the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff reported (https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/09/26/trumps-top-general-says-iran-honoring-nuke-deal/) to Congress that “Iran is adhering to its JCPOA obligations”; and the U.S. intelligence community presented no evidence justifying Trump’s decertification.

Trump’s subsequent decision to withdraw from the JCPOA was no surprise. For years, he had railed against it as the “worst deal ever negotiated” by tossing out a raft of easily debunked assertions: that Iran was given $150 billion under the terms of the deal, a claim The Washington Post’s Fact Checker rated with four Pinocchios; that Iran’s regime was verging on “total collapse” before the deal, implying that somehow the deal lent the regime new life. After pulling out, Trump has continued to dispute his own intelligence community’s assessment that Iran had been complying. Numbed to a president who lies so regularly that it’s become the background noise to our political culture, his reckless exit from a multilateral, U.N. Security Council-endorsed arms-control agreement that wasn’t being violated was treated as just another routine turn of events in Trump’s Washington.

[Trump is moving us closer to war with Iran (https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/02/07/trump-is-moving-us-closer-war-with-iran/?utm_term=.18344b0c2ac5)]

Since then, Trump’s administration has made every effort to manufacture a crisis with Iran. To the dismay of our closest European allies, the administration has repeatedly imposed new sanctions; officially designated Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization; announced an “Iran Action Group” in the same week as the 65th anniversary of a U.S.-backed coup in Iran; threatened, via a tweeted-out video message from national security adviser John Bolton, that the Iranian regime wouldn’t “have many more anniversaries to enjoy”; and hinted that the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force against al Qaeda and associated forces could be applied to war with Iran.

This month, the manufactured crisis was escalated. Bolton announced the deployment of a U.S. aircraft carrier strike group and a bomber task force to the region, referencing unspecified “troubling and escalatory indications and warnings” from Iran that could lead to the use of “unrelenting force” by the United States. Days later, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned that any attacks from Iran or its proxies would be met with a “swift and decisive U.S. response.” The State Department has drawn down some of our personnel in nearby Baghdad, again citing unspecified threats from Iran.

Our allies have contradicted this view: Speaking at the Pentagon this week, a British major general stated (https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/14/politics/uk-maj-gen-iran-threat-syria-iraq/index.html), “There’s been no increased threat from Iranian-backed forces in Iraq and Syria.”

The ideological agenda behind the administration’s rhetoric and policies is clear. Bolton, in particular, has long advocated regime change and called for war, writing an op-ed (https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/opinion/to-stop-irans-bomb-bomb-iran.html) in 2015 for the New York Times titled, “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran.” Israel and Saudi Arabia — with governments that have cultivated close ties with Trump — favor confrontation with Iran. Based on that history, it’s hard not to conclude that Trump’s administration has pursued a clear strategy: provoke Iran into doing something that gives a pretext for war. And as with Iraq, the administration has used exaggerations and unspecified intelligence reports to lay the predicate that an offensive war against Iran will be defensive. In that context, the closure (https://www.npr.org/2018/09/29/652988484/u-s-closes-consulate-in-basra-citing-iran-backed-violence) of the U.S. consulate in Basra and the Baghdad embassy drawdown are ominous, removing targets that could feature in an Iranian response to a U.S. attack.

[Obama worried with foreign leaders about Trump. The president has proved them right. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/07/02/obama-worried-with-foreign-leaders-about-trump-the-president-has-proved-them-right/?utm_term=.8940ca8f8188)]

The remaining question involves President Trump’s ultimate intentions. He campaigned pledging to end U.S. wars in the Middle East and as recently as his State of the Union address earlier this year, said (https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/05/politics/donald-trump-state-of-the-union-2019-transcript/index.html) “Great nations do not fight endless wars.” But he also clearly revels in undoing the progress of President Barack Obama’s Iran deal and posing as a tough guy on the world stage. He could (and should) pivot back to diplomacy, as he’s attempted to do with North Korea, though his actions to date have only set back the starting point for serious diplomatic efforts. Instead, on his watch, our country has become isolated from our allies and, unsurprisingly, Iran has signaled that it plans to restart elements of its nuclear program that were rolled back or halted under the JCPOA. Trump could still pull back from the brink, or he could follow the momentum of his own creation into a war that could be a deadly, costly disaster.

We don’t know what he’ll do. But we know Trump is averse to truth, addicted to lies, and that what he says about Iran should be treated with tremendous skepticism. The consequences of a war with Iran — a much larger, more determined and more sophisticated adversary than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq — should be urgently aired. And Congress, the branch of government empowered to declare war, should make clear that military action against Iran is not authorized.

It can be tempting, sometimes, to shrug off the false and misleading statements, more than 10,000 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/29/president-trump-has-made-more-than-false-or-misleading-claims/?utm_term=.644348027fbb) and counting, that Trump has habitually proffered while in office. But if we slide into another war based on a fundamentally dishonest premise, Trump’s lies could wind up producing painful and far-reaching consequences.

[ORAC]

To counter the above, from the Grauniad - not known as an American mouthpiece.....

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/16/iran-tells-middle-east-militias-prepare-for-proxy-war

Iran’s most prominent military leader has recently met Iraqi militias in Baghdad and told them to “prepare for proxy war”, the Guardian has learned.

Two senior intelligence sources said that Qassem Suleimani, leader of Iran’s powerful Quds force, summoned the militias under Tehran’s influence three weeks ago, amid a heightened state of tension in the region. The move to mobilise Iran’s regional allies is understood to have triggered fears in the US that Washington’s interests in the Middle East are facing a pressing threat. The UK raised its threat levels for British troops in Iraq on Thursday.

While Suleimani has met regularly with leaders of Iraq’s myriad Shia groups over the past five years, the nature and tone of this gathering was different. “It wasn’t quite a call to arms, but it wasn’t far off,” one source said.

The meeting has led to a frenzy of diplomatic activity between US, British and Iraqi officials who are trying to banish the spectre of clashes between Tehran and Washington and who now fear that Iraq could become an arena for conflict. The gathering partly informed a US decision to evacuate non-essential diplomatic staff from the US embassy in Baghdad and Erbil and to raise the threat status at US bases in Iraq. It also coincided with a perceived separate risk to US interests and those of its allies in the Persian Gulf and led to a heightened threat that more than a decade of proxy conflicts may spill over into a direct clash between Washington and Tehran.

Leaders of all the militia groups that fall under the umbrella of Iraq’s Popular Mobilisation Units (PMUs) were in attendance at the meeting called by Suleimani, the intelligence sources claimed. One senior figure who learned about the meeting had since met with western officials to express concerns. As the head of the elite Quds force, Suleimani plays a significant role in the militias’ strategic directions and major operations. Over the past 15 years, he has been Iran’s most influential powerbroker in Iraq and Syria, leading Tehran’s efforts to consolidate its presence in both countries and trying to reshape the region in its favour.......

[Blossy]

Iran is heavily involved in the Yemeni war amongst others. As has been remarked, a gentle people ruled by monsters.

[RearEntry]

That is as may be, but not a justification for killing members of the populace

[SASless]

Over the past 15 years, he has been Iran’s most influential powerbroker in Iraq and Syria, leading Tehran’s efforts to consolidate its presence in both countries and trying to reshape the region in its favour.......

Why is he not bonking 72 Virgins in the Hereafter?

[flyhardmo]

Iran is heavily involved in the Yemeni war amongst others. As has been remarked, a gentle people ruled by monsters.

So are the USA,UK,UAE, Jordan, Bahrain,Morocco, Egypt, Al Qaeda, Other extremist Sunni groups of now rebranded as freedom fighters, an ousted Yemeni government, various mercenaries from around the world and many more. Name me one of them that are not monsters.

[Lyneham Lad]

On the other hand...

Trump curbs hawks rushing towards conflict with Iran (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trump-curbs-hawks-rushing-towards-conflict-with-iran-9sgfzprpv?shareToken=833d4dbba2ab9c56a91b0ed3aa458605)

Article in today's The Times.

[Lonewolf_50]

@LynehamLad: thanks for that link.
A related link (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-military-confrontation-between-us-and-iran-could-look-analysis-vr3jfjqhw) quotes Former Sec Def Gates: (He always seemed to me to have a good head on his shoulders).
Robert Gates, ever a realist as US defence secretary from 2006 to 2011, once said that any Pentagon chief who advised an American president to launch another land invasion in the Middle East would need his head examined. After the prolonged insurgency in Iraq following the US-led invasion in 2003, Mr Gates had Iran in mind. Seven years ago, in retirement, he warned that any military strike against Iran, whether by the US or Israel, would have “catastrophic” consequences.
Despite his predecessor’s misgivings, Patrick Shanahan, the acting defence secretary who has now been selected by President Trump for the top job if confirmed by the Senate, has dusted off and revised the Pentagon’s contingency plan for military confrontation with Iran (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/how-old-enemies-might-stumble-into-armed-clash-2gzjcd6ws).

[SASless]

I suppose the US DOD could just twiddle its collective Thumbs and hope Iran does not kick off the fracas and use that as Plan "A".

I very much hope they have Plans "B" thru "Z" on file and brought up to date in case Plan "A" is OTBE.

[Lonewolf_50]

Dear SASless:

There's a CONPLAN for just about everything.

Yours in deep psychic pain,
A retired field grade officer

(My brain still hurts, Mr Gumby, and it's been about 15 years since I touched one)

[A_Van]

IMHO, recent urgent visit of Pompeo to Russia and his talks not only with Lavrov (his counter-part), but with Putin too, was aimed at discussion about Iran, though it was not announced. If so, it is good that US are interested in deep analysis. But it is bad that a military option is still on the table.

[magruder1980]

I think you always have a military option but you need to remember its the LAST resort and if you use it things rarely turn out as you'd planned , wished or hoped - it may be just better than the alternative

Wasn't it Isaac Asimov who wrote "violence is the last refuge of the incompetent"??

[SASless]

But it is bad that a military option is still on the table.

How so?

