|
Tab8715 posted:Worse than ‘08? if they manage to actually close the strait of Hormuz the price shock alone from the world's shipping capacity being hosed would take months to recover from.
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 08:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:45 |
|
|
Squalid posted:from back a bit, but firstly, there aren't a lot of actors with the capability to pull this off. The only plausible options are USA, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and UAE. Eh maybe Israel too, though I dunno. I mean, does this whole operation come across as competent to you? 'Iran struck that tanker with torpedoes, no whoops it was limpet mines (and we have blurry, inconclusive video from... somewhere), no whoops it was missiles' sounds very much like the US giving cover to some idiot Saudi op.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 08:43
|
|
|
Squalid posted:from back a bit, but firstly, there aren't a lot of actors with the capability to pull this off. The only plausible options are USA, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and UAE. Eh maybe Israel too, though I dunno. Cool. Now how about you come up with an explanation that doesn't rest entirely on blindly accepting every Orientalist trope in the book?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 08:59
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Cool. Now how about you come up with an explanation that doesn't rest entirely on blindly accepting every Orientalist trope in the book? Tropes like Saudi Arabia being incompetent? Clearly an unwarranted stereot- quote:There is credible evidence that Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and other high-level officials are individually liable for the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, a UN expert says. -ohhhh, right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 12:06
|
|
|
Meanwhile, in Syria: https://twitter.com/UNReliefChief/status/1141083109745733632
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 14:15
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Volkerball tell me more about how Trump is a pathological liar except for all the times when your narrative requires him not to be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 14:30
|
|
|
It just seems comical that the iranians would strike a japanese tanker while the japanese premier was visiting It just smells like such an obvious set up
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 14:38
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/woodruffbets/status/1141301953126981632 https://twitter.com/John_Hudson/status/1141189037916655617 So insane that Tucker Carlson might be the guy keeping us out of a war.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 14:39
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Tropes like Saudi Arabia being incompetent? Clearly an unwarranted stereot- Yes indeed, the exceptional level of competence necessary to attach some explosives to a huge-rear end tanker clearly exceeds the capabilities of the savage Arab. Therefore it must have been the wily Persian, for only he possesses the wicked mind and blind thirst for destruction that is required for such a plot. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 15:20
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:https://twitter.com/woodruffbets/status/1141301953126981632 More like terrifying. Tucker Carlson should absolutely not have a more direct line to our idiot president's brain than he already does through Fox.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 15:23
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Yes indeed, the exceptional level of competence necessary to attach some explosives to a huge-rear end tanker clearly exceeds the capabilities of the savage Arab. Therefore it must have been the wily Persian, for only he possesses the wicked mind and blind thirst for destruction that is required for such a plot. also, loving the idea that the US wouldn't cover for a half-assed Saudi operation. that would be wrong of us. by the way, volkerball, how's the war of extermination against the perfidious Yemeni for the crime of [???] going, think we'll be home by Christmas?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 16:03
|
|
|
The question "Who in the Gulf has executed this idiotic plan incompetently?" has a nearly unlimited set of potential correct answers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 16:21
|
|
|
The only thing any Saudi does competently is walk like a pimp with a staff, which if you've seen in person you know justifies their entire society.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:I mean, does this whole operation come across as competent to you? 'Iran struck that tanker with torpedoes, no whoops it was limpet mines (and we have blurry, inconclusive video from... somewhere), no whoops it was missiles' sounds very much like the US giving cover to some idiot Saudi op. Well whoever it was managed to avoid detection prior to the attacks, so that's a minimum level of competence met. Also the US has not changed its story regarding the nature of the attack, always saying it was a mine I think. Planting a mine would not be the hardest part for the Saudis, rather I have doubts they could keep it under wraps. It's high risk behavior, if they are caught it would poison relations and they'd get nothing. I really dislike this style of reasoning whereby we try to guess at the motivations of nations and leaders, and thereby infer who is responsible. It just strikes me as bad practice, the only reason I wrote out that last post was because I felt Delthalaz was sincerely confused as to the nature of the argument. The problem with using our estimate of a nation's interest/motivation to carry out these bombings to guess at the perpetrator is ultimately it's not going to have made sense for anyone to have done it. Why would Saudi Arabia bomb like six ships carrying their own oil? Doesn't make sense. Why would Israel risk throwing away all the trust they have with US intelligence just to get some token revenge attack? Doesn't make sense. Why would the US frame Iran for the attacks and then not do anything and call for diplomatic solutions? It doesn't make sense. Why would Iran believe attacking tankers would bring the Americans back to the negotiating table instead of just making them retaliate? It. Doesn't. Make. Sense. Looking for motivation first, and then judging the evidence by how well it fits that just seems like bad practice. Unfortunately, the only organizations that are capable of investigating these incidents also have a stake in the outcome. The result is uncertainty. By the way, the US navy released pictures today of what they said were parts of the bombs used in two of the attacks. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-attacks-navy/us-navy-says-mine-fragments-suggest-iran-behind-gulf-tanker-attack-idUSKCN1TK1DX THE US military has been wishy-washy on who they are blaming for the attacks. They have not aggressively blamed Iran they way Pompeo has.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 17:30
