Author Topic: Tanker War 2.0  (Read 13750 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 294,241
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,904
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #25 on: June 15, 2019, 15:35:04 »
Quote from: E.R. Campbell

He concludes that "Even short of such worst-case scenarios, any war with Iran would tie down the United States in yet another Middle Eastern conflict for years to come. The war and its aftermath would likely cost hundreds of billions of dollars and hobble not just Trump but future U.S. presidents. Such a commitment would mean the end of the United States’ purported shift to great-power competition with Russia and China."

I had it explained to me that Iran knows the USA has Middle East fatigue so their plan is to wait the US out. They already have a foothold in Iraq, both politically and with the SMGs. All the pro-Iran militias. Iran supposedly put some kind of moratorium on attacking US and allied members (to the militia groups) to try and get the US out faster.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 225,500
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,648
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #26 on: June 15, 2019, 15:40:43 »
I had it explained to me that Iran knows the USA has Middle East fatigue so their plan is to wait the US out. They already have a foothold in Iraq, both politically and with the SMGs. All the pro-Iran militias. Iran supposedly put some kind of moratorium on attacking US and allied members (to the militia groups) to try and get the US out faster.

“They have the watches. We have the time.”
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,744
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,102
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #27 on: June 15, 2019, 16:58:24 »
Wait... So if Trump were to do this (attack Iran), it would potentially be  aboon to Russia? Say it ain't so...
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 109,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,791
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #28 on: June 15, 2019, 17:05:20 »
Operation Preying Mantis 1988. I think this type of op may play out sooner than later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 69,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,843
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #29 on: June 15, 2019, 18:04:36 »
Trump hasn't established a pattern as a warmongerer, but he is sometimes prone to adopting the course of action recommended by the most recent person who made a case to him.  The risk of war originates not with Trump.  More oversight of what the executive agencies are peddling rather than less is warranted.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,562
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #30 on: June 15, 2019, 18:16:49 »
I had it explained to me that Iran knows the USA has Middle East fatigue so their plan is to wait the US out. They already have a foothold in Iraq, both politically and with the SMGs. All the pro-Iran militias. Iran supposedly put some kind of moratorium on attacking US and allied members (to the militia groups) to try and get the US out faster.

From what I heard and read, the Iranian regime is made up of competing factions, so while such an order may go out, eventually one of the factions/groups are going to say "eff this" and conduct an attack of some sort.

If I was the US, I would start by attacking Iranian Proxy groups.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 486,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,390
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #31 on: June 15, 2019, 18:36:06 »
From what I heard and read, the Iranian regime is made up of competing factions, so while such an order may go out, eventually one of the factions/groups are going to say "eff this" and conduct an attack of some sort.

If I was the US, I would start by attacking Iranian Proxy groups.

Or one might say:

From what I heard and read, the Iranian American regime is made up of competing factions, so while such an order may go out, eventually one of the factions/groups are going to say "eff this" and conduct an attack of some sort.

If I was the US Iran, I would start by attacking Iranian American Proxy groups government in the region.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 109,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,791

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,562
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #33 on: June 15, 2019, 21:00:57 »
Or one might say:

From what I heard and read, the Iranian American regime is made up of competing factions, so while such an order may go out, eventually one of the factions/groups are going to say "eff this" and conduct an attack of some sort.

If I was the US Iran, I would start by attacking Iranian American Proxy groups government in the region.

The main two "factions" in the US are the State Department and the Pentagon, they see each other as the major opponent of the other. However the US military will not be attacking without orders. Iran has been fighting with US proxy groups for quite sometime. However there are quite few Iranian proxy groups that are quite exposed both in Iraq and Syria, that could suffer serious losses if the US decided to go after them without any warning. If you watch the ANNA and other video's you see a lot of of those groups have terrible Signal discipline and use commercial radios for comms. I suspect and hope the US have been quietly listening and tracking those proxy HQ's and leaders for such an occasion.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 486,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,390
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #34 on: June 16, 2019, 07:57:17 »
Saw this video, from Al Jazeera, on another website.