Can one deal with Nutters like the Mullahs from anything but a position of strength?

Hand shakes can still be done while you hold a Mace in the other!

[ORAC]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/18/iran-war-us-risk-civilian-aircraft

Iran says 'there will be no war' as US warns of risk to civilian aircraft

Iran’s foreign minister said on Saturday “there will be no war” with the US, since “nobody in the region is suffering from a hallucination to think that he is able to confront Iran”.

Nonetheless, US diplomats warned commercial airliners flying over the Persian Gulf that they faced a risk of being “misidentified” amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran.........

On Saturday, a warning from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) relayed by US diplomatic posts underlined increased risks in a region crucial to global air travel and where Lloyd’s of London has warned of increasing risk to maritime shipping.

The order relayed on Saturday by US diplomats in Kuwait and the UAE came from an FAA Notice to Airmen published late on Thursday. It said all commercial aircraft flying over the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman needed to be aware of “heightened military activities and increased political tension”. This presents “an increasing inadvertent risk to US civil aviation operations due to the potential for miscalculation or misidentification”, the warning said. It also said aircraft could experience interference with navigation instruments and communications jamming “with little to no warning”.

Emirates, Etihad and Qatar Airways all said they were aware of the notice and operations were unaffected. Oman Air did not respond to a request for comment.

The warning appeared rooted in what happened 30 years ago after Operation Praying Mantis, a daylong naval battle in the Persian Gulf between US forces and Iran during the country’s long war with Iraq. On 3 July 1988, the USS Vincennes chased Iranian speedboats, which allegedly opened fire on a helicopter, into Iranian territorial waters. The US ship then mistook an Iran Air plane heading to Dubai for an Iranian F-14. The Vincennes fired two missiles, killing all 290 people onboard the flight......

[Asturias56]

Does anyone REALLY think the USA is about to start another war in the Middle East? Especially when the current president is mulling another 4 year stint?

Not a hope to be honest .............

[jolihokistix]

Quote: "What is different about these drones?
This latest attack signifies a big jump in abilities as the drone flew more than 800km into Saudi Arabia to successfully attack its target. The drone was guided using satellite technology, as beyond a certain range, drones need a satellite data link for information to be sent back to the pilot.Satellites technically allow drones to be flown from halfway around the world, as many military drones are, but they also need a second pilot station with line-of-sight access to take off and land. The is due to the delay in satellite communications - albeit minor - which causes delays that can be fatal for a drone coming in to land. The Iranians and Houthis have no known communications satellites and would need to rely on commercially available satellite space. All this means that imagery analysts, communications experts, uplink engineers, two-pilot crews, armourers and mechanics all need to work in unison for an attack to succeed.
This implies increasingly sophisticated levels of training.

On the subject of increasing drone sophistication, especially by Houthis trained by Iran, what do the honourable members feel about this article?
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/05/houthi-drone-attacks-saudi-show-level-sophistication-190515055550113.html

(PS Sorry about the text size at the beginning but I cannot see any option in the editing bar.)

[Lonewolf_50]

The Iranians and Houthis have no known communications satellites and would need to rely on commercially available satellite space. Unless they are leasing some time on, say, a Chinese one ... ;)

(The [enclosed in square brackets} h2 ; / h2 is what was doing it to you)

For Asturias56
Does anyone REALLY think the USA is about to start another war in the Middle East? Nope, which makes the "rabid dog" act Bolton is playing strike a lot of false notes.

[beardy]

Is there not a mobile phone system in the middle east which is satellite based rather than using terrestrial cells? Perhaps this is used for control and command of remote systems?

[jolihokistix]

Thanks, Lonewolf_50.

[Lyneham Lad]

In the WSJ today:-
Trump Invokes Emergency Arms Sales Authority to Counter Iran (https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-invokes-emergency-arms-sales-authority-to-counter-iran-11558721927?shareToken=ste47328c09bd0401f80f26ffa16e0440e)Ex tract:-

WASHINGTON—The Trump administration on Friday invoked a rarely used provision of American arms control laws to sidestep Congress and authorize billions of dollars in weapons sales to key Middle East allies, raising regional tensions and angering lawmakers who characterized the decision as an abuse of power, according to congressional sources.

Officials notified Congress that the administration is declaring an emergency under arms control laws amid tensions with Iran (https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-told-aides-he-doesnt-want-war-with-iran-11558036762?mod=article_inline) to rush through the weapons sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, two key allies in America’s intensifying confrontation with Iran.

People familiar with the details said the sale represents a broad package of 22 separate deals worth about $8 billion.

That will certainly help to calm things down...

[Two's in]

That will certainly help to calm things down...

Honestly Lyneham Lad, you're so suspicious. Next thing you know it'll be some wild theory about how convenient it is that Arms sales are bypassing Congress just as the Acting Sec Def turns out to be a former CEO of a major Defense Contractor...

/Perception is everything

[racedo]

Nope, which makes the "rabid dog" act Bolton is playing strike a lot of false notes.

Bolton is Trump's tool to keep him in with the MIC, Trump has the dog on leash and yanked it quite hard in public regarding Venezuala and Iran.

Bolton wants a war but Trump will not give him that even when Bolton sets up a Liberty / Gulf of Tonkin incident. Bolton is of course a Chickenhawk from Vietnam days.

[jolihokistix]

In the absence of any official announcement, and reading between the lines from various different sources, I have picked up two hints as to what happened to the ships anchored outside Fujairah.

One article says they were limpet mines, and another said that the 'shrapnel' found was of the type used by Iran's Revolutionary Guards.

A Japanese tanker was attacked in the Persian Gulf from behind in similar mysterious circumstances some years ago. At first sight no explosive residue. The Japanese ship looked as though it had been punched by a giant fist. The latest Norwegian ship looks like someone took a can opener to the stern at the water line. If these were meant to be a warning, with no loss of oil, then perhaps the explosive charge was lessened in some way. (?) Since 'they' hit ships 'to the east' of Fallujah in the Gulf of Oman, that would suggest to me that their escape route lay on that side.

The Houthis in Yemen probably do not yet have quite that reach. And if the US was threatening to cut off Iran's oil exports and passage through the Strait of Hormuz, then it would be logical for Iran to give the nod to any entity able to hit the end of the UAE's overland Hormuz-bypassing pipeline operations in Fujairah, if only as a tit-for-tat warning.

[SASless]

Or you could look at Gulf of Tonkin revisited where certain parties in US Govt need a war but CinC is very clear one is not going to happen.

So....are you saying it was a US CIA Covert Op to attack Tankers with the goal of Iran being blamed for the attacks?

[racedo]

So....are you saying it was a US CIA Covert Op to attack Tankers with the goal of Iran being blamed for the attacks?

Nope but there are a "lot" of people (Countrys plus big business) who would be very very happy if Iran could be proven to have done it.

Defining who will benefit most is generally a good way to see where the back trail leads to.

[Lyneham Lad]

Lengthy article in the WSJ today.

BEIRUT—A U.S. conclusion that Iran was behind recent strikes on oil tankers has reignited concern about Iran’s ability to wage guerrilla warfare in one of the world’s most vital waterways. (https://www.wsj.com/articles/irans-fast-boats-and-mines-bring-guerrilla-tactics-to-persian-gulf-11559208602?shareToken=stf20187aa02bf4ee687b927a19205731b)

In the recent tanker incident, the U.S. military concluded (https://www.wsj.com/articles/bolton-signals-caution-over-u-s-tensions-with-iran-11559114864?mod=article_inline) that Iranian divers planted timed magnetic mines on four ships, a U.S. official told The Wall Street Journal. The mines exploded within 53 minutes of each other, creating similar holes up to five meters square, the official said.

[racedo]

Lengthy article in the WSJ today.

BEIRUT—A U.S. conclusion that Iran was behind recent strikes on oil tankers has reignited concern about Iran’s ability to wage guerrilla warfare in one of the world’s most vital waterways. (https://www.wsj.com/articles/irans-fast-boats-and-mines-bring-guerrilla-tactics-to-persian-gulf-11559208602?shareToken=stf20187aa02bf4ee687b927a19205731b)

But again zero proof only a claim, as US forces in area then they would have track of all vessels in area. Strange said evidence is nowhere.

Is journalist now "believeable" where as a couple of years ago when he worked for Guardian he wasn't.

[Lonewolf_50]

But again zero proof only a claim The US intel folks have no duty to answer to you, an internet nobody enamored of conspiracy theories.
, as US forces in area then they would have track of all vessels in area. Really? I've been in US forces at sea in various places on the globe. We never 'knew it al." (We did keep track of a lot, though).
A signature sound byte of garden variety CT nonsense: asserting that their big, bad evil cause of all harm is blessed with omniscience.
Strange said evidence is nowhere. I am not privy to what went into that assessment that went into that rather bland public comment.
Are you? Betting the answer is no.
Critical thinking 101: what you perceive as absence of evidence ("hey, nobody told me!") is not in fact evidence of absence.
All it means it that nobody put you on the cc line. (Me either).
In Your Defense: it may be pure BS too. One really doesn't know, from the outside looking in.
Is journalist now "believeable" where as a couple of years ago when he worked for Guardian he wasn't.
More CT-style nonsense: must we deal only in your "all or nothing:" styled presumptions?
No.
1. Consider the source
2. Take each case on its own merits, or lack thereof.
3. Stop assuming that the target of your ire is all knowing, all powerful, and all seeing.

I found Jokiholistix post to be a worthwhile insight.

[Lonewolf_50]

Honestly Lyneham Lad, you're so suspicious. Next thing you know it'll be some wild theory about how convenient it is that Arms sales are bypassing Congress just as the Acting Sec Def turns out to be a former CEO of a major Defense Contractor...

/Perception is everything He did the same thing when Mattis was SecDef:
Remember the "arms sales still on despite that murder in Turkey" deal?
This is Trump being Trump.
"Increased sales! Yes!" That seems to be his guiding principle.
I sometimes get the idea that President Trump may believe that he gets a residual, or a percentage or a comission, on US sales to foreign countries when he's president.
(Newsflash: No, Mr President, you don't).

