[W:140:186] *2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Atomic Kid said:

The fleet could have been recalled at any point along the way if diplomatic progress had been made. But there was none. I'm not sure but I think Hull's demand that Japanese completely withdraw from China was not a part of the original negotiations and was added as American diplomatic team was en route to the negotiations. The Japanese saw that demand as a casus belli and indication that the US was not truly interested in reaching a negotiated settlement. But it's not like this tells the entire story of how the US and Japan arrived at this impasse. This was many years in the making and perhaps in large part shaped by racial prejudice and cultural misunderstanding that gave the Japanese reason to be sensitive to Western subjugation. Think 'Gun Boat Diplomacy', 'The Perry Expedition', 'Open Door Policy' and way the Japanese were all but completely ignored by the Western power allies at Versailles at the end of WWI at which the Japanese delegation ended up walking out on in protest.

Click to expand...

The fleet could have been recalled, but the Japanese (understandably) felt under pressure to end the rounds of unresolved differences. Moreover, they were also well aware that to abort a major and expensive operation (burning fuel oil strategic reserves) on a less than robust and long term agreement was not worth it.

The US, for its part, was unaware of the exact deadline for war. The US, according to my readings, rejected proposal A of the Japanese (they knew what it was going to be anyway due to their code breaking). They didn't reject B outright, and was preparing a counter-proposal when the administration decided that Japan could not be trusted and drafted the Hull memorandum.

The impasse was not due to racial prejudice or cultural misunderstanding. It was due to irreconcilable differences over the aims of the Japanese empire and the aims of the US administration. No matter how "understanding" one might be of Japanese feelings, it wouldn't have change their feelings or war aims. They wanted a colonial empire, and felt entitled to it in part because Europeans had one.

However, aside from the impasse, the end result was due to a misunderstanding by the Japanese - not only as to the power of the U.S. and determination of its people, but also as to strong desire to avoid war among US politicians (other than Roosevelt). The Japanese never considered a limited attack on just those nations that held oil (Java), and was unwilling to risk it. Clearly they should have.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

maxparrish said:

You might note that the assessment is not based on a couple of specific facts, its based on the totality and circumstances of all the facts combined. The immediate presence of the Iranian Guard, the demand that ships and crews be turned over to them (even after they had been rescued by others), removal and disposal of evidence without any explanation, and seizure of one ship is sufficient evidence to conclude that more likely than not it was Iran that sponsored the attack. (And by the way, the eyes of the Dutch crew was not "grainy" and was very close to the second mine, which they thought was an explosive).

Frankly, if I read of a bus of passengers being attacked, the bus seized, and the already rescued passengers taken and bus transported to a known terrorists to a known criminal hideout I am going to assume that the attackers were the kidnappers.

Although I am sure one can invent excuses, methinks you'd be a fool to do so.

Finally, someone who knows a lot more than us, and who has street cred is saying the same thing, Adam Shiff (head of the intelligence committee, on Meet the Press):

Click to expand...

I don't believe either ship had been seized. The US Navy returned at least part of the crew to the Japanese ship to assist in towing it. The Norwegian ship is currently under tow to the UAE and that all 23 crew members remain safe with plans being made to repatriate them as soon as possible. And I'm not making excuses I'm just pointing out the difficulties we find ourselves being confronted with in light of this administration's credibility problems and strained relationships. Which Adam Schiff's statement served to underscore. Supposedly Pompeo worked the phones yesterday lobbying various allies and friends and other nations on the Iranian situation and it doesn't appear that there were many takers.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Rexedgar said:

You brought up PH. I recommended further study. You told me you had read “tons” and were a history major to boot. I recommended a handful of additional topics, posting that particular period must have been “breezed over,” you feigned insult and claimed victory. If you use your education to bolster your position, you ought to do better and not be insulted when it is questioned because you won’t engage other than to declare yourself the winner.

Click to expand...

I figured you would back down... all good. Better luck next time.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

What if...? said:

Well, as the US knew the Japanese fleet was heading toward Hawaii but nobody told Pearl, it could be said that its the US' "fault". Through negligence if nothing else.

