Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Two tankers attacked in Gulf of Oman

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Two tankers attacked in Gulf of Oman

Old 13th Jun 2019, 15:42
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,424
At this point....the latest two "attacks" have not been confirmed by any investigation or examination of the ships involved.

But please....do not let that get in the way of your allegations and declaration of the causes and culprits.

SASless is online now  
Old 13th Jun 2019, 17:18
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 738
So it would seem the Iranians were in close proximity to the tankers and ready to act immediately after the attacks occurred.
The Iranian SAR vessel NAJI10 put out from the nearby Iranian port of Jask so I wouldn't read too much into that. Iranian news was quoted as having said quite a number of the Front Altair's crew were taken into Jask. Meanwhile, it seems neither vessel is going anywhere. Front Altair is showing a speed of 08. knots and the other 0.4 knots.
KelvinD is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2019, 18:16
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Dublin
Posts: 732
Cui Bono .... ?

JAS
Just a spotter is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 01:11
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 652
Photos here appear to show that the fire has been extinguished. If so bravo to all. Not so easy to put out the fires of suspicion, though.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/...150655075.html
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 01:15
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 228
This has John Bolton's name written all over it.

He has been desperate for Iranian regime change for a while now, and Trump is not a "yes man." The only way to achieve it is to set something up. Saudi?!
All speculation but this is a rumour site.

It makes absolutely no strategic sense for Iran to do this. Talk about cutting off their nose to spite their face - they're smarter than this.
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 01:31
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oop North
Posts: 109
BVRAAM, agreed. can't wait for the next dodgy dossier.
Marly Lite is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 04:05
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,424
This has John Bolton's name written all over it.
Since when would a false flag operation bear signed autographs?

SASless is online now  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 05:28
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 52
Posts: 1,359
Originally Posted by SASless View Post
Since when would a false flag operation bear signed autographs?
John Bolton is the kind of Hawk that wants his name all over a war
Load Toad is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 05:30
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 52
Posts: 1,359
Fairly Damning Though Innit?
Load Toad is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 06:33
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,164
TEEEJ is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 08:34
  #31 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,114
Background to video above.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...tanker-attacks

US says video shows Iranian military removing mine from tanker

The US military has released video footage it says shows an Iranian military patrol boat approach one of two tankers attacked in the Gulf of Oman, to support the Trump administrationís claims that Iran was responsible.

The blurry black and white footage, taken from the air, shows a small military boat alongside the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous, and someone standing up on the prow of the boat to remove an object from the tankerís hull. The small boat then pulls away from the tanker.

US officials were quoted as saying the boat was an Iranian Revolutionary Guard patrol boat approaching the tanker after it was attacked on Thursday, and the object removed was an unexploded limpet mine. It was unclear whether it was being alleged the Iranian sailors were detaching the mine in order to remove evidence......

The US military also released a photo it claimed showed a mine on the side of the Kokuka Courageous and some damage to the hull.



ORAC is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 09:33
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Japan
Posts: 652
After the first explosion the crew of the Japanese ship report seeing 'flying objects' coming in towards them, and the manager of the company is adamant from listening to their testimony that the subsequent explosion was 'definitely not a mine or a torpedo', it says.

In Japanese: https://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=2...00080-jij-soci

And from NHK, in English until they take it down. A 'projectile' is the translation here: https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20190614_31/

Last edited by jolihokistix; 14th Jun 2019 at 09:51.
jolihokistix is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 09:55
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 769
Intriguing why the mines (assuming this is what caused the damage) were positioned above the waterline. Intention to damage rather than sink? Also they would have been quite easy to spot from the deck, depending how long they had been in place. Peculiar stuff.

I do struggle to see how the Iranians benefit from this, assuming they or their proxies are indeed behind this. The Arab states on the other hand...
dead_pan is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 10:08
  #34 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,114
I do struggle to see how the Iranians benefit from this, assuming they or their proxies are indeed behind this.
Good article in The Times.....

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...hran-rf9b72s7m

Trump and his allies given the clearest of messages

No one has claimed responsibility for yesterday’s attacks, nor for similar attacks on May 12, but an investigation of those pointed the finger obliquely at Iran, and most western powers and their Gulf allies will be working on the assumption that Tehran is to blame. If that is the case, the speed with which Iranian media were able to announce the attacks and then post video of the resulting conflagration would suggest a brazenness that will help intelligence agencies decipher their purpose.