[AnglianAV8R]

Nope but there are a "lot" of people (Countrys plus big business) who would be very very happy if Iran could be proven to have done it.

Defining who will benefit most is generally a good way to see where the back trail leads to.


Or, in other words, follow the money.

[racedo]

The US intel folks have no duty to answer to you, an internet nobody enamored of conspiracy theories.
Really? I've been in US forces at sea in various places on the globe. We never 'knew it al." (We did keep track of a lot, though).

As I would have expected.

USN / FAF were flying overhead when this occurred.............. see the original media reports. Also doubt Omani's have zero capability for tracking what is around.

Your absense of evidence is correct BUT you also have to look at whose agenda it suits when it occurred.

US media claiming initially that the ships were targeted because 2 going to the US, nobody seems to want to explain how people would know when a tanker leaving it is heading to the US, master of vessel will have an idea but knows that can and does change all the time.

[Ddraig Goch]

2 more tankers had unfortunate accidents yesterday the 13th June, as reported by the BBC
see https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-48633016 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-48633016)

[SASless]

Race,

Take a deep breath please.

You think the American Media has the inside line on this story....do recall it is a Republican Administration.....Obama's crowd departed almost three years ago.

You challenge your own logic by saying destinations often change for outbound Tankers....that is true...but they do depart with some destination given....otherwise which way would the Captain know to point his vessel?

Commonsense says the Tankers are headed to consumers....take your pick of any except for Iran which does not need to import much oil right now.

If Plod stops a known burglar late at night and discovers him with a pry bar and lock picks in his possession....would not he be right to assume the guy was up to no good?

You do not know what the various Intelligence Agencies and Militaries know about the May incident or this one....yet you sure want to let on like you are in the know somehow and seem to think we should just accept what you offer.

You don't know...and are only offering mere uninformed conjecture.

Just what are you basing your opinion on besides fantasy?

[racedo]

Race,

Take a deep breath please.

You think the American Media has the inside line on this story....?

US Media have zero line on any story unless they are told they have one...............

[Blossy]

US Media have zero line on any story unless they are told they have one...............

I along with many others find your anti-American attitude tiring and tedious. Can't you think of anything nice (or even neutral) to post on here?

[racedo]

I along with many others find your anti-American attitude tiring and tedious. Can't you think of anything nice (or even neutral) to post on here?

US media are really nice and always tell the truth.

Happy ?

[Asturias56]

"destinations often change for outbound Tankers....that is true...but they do depart with some destination given....otherwise which way would the Captain know to point his vessel? Commonsense says the Tankers are headed to consumers....take your pick of any except for Iran which does not need to import much oil right now."

Actually they often leave WITHOUT a final destination - they head for "Europe" or "N America" and their final destination is chosen when the cargo owner decides where he/she can get the best deal. And sometimes if the price falls suddenly they'll park up for a while somewhere (like Falmouth in the UK) until they decide what the best option is.

"You do not know what the various Intelligence Agencies and Militaries know about the May incident or this one....yet you sure want to let on like you are in the know somehow and seem to think we should just accept what you offer."

Lets just remember that believing in the word of the Intelligence community hasn't necessarily been an intelligent thing to do over the last few decades - Indian Intelligence in 1962, Russian intelligence in 1979, the USA in Vietnam, the British in 1982, and the whole Iraqi WOMD saga are all examples of catastrophic misjudgments

[ORAC]

Well it’s one way to start a war.......

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48865030

Oil tanker bound for Syria detained in Gibraltar

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-oil-tanker-threat-gibraltar-seize-revolutionary-guard-a8989371.html

Iran threatens to seize British oil tanker in retaliation unless ship taken by Royal Marines off Gibraltar released

[Mil-26Man]

But again zero proof only a claim....

This, from racedo. I nearly died laughing.

[racedo]

This, from racedo. I nearly died laughing.

Thank you for your insightful contribution to the thread and giving your personal point of view. Oh wait you didn't bother with any of that.

[Seight]

Well it’s one way to start a war.......


Or at least for a Foreign Secretary and underdog in a Conservative Leadership Contest to try to raise his profile and convince the Conservative Party Membership that he's a tough guy .....

[Mil-26Man]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mil-26Man https://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/586655-iran-6.html#post10510248)
This, from racedo. I nearly died laughing.
Thank you for your insightful contribution to the thread and giving your personal point of view. Oh wait you didn't bother with any of that.

No, thank you for your insightful contribution to the thread and giving your personal point of view. Gave me the biggest belly-laugh I've had all week.

[melmothtw]

Seight (https://www.pprune.org/members/184894-seight)

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Age: 48
Posts: 1

That's some lurking, Seight. Welcome aboard....

[Seight]

Thanks - I'll try to behave !

[SASless]

Seizing a Panamanian registered Tanker full of Iranian Oil....now it is the British that are poking the Ayatollah's in the eye instead fo those pesky Americans.

A news report states there are four Iranian owned Tankers engaged in the illegal shipping of crude oil.

Memory serves me there have been four Tankers attacked by Limpet Mines.....sounds fair to me that the SBS and SEAL's do a direct action operation in retaliation.....let the Ayatollah's do the math on how many Tankers they have as compared to the rest of the World.

[TCAS FAN]

Regretably, together with the buffoon Boris' comments when he was Foreign Secretary, I don't see Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe coming home soon.

[arketip]

Seizing a Panamanian registered Tanker full of Iranian Oil....now it is the British that are poking the Ayatollah's in the eye instead fo those pesky Americans.

A news report states there are four Iranian owned Tankers engaged in the illegal shipping of crude oil.

Memory serves me there have been four Tankers attacked by Limpet Mines.....sounds fair to me that the SBS and SEAL's do a direct action operation in retaliation.....let the Ayatollah's do the math on how many Tankers they have as compared to the rest of the World.

You mean Iran should be allowed to shoot down a US airliner to be fair?

[chopper2004]

Well it’s one way to start a war.......

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48865030

Oil tanker bound for Syria detained in Gibraltar

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-oil-tanker-threat-gibraltar-seize-revolutionary-guard-a8989371.html

Iran threatens to seize British oil tanker in retaliation unless ship taken by Royal Marines off Gibraltar released

Ok bring back the Armilla Patrol then.

Cheers

[melmothtw]

You mean Iran should be allowed to shoot down a US airliner to be fair?

Some suggest they did - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10688067/Lockerbie-bombing-was-work-of-Iran-not-Libya-says-former-spy.html

[SASless]

You mean Iran should be allowed to shoot down a US airliner to be fair?



Did you ever stand up to a Play Ground Bully in your life?

They hit you...you hit them back....they go pick on someone else!

In the Freedom of Navigation game....which Navy will you bet your money on....the Iranian Navy or the US Navy?

Every time one of their vessels crosses the 12 Mile limit and hazards any vessel in any manner...put them on the bottom and hold a Miller Time for all Hands.

How long do you think that would last before they got the message?

[etudiant]

Who is the bully here?
Afaik, Iran has done nothing illegal under international law, whereas the seizure of their tanker is pretty iffy legally.
No question the US Navy has much more power, not sure that might makes right in this instance.

[SASless]

You of course assume Iran is not guilty of the attacks or deny Iran is behind the four mine attacks....right?

If you reject the idea that Iran is the guilty party....who did the attacks?

[Asturias56]

SAS - I think there was quite a discussion about that question earlier - there were enough suspects to fill an Agatha Christie TV episode.

I see your point about playground bullies BUT -are you willing to take any consequences? Say the USN sinks a few Iranian warships - then I'd say it would be understandable if the Iranians sank a US ship or two - no?

Or is it a one way street??

[Eclectic]

....who did the attacks?

Mossad?
They have lots of motivation and plenty of previous.

[melmothtw]

Mossad?
They have lots of motivation and plenty of previous.

Ah, the Jews. Only took 131 posts.

[ACW342]

Melmothw,
To say that it might have been Mossad is not being anti semitic. I personally have no particular love for the current Israeli regime nor of the Zionists (a political, not religious movement) and their continued breaking of UN mandates in building settlements on the West Bank. But for the Jewish religion as a whole, I have nothing but admiration considering all that was endured in the holocaust. Your suggestive statement "Ah, the Jews...." would suggest that no one can look at the possibility of a particular country or that countries security organisation might be responsible for an attack disguised as a terrorist attack is risible. There have been many false flag operations around the world by countries (ours included) wanting to stir the sh1t a bit. Just as I personally think that the student attack on legco in HK was possibly not by the undergraduates of a HK college but one much much further north. Rant over.

[melmothtw]

I personally have no particular love for the current Israeli regime...

You surprise me.

...the Zionists (a political, not religious movement) and their continued breaking of UN mandates in building settlements on the West Bank.

Boom, there we go.

There have been many false flag operations around the world by countries (ours included)

So why not MI6 then, or the CIA or the FSB? Why always straight to Mossad? It's a rhetorical question.

Just as I personally think that the student attack on legco in HK was possibly not by the undergraduates of a HK college but one much much further north

So?

[WE Branch Fanatic]

https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1148522369625051137

[SASless]

Or is it a one way street??

Done right....absolutely!

Mess with the Bull....you get the horns!

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bp-oil-tanker-sheltering-in-gulf-amid-fears-it-could-be-seized-by-iran-h2q85hn6v

Royal Navy frigate ‘on standby’ amid fears Iran could seize oil tanker

Defence chiefs are considering plans to order a Royal Navy frigate escort for a BP oil tanker through the Gulf after Iranian officials threatened to impound British vessels.

British Heritage, a tanker owned by BP Shipping and registered in the Isle of Man, is off the coast of Saudi Arabia after Tehran today repeated the threat, which it first issued last Friday. That was a response to the detention of an Iranian tanker in Gibraltar (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/royal-marines-in-gibraltar-stop-oil-tanker-believed-to-be-heading-to-syria-0cpdm79sx) because of fears it could be used to breach sanctions. The fate of the tanker is now being debated at the highest levels, with the future of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz at the entrance to the Gulf, the world’s most important shipping lane for oil and gas, at stake.

