|
Brown Moses posted:I'm not saying they planted the mines, for all anyone knows they could have spotted the mine and decided to take it for their own analysis. You're the one jumping to conclusions here, not me. Also, "this is fake because it doesn't fit my worldview" is a pretty dumb take. Actually a really dumb take would be assuming that the Iranians would launch an illogical attack that is detrimental to their national interest just because US intelligence says that's what happened
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 11:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:Actually a really dumb take would be assuming that the Iranians would launch an illogical attack that is detrimental to their national interest just because US intelligence says that's what happened Can you point to me where I said that? Meanwhile the president of the company who owns the Kokuka Courageous had this to say: https://twitter.com/nytimesworld/status/1139451546654183424 quote:One of the tankers that were attacked in the Gulf of Oman was struck by a flying object, the ship’s Japanese operator said on Friday, disputing at least part of the account of United States officials who had blamed Iran for the attack. Which obviously doesn't help make things any clearer. Hopefully the Iranians present what they removed from the side of the boat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 11:09
|
|
|
And apparently the ship was flying a Panamanian flag, not a Japanese flag, so if (IF) (IFFF) it was the iranians the meeting with Abe wouldnt technically affect this "operation". My biggest question here is what the Iranians would win with this. Or, even regarding alliances, what would the Russians win with this? Oil or gas prices rising?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 11:14
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:Why would they have to do that, it seems pretty drat obvious that the video is fake news. If Iran did do it, they were definitely banking on people thinking stuff like this. You can't speak authoritatively about what their motives are. All you can do is wildly speculate. How about you just chill the gently caress out and wait for some more details. This all pales in comparison to the bomb plot at the NCRI rally in Paris, and not a drat thing happened over that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 11:31
|
|
|
if this is an iranian op (which seems unlikely) it's probably some wacko hardline faction of the Guards who want to keep up tensions with the USA to shore up domestic support. that might also explain the reticence of the iranians in coming up with an explanation, because until they've quashed these maniacs any lie they feed might be undermined by a leak, and admitting that your armed forces are going around doing their own ops is a big no-no still think a saudi or random terrorist group is more likely culpable though
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 11:32
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:if this is an iranian op (which seems unlikely) it's probably some wacko hardline faction of the Guards who want to keep up tensions with the USA to shore up domestic support. that might also explain the reticence of the iranians in coming up with an explanation, because until they've quashed these maniacs any lie they feed might be undermined by a leak, and admitting that your armed forces are going around doing their own ops is a big no-no I could see it as a warning for what escalated tensions mean, and lashing out at the current state of rhetoric and sanctions. It doesn't take much plausible deniability to paralyze the west when it comes to politicized attacks like this, so there's a grey area there where all signs could point to Iran for those observing all of the evidence, but in the general public perception, and therefore in government policy, they would not seen as responsible or held accountable. If they did do it, I'd imagine it would be out of a sense of "don't forget what we're capable of, and what the consequences can be if you decide to gently caress with us/don't cut this poo poo out." That being said, in lieu of more evidence, I'm not convinced they did it either. We'll see what the next few days bring.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 11:54
|
|
|
What comes to the possible motivations for Iran to do this, two things come to mind: 1) Internal disagreement between hardliners and reformists. Iran is not entirely united as a politically body and there could be real attempts to provoke a conflict by "rogue" actors 2) A knowing demonstration of capability. Cause non-fatal damage with plausible deniability for the sake of reminding that it is possible to close down the strait Not to say that it couldn't be a sophisticated false flag, a Houthi operation or just plain old stupidity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 11:54
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I could see it as a warning for what escalated tensions mean, and lashing out at the current state of rhetoric and sanctions. It doesn't take much plausible deniability to paralyze the west when it comes to politicized attacks like this, so there's a grey area there where all signs could point to Iran for those observing all of the evidence, but in the general public perception, and therefore in government policy, they would not seen as responsible or held accountable. If they did do it, I'd imagine it would be out of a sense of "don't forget what we're capable of, and what the consequences can be if you decide to gently caress with us/don't cut this poo poo out." That being said, in lieu of more evidence, I'm not convinced they did it either. We'll see what the next few days bring. i really don't think that iran of all countries is going to get much benefit of the doubt tbh, banking on that seems completely demented - i can see iranian hardline military types doing this, but this would be insanely risky at a time where the US has been very pointedly rattling sabers in their direction and has an unpopular and unscrupulous president seeking reelection, and neither rouhani nor khamenei are insane
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 12:15
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i really don't think that iran of all countries is going to get much benefit of the doubt tbh, banking on that seems completely demented - i can see iranian hardline military types doing this, but this would be insanely risky at a time where the US has been very pointedly rattling sabers in their direction and has an unpopular and unscrupulous president seeking reelection, and neither rouhani nor khamenei are insane I don't think it would really matter what country it is. It isn't about trusting Iran, it's about distrusting the US and its allies governments. That's a powerful tool, although Iran still could've miscalculated, or not done enough to cover their tracks. But we'll see. Hard to imagine uniformed Iranian regulars being directly involved in this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 12:26