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Well whoever it was managed to avoid detection prior to the attacks, so that's a minimum level of competence met. Also the US has not changed its story regarding the nature of the attack, always saying it was a mine I think. Planting a mine would not be the hardest part for the Saudis, rather I have doubts they could keep it under wraps. It's high risk behavior, if they are caught it would poison relations and they'd get nothing. I mean, the US doing it actually makes the most sense by far because the government has outright descended into factions with completely different FP goals.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
The comments from Trump and Pompeo et al have been really weird. Trump was like, "well it's the same boat as the Iranians have so it 100% was them" although he still seems to really not want to launch a strike. Like the entire evidence of the Iranians doing it as presented even to Trump was literally just the boat picture. Meanwhile Pompeo has made a couple statements where he is basically saying that whatever evidence needs to be fabricated for an attack to happen will be fabricated, given how certain he is that Trump will come around to wanting to attack Iran.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 20:44
|
|
|
Iran will not close the strait of hormuz. This isnt 1976. Doing so would ramp up keystone XL funding and truly detach the us from needing foreign oil.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Iran will not close the strait of hormuz. This isnt 1976. Doing so would ramp up keystone XL funding and truly detach the us from needing foreign oil. Why the hell not? Throw a bunch of mines around and it'll take nearly a year to get it all cleaned up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Why the hell not? Throw a bunch of mines around and it'll take nearly a year to get it all cleaned up. Even assuming it went "well" high oil prices and a sealed strait are extremely beneficial to the economies of the USA and KSA. Or at least the relevant corporations doing the extraction in the former's case even though the externalities would gently caress up everyone not employed in oil and gas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:The comments from Trump and Pompeo et al have been really weird. Trump was like, "well it's the same boat as the Iranians have so it 100% was them" although he still seems to really not want to launch a strike. Like the entire evidence of the Iranians doing it as presented even to Trump was literally just the boat picture. Meanwhile Pompeo has made a couple statements where he is basically saying that whatever evidence needs to be fabricated for an attack to happen will be fabricated, given how certain he is that Trump will come around to wanting to attack Iran. what comments by Pompeo specifically are you referring to? For reference, this is what he said yesterday: https://www.state.gov/secretary-of-state-michael-r-pompeo-remarks-to-the-press-2/ quote:QUESTION: Are there any conversations, either directly or through third parties, with Iran to try and deconflict the situation in the Persian Gulf? He mostly just seems to waffle and say nothing. I caught a hint he was looking for allies to commit their own navies to patrol the Gulf, but I might have just been primed to hear that from some other sources. I'm not sure why you think Trump's statements have been more weird than usual on this subject. Like to rephrase your summary, "Iran did it, but we aren't going to attack them because of it," seems perfectly ordinary. If Iran did do it, it is also arguably the correct and rational response. I wouldn't put any weight on his specific explanation of the reasoning, since his explanations of that kind of thing never make sense. Tab8715 posted:Why the hell not? Throw a bunch of mines around and it'll take nearly a year to get it all cleaned up. One issue is that it would royally piss off all nations dependent on Saudi oil in Europe and Asia. Right now they are willing to work with Iran and oppose US aggression and sanctions. Cut their access to oil and they might start to feel differently. Squalid fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Jun 19, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 22:22
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Why the hell not? Throw a bunch of mines around and it'll take nearly a year to get it all cleaned up. Cool so global oil dependency moves further towqrds US ALLIED
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2019 22:36
|
|
|
Associated Press has a breaking news banner saying that Iran shot down a US drone. edit: https://apnews.com/e4316eb989d5499c9828350de8524963 BattleMaster fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 04:17
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:Associated Press has a breaking news banner saying that Iran shot down a US drone. To be more precise, it says that Iran says they shot down a US drone. The US denies that and says that there weren't any drones for Iran to shoot down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 04:36
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/StefSimanowitz/status/1141068275155161089
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 04:43
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:To be more precise, it says that Iran says they shot down a US drone. The US denies that and says that there weren't any drones for Iran to shoot down. That's not precise at all. AP posted:Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency, citing the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, identified the drone as an RQ-4 Global Hawk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 04:45
|
|
|
That's double speak for "it got shot down after accidentally crossing into Iran's half of the gulf waters."