Iran has threatened to close the Strait periodically if its vessels are blocked from trading oil as a result of the Trump administration’s decision to reimpose tight sanctions on it. The United States, Britain and other allies have been equally vehement that the Strait must remain open and said “all options” would be considered to ensure this happened.

HMS Montrose, a Royal Navy frigate based in Bahrain, is in the Gulf and is understood to have been alerted to a possible operation to “shadow” British Heritage as it sails. BP and Royal Dutch Shell are both refusing to comment on the vessel’s fate, fearing any escalation in the situation. Vessel tracking websites today showed that British Heritage was still in the Gulf, well clear of Iranian waters, off the Saudi port of Dammam. A Royal Navy spokesman refused to comment on whether a request for naval protection had been received.......

British officials are said to be in close touch with the US and other allies about the threat to shipping in the region. A firm decision on what to do next has not been made as yet, The Times understands.......

British Heritage had been due to pick up oil from the Iraqi port of Basra on a contract with Royal Dutch Shell, according to the financial news agency Bloomberg........

Vessel-tracking websites showed that the British Heritage, which was already in the Gulf, changed course on Saturday and failed to dock in Basra. The port, the key node at the head of the Gulf for Iraq’s oil industry, is a few miles from the Iranian border and any shipping that docks there has to skirt Iranian territorial waters. The vessel is reluctant to try to leave the Gulf, which would also mean coming close to Iranian waters. The Strait of Hormuz is only 40 miles across at its narrowest point, with Iranian vessels also present.

Major General Mohammad Bagheri, head of Iran’s armed forces, renewed its threat to British shipping this morning. “Capture of the Iranian oil tanker based on fabricated excuses will not be unanswered and when necessary Tehran will give appropriate answer,” he said.

Separately, the Gibraltar authorities said that tests had confirmed the Grace 1 was “filled to the brim” with crude oil, discounting other claims that it was carrying fuel oil........

[T28B]

Thanks - I'll try to behave ! :D I have nominated you for the prestigious, and fictional, PPRuNe Member of the Decade award. Not sure when the elections are, though.

[Asturias56]

Whilst the melmoth and acw contributions are still up I notice a truly appalling post has been removed by the mods -

sort of shakes you to see that sort of thing in print on here

[melmothtw]

Whilst the melmoth and acw contributions are still up I notice a truly appalling post has been removed by the mods -

sort of shakes you to see that sort of thing in print on here

Indeed. I noted that the particular comment you refer to and most of the foul ones on the Gay Pride thread came from posters who I have not seen on the Military Aircrew site before. Hopefully they have all gone back to Jet Blast, and will stay there.

[SASless]

Now where were we.....oh...yes....dealing with playground bully's we were discussing.

It seems five Iranian Revolutionary Guard Gun Boats tried to seize a UK Oil Tanker....until the Royal Navy Frigate showed up and pointed the Ship's guns at the bad boys.

The Iranians elected to have a run ashore in lieu of boarding the Tanker it seems.

Odd that....show the Bully Boys they are going to get their hind ends kicked and they leg it.

Not much changes over the years when it comes to stuff....really.

If you appease them...they only grow bolder......remember that "Peace in our time...." stuff from yesterday year?


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7234881/Five-armed-Iranian-boats-attempt-storm-British-oil-tanker-Gulf.html

[racedo]

Now where were we.....oh...yes....dealing with playground bully's we were discussing.

It seems five Iranian Revolutionary Guard Gun Boats tried to seize a UK Oil Tanker....until the Royal Navy Frigate showed up and pointed the Ship's guns at the bad boys.

The Iranians elected to have a run ashore in lieu of boarding the Tanker it seems.

Odd that....show the Bully Boys they are going to get their hind ends kicked and they leg it.

Not much changes over the years when it comes to stuff....really.

If you appease them...they only grow bolder......remember that "Peace in our time...." stuff from yesterday year?


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7234881/Five-armed-Iranian-boats-attempt-storm-British-oil-tanker-Gulf.html

So no attempt to board, no warning to stop just they happened to be in the same area which is their territorial water. Looks like Foriegn Office PR Dept is at work.

[Mil-26Man]

Looks like Foriegn Office PR Dept is at work.

That's what everything looks like to you, racedo. If the boot's on the other foot though, then no questions asked.

[ORAC]

no warning to stop

A British Ministry of Defense source told CNN that it "appeared that the Iranian vessels were trying to divert the Heritage from international to Iranian waters" before the British Navy ship HMS Montrose "got between them and issued a verbal warning to withdraw."​​​​​​​

[SASless]

This new whiz bang will change the rules of the game a bit....120 nm range.....find you three different ways....now try to target a Drone in International waters with a few of these looking for your emitter.

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/new-navy-air-to-ground-missile-destroys-air-defenses-from-120-miles

[Lonewolf_50]

I wonder if anyone is dusting off old copies of Operation Earnest Will (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Earnest_Will) and the various O-Plans that are associated with it.
32 years later and we see SSDD: Same Stuff, Different Decade.

[SASless]

Lots of technology and force structure differences between then and now......bad conduct by the Revolutionary Guard.....not so much.

[Asturias56]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48958359

The UK has brought forward plans to send a second warship to the Gulf amid rising tensions with Iran.

HMS Duncan is currently in the Mediterranean and is expected to join HMS Montrose in the region next week. It comes after the UK government said Iranian boats tried to impede a British oil tanker in the Gulf (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48956547) on Wednesday. Meanwhile, Iran has reiterated calls for the UK to release an Iranian-owned oil tanker which was detained by Royal Marines in Gibraltar last week. An Iranian official, speaking to state news agency IRNA, warned the UK not to get involved in "this dangerous game".

The relationship between the UK and Iran has become increasingly strained in recent weeks. On Tuesday, the UK raised the threat to British shipping in Iranian waters in the Gulf to the highest level (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48956547) - where the risk of attack is critical. The following day, boats believed to belong to Iran's Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) approached the British Heritage tanker and tried to bring it to a halt as it was moving out of the Gulf into the Strait of Hormuz. HMS Montrose, a British frigate shadowing the BP-owned tanker, was forced to move between the three boats and the ship, a Ministry of Defence spokesman said. Iran denied any involvement in the attempted seizure.

HMS Duncan, a type 45 Destroyer, will operate alongside HMS Montrose in the Gulf for a short period, before HMS Montrose goes back to Bahrain for routine maintenance. A government spokeswoman said: "As part of our long-standing presence in the Gulf, HMS Duncan is deploying to the region to ensure we maintain a continuous maritime security presence while HMS Montrose comes off task for pre-planned maintenance and crew change over. "This will ensure that the UK, alongside international partners, can continue to support freedom of navigation for vessels transiting through this vital shipping lane."

[Lyneham Lad]

A Type 45 deploying to the Gulf at the height of summer - what could possibly go wrong...

[Lonewolf_50]

A Type 45 deploying to the Gulf at the height of summer - what could possibly go wrong... Sunburn????

[ORAC]

Lonewolf....

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/putting-the-type-45-propulsion-problems-in-perspective/

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/final-cure-for-type-45-destroyer-propulsion-problems-announced/

[AnglianAV8R]

Iranian and US officials held a secret meeting in the northern Iraqi province of Arbil late on Tuesday, US media reported Wednesday.
A group composed of the grandson of the founder of the Islamic Republic, Hassan Khomeini, and two Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers and Iran's envoy to Iraq, Iraj Musjidi, met US officials in Arbil after growing. Iran's internal political struggle, between conservatives and reformists.

The IRNA network confirmed that its sources had provided information about the "launching of a campaign of political liquidation among the dissenters in Iran, the secular government led by Hassan Rowhani and the conservative conservatism of Qayad Ali Khamenei, which led to the arrest of 125 Iranian officials and the assassination of an unknown number, Nasseri, which called for a group of officials angry as a result of the current dispute, the holding of the meeting with the United States, and for unspecified reasons, most of the desire to stop the current weakness of the government in Tehran.
The network pointed to "a split in the ranks of the Basij, in addition to the government, where the political campaigns of liquidation, fearing a soft coup against the current regime." https://www.alghadpress.com/news/%D8%A7%D8%AE%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A9/207869/%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B9-%D8%B3%D8%B1%D9%8A-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%A4%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%85%D9%86%D9%87%D9%85-%D8%AD%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D8%AE%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%86%D9%8A-%D9%88%D8%A7

[SASless]

In the meanwhile....the UK is dispatching more warships into the area....doubling or tripling its presence there.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9522374/iran-threat-attack-britain-tanker-gulf-navy-third-warship/

I am sure the Bangers and Mash from the supply ship will go over swell on any US Warship it services!

[Lonewolf_50]

Lonewolf.... https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/putting-the-type-45-propulsion-problems-in-perspective/
https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/final-cure-for-type-45-destroyer-propulsion-problems-announced/ I was making a slight play on words (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-N-22) that seems to not have registered. :E Thanks for the links, interesting reading.

[ericsson16]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-49029053

[racedo]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-49029053

Seems like nobody wants to own up to owning it and where it was going.

Seems like they can claim it was a legitimate stop until all data is provided.

[John Marsh]

From the Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/18/us-shoots-iranian-drone-straits-hormuz-says-trump/)

US President Donald Trump said on Thursday that a US warship destroyed an Iranian drone in the Strait of Hormuz amid heightened tensions between the two countries.

Mr Trump said the USS Boxer took defensive action after the drone closed to within 1,000 yards of the warship and ignored multiple calls to stand down.

The President called it the latest "hostile" action by Iran and urged other countries to condemn what he says are Iran's attempts to disrupt the freedom of navigation and global commerce in the strategic waterway in the Persian Gulf region.

He said the drone threatened the safety of the American ship and its crew.

Iran recently shot down a US drone that it said was flying over Iran.

Trump called off a planned retaliatory airstrike at the last minute, citing the number of potential casualties.

This is a developing story.