Click to expand...

Bodhisattva said:

Present evidence that the US knew that Japan had a fleet heading towards Hawaii...

Click to expand...

Thought so... :lol:

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Bodhisattva said:

I figured you would back down... all good. Better luck next time.

Click to expand...

A little bored today?

Your argument overwhelmed me!

1) you read a “ton.”
2) you are a history major
3) you twice declared victory; you need a third victory lap?

You are a master at presenting your position in concise written terms, you should be proud!

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Rexedgar said:

A little bored today?

Your argument overwhelmed me!

1) you read a “ton.”
2) you are a history major
3) you twice declared victory; you need a third victory lap?

You are a master at presenting your position in concise written terms, you should be proud!

Click to expand...

It is probably better to just not respond than to make yourself look even more foolish with a clown act...

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Bodhisattva said:

Present evidence that the US knew that Japan had a fleet heading towards Hawaii...

Click to expand...

IIRC our people reported from Japan that the fleet sailed but there was no knowledge of where to. It was assumed it would be to headed south to the Philippines.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Fledermaus said:

IIRC our people reported from Japan that the fleet sailed but there was no knowledge of where to. It was assumed it would be to headed south to the Philippines.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the USA expected an attack. That is agreed to. The issue was that we did not know where... and that is not evidence that the US knew that a Japanese fleet was sailing towards PH.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Bodhisattva said:

It is probably better to just not respond than to make yourself look even more foolish with a clown act...

Click to expand...

Did Trump University offer classes in history? The thread topic is the tankers in the Gulf of Oman; if you want to explore another topic feel free to start a thread.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Bodhisattva said:

Yeah, the USA expected an attack. That is agreed to. The issue was that we did not know where... and that is not evidence that the US knew that a Japanese fleet was sailing towards PH.

Click to expand...

The Japanese maintained radio silence and were not detected enroute.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Rexedgar said:

Did Trump University offer classes in history? The thread topic is the tankers in the Gulf of Oman; if you want to explore another topic feel free to start a thread.

Click to expand...

You challenged me on the topic of Japan... in order to not look silly again, in the future do not challenge people on a topic that you are weak in.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Fledermaus said:

The Japanese maintained radio silence and were not detected enroute.

Click to expand...

I understand... what is your point?

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Bodhisattva said:

I understand... what is your point?

Click to expand...

That you are 100% correct.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Renae said:

I'm just waiting for the false flag ops people to pollute the thread.

Click to expand...

The interesting thing about "false flags" is that ANYONE can fly them.

What this could mean is that (as an example)


and there are a whole lot of other scenarios that you could spin.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

ElChupacabra said:

Well I could put on my tin foil hat and come up with all sorts of scenarios....

Click to expand...

Are you saying that it would NOT be "inconvenient" to admit that the Iranians were actually leading the rescue efforts when you want to imply that it was the Iranians who attacked the ships?

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Trump said:

have any Iranian TV footage to back up Iranian progadanda:lol:

Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence that the Reuters report is false?

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Evilroddy said:

Four tankers damaged by what looked like limpit mines attached to the hull in non-vital areas but below the waterline to minimise environmental damage and loss of life but to maximise publicity in May near the UAE. June 6th, UN "sponsored" report comes out but doesn't name Iran. June 7th six Iranian ships in port and a sizable part of one port town are destroyed by fire. June 12, Japanese PM Abe is in Iran to diffuse tensions when on June 13th two more tankers with Japanese related cargoes are damaged in the Gulf of Oman. Iranians rescue the crews of the two ships and as far as I know, no one was killed.

My guess would be this is not Iran nor a state actor but rather a non-state actor with state assistance trying to create a causus belli for a regional war or strikes against Iran. I would be looking at all the PMSC companies in the world to see which ones have the personnel, expertise and the patrons to carry this off deniably. Suspects for patronage are first the UAE, then Saudi Arabia, then the State of Israel, then the USA or rogue elements with in the USA, then the UK, then France, and finally Russia. Perhaps another Gulf State might be added after Russia. All of this is speculation however and right now there is very little evidence to proceed upon.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Click to expand...

Other than the fact that you omitted "in order to advance the political career of someone in the United States of America" as a potential motivator (which I don't claim was actually a motivator, but only a potential motivator), I agree with your analysis.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Erod said:

You want Iran as a nuclear power so bad. I get it.

Click to expand...

There was a good, and workable, international agreement that was actually ensuring that that wouldn't happen.

Mr. Trump took the US out of that agreement and now his supporters are demanding that there be a good, and workable, international agreement that would actually ensure that that wouldn't happen.

I suppose that one way of achieving that is to take the JCPOA and run it through the word processor so that it comes out as "The Donald John **T*R*U*M*P** Fantastically Hugely Wonderful JCPOA" and everyone will be happy.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Bodhisattva said:

This is ridiculous... like blaming the USA for Pearl Harbor...

Click to expand...

Given that the US government placed an embargo on Japan that would have had the net effect of causing millions to starve and the Japanese economy to collapse while, at the same time, not providing the Japanese with any acceptable method of actually negotiating to a position whereby the Japanese government could "save face" and thus placed the Japanese in a situation where they had no alternative (in their own world view) but war, it is quite possible to make a case whereby the US government DID "cause" the Pearl Harbour attack.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

apdst said:

If they win: control of the Straits of Hormuz, i.e. control of most of the world's oil.

Click to expand...

Please identify the person who:

• has an IQ higher than 100;
• knows what the strength of the Iranian military is;
• knows what the strength of the US military is;
• knows something about the countries involved (other than Iran); and
• is not a delusional sycophantic follower of Donald Trump;

who actually thinks that the Iranians think that they could "win" a war with the United States of America and I'll give your position a bit of credit.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Bodhisattva said:

I have read tons about it... The USA did not force Japan to attack. Japan is responsible for it's own actions, just like the ones that attacked the oil tankers.

Click to expand...

If someone doesn't understand the Japanese psyche, your statement that "The USA did not force Japan to attack." makes a lot of sense.

To someone who is under the impression that people in Tokyo are just like people in Toledo, your statement that "The USA did not force Japan to attack." makes a lot of sense.

I can see why you thing that your statement that "The USA did not force Japan to attack." makes sense.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

apdst said:

Oh my! Is this where you tell us that we knew the Japanese were going to attack and sat back and let it happen? :lamo

Click to expand...

I doubt it.

Only a fool equates "a total ****-up involving missed messages, misread messages, incompetent diplomats, hubris, bureaucratic bungling, and lack of rational analysis" with "we knew the Japanese were going to attack and sat back and let it happen".

Quite frankly if it had been the case that "we knew the Japanese were going to attack and sat back and let it happen" the US government and military would look one hell of a lot better in retrospect than the actually do.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

ecofarm said:

Terrorist groups don't have lippet mines or the ability to deploy them. Nor do they have the capacity for such a coordinated action.

Click to expand...

Given the industrial capacity that I can purchase at HomeDepot, and the materials that I can purchase on Amazon, and the materials that I can build using commonly available chemicals in order to make explosives (or the explosives that I can get from someone who stole them), a statement such as "Terrorist groups don't have limpet mines." makes no sense whatsoever.

Given that I can purchase both full sets of SCUBA gear AND "underwater scooters" commercially, a statement such as "Terrorist groups don't have the ability to deploy them (limpet mines)" makes no sense whatsoever.

Given that "terrorist groups" HAVE conducted coordinated action in the past, a statement such as "Terrorist don't have the capacity for such coordinated action." makes no sense whatsoever.

Re: 2 oil tankers damaged in suspected attack in the Gulf of Oman, crew evacuated

Unitedwestand13 said:

I don’t think the United States would have a Casus belli if no American citizens or military people were harmed.

Click to expand...

The Germans had a Causus Belli when the German border checkpoint was attacked by Poles.

(If you don't get what I'm saying, go and look it up.)