The May incident was unprecedented and shocking, but in some ways was less dangerous, as it came at a moment when tensions between Iran and the United States were already high. The United States had boasted of sending an aircraft carrier to the Middle East, along with extra B52 bombers to the US air base at al-Udeid in Qatar. Iran had been threatening action in response to the effective US blockade of Iranian oil exports through its sanctions programme.

But the warnings of an accidental drift to war had already begun to have an effect by May 12. President Trump, who was elected on a pledge not to get involved in Middle East conflicts, went out of his way to talk down the threats of the belligerent John Bolton, his national security adviser, and publicly called for talks with the Iranian regime. He was not looking for regime change, he insisted, only to talk to the regime about its nuclear programme.

He then dispatched the Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, to talk to the Supreme Leader. Mr Abe’s spokesman denies his current trip to Tehran is just to act as mediator for the US, but Japan has a vested interest in seeking a solution to the dispute between its most important strategic ally and Iran, previously one of its major oil suppliers.

If today’s attacks are a response to this outreach by the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, it is then a particularly devastating one. The ayatollah has not only rejected talks with America – which he had already done, and did again when meeting Mr Abe – but done so in the most egregious way. The choice of a Japanese-owned tanker would be a particular insult to Mr Abe.

The only silver lining to this threatening cloud is that this message appears so clear it must be intended to be read as such by his opponents. It is assumed Iran does not actually want a war - which would be devastating to it and, if Mr Bolton had his way at least, could well end the Islamic Republic altogether. Rather, perhaps, the ayatollah is saying that he cannot just be expected to come crawling at the request of an intermediary like Mr Abe.

The tankers targeted so far have been Norwegian, Saudi and Emirati - last month - and Japanese and Norwegian this month. All are key allies but none is actually American, which might trigger an immediate military response.

Iran may be saying that it wants Mr Trump, if he is so keen for a deal, to come crawling himself, or face the consequences.


ORAC is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 10:23
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Down South
Posts: 228
Originally Posted by Load Toad View Post
John Bolton is the kind of Hawk that wants his name all over a war
He's already had his name over one...

It was only 16 years ago.
BVRAAM is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 10:27
  #36 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,114
Bellingcat started a thread on the attack, still adding posts.

ORAC is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 11:11
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 769
Rather, perhaps, the ayatollah is saying that he cannot just be expected to come crawling at the request of an intermediary like Mr Abe.
Then why host him at all, or get one of his lackeys to meet him?
dead_pan is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 12:29
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Age: 50
Posts: 1,345
It all seems a bit too nailed on to me. Unless Iran were sending a message of course.
Tashengurt is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 13:07
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,315
The Iranians (if indeed they are) in the boat could simply claim they were disarming / removing a device they had seen to prevent further damage.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2019, 13:47
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,424
The Iranians in the Patrol Boat were removing and disarming the Mine....no doubt.

Nice of them to do that at very great risk to themselves.

Of course....the possibility they knew what it was....how to safely disarm it....and do so in very short order.....does make one wonder how they knew how to safely and efficiently do so.

Very well trained those Iranians I would say.

Now if they were genuinely innocent of any wrong doing....don't you think the Iranian government would be inviting outsiders (media, military, intelligence) to examine the mine to determine its origins?

Also...none of the ships attacks with Mines in the May incidents and the most recent have sunk....and were only damaged.

None were American.....which as we know from posts here and by the Iranians Public Announcements is the real enemy.

Why have American Allies been attacked but not an American Vessel?

The Iranians are playing the long game here.....divide and conquer....and find a way to get the Sanctions removed shy of getting into a real war.

They know this for sure...

President Trump, who was elected on a pledge not to get involved in Middle East conflicts, went out of his way to talk down the threats of the belligerent John Bolton, his national security adviser, and publicly called for talks with the Iranian regime.
He even asked for help from Abe in that effort.

They better not overplay their hand because if they do it shall get very ugly for them because the Sanctions shall not be removed until the Ayatollah's find themselves hawking Korans in the Bazaars for a living.

The Iranians are behind the attacks....either the Revolutionary Guards are doing it or some group supported by the Iranians are doing it at their bidding.

If it looks like a Duck, waddles like a Duck, quacks like a Duck....it might just be a Duck!


SASless is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.