[West Coast]

Seems like nobody wants to own up to owning it and where it was going.

Seems like they can claim it was a legitimate stop until all data is provided.

I don’t know if this is a revelation to you or not, but you don’t have to hold a position, you can wait out till evidence is made public.

Just a thought.

[AnglianAV8R]

Iran makes 'substantial' nuclear offer in return for US lifting sanctions​​​​​​​

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/18/iran-nuclear-deal-trump-mohammad-javad-zarif-sanctions

[racedo]

I don’t know if this is a revelation to you or not, but you don’t have to hold a position, you can wait out till evidence is made public.
Just a thought.
You and I both know there is no chance that "evidence" will be made public unless it suits someone's personal agenda. Media will then spin it in whatever way they are told to.

I am happy, like you are, to express an opinion, it is my opinion solely, neither of us has to be right or wrong. Ultimately we are just expressing personal opinions and having read your opinions, I think I can safely say that they are yours solely, not influenced by anybody. It is why I read them.

[Lyneham Lad]

In the WSJ (https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-navy-flotilla-encounters-iran-in-strait-of-hormuz-11563491109?shareToken=stb4937a16832b435aadd3fe57c240bd3d).

Extract:-
An unarmed Iranian navy Bell 212 helicopter flew alongside the Boxer, yards away from the deck, before it was chased away by a U.S. helicopter. The commander of the Boxer, Capt. Ronald Dowdell, called the engagement “surreal.”

The convoy swept past the speed boats without incident but was followed by the larger Iranian military vessel, which came as close as 500 yards to the Boxer—the distance the U.S. navy allows before verbally communicating to a ship not to come any closer.

U.S. helicopters flew between the Iranian ship and the Boxer to warn it away, then followed a white Iranian aircraft that U.S. naval officials identified as a Y-12 surveillance plane.

Soon after, at approximately 10 a.m. local time, the Boxer convoy downed the drone, a U.S. official said late Thursday.

[havoc]

A BRITISH-flagged Swedish owned tanker has been seized by Iran and is heading for the Revolutionary Guard base at Qeshm Island.

Northern Marine, a subsidiary of Stena AB, confirmed "hostile action" had occurred before the tanker Stena Impero changed its course this afternoon.

It is believed 23 crew members were on board.

Just a few days ago Iran's supreme leader had threatened Britain will retaliation over what he described as the "vicious" seizure of an Iranian oil tanker near Gibraltar by UK forces.

Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has accused Britain of “piracy” after the Royal Marines seized a supertanker believed to be carrying Iranian crude oil to Syria on July 5.He has called for the immediate release of the oil tanker Grace 1, which was detained on suspicion it was breaking European sanctions by taking oil to Syria. In a TV speech, the Ayatollah said: “Evil Britain commits piracy and steals our ship and gives it a legal appearance.“ Iran and those who believe in our system will not leave such vicious deeds unanswered.”

Iran's Revolutionary Guard also seized another oil tanker on Sunday, the Panama-flagged MT Riah.The country later released a video showing the troops in speedboats seizing the tanker along with 12 members which it accused of smuggling oil.The unverified video shows the moment two speedboats circulating the Panama-flagged MT Riah.

The foreign oil tanker was reportedly then seized shortly after being surrounded in stormy waters.

[SASless]

Let's see how quickly the Americans and their President get blamed for all of this and the Iranians not.

That has been the standard response in the past.

[havoc]

So is this a NATO Article 5 issue?

[Airbubba]

Looks like the Liberian flagged crude oil tanker Mesdar has taken a turn for the worse as well.


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1613x791/mesdar_6f3943b22337c0cf6dbc4917e535a673109d0738.jpg

[racedo]

So is this a NATO Article 5 issue?

Only in John Boltons Wet Dreams............... speaking of which he seems to be staying in his coffin a lot these days.

[racedo]

Let's see how quickly the Americans and their President get blamed for all of this and the Iranians not.

That has been the standard response in the past.

Ok I will blame yawl, nothing to do with you but hate to feel you are left out ;)

[Airbubba]

Looks like the Mesdar may be turning back on course to Saudi.


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1772x923/mesar_2_3be28e022ec319d55289ba95beca88d3b5123157.jpg

[SASless]

The question is what are we (the all inclusive "we") going to do about what plainly is a series of actions by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard that could very well equate to Piracy or even acts of war?



What response shall we see from the UK?

[havoc]

Only in John Boltons Wet Dreams............... speaking of which he seems to be staying in his coffin a lot these days.

I'll wait for the response or lack of over the next few days from the Brits or NATO but no thanks for the political commentary.

[SASless]

Racedo,

I would much rather hear a reasoned response from you offering your opinion about the actual situation at hand.

We get it....you do not like Bolton, Pompeo, Trump, or apparently anything American....but that is irrelevant to the matter at hand and gratuitous slanging does not add too the discussion.

Stick to the facts and issues if you will.

Do tell us how you think the UK and by default NATO and other non-NATO nations should react to the latest event(s) by the Iranians.?

There can be no doubt the Iranians are involved....no matter how you wish otherwise.

If you wish to be seen as credible....you must stick to the issues and at some point take a position beyond banging your favorite drum.

So tell us....what is your analysis and expectations for the UK Government over the next few days....weeks...and couple of months?

[racedo]

Racedo,

I would much rather hear a reasoned response from you offering your opinion about the actual situation at hand.

We get it....you do not like Bolton, Pompeo, Trump, or apparently anything American....but that is irrelevant to the matter at hand and gratuitous slanging does not add too the discussion.

Stick to the facts and issues if you will.

Do tell us how you think the UK and by default NATO and other non-NATO nations should react to the latest event(s) by the Iranians.?

There can be no doubt the Iranians are involved....no matter how you wish otherwise.

If you wish to be seen as credible....you must stick to the issues and at some point take a position beyond banging your favorite drum.

So tell us....what is your analysis and expectations for the UK Government over the next few days....weeks...and couple of months?

Au contraire......... I do like Trump a lot, he was the President I believed the US needed, not the one the media would have wanted but that is a different story.

Best reaction is not to over react. Iranians reacting to UK taking their tanker, Uk wants to hold it another month, Iranian decided to play a tit for tat game.

SFA to do with NATO but we will see them running in as soon as possible.

Bolton will already be wanting Special forces to go in and kill lots of people and get the tanker back, cooler heads will prevail and it will eventually be released as part of a choreographed action.

Article by Peggy Noonan is one to read and maybe for US to follow.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/america-needs-to-rediscover-tact-11563490667

[ericsson16]

Racedo,

I would much rather hear a reasoned response from you offering your opinion about the actual situation at hand.

We get it....you do not like Bolton, Pompeo, Trump, or apparently anything American....but that is irrelevant to the matter at hand and gratuitous slanging does not add too the discussion.

Stick to the facts and issues if you will.

Do tell us how you think the UK and by default NATO and other non-NATO nations should react to the latest event(s) by the Iranians.?

There can be no doubt the Iranians are involved....no matter how you wish otherwise.

If you wish to be seen as credible....you must stick to the issues and at some point take a position beyond banging your favorite drum.

So tell us....what is your analysis and expectations for the UK Government over the next few days....weeks...and couple of months?
"It was carried out by the authorities in the Iranian province of Hormozgan" Nothing to do with the Iranian Government! Keep hearing the Iranians don't want war,let's put that to the test. SASless your spot on

[SASless]

Racedo,

Now that is exactly the kind of reply that bears considering.

As to what exactly Bolton is thinking....upon what inside source do you rely to base that comment upon?

You reckon that he may be tasked to play that role in the administration so the President can be seen as taking a more reasoned and diplomatic approach to these kinds of events?

Keeping one's adversaries on their hind foot does work to one's advantage and to the opponents dis-advantage.

Being un-predictable makes the political calculus for the other side much more difficult for them to sort out.

[racedo]

Racedo,

Now that is exactly the kind of reply that bears considering.

As to what exactly Bolton is thinking....upon what inside source do you rely to base that comment upon?

You reckon that he may be tasked to play that role in the administration so the President can be seen as taking a more reasoned and diplomatic approach to these kinds of events?

Keeping one's adversaries on their hind foot does work to one's advantage and to the opponents dis-advantage.

Being un-predictable makes the political calculus for the other side much more difficult for them to sort out.

Bolton is a warmonger, always has been, always will be. A coward when it came to Vietnam but willing to send others to their death with a zero care for them or its consequences. He is not new on the scene as have observed his actions for decades, even when he was a recess appointment as UN Ambassador under Dubya and Senate would not confirm him.

He maybe a useful foil to have but he recently has believed he has more power than he has. Trump slapping him down publicly twice within weeks brought him to heel. He wants a war against Iran because Israel wants a war and he is beholding to them and has been for decades.

I doubt a lot will happen prior to Israel elections in September, though Bibi may want something to try and get him elected again.

Tanker being siezed in Gibraltar was what set this off, Iran was always going to react it just needed time.

Iran is clear it will not be pushed around, it made and kept to agreements in the past that US broke. So from their side why would the trust the US when Israel just has to tell them break it and it happens. Any agreement US makes would just have next President repudiate it hence now US word becomes meaningless, now even US friends understand that, when your friends doubt your word then you need to worry.

[obgraham]

Racedo, what agreements with Iran did the US "break"?

The US withdrew from the previously negotiated agreement. As in, canceled it. Nothing there to "break".

[Airbubba]

Another oil tanker, the Panama flagged LR2 Poseidon has reportedly been boarded in the Gulf of Oman.


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1438x823/poseidon_d84b760aebe3faf9426092173261e89380d2b9d1.jpg

[SASless]

President Trump has legal and executive authority under US and International Law to do as he did.

It may not be popular, and might even be the wrong thing to do...but he is within his authority.

The terms of the Agreement (Treaty if you wish....) facilitate any individual Nation a part of the Agreement to cite issues and take action if it feels there was not a proper response to those concerns.