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 05:00
|
|
|
Yeah,  accidentally.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 05:18
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Well whoever it was managed to avoid detection prior to the attacks, so that's a minimum level of competence met. Also the US has not changed its story regarding the nature of the attack, always saying it was a mine I think. Planting a mine would not be the hardest part for the Saudis, rather I have doubts they could keep it under wraps. It's high risk behavior, if they are caught it would poison relations and they'd get nothing. Yes, because nations and leaders just kinda do things arbitrarily, no need to entertain the notion that they are by and large rational entities who pursue identifiable goals. Like, seriously dude, are you even listening to yourself here? Because this is so goddamn dumb that I don't even really know what to say. Also the Saudi motivation is crystal clear, they want the US to get rid of Iran for them (because Iran is their biggest rival), so they bombed their own tankers because they figured that it would escalate tensions and the US would blame Iran, and hence make it more likely that they reached their goal. This is literally the exact same poo poo that smaller nations living under the thumb of a hegemon have pulled against each other throughout at least all of recorded history. So the fact that you think that it doesn't make sense is telling, because it either means that you're being disingenuous or that you're completely ignorant about how the world works.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 05:51
|
|
|
Jagged Jim posted:Yeah, Iran's S-300 batteries are a known quantity, so if this happened then whoever flew or okayed a RQ-4's flight path through Iranian airspace was nothing short of a loving moron.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 05:56
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Yes, because nations and leaders just kinda do things arbitrarily, no need to entertain the notion that they are by and large rational entities who pursue identifiable goals. Like, seriously dude, are you even listening to yourself here? Because this is so goddamn dumb that I don't even really know what to say. He's not saying that that nations and leaders don't have rational goals, he's saying that operating under the assumption that you understand what their goals might be in every given situation is silly. For instance after Ghouta, there were dozens of posters popping in here speaking authoritatively about how the regime had no motive. They were winning, and there was a UN delegation there, and this that and the other, so it was a false flag for invasion. But it didn't matter what those people thought they knew about Assad's goals, he still loving did it. We can discuss the reasons we suppose why the regime might have done it, but the fact remains that the regime perpetrated the attack. There's a reason RT and co always dabble in the "there was no motive" type stories. It's the easiest type of talking points to make people who have no idea what they are talking about feel like they understand every angle when really what they are being led to believe is a lie. quote:Also the Saudi motivation is crystal clear, they want the US to get rid of Iran for them (because Iran is their biggest rival), so they bombed their own tankers because they figured that it would escalate tensions and the US would blame Iran, and hence make it more likely that they reached their goal. This is literally the exact same poo poo that smaller nations living under the thumb of a hegemon have pulled against each other throughout at least all of recorded history. This is different than claiming that Iran has no motive. The people saying this don't know the names of 98% of the Iranians who would be involved in a decision like this, much less their goals and aspirations, and the nuances of the power struggles between them. The evidence from the US photos is enough to conclude that an Iranian fast boat pulled up next to the kokuka courageous and removed an object from the side of it. In lieu of a thorough explanation for what was happening there, the logical conclusion is that Iran has something to hide. There's a chance they could be playing Saddam's little "I'm not gonna provide evidence of my innocence because maybe I did do it, guess you'll never know  " game, but if they are, they're loving idiots.
