BREAKING: Iran Forces Seize US Cargo Ship With 34 People On Board

a reply to: projectvxn

Another brother from another mother.

This is not what you think (based on your post), and I am certain you know that.

No-one has taken anyone - consider this nothing more than a USCG Port State Control detention and someones just pocketed cashhhhhhhh......

True story (from initial feedback I am getting from my sources) most likely (Iranian) custom officials are now laughing all the way to the bank.

[winks at Haman10]

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: crazyewok


Look he antagonize cowboys to attack his country I responded in jest. No body gives a flying # about that weak country. And frankly let's not talk if's and but's the March to Tehran would be a 24 hour event, judging by history there is no denying that. So why antagonize why stereotype us, screw them and the horse they rode in on with that senitment l, no one cares about that country but they certainly don't want us to start caring with that attitude. I'm 27 there haman I am a veteran you have no idea what your talking about, and don't see Your threat you put out there that started this whole conversation.

Well dear , the fact that you don't care about "weak" countries , is the exact same reason why US has been losing it's superpower status . you attack all the "weak" countries and you kill their people .

when online , you condescend them . you think you're bigger than them in size .

Well , guess what dear , Iran is not a weak country and we've always been a headline . no matter which timeline .

and seriously brother , my "threat" ? did i threaten anyone here ? quite the opposite my dear , if you only cared to read this thread , my country is the one who is threatened here .

We call for peace , we want it and we quite frankly BEG for it . but hey there , don't you think Iran is just another Iraq dear . We'll rain hell on any aggressor . we'll send them back home packin' .

a reply to: haman10

That being said , Iranian officials confirmed that they intercepted the cargo because it violated our waters .

I don't know of course, but I have a strong hunch this is exactly what happened. Maybe they will escort the cargo out of Iranian waters, and everybody can go back to living unhappily everafter.

originally posted by: peck420
a reply to: NavyDoc
Iran never ratified UNCLOS.

They are not bound by it. Unless you wish to openly state that every treaty the US has signed, but not ratified, the US is now bound by, as well.

the UN nations outnumber Iran so does it really matter? Above someone posted the law of maritime travel that all nations are to follow.

Iran has signed but not ratified the UNCLOS, but it has ratified the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone. On the other hand, Oman, the other coastal state, has ratified UNCLOS. Both Iran and Oman, however, subject the passage of foreign warships to prior notification. The United States has not signed UNCLOS but considers it to reflect customary international law.

SEE the US dont HAVE TO ASK PERMISSION EITHER since they did not sign UNCLOS either right? That convention from the 58th year still applies even if they did not sign.

FOund out the MARSHALL ISLANDS RATIFIED UNCLOS TOO.

a reply to: haman10

Yea Yea, you want to know something I learned Haman everyone's tough until they're not.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: projectvxn

Another brother from another mother.

This is not what you think (based on your post), and I am certain you know that.

No-one has taken anyone - consider this nothing more than a USCG Port State Control detention and someones just pocketed cashhhhhhhh......

True story (from initial feedback I am getting from my sources) most likely (Iranian) custom officials are now laughing all the way to the bank.

[winks at Haman10]

Frankly , i personally am not a fan of soft-soaping and lip-service . but i'd really love to meet you in person one day .

who knows , maybe i will

on topic , i really am trying hard to get some news , but no one actually pays any attention here apparently .

donno why such an unimportant event suddenly became relevant .

Apparently there were no US sailors on board as reported.

Source

Saudi-owned Al Arabiya television earlier said an Iranian force fired on and seized a U.S. cargo ship with 34 U.S. sailors on board, and directed it to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas. But the Pentagon spokesman said there were no U.S. citizens on board the ship.

Guess that's the fastest way of disseminating false information, throw the US crew aboard the vessel and you have headlines.

originally posted by: mr-lizard

originally posted by: Obsrvr
Obama doesn't have the balls to do what needs to be done here. He's too wrapped up in his bull$@&# bomb deal. President Tinyballs will dance diplomacy until the cows come home rather than send a good, strong message to those in the ME that you don't mess with the US.

What a load of old rubbish, neither you nor I know what's going on. If a ship has wandered into Iranian waters and ignored radio as has been alleged, then I believe legally Iran has the right to stop that ship for inspection.

Now grow up and get used to the notion that your ideas of the world are (thankfully) not based in reality. Nobody is 'messing' with you.

Yeah, but... 'MURICA!

a reply to: haman10

Rain hell huh? Look i like the iranian people but the government is my issue.(i dislike all governments btw) If we wanted to hit iran we could do so and kill their ability to wage a war quite fast. Destroying their dams, power plants, Oil refineries,and gas production within 24 hrs with massive cruise missile attacks and air power.

Then after that stand back and blockade the nation forcing the iranian people to overthrow their government or starve and thirst to death after destroying their crops as well as water supplies too.