Yale Journal of International Law | Is the Trump Administration Bound by the Iran Deal? (http://www.yjil.yale.edu/is-the-trump-administration-bound-by-the-iran-deal/)

[racedo]

Racedo, what agreements with Iran did the US "break"?

The US withdrew from the previously negotiated agreement. As in, canceled it. Nothing there to "break".

US made a binding agreement along with other parties with Iran. It decided to break it and walk away with zero proof even though body monitoring said it was clear that Iran was keeping to the agreement. Israel demanded US break the agreement and it did. Why is US allowing a foreign govt interfere ? US then imposed sanctions and demanded others do so as well.

[ericsson16]

Jeremy Hunt has warned Iran it will face "serious consequences" if it does not release a British-flagged tanker seized in the Strait of Hormuz.By jove Jeremy,I am sure they will be choking on their Chelo Kabab's.Come Tuesday Boris will slap them down with a Kipper!

[Sunfish]

So it’s legal when britain takes an iranian ship in international waters but piracy when iran returns the favor?

[racedo]

President Trump has legal and executive authority under US and International Law to do as he did.

It may not be popular, and might even be the wrong thing to do...but he is within his authority.

The terms of the Agreement (Treaty if you wish....) facilitate any individual Nation a part of the Agreement to cite issues and take action if it feels there was not a proper response to those concerns.

Yale Journal of International Law | Is the Trump Administration Bound by the Iran Deal? (http://www.yjil.yale.edu/is-the-trump-administration-bound-by-the-iran-deal/)

Iran as per the body monitoring the agreement was keeping to it. Israel didn't like it, US administration bowed to what Israel wanted. This is what everybody sees and everybody reads.

US decided that it could do what it wanted and break its previous agreement. It then demand everybody else follow its steps or they would sanction any business doing trade with Iran and start and economic blockade. Now even its own friends realise that any agreement with US is breakable by them whenever a politician wants to do it. A Treaty means nothing because the next President can just walk away from it.

US doesn't need to worry about its enemies, they will always be there, its friends however are the ones who openly wonder what US is doing. UK will always be a lapdog but rest of EU see blocking of pipelines etc as nothing more than a move to corner the market.

[Professor Plum]

Sunfish,

the Iranian vessel was on its was to Syria in breach of EU sanctions and was therefore boarded. But Im sure you knew that already didnt you? The UK have also been in talks and offered a peaceful way forward.

It appears however, that Iran has proceeded in a tit for tat game. Itll be interesting to see if the UK vessel was in breach of any international rules/regs. The company who own it claim it hasn’t.

[Sunfish]

is iran a member of the EU? By your logic, I could prohibit you from drinking beer and then send a friend around to keep you out of the pub because you are in breach of my “sanctions”.

To put that another way, there is no legal relationship between iran and the EU. U.N. sanctions? Yes EU? no.

[drustsonoferp]

The Grace I sailed through territorial waters of an EU member. I'm not sure the information is yet sufficiently clear on position of the 2 ships apparently taken by the Iranians to confirm whether they were in international waters or not.

The equivalent in your analogy might be not allowing people to drink beer in your own garden, but having no influence over what they do in a pub.

[Professor Plum]

Drust-etc - my thoughts exactly.

sunfish - the Iranian boat (sorry - ship) was in EU waters in defiance of EU sanctions when it was detained. Expecting to sail through unchallenged in defiance of said members states sanctions is somewhat dumb.

The uk flagged tanker on the other hand was in international waters apparently. It’ll be interesting to see what international rules/regs it had broken. No proof has been forthcoming just yet.

If we’re into analogies-

It’s like me telling you that you aren't allowed to walk through my property (or the property of my neighbours) en route to so and so’s party carrying beer, and then being annoyed when you do and then get detained. I then offer to release you, providing that you don't take your beer to so and so’s house.

You then threaten to detain a member of my family. You attempt to do so on a public highway (i,e not on your property) but get chased away by their older brother, and a few days later, you try the same again and succeed. Again-not on your property, with no proof forthcoming yet of any wrongdoing.

[ericsson16]

Drust-etc - my thoughts exactly.

sunfish - the Iranian boat (sorry - ship) was in EU waters in defiance of EU sanctions when it was detained. Expecting to sail through unchallenged in defiance of said members states sanctions is somewhat dumb.

The uk flagged tanker on the other hand was in international waters apparently. It’ll be interesting to see what international rules/regs it had broken. No proof has been forthcoming just yet.

If we’re into analogies-

It’s like me telling you that you aren't allowed to walk through my property (or the property of my neighbours) en route to so and so’s party carrying beer, and then being annoyed when you do and then get detained. I then offer to release you, providing that you don't take your beer to so and so’s house.

You then threaten to detain a member of my family. You attempt to do so on a public highway (i,e not on your property) but get chased away by their older brother, and a few days later, you try the same again and succeed. Again-not on your property, with no proof forthcoming yet of any wrongdoing.

Well said and explained Prof Plum.

[Sunfish]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage

Transit passage is a concept of the Law of the Sea (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_sea), which allows a vessel or aircraft the freedom of navigation or overflight solely for the purpose of continuous and expeditious transit of a strait (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait) between one part of the high seas (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_waters) or exclusive economic zone (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exclusive_economic_zone) and another. The requirement of continuous and expeditious transit does not preclude passage through the strait for the purpose of entering, leaving or returning from a state bordering the strait, subject to the conditions of entry to that state.

This navigation rule is codified in Part III of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea).[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage#cite_note-UNCLOS-1) Although not all countries have ratified the convention,[2] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage#cite_note-UNCLOS-ratification-2) most countries, including the US,[3] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage#cite_note-dyke-20081002-3)
[4] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage#cite_note-4) accept the customary navigation rules as codified in the Convention. This navigation rule took on more importance with UNCLOS III as that convention confirmed the widening of territorial waters (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters) from three to twelve nautical miles, causing more straits not to have a navigation passage between the territorial waters of the coastal nations.[3] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage#cite_note-dyke-20081002-3)

Transit passage exists throughout the entire strait, not just the area overlapped by the territorial waters of the coastal nations. The ships and aircraft of all nations, including warships, auxiliaries, and military aircraft, enjoy the right of unimpeded transit passage in such straits and their approaches. Submarines are free to transit international straits submerged since that is their normal mode of operation.[3] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage#cite_note-dyke-20081002-3)Transit passage rights do not extend to any state's internal waters (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_waters) within a strait.[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage#cite_note-UNCLOS-1)

The legal regime of transit passage exists for all straits used for international navigation where there is not a simple alternative route, and where there is no long-standing international convention governing the straits such as for the Danish Straits (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_Straits), the Turkish Straits (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Straits), and the Strait of Magellan (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Magellan). The major international trade routes of the Strait of Gibraltar (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Gibraltar), Dover Strait (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dover_Strait), Strait of Hormuz (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Hormuz), Bab-el-Mandeb (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bab-el-Mandeb) and Strait of Malacca (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Malacca) are covered by the transit passage provisions.[3] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transit_passage#cite_note-dyke-20081002-3)

If that doesn’t apply at Gibraltar then it doesn’t apply in hormuz. If britain can stop ships then so can iran.

[Asturias56]

Did anyone think this through?

As in - if we arrest /detain a tanker at Gibraltar how many UK ships re in the Gulf and how will we protect them? Because it's either criminal lack of foresight or an attempt to make the situation in the Gulf worse................

Which is weird as the UK is trying to save the N deal but at the same time has issues with that lady in jail and refuses to settle the bill for the tanks that is till outstanding... certainly NOT a joined-up policy I'm afraid :rolleyes:

[SASless]

If that doesn’t apply at Gibraltar then it doesn’t apply in hormuz. If britain can stop ships then so can iran.

If you are suggesting that Iran playing a game of "Tit for Tat" is fair dinky and legal....you are grossly wrong.

The correct and legal methods are with diplomatic protests and International Courts....not piracy!

The Captain and senior Officers of the Tanker seized by the UK were given a Court appearance and bonded....and released.

The Court extended the period the Tanker could be held pending the "defendant" to prove its cargo was headed to legitimate buyers.

Compare that to the Iranian actions.

Also take note that the Official News outlet for the Iranian Regime directly contradicted the semi-official PARS version of the reasons behind the seizure.

The Iranians cannot get on the same sheet of music when it comes to the reasons they are seizing multiple Tankers....and have not afforded the crews that are being held captive any sort of legal proceeding .

Face it....the Iranians are walking over their own Willy by doing what they are and how they are going about it.

[chips101]

It's ok. The British government is taking this seriously 🤣

[ericsson16]

Conservative Tom Tugendhat,( Neville Chamberlain) chairman of the Commons foreign affairs(and appeasement) committee, said if the report is correct, Britain should rule out the use of force in response. “That’s an important Iranian military port and I think any military options will therefore be extremely unwise,” he told BBC Radio 4

[obgraham]

US made a binding agreement along with other parties with Iran. It decided to break it and walk away with zero proof even though body monitoring said it was clear that Iran was keeping to the agreement. Israel demanded US break the agreement and it did. Why is US allowing a foreign govt interfere ? US then imposed sanctions and demanded others do so as well.
Since the "agreement" was never subjected to Congressional approval (because it clearly would have failed) this never reached the status of a treaty. Trump was right to walk away from it, as most Americans felt he should.

It is true that after reimposing sanctions, the US told others "you choose, us or them". Sorry you don't like that, but you still have a choice.

[SASless]

What military action can the UK carry out that would have a "positive" effect on this whole situation and not. harm its own interests?

There just isn't the Tools in the Kit Bag due to the down sizing of the UK Military these days for them unilaterally to influence such a campaign.

It would require a multi-national response...UK/US perhaps....but certainly not the Israeli's.

The Israeli's understand they have to act independently or see an anti-Iran Arab/Western powers coalition fall apart.

Racedo.....exactly where do you come up with this notion that the Agreement is "binding" on any signatory to the Agreement?

The "Agreement" has options for every signatory to raise issues and exercise options.....that is exactly what the United States Government did.

Put up your evidence to prove the United States violated the wording of the "Agreement".