Volkerball fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 06:14
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:He's not saying that that nations and leaders don't have rational goals, he's saying that operating under the assumption that you understand what their goals might be in every given situation is silly. For instance after Ghouta, there were dozens of posters popping in here speaking authoritatively about how the regime had no motive. They were winning, and there was a UN delegation there, and this that and the other, so it was a false flag for invasion. But it didn't matter what those people thought they knew about Assad's goals, he still loving did it. We can discuss the reasons we suppose why the regime might have done it, but the fact remains that the regime perpetrated the attack. There's a reason RT and co always dabble in the "there was no motive" type stories. It's the easiest type of talking points to make people who have no idea what they are talking about feel like they understand every angle when really what they are being led to believe is a lie. lol literally the geopolitical equivalent of assuming that the black guy walking though a fancy neighborhood is obviously there to case the joints.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 07:01
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:lol literally the geopolitical equivalent of assuming that the black guy walking though a fancy neighborhood is obviously there to case the joints. Assuming he's on video walking around, fiddling with poo poo, and looking through the windows of a store on the night that it got robbed. Probably should have an explanation other than "Israel robbed it." Volkerball fucked around with this message at 07:40 on Jun 20, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 07:37
|
|
|
It has been confirmed that Iran has shot down a US drone today.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 09:50
|
|
|
What makes the US more legitimate in inspecting this item than Iran? What would make the USA's conclusion to this investigation than Iran's? Yes, we can expect Iran to be quite obviously lying about it. But the same can be said of the USA, who have a demonstrated history of bullshit forgery in the very recent history, bullshit forgeries whose consequences are still being felt today. Personally, I do honestly think it's an Iranian op: the thing was carefully calibrated to send a message without causing fatal damage ; it's a way to remind people of Iran's main deterrent. But ultimately, the ones who are culpable of it are the USA, and the onus is on them to stop their illegal and illegitimate sanctions on trade with Iran. Whatever argument about "Iran bad" you can make, you can also make about Israel and Saudi Arabia. If you want to get me onboard sanctions against Iran, then start by applying the same sanctions against these two other countries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 10:30
|
|
|
Iran has shot down a large US drone.quote:Iran's Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) said the drone had violated Iranian airspace. But US military said it had been over international waters. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48700965 edit: this is what I get for not refreshing the page first. Super beat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 12:30
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:This is literally the exact same poo poo that smaller nations living under the thumb of a hegemon have pulled against each other throughout at least all of recorded history. Can you summarize one of these examples? sounds interesting, I can't really recall any off the top of my head. The current events in the Persian Gulf remind of of one incident in 1984, when someone secretly mined the Red Sea. No one was ever able to prove who did it and nobody ever claimed the mines. The US and her allies blamed Ghadaffi's Libya, who was mad at the Gulf states and Egypt for something or other. Sometimes there won't ever be proof and we can never really know what happened. That's just something we have to accept. Be cautious about allowing yourself to use motivated reasoning. Do you really think i was Saudi Arabia, or would it just be convenient for you if that were so? Or are you just pointing out the very real uncertainty? Consider Cat Matress's position, which I think is very reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/iresimpsonsfans/status/1140733182876233728
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 17:32
|
|
|
Well, it seems as though one potential motive has emerged - the Trump administration tried to use the Iran escalation as an excuse to force through weapons exports to the Saudis. https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/st...ingawful.com%2F
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 17:40
|
|
|
"I have a feeling that someone under the command of that country made a big mistake," he said. "I find it hard to believe it was intentional. It could have been someone who was loose and stupid who did it." - Trump (who is either backing down or doubling down hard on the drone)
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 20:45 |
|
|
Turns out that psychopath SEAL on trial for murdering an ISIS detainee may not have actually been the one to kill him: https://twitter.com/PattersonNBC/status/1141761903993090049
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2019 19:41
|
|