Iran responsible for 'blatant assault' on oil tankers in Gulf of Oman, Mike Pompeo says

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I'm inclined to think that they didn't do it, but am still open to the possibility they did once I see some evidence.

They're notorious for sabre rattling as are we. But unfortunately, I trust taking the word of my country in situations like this very little. We've been lied to far too many times, and this instance comes out of the old playbook.

What really bugs me, is that they were so willing to speak in absolutes the same day it happened. But what really gets me, is I can spot at least one lie.

Pompeo says no other country could have orchestrated the explosions with “such a high degree of sophistication.”

link

That is just utter BS, and we all know it.

Furthermore, I'm tired of paying taxes to the world police. There are very capable countries in the region, yet whenever something like this happens, it's an automatic question of everyone on the planet "what is the US going to do to 'fix' this".

Is Israel and Saudi Arabia helping our border? No. Would they help us in another venture that wouldn't be self serving to them as well? One I'd lean more towards a yes than the other, but I wouldn't want to depend on them.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

That is just utter BS, and we all know it.

In the meantime, Israel is getting ready to vote to name a Golan Heights settlement after Trump.

The ministers will vote on whether to support naming a settlement after Trump and, if approved, will subsequently vote on its precise name.
According to Israeli media, the settlement is set to built in the northern Golan and dubbed "Trump Heights".

www.yahoo.com...

With all Iran's sabre rattling, I find it astounding that they continue to deny they did it.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

In the meantime, Israel is getting ready to vote to name a Golan Heights after Trump.

Bibi's thank you gift to Trump for helping him win the election at the last minute.

He will call in another favor before September, and that might include something to do with the very topic we speak of.

With all Iran's sabre rattling, I find it astounding that they continue to deny they did it.

I was thinking about that earlier today, and I couldn't agree more. If the objective was to try and leverage the international community, it won't be as effective if the international community has to walk on eggshells to determine who did it, which a vast part of the global community is waiting to do.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

What would their growth look like without the JCPOA? That massive spike in 2016 was clearly a direct result from it.

With how much it dropped between 2016 and 17 I wouldn't be surprised if their economy shrank last year.

And even in the years where it grew we know it wasn't due to military production.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: burdman30ott6

What would their growth look like without the JCPOA? That massive spike in 2016 was clearly a direct result from it.

I don't know if Obama's idiotic $1.7 Billion ransom went into Iran's GDP or not, to be honest.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: burdman30ott6

What would their growth look like without the JCPOA? That massive spike in 2016 was clearly a direct result from it.

I don't know if Obama's idiotic $1.7 Billion ransom went into Iran's GDP or not, to be honest.

*yawns*

Yall really hung up on 1.7 billion dollars that wasn't even our money.

We could blow 1.7 billion dollars that we'll have to borrow in ten minutes over there here soon, and the same people who complain about the "ransom" would be shotgunning beers watching it unfold on Fox News. Operation Awe and Shock.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

JCPOA goes in to effect in July 2015. Sanctions get eased and a whole new industry becomes viable. 2016, Iran's economy grows at an unprecedented rate only to dwindle back to a normal level the next year.

I know correlation doesn't imply causation. At the same time you have to be an idiot to not see why Iran's economy grew so much in 2016.

Even then, Germany had multiple years where their economic growth was around 10% (not just one) and they were outspending every other country on military production. Iran doesn't even rank in the Top 10. Even if you look at it as a percentage of GDP.

Double post

a reply to: CriticalStinker

They still owe me some Shock n Awe.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

It's a valid comment, though. Was that applied to their GDP for 2016?

As far as how much $1.7 Billion is in the US' overall budget, nice attempt at a strawman argument. Theft is theft and illegal is illegal, regardless of the magnitude compared to a non sequitur figure.

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: CriticalStinker

They still owe me some Shock n Awe.

You're desensitized Lysergic. We'd have to throw some jumper cables on you somewhere creative (or obvious) while show you videos of the strikes.... And even then we'd be screaming "ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED"?

But that's why we keep you around 😉

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I didnt even get to see a MOAB as I sat in glued to the cable news whose ads switched to SSRI and antidepressants adverts.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: CriticalStinker

It's a valid comment, though. Was that applied to their GDP for 2016?

As far as how much $1.7 Billion is in the US' overall budget, nice attempt at a strawman argument. Theft is theft and illegal is illegal, regardless of the magnitude compared to a non sequitur figure.

Sure, it added .25 percent to their GDP that year, now they can take over the world.

Theft is theft and illegal is illegal, regardless of the magnitude compared to a non sequitur figure.

Theft of what? Iranian assets frozen in sanctions?

check out some background in the money the US kept from the Iran purchase of weapons that weren't delivered and this "ransom". They were tied in a way, but Iran got 7 citizens back too.

fortune.com...

I didn't know there was a US/IRAN claims tribunal @ the Hague back in jan 1981 that involved claims on both sides including the 400million Iran paid for weapons that weren't delivered (about $1.5 billion in 2017 dollars)

www.iusct.net...

One can even look into Reagan's Iran contra affair and the US selling weapons to Iran in the 80s as "ransom" to get american citizens back in addition to a bunch of mess in Central America...

www.britannica.com...

Sorry, having problems on the phone trying to press the small icons to insert links and text, etc.

a reply to: ufoorbhunter

en.wikipedia.org...