Even Obama called the "Agreement" a political agreement and did not pursue Congressional approval as a "Treaty".

President Trump carried that forward upon taking office.

http://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2017/sep/12/crs-report-options-cease-implementing-nuclear-deal

[Airbubba]

Video of the capture of the Stena Impero on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/Isna_Int/status/1152595291805274112

[Bergerie1]

If Britain had not invested so much money in two large aircraft carriers, there would have been more money available for more destroyers and frigates. Does Britain really need these two huge assets? It seems clear that a fleet of many more smaller vessels would be much more useful - not only in places like The Gulf, but also around the coast of Britain to control immigration, and perhaps fishing rights after Brexit.

The Royal Navy is seriously short of ships. Had every British vessel been escorted through the Straits of Hormuz after the oil tanker carrying Iranian oil was stopped and taken to Gibralter, this would not have happened. You don't need too much imagination to see that this tit-for-tat escalation would soon start. But we are now almost impotent.

[Asturias56]

"The Captain and senior Officers of the Tanker seized by the UK were given a Court appearance and bonded....and released."

Nothing to stop the Iranians from doing the same - bu the crew may want to stay on the vessel under "house arrest"

I'm interested in what the Iranians say - about where the tanker was - but right now it does look like tit-for-tat. Which is clearly illegal under international law.............. but I suspect they feel International Law hasn't done much for Iran over the years.

[Sunfish]

Sasless: ‘The Captain and senior Officers of the Tanker seized by the UK were given a Court appearance and bonded....and released.

The Court extended the period the Tanker could be held pending the "defendant" to prove its cargo was headed to legitimate buyers.

Compare that to the Iranian actions.

How do you know the Iranians have not done exactly the same thing? Just asking.....

[SASless]

Nothing to stop the Iranians from doing the same....

Like they did when they invaded the American Embassy...right?

If the Iranians were playing by the Rules they would have preferred charges against the Captain and perhaps the senior members of the crew....and made all those proceeding public wouldn't they?

They have not....and the news media (international media) are not having much access to the crews are they?

[Blossy]

And the point of the troops on the Mil helicopter needing facemasks is...…?

[OvertHawk]

And the point of the troops on the Mil helicopter needing facemasks is...…?

The exact same reason that many police and military personnel (especially SF) from all over the world have their faces covered / pixelated when being filmed. :ugh:

[Halfwayback]

Sunfish,
The Iranian tanker actually stopped of its own accord to take on stores in Gibraltar's territorial waters - in exactly the same way that many other merchant ships do. It was not just conducting a transit of the area.

Membership of the EU requires any state to enforce the EU sanctions currently in place. Gibraltar did just this.

Gibraltar asked for, and was given, the assistance of Royal Marines (who specialise in this field) to assist the Gibraltar police in apprehending the vessel.

You are right. The boarding of a ship in transit of a Strait, especially by armed force, is an illegal act - which is exactly what the Iranians have done.
It is of note that the Iranian ship is full of Iranian oil; the Stena Impero is in ballast and has NO cargo.

HWB

[Asturias56]

SAS - its not just the Iranians - i don't remember the international press being invited to Guantanamo very often either - or charges being brought in a proper court of law

Face it - countries will do what they want when they want to do it and they will justify whatever it is

Doesn't convince anyone but it makes them happy

[Islandlad]

....... certainly NOT a joined-up policy I'm afraid :rolleyes:

Unless those joining up the 'policy' are an out going PM and Foreign Secretary leaving a little "Welcome to No 10" gift to the inbound PM.

Just a thought.

[Professor Plum]

Sunfish-

quote “If that doesn’t apply at Gibraltar then it doesn’t apply in hormuz. If britain can stop ships then so can iran.”

given your eye for an eye philosophy, are you suggesting that Gibraltar starts mining merchant vessels in the straits of Gibraltar then, when nobody's looking? Just like Iran did?

:ugh:

[SASless]

i don't remember the international press being invited to Guantanamo very often either

That is irrelevant to the issues at hand.....here we are talking about acts of war, piracy, and violations of UN and EU sanctions against Iran.

Ya'll did notice the Iranian Foreign Minister was in the USA while the latest acts were taken.....and ya'll probably are unaware that the Revolutionary Guards and the Ayatollah's do not care much for the FM who was educated in the United States.

The Iranian Government is splintered with multiple competing factions...some due to religion and politics....which creates a situation where different factions are working at cross purposes far too often.

I am thinking we are going to see far more support for the secular side of the Iranian government than we are the Zealots like the Revolutionary Guards side of the government.

Sanctions are really beginning to hurt the Iranians....and we can count on more and tougher sanctions yet to come over their latest antics.

I am thinking the bets are on the people rising up and a "counter-revolution" taking place that shall see the Ayatollahs unseated and the Revolutionary Guard kicked to the curb.

[Fareastdriver]

Were the UK to have left the European Union on the 29th march as we was supposed to then we would not have to had to stop the Iranian tanker and all this trouble in the Straight of Homuz wouldn't have happened.

[SASless]

The RN took very decisive action it appears....a bit short of a serious telling off of the Iranians....which could have provoked a hostile response I reckon.:ugh:

The link contains the audio of the radio transmissions of the Iranians and the RN warship.


https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/07/21/revealed-audio-of-britains-royal-navy-vs-irans-islamic-guards-during-tanker-seizure/

[dead_pan]

Were the UK to have left the European Union on the 29th march as we was supposed to then we would not have to had to stop the Iranian tanker and all this trouble in the Straight of Homuz wouldn't have happened.

​​​​​​Err so the plan is from now on we cower under the blankets and abrogate our responsibilities as a serious world player? So much for global Britain eh (Assuming of course this isn't sarcasm - its impossible to tell nowadays)

Actually it is grimly amusing to see the Iranians trolling us so blatantly. They know full well we can do eff all about it.

[dead_pan]

I am thinking the bets are on the people rising up and a "counter-revolution" taking place that shall see the Ayatollahs unseated and the Revolutionary Guard kicked to the curb

Very wishful thinking methinks. Didn't they try that a few years back and get brutally put back in their box?

If a recent BBC in-country report is anything to go by, a growing portion of their young people are getting more than a little hacked off with the west, with this seemingly endless flip-flopping

[Asturias56]

Interesting that according to today's "Times" the Gibraltar Govt changed their rules /laws 36 hours before they intercepted the tanker and kicked this off - sounds like the long stranding rules didn't allow interception of tankers passing through... now WHO suggested that change I wonder......

And since Spain has a claim on those waters why didn't they act???

[Not_a_boffin]

Very wishful thinking methinks. Didn't they try that a few years back and get brutally put back in their box?

If a recent BBC in-country report is anything to go by, a growing portion of their young people are getting more than a little hacked off with the west, with this seemingly endless flip-flopping

I saw that completely unbiased and not at all influenced by an "if only Trump hadn't trashed the nice EU nuclear deal everything would be wonderful and unicorns would frolic in crystal pools of water with unlimited chocolate and honey for all" piece. Leading questions, left, right and centre......

[ORAC]

Doubtless all the fault of Boris and Brexit.......

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fears-grow-for-academic-held-in-iran-nxbfkkjfs

Fears grow for academic held in Iran

Concerns are growing over the fate of a respected French-Iranian academic a month after she was thrown into prison as the latest apparent hostage in Tehran’s conflict with the West.

Efforts led by President Macron have so far failed to elicit any explanation of the arrest or provide a French consular visit for Fariba Adelkhah, 60, an authority on Iran at the Sciences Po university in Paris. She was secretly arrested while working in Tehran last month and was jailed in the city’s notorious Evin prison.

Ms Adelkhah, an anthropologist, has joined Britain’s Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and about ten other dual nationals as pawns in a power game assumed to be led by the regime’s hardliners......

Tehran simply confirmed her arrest and said she was regarded as an Iranian citizen.

https://iranhumanrights.org/2019/04/memo-to-zarif-stop-taking-dual-nationals-as-hostages/

[dead_pan]

I saw that completely unbiased and not at all influenced by an "if only Trump hadn't trashed the nice EU nuclear deal everything would be wonderful and unicorns would frolic in crystal pools of water with unlimited chocolate and honey for all" piece. Leading questions, left, right and centre......

Show me an unbiased media report on the country...

As far as I recall I don't think any openly expressed their support for the regime either.

[dead_pan]

Gibraltar Govt changed their rules /laws 36 hours before they intercepted the tanker

Odds on this law being changed back on Wednesday afternoon?

[TURIN]

Interesting that according to today's "Times" the Gibraltar Govt changed their rules /laws 36 hours before they intercepted the tanker and kicked this off - sounds like the long stranding rules didn't allow interception of tankers passing through... now WHO suggested that change I wonder......


Indeed, and why? Who is trying to provoke who?

It sickens me that we are being led, again, into another conflict with the very same agenda as Gulf War II.
Have we learned nothing?

[ORAC]

That is not what The Times reported.

What The Times did say was that the blog EU Sanctions reported Gibraltar had updated its EU sanctions regulations, which it did on 3rd July, just before the ship was stopped. I include a link to the relevant blog report below and the EU regulation implemented.

Note that 3rd July was the date of commencement of the regulation (link 2) not its date of issue , which was as part of the Sanctions Act 2019/06, which was signed into effect on 28th March (link 3) - over 3 months previously.

https://www.europeansanctions.com/2019/07/gibraltar-sanctions-laws-grace-1-designation/

https://www.gibraltarlaws.gov.gi/articles/2019s131.pdf

https://www.gibraltarlaws.gov.gi/articles/2019-06o.pdf

[racedo]

If you are suggesting that Iran playing a game of "Tit for Tat" is fair dinky and legal....you are grossly wrong.

The correct and legal methods are with diplomatic protests and International Courts....not piracy!
.

What happen when some "big" countries refuse to recognise International Courts...................... even when caught out. Like mining Nicuraguan harbours. Claim countrys should respect International laws and courts because laughable when countries decide what they will respect when it suits.