|
|
|
yeaaaah i think you're enormously overestimating the political impact of skepticism towards american motives - the invasion of iraq on entirely specious grounds should have put paid to that much of NATO would join simply out of inertia, like they did in afghanistan or libya
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 12:38
|
|
|
Seeing how Iran was one of the first on the scene to rescue crew members, they should be able to present their own evidence in the matter. A detailed timeline would be interesting here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 12:42
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:much of NATO would join simply out of inertia, like they did in afghanistan or libya Nah. It was European countries that dragged the US into Libya, and Afghanistan was considerably different because the US invoked Article 5. France famously sat out Iraq, and the UK voting to sit out of any conflict with Syria was part of why Obama didn't attack the regime after they used chemical weapons. Maybe we could get some countries to send token forces, but Trump isn't the most persuasive American leader, the Europeans blame us for withdrawing from the Iran deal, and the UK is even more bogged down with their own domestic bullshit now, so it's hard to imagine them jumping into another unpopular war they'd mostly think is our fault on top of all that. FWIW I think the unpopularity of a new war in the Middle East will keep the US from a major conflict with Iran too, which is why Trump keeps kneecapping the hardliners, though his short attention span and desire to appear tough are dangerous since continually ramping up tensions can lead to an accidental war.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 12:55
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:Actually a really dumb take would be assuming that the Iranians would launch an illogical attack that is detrimental to their national interest just because US intelligence says that's what happened Good username post combo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 13:21
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Nah. It was European countries that dragged the US into Libya, and Afghanistan was considerably different because the US invoked Article 5. France famously sat out Iraq, and the UK voting to sit out of any conflict with Syria was part of why Obama didn't attack the regime after they used chemical weapons. Maybe we could get some countries to send token forces, but Trump isn't the most persuasive American leader, the Europeans blame us for withdrawing from the Iran deal, and the UK is even more bogged down with their own domestic bullshit now, so it's hard to imagine them jumping into another unpopular war they'd mostly think is our fault on top of all that. libya was a french pet op to start with, and yet mysteriously countries like norway and denmark got on board once the americans took over ownership of it also iraq was conducted on the basis of outright and transparent falsehood and still dragged half of europe in with it, if anything it demonstrates how possible it is for the US to mobilise for war even on entirely specious grounds
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 13:26
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:libya was a french pet op to start with, and yet mysteriously countries like norway and denmark got on board once the americans took over ownership of it Iraq is why we can't do that anymore. Yeah, we conned a bunch of people into our stupid war we lost, and nobody wants to do that again. Also UN authorization had a lot to do with why European countries got on board in Libya, even if the campaign obviously ended up going well beyond the cover that authorization was meant to provide. Russia and China aren't approving a war with Iran.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
Maybe it's the aliens behind those UFOs that the US government has been hiding all this time and is now letting its retired personnel openly talking about for whatever reason. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 14:02
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Maybe it's the aliens behind those UFOs that the US government has been hiding all this time and is now letting its retired personnel openly talking about for whatever reason. I really hope for the ETs that they have more advanced technology than partly malfunctioning limpet mines...which apparently have been placed waay too high to actually sink the ships. SavageGentleman fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Jun 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 15:24
|
|
|
It's a false flag, how much more obvious could it be - The video shows "a mine being removed" from the port side of the ship - The damage is on the starboard side - Which is the side facing Arabia, not Iran - Which is where the crew reported the flying objects which caused the impacts coming from
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 15:36
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:Actually a really dumb take would be assuming that the Iranians would launch an illogical attack that is detrimental to their national interest just because US intelligence says that's what happened 
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
When has Iran ever acted irrationally self-destructive before?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
the latter years of Nader Shah?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:00
|
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:When has Iran ever acted irrationally self-destructive before? Rent-A-Cop fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Jun 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Iraq is why we can't do that anymore. Yeah, we conned a bunch of people into our stupid war we lost, and nobody wants to do that again. Also UN authorization had a lot to do with why European countries got on board in Libya, even if the campaign obviously ended up going well beyond the cover that authorization was meant to provide. Russia and China aren't approving a war with Iran. our participation (norway) was framed at the time explicitly in terms of being a 'good ally' and the UN mandate was used mostly to quash leftist objections to the intervention rather than a justification in itself; this from a country that sat iraq out, with the left in government it's still framed as being a good ally in terms of what we actually achieved. nobody much likes talking about it the point being, NATO is not much weakened and its junior members are still as spineless as ever. go to war with a semi-plausible cause and they'd fall in line, if not to the point of active participation then at least tolerating it with token objections and logistics support