P.S. I find Al Jazeera's news mostly "fair and balanced."
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Online Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 551,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,108
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #35 on: June 16, 2019, 08:34:48 »
P.S. I find Al Jazeera's news mostly "fair and balanced."
Ditto.  It's one of my start-the-day, over coffee, checks of the overnight traffic.   :nod:

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,744
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,102
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #36 on: June 16, 2019, 09:06:40 »
Ditto.  It's one of my start-the-day, over coffee, checks of the overnight traffic.   :nod:

I usually start with cbc, CNN and fox for their pure entertainment value, but then I finish off with AJ, WP, BBC and Reuters for a more unbiased take on actual news. AJ has been one of the best (surprisingly) news outlets I've enjoyed so far.

(it's actually very interesting jumping between fox News and CNN and seeing which site had which story at the top, and when, as well as seeing the different spin or "flavor" that each one will put in the same story... Basically, I don't go to these sites for real news, I go to watch in amusement as the US msm slowly spirals into... Whatever it is that is becoming...)
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 181,210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,327
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #37 on: June 16, 2019, 12:45:39 »
I usually start with cbc, CNN and fox for their pure entertainment value, but then I finish off with AJ, WP, BBC and Reuters for a more unbiased take on actual news. AJ has been one of the best (surprisingly) news outlets I've enjoyed so far.

Agreed.  Their English service is miles ahead of most American channels.  BBC, AJ and WP/NYT, then the Guardian.
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline boot12

  • Member
  • ****
  • 11,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 106
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #38 on: June 16, 2019, 19:48:15 »
In my experience, the reality of a news org's reliability and objectivity is often more complex than can be characterized by a simple trustworthy/untrustworthy label.

Al Jazeera, for example, is generally one of the better sources for news related to the Middle East. However, there is more observable bias in stories relating to Qatar or the greater Qatar/Saudi dynamic. Knowing the background/ownership of a specific org is always helpful going in.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,562
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #39 on: June 17, 2019, 13:41:24 »
The 10 employees working on the Norwegian-owned MT Front Altair landed in Dubai following two days in Iran, the AP reports.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 143,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,562
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 294,241
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,904
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #41 on: June 17, 2019, 22:25:16 »
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7151697/Pentagon-reveals-color-pictures-says-PROVES-Iran-attacked-tankers-Gulf.html?fbclid=IwAR3nqT9xMOfBKxJl4nSOba78RqIY92YwWG7zZRCKbGWvKmI0AgNip-vwvAw



Quote
Among the pictures is one showing what is said to be the remnants of the removed limpet mine and another one which shows what the military say is a handprint left by one of the Revolutionary Guards

I'm sure they'll also find a passport from another revolutionary guard member that's dropped  in the water   :nod:
« Last Edit: June 17, 2019, 23:32:30 by Jarnhamar »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 109,505
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,791
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #42 on: June 17, 2019, 23:17:20 »
I am calling this thread the Pretzel Thread because everyone is twisting themselves every which way to deny Iran and its history of terror. The evidence speaks for itself sorry.

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 181,210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,327
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #43 on: June 18, 2019, 00:54:03 »
I am calling this thread the Pretzel Thread because everyone is twisting themselves every which way to deny Iran and its history of terror. The evidence speaks for itself sorry.

I'm not denying that Iran would attack a freighter.  I do think, however, that attacking a Japanese-flagged one around the same time as hosting their PM and them being one of the few buyers of Iran's oil sounds a little dumb. 
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline Brihard

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 225,500
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,648
  • Non-Electric Pop-Up Target
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #44 on: June 18, 2019, 06:51:00 »
I am calling this thread the Pretzel Thread because everyone is twisting themselves every which way to deny Iran and its history of terror. The evidence speaks for itself sorry.

Show me one person denying Iran’s history of terror. Go ahead.