[racedo]

Since the "agreement" was never subjected to Congressional approval (because it clearly would have failed) this never reached the status of a treaty. Trump was right to walk away from it, as most Americans felt he should.

It is true that after reimposing sanctions, the US told others "you choose, us or them". Sorry you don't like that, but you still have a choice.

Which basically means to anybody is "any agreement with US President is not worth the paper it is written on".

[racedo]

Like they did when they invaded the American Embassy...right?

If the Iranians were playing by the Rules they would have preferred charges against the Captain and perhaps the senior members of the crew....and made all those proceeding public wouldn't they?

They have not....and the news media (international media) are not having much access to the crews are they?

They fact they haven't, doesn't mean they won't. After all how long did it take for US to put charges to people at Gitmo and where was their access to the media ?

[ORAC]

Which basically means to anybody is "any agreement with US President is not worth the paper it is written on". Correct - the Kyoto and Paris climate agreements being examples in point.

[SASless]

Racedo,

I believe a short ramble through British (or is it English....I get confused on the semantics of it all) History might remind you who we learned all that from and more.

Capturing a Terrorist or Non-Uniformed Combatant on the battlefield does differ a bit from a crew of mariners going about their daily business I should think.....don't you agree?

[racedo]

Racedo,

I believe a short ramble through British (or is it English....I get confused on the semantics of it all) History might remind you who we learned all that from and more.

Capturing a Terrorist or Non-Uniformed Combatant on the battlefield does differ a bit from a crew of mariners going about their daily business I should think.....don't you agree?

George Washington was a Non Uniformed Combatant for many a year.

Stopping oil going to Syria so it can continue to destroy IS/Al Aaeda with a crew of mariners comes along as the height of stupidity. Then again US Foreign Policy in Middle East is along those lines.

As for learning from the Brits, but like getting Ray Charles to provide driving lessons to Stevie Wonder and then wonder why are at the bottom of the cliff.

Its the Wilberforce worked to abolish Slavery, while many fellow Brits were making millions from type of hypocrisy.

[SASless]

If George had been captured he would have been a prisoner in one of the many prison ships you lot had in New York Harbor.

[unclenelli]

Easy diplomatic solution:
Detain the GRACE 1 crew in Gibraltar and let them go through due legal process for breaching sanctions, then...
1. Fly out a new crew to take the ship back to Iran, full, or
2. Sell the fuel to a neutral country at baseline market price (without transportation costs), then the second crew take empty ship back to Iran. (But, the quantity of cash being carried on GRACE 1 would attract the attention of pirates around the Horn of Africa area = not our problem!!! - Send your speedboats out there!)
The first crew would likely try to claim asylum, get rejected and be home with family soon enough.

[ShotOne]

Hypocrisy, racedo? Yes, Brits were making millions from slavery. But that didn’t stop us abolishing it. And devoting huge resources to enforcement. And speaking of enforcement, there has been support from France and Germany for UK proposals for increased naval presence in the Gulf. Something Iran will no doubt find unwelcome.

[t43562]

Pompeo on Iran’s capture of British-flagged tanker: Up to ‘United Kingdom to take care of their ships’

https://www.foxnews.com/world/pompeo-says-uk-must-free-captured-tanker

Helpful and supportive.

[racedo]

Hypocrisy, racedo? Yes, Brits were making millions from slavery. But that didn’t stop us abolishing it. And devoting huge resources to enforcement. And speaking of enforcement, there has been support from France and Germany for UK proposals for increased naval presence in the Gulf. Something Iran will no doubt find unwelcome.

Only when others had cashed in on UK market share and were making more money. Slavery isn't abolished, tell that to the people in the open air slave markets in Libya that Uk helped reform,

Wonder where all the Libyan money will end up that UK Govt sequestrated.

[racedo]

Easy diplomatic solution:
Detain the GRACE 1 crew in Gibraltar and let them go through due legal process for breaching sanctions, then...
1. Fly out a new crew to take the ship back to Iran, full, or
2. Sell the fuel to a neutral country at baseline market price (without transportation costs), then the second crew take empty ship back to Iran. (But, the quantity of cash being carried on GRACE 1 would attract the attention of pirates around the Horn of Africa area = not our problem!!! - Send your speedboats out there!)
The first crew would likely try to claim asylum, get rejected and be home with family soon enough.

No legal basis for sanctions in the first place. Iranians kept to their agreement. UK doing what Washington told them like a good lap dog.

[ShotOne]

Yes, racedo others did cash in on market share. And yes, the trade did continue despite our efforts. Sickeningly to the present day as you rightly point out. Are you demanding a return of pax britannica to stamp it out?

ironically, this seizure seems to be mobilising Europe against Iran despite having previously been very reluctant to go along with US “maximum pressure”

[tdracer]

Which basically means to anybody is "any agreement with US President is not worth the paper it is written on".

The POTUS isn't a dictator (not yet, anyway). His/her agreements are not binding and don't carry the weight of the nation until they are ratified by the US Congress.
We rather like that the POTUS isn't a dictator and being limited in what they can unilaterally do or agree to.

[racedo]

Yes, racedo others did cash in on market share. And yes, the trade did continue despite our efforts. Sickeningly to the present day as you rightly point out. Are you demanding a return of pax britannica to stamp it out?

ironically, this seizure seems to be mobilising Europe against Iran despite having previously been very reluctant to go along with US “maximum pressure”

The attempt at rewriting history such that London outlawed slavery, from thence on its citizens stopped being slavers is interesting, no factual basis for it but interesting never the less.

[ShotOne]

Any who didn’t stop did so under threat of heavy penalties, strongly enforced.

[unclenelli]

No legal basis for sanctions in the first place. Iranians kept to their agreement. UK doing what Washington told them like a good lap dog.

Security Council Resolution 2199(2015) (https://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sc12090.doc.htm) was passed to prevent funding by oil smuggling.

[AnglianAV8R]

Security Council Resolution 2199(2015) (https://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sc12090.doc.htm) was passed to prevent funding by oil smuggling.

Prevent funding of terrorism, namely ISIL, Al Qaeda etal, not Syria.

[Asturias56]

The attempt at rewriting history such that London outlawed slavery, from thence on its citizens stopped being slavers is interesting, no factual basis for it but interesting never the less.

Let's just say the Brits were less likely to trade in slaves after the law was passed eh?

No-one has totally clean hands here but at least the Brits did something a long way ahead of many other countries

[racedo]

Security Council Resolution 2199(2015) (https://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sc12090.doc.htm) was passed to prevent funding by oil smuggling.

So US is breaking US Sec Council regs in allowing oil smuggling

[racedo]

Let's just say the Brits were less likely to trade in slaves after the law was passed eh?

No-one has totally clean hands here but at least the Brits did something a long way ahead of many other countries

Some were but others continued profitable. Moralising and being so against something when you know you position is no longer profitable or tenable is a very British Trait.

Like wanting to introduce Democracy to Hong Kong as you are leaving after ignoring it for the previous 90 years.

[ShotOne]

Repeat a lie enough times and it becomes true, racedo?Slavery was both immensely profitable and tenable, witnessed by many nations which continued to profit hugely, long after abolition. It’s not for UK to tell HK how it should be governed. But we are very much party to the 50 year joint agreement guaranteeing HK retains its own laws. Amongst other things, these outlaw Hong Kongers from being kidnapped without legal process to reappear in Chinese prisons.

[beardy]

Has nobody considered that in responding to racedo all they are doing is priming a chatbot with its next response?

[dead_pan]

Epic thread drift...

Waiting for Boris speed-reading his first briefing then offhandedly announcing the tanker was indeed in Iranian waters and that the crew deserves everything coming to them.

Serious questions - what is the advantage of British flagging a Swedish-owned tanker with a predominantly Indian crew? Is it a tax thingy? Also, could other countries offer their flags as temporary flags of convenience to British shipping until the Iranians calm down a bit?

[racedo]

Repeat a lie enough times and it becomes true, racedo?Slavery was both immensely profitable and tenable, witnessed by many nations which continued to profit hugely, long after abolition. It’s not for UK to tell HK how it should be governed. But we are very much party to the 50 year joint agreement guaranteeing HK retains its own laws. Amongst other things, these outlaw Hong Kongers from being kidnapped without legal process to reappear in Chinese prisons.

UK decided Hong Kong should have democracy only when they were leaving not before. Why not ?

[racedo]

Has nobody considered that in responding to racedo all they are doing is priming a chatbot with its next response?

Why do you feel you have to abuse people personally when you disagree with their viewpoint ?

[unclenelli]

QUEST1 has had it's tracker turned off since 19 May heading to Mediterranean (MEDITE)
So what was is doing at Gibraltar in July if it wasn't heading back to some clandestine delivery to a rogue nation?

[beardy]

Why do you feel you have to abuse people personally when you disagree with their viewpoint ?
Quod erat demonstrandum

[Asturias56]

Racedo (and the likes of Van) are useful as they stick out a foot occasionally to interrupt the group think that can settle in on here

I'm sure West Coast, SAS-less and some of the other Cold War warriors don't object to having their tails tweaked occasionally.........

[NutLoose]

Does this not read like......It looks like we have screwed our Navy over so much we can't protect our own ships, I know. let's suggest we have an international force and get them to do it for us.


https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/iran-rejects-uks-proposal-for-european-led-maritime-force/ar-AAEKfy2

[Mil-26Man]

Does this not read like......It looks like we have screwed our Navy over so much we can't protect our own ships, I know. let's suggest we have an international force and get them to do it for us.


https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/iran-rejects-uks-proposal-for-european-led-maritime-force/ar-AAEKfy2


https://twitter.com/chrismiller_uk/status/1153399861401849860?s=19

[ShotOne]

Even if the Royal Navy was four times it’s size, it couldn’t possibly escort every single ship. But a broad coalition (no, NOT an EU Navy!) would certainly change this picture, however unpalatable Iran May find this. How ironic that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards should be succeeding where Trump failed!

[West Coast]

Quod erat demonstrandum

Van brings a ranging perspective. Racedo is like a broken record.