Despite an initial 2% rise in oil prices, oil markets ultimately did not react significantly to the Iranian threat, with oil analyst Thorbjoern Bak Jensen of Global Risk Management concluding that "they cannot stop the flow for a longer period due to the amount of U.S. hardware in the area".[52] While earlier statements from Iran had little effect on global oil markets, coupled with the new sanctions, these terse comments from Iran are driving crude futures higher, up over 4%.[44] Pressure on prices reflect a combination of uncertainty driven further by China's recent response – reducing oil January 2012 purchases from Iran by 50% compared to those made in 2011.[53]

thats what happened last time they threatened to close it and why some nations are moving away from iranian oil

usa and most nato is pretty big on freedom of the seas www.telegraph.co.uk...

But the ayatollahs vowed that, if ever the need rose again to blockade the Gulf, they would have the means to do so. Consequently the Iranian military has spent much of the past two decades overhauling its capabilities, to the extent that if the order were given to close the Strait of Hormuz it could actually carry out the threat – albeit for a few days. Iran would be able to deploy anti-ship cruise missiles, submarines, mines and thousands of small watercraft that could be used in “swarm” attacks against shipping if the ayatollahs decided to impose a blockade. Such is the confidence of senior Iranian commanders in their firepower that Admiral Habibollah Sayari, the head of Iran’s navy, recently boasted that closing the strait would be “as easy as drinking a glass of water”. And to prove the point, this week his forces completed 10 days of war games in which they successfully tested three anti-ship missiles. But if the Iranian military threat is much more potent than it was in the 1980s, the Pentagon insists that it still would be no match for US firepower. One aircraft carrier is able to deploy more air power than the entire Iranian air force, and it is difficult to argue with the assessment of most military analysts that it would take just a few days to knock out the entire Iranian military effort. Nor would the American response be confined to the Iranian navy, as any attempt by Iran to use military force to disrupt Gulf shipping would inevitably lead to America and its allies using it as an excuse to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, thereby resolving the nuclear crisis once and for all.

if they decide to usa/nato would respond and id see the isreli/egyptian/saudi alliance using the chaos to make its move against iran ,idf would most likely go for their reactors ,Saudi would call its banners and cause what chaos it thinks it could get away with and with most of the major players in the middle east either on Saudis team or fighting protracted civil wars (see syria) not much regionally would be available to help iran

globalriskinsights.com...

The winners All the states involved in the alliance will benefit to various extents. Israel is gaining tacit, and even overt, diplomatic recognition from important elements in the Arab World. Jerusalem is also given an excuse to not act on the Palestinian issue as the once major proponents of the Palestinian cause now pay lip service to it. This will further Israel’s strategic position. Egypt, the Gulf States all stand to gain access to some degree of Israeli support, no small thing given Israel’s intelligence and military prowess. There is also a growing economic dimenstion to relations that is not often examined. They may also benefit from Netanyahu’s strong connection to President Trump and Washington in general given current political circumstances. Al-Assad also stands to gain immensely by being welcomed back into the Arab League. This is leading to the re-establishment of diplomatic ties with Gulf States thereby legitimizing his rule. The Kurds could also potentially benefit. If Assad and the Kurds strike a deal which brings them back under government control they may gain some level of autonomy within Syria and stave off a Turkish offensive.

doubt the Turks would wanna get involved
sure the iranians could cause some chaos but never keep it closed for long ,odds are its a negotiation tactic in hopes of easing sanctions but bolton and pompeo have wanted to do this for a while so who knows

originally posted by: DerBeobachter

LOL how many of those bases are still operational? havent most been deactivated

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Dear ATS Readers, Writers,

Hello CriticalStinker, have really enjoyed your input throughout this thread by the way.

Had a sleep, and trying to follow up on this story, and this thread.

I was not surprised but very disappointed when I saw the poor poor quality of the alleged "guilty" video. What a joke eh?

And you are spot on about the obvious lie about Iran being the ONLY one who could pull this off...yeah right...Cough, cough.

It is a major red flag whenever they immediately, or almost immediately, within an hour or two of breaking bad news..they start speaking in absolutes. It is like a giveaway that some sort of cover up is going on.

In the last 24 hours, the story has other reports that refute the official absolutes stated already!

One about a missile seen coming in, not a mine. Ships owner refuting official narrative...mines aren't placed well above the water line. A mine blows a round hole into a ship, not a long angled "slash" as in the one photo produced reportedly showing another mine attached to the hull about 30 to 40 meters away from damage.

Then the explanation, or cover up on the mines being called torpedoes, since it is a "European term"... and it wasn't a torpedo (per se') that sank the USS Maine, it was a floating mine, supposedly.... that they used to call torpedoes! Admiral Perry, "Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead"... pretty thin splaining on that one, in my opinion.

That explanation was VERY lame, as most people, know that the USS Maine sank because of a coal bunker explosion. I watched a doco on it once that showed the metal bent outwards from the Maine, indicating a explosion from INSIDE the ship! So the torpedo explanation was based on a lie, but a myth everyone can identify with and understand. It is all pretty sick in my opinion. Using lies to explain a lie, based on a lie, on top of another lie...it never stops it seems.

And another thing seems to be a sense of silence ever since Pompeo said his "Iran did it" news announcement.

Working up a "response" to make Iran pay for this deed? That they maybe didn't do? Maybe they did? I don't know, and most of us will never know the real truth of it all. (Thinking the Gulf of Tonkin event. Which also had been admitted that the myth was a lie all these years later.)

Now they have added this to the narrative:

Iranians fired missile at US drone prior to