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.

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.

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.

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).
A signature sound byte of garden variety CT nonsense: asserting that their big, bad evil cause of all harm is blessed with omniscience.
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.
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.

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).

Or, in other words, follow the money.

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.

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

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?

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?

US media are really nice and always tell the truth.

Happy ?

"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

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.

Seight

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

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

Thanks - I'll try to behave !