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:07
|
|
|
I might be just a dumb goon, but how does a mine end up on the sides of a ship way above the waterline?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
Luckyellow posted:I might be just a dumb goon, but how does a mine end up on the sides of a ship way above the waterline? Limpet mines are generally magnetic and attached by hand or with an ROV. They're a sabotage weapon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:12
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:I doubt it's a false flag, at least not one ordered by high-level authorities. Generally the idea behind false flag attacks is to do something extremely provocative, fabricate evidence that can conclusively blame it on the other side, and then rush to war before other actors can figure out what is going on, as in the Nazi false flag on the Polish border to kick off WWII. It doesn't make sense to do with drip-drip-drip of non-fatal attacks on neutral shipping. If it is a false-flag its by someone without the resources to go all the way. so, the saudis
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:13
|
|
|
WhiskeyWhiskers posted:When has Iran ever acted irrationally self-destructive before? Isn't it the same way folks like John Bolton think it's a good idea? They believe in the long run they'll win and the cost while incredibly high will be worth it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:13
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Its government is ostensibly headed by dudes taking their instructions from an imaginary friend. They dont appear millenarian enough to risk their fiefdom though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:16
|
|
so that means I can be a cheapskate and post about posting instead of having some wit or spending any more on comedy avs for people. Which I'm also incapable of. Comedy.
|
Tab8715 posted:Isn't it the same way folks like John Bolton think it's a good idea? John Bolton thinks that Iran will be paying that cost. Casualties into the hundreds of thousands but all on one side. None of these people are particularly smart/cunning/intelligent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
Luckyellow posted:I might be just a dumb goon, but how does a mine end up on the sides of a ship way above the waterline? I can only think it would be put there specifically to cause superficial damage but to not sink the boat. I have no idea how big the explosion would be though so it's just speculation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:30
|
|
|
Jippa posted:I can only think it would be put there specifically to cause superficial damage but to not sink the boat. I have no idea how big the explosion would be though so it's just speculation. And anything big enough to sink a tanker by flooding would almost certainly be too heavy to manhandle into place from a small boat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:37
|
|
|
So now the reports are that a mine didn’t cause the damage but a flying object. Then that video is high suspect. Where did it come from?
Raccooon fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Jun 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:John Bolton thinks that Iran will be paying that cost. Casualties into the hundreds of thousands but all on one side. None of these people are particularly smart/cunning/intelligent. think they’re idiots too but they are true believers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:57
|
|
|
Raccooon posted:So now the reports are that a mine didn’t cause the damage but a flying object. Then that video is high suspect. Where did it come from? Per the Washington Post, it was released by CENTCOM.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
Raccooon posted:So now the reports are that a mine didn’t cause the damage but a flying object. Then that video is high suspect. Where did it come from? Maybe an RPG. Any ship to ship missile is doing more damage than that unless you get an unexploded missile flying through the hull, and then you have a fire similar to the Stark.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 17:11
|
|
|
PneumonicBook posted:Maybe an RPG. Any ship to ship missile is doing more damage than that unless you get an unexploded missile flying through the hull, and then you have a fire similar to the Stark. Although I'm still fairly skeptical of the flying object theory since eye witnesses don't have the best record when it comes to why things suddenly exploded in the dark, and the story is only coming from one company spokesman at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 17:39
|
|
|
Raccooon posted:So now the reports are that a mine didn’t cause the damage but a flying object. Then that video is high suspect. Where did it come from? The video and photographs were attached to this statement from US CENTCOM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5rZeMqvZ9g Kinda weird the "mine" in the two photos is a near perfect equilateral triangle. Brown Moses fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Jun 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Isn't it the same way folks like John Bolton think it's a good idea? John Bolton doesn't have to worry about an existential threat to the US government from the war. At absolute best for Iran it leads to the US having to turn tail. They can't gain anything from a war with the US.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 18:43
|
|
|
It's plausible that a war with Iran is the last straw for America as world police or whatever we're calling ourselves two decades into a Forever War. It could easily disgust our allies enough that they just refuse to work with us on anything in the future, spell the end of the Five Eyes agreements etc. Iran wouldn't win directly, but being the cause of the collapse of American hegemony is probably a victory they'd take.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 19:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
After the failure of INSTEX, I'm absolutely certain Iran wouldn't be rolling the dice on war and pinning their hopes on the Europeans meaningfully breaking from the US.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2019 19:09
|
|