While a I wait for that- what you’re seeing here isn’t denial of history, it’s reasonable skepticism as to what is going on now, and more particularly who is behind it and why. This is a part of the world rife with internal and external conflicts, rivalries, and hatreds. It’s a part of the world which is, simply, a mess; relations and actions there take place with a chronic deficit of good faith, and there isn’t a country (or major interest) in the region that consistently operates in good faith and guilelessly, America included.

Iran is not a monolithic regime. It has factions and internal power struggles within the political and military structure. It is absolutely very possible that one of these factions, with or without the knowledge of the political leadership, carried out these attacks. I’d say it’s more likely that than something else. But it’s by no means a certainty.

What is very unclear in any of this is motive. Cui Bono? Who in Iran (or Saudi, or Qatar, or the US, etc) would stand to gain from a demonstration of the ability to smoke a couple tankers? There isn’t a clear answer to this. An attack was actually carried out on two tankers. That’s hugely provocative and highly risky.

What we cannot do is just write it off as ‘stupid’, because to whoever carried it out, it made sense to do. It was a rational act inasmuch as it serves (or is believed to serve) the strategy of whoever is guilty.

So, why? And from there, who? And now what?
Pacificsm is doctrine fostered by a delusional minority and by the media, which holds forth the proposition it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Online Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 551,540
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,108
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #45 on: June 18, 2019, 08:18:09 »
I am calling this thread the Pretzel Thread
Well then, I'll call this the 'Boy Who Cried Wolf' thread.  While previous governments would  lie in singular instances to garner international community buy-in for some endeavour (Maddox/Vietnam, WMD/Iraq),  you now have an administration with a virtually unbroken track record of compulsive lying, butt-hurt because no one believes them.

Offline milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 419,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,053
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #46 on: June 18, 2019, 09:56:42 »
... I do think, however, that the Iranian government ordering/sanctioning attacking a Japanese-flagged one around the same time as hosting their PM and them being one of the few buyers of Iran's oil sounds a little dumb.
Agree with this take from Dimsum & others - it sometimes only takes a few idiots in any group to :stirpot: if they don't like what the group is doing.
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,744
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,102
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #47 on: June 18, 2019, 11:02:57 »
Agree with this take from Dimsum & others - it sometimes only takes a few idiots in any group to :stirpot: if they don't like what the group is doing.

Just how great is the disconnect in ideology, authority, and chain of command between the Republican Guard and the regular armed forces? As I understand it, both the Republican Guard and the regular military have chain of command that end with the Ayatollah.

Could it be that the Ayatollah and the President/Government don't see eye to eye, and the Ayatollah is using the Republican Guard as his own private military to act on policies that perhaps the national legislature and government do not agree with?
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 69,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,843
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #48 on: June 18, 2019, 11:07:54 »
This is an excellent time to be skeptical.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,744
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,102
Re: Tanker War 2.0
« Reply #49 on: June 18, 2019, 11:52:50 »
I think I found the answer to my question:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/iran-has-two-naval-forces-with-separate-missions-and-commands-this-is-why/2019/06/14/ea3704a8-8ead-11e9-b08e-cfd89bd36d4e_story.html?fbclid=IwAR3068ELTZBp3Fn3hqLI8F_uAWMz6L0x2-QcIuNdTc_IXi-Kg4yjjj9f0sk&utm_term=.6ff285dcb653

Quote
Iran’s naval forces have a split personality. There is the regular navy with conscripts and career officers with a chain of command to the defense minister and others in government.

And then there are the more elite seagoing divisions run by the Revolutionary Guard, whose commanders answer directly to the nation’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Quote
Who is in charge?

Revolutionary Guard forces are under the direct control of Khamenei and his inner circle, who also oversee other key parts of the government, including the intelligence services.

The regular navy is also nominally under the supreme leader, who has the final word in all important military decisions. But the navy’s regular operations fall under the defense ministry and the elected leadership led by Iran’s president and parliament.
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!