Warcrime? sure. End resistance fast? you bet cha. remember kids its only a crime if the ROE arent worded correctly.

originally posted by: yuppa

So...per your own words...under the only applicable treaty (Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone), the 21 mile width is not covered by the 24 nm contiguous zone. Therefore not passable without the expressed consent of the country of ownership.

Anything else, or did that just sum it up?

Glad we cleared that all up.

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: haman10

Yea Yea, you want to know something I learned Haman everyone's tough until they're not.

yea yea . try again when you ruled the world for a thousand year .

en.wikipedia.org...

"The history of Iran, commonly also known as Persia in the Western world, is intertwined with the history of a larger region, also known as Greater Iran, comprising the area from Anatolia and Egypt in the west to the borders of Ancient India and Syr Darya in the east, and from the Caucasus and the Eurasian Steppe in the north to the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman in the south.

Iran is home to one of the world's oldest continuous major civilizations, with historical and urban settlements dating back to 4000 BC.[1]Hegel names the Persians as the first Historical People."

a reply to: haman10
Small world.

a reply to: peck420
We do not ask for permission, we just transit. If contacted via bridge to bridge, we respond, everything is professional. We have also transited without Iran's knowledge on purpose by using deceptive means, multiple times.
My username is what I did in the Navy.

a reply to: haman10

You are just like your government you so badly want to remain relevent, you so badly want to be seen as a force to be reckoned with, to the point you'll make threats then upon responding you'll claim aww you mean condescending Americans. Its like you just want to be seen as fighting America to have bragging rights,and as a peaceful state of the art country, like your just all around people. Its ridiculous and silly. We may be hated even within our own western society but we are a true force to reckon with that is the axiom period,

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: haman10

Rain hell huh? Look i like the iranian people but the government is my issue.(i dislike all governments btw) If we wanted to hit iran we could do so and kill their ability to wage a war quite fast. Destroying their dams, power plants, Oil refineries,and gas production within 24 hrs with massive cruise missile attacks and air power.

Then after that stand back and blockade the nation forcing the iranian people to overthrow their government or starve and thirst to death after destroying their crops as well as water supplies too.

Warcrime? sure. End resistance fast? you bet cha. remember kids its only a crime if the ROE arent worded correctly.

You know what i see in your post ? nothing worth mentioning . just typical rants that are thrown at Iran on a daily basis over the net .

you're a young person who watches too much hollywood .

My dear , if you really think you can do this , then what has stopped you ? people in your government don't give a tootsie roll to the lives of people here in ME . they would have attacked their real enemy - Iran - if they could .

Was Iraq really more of a threat to US than Iran ? hell no .

So stop being a keyboard warrior my dear . lets work peace out as citizens . don't condescend others cause it'll fire back .

a reply to: TechniXcality

a reply to: haman10

Your both as bad as each other.

Stop with the dick waving and kiss and make up

I am hearing that this is a PORT STATE CONTROL situation.

So - let me explain,

What this means is that the vessel was transiting in IRANIAN waters (WITH permission) and just like what Australia , and every other (non land-locked) country does is they have the right, under IMO (UN mandated international law) to inspect a vessel and insure it complies with that countries minimum Maritime requirements but more importantly SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) and MLC (Maritime Labour Convention) compliance, class (certification body) and flag state (registration body).

Ie - do they carry the required # of lifejackets, will the lifeboat actually launch in an emergency, are the guys being fed and paid correctly and I can go on an on for pages.

No different to being pulled over in your caarr and the cops wanting to make sure no illegal mods etc etc.

Standby for verification...........its 0230hrs now here in Perth (Aus) so might nott be till morning.

Cheers for all the PM guys - very much appreciated.

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: yuppa

So...per your own words...under the only applicable treaty (Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone), the 21 mile width is not covered by the 24 nm contiguous zone. Therefore not passable without the expressed consent of the country of ownership.

Anything else, or did that just sum it up?

Glad we cleared that all up.

Not so fast OMAN has the same size of zone and they Signed onto UNCLOS too. nice try. When two nations waters over lap its a neutral zone in that instance going by the old law.

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: haman10

You are just like your government you so badly want to remain relevent, you so badly want to be seen as a force to be reckoned with, to the point you'll make threats then upon responding you'll claim aww you mean condescending Americans. Its like you just want to be seen as fighting America to have bragging rights,and as a peaceful state of the art country, like your just all around people. Its ridiculous and silly. We may be hated even within our own western society but we are a true force to reckon with that is the axiom period,

By all means : if you find anything threatening in my posts - which were not a response to your fella's threats - find it and quote it here .

I will leave this forum for good , if you succeed .

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
a reply to: peck420
We do not ask for permission, we just transit. If contacted via bridge to bridge, we respond, everything is professional.

A country can follow the tenants of a treaty without being legally bound by a treaty. It happens every day, all the time.

We have also transited without Iran's knowledge on purpose by using deceptive means, multiple times.

Than I would have to assume that you would be okay with any country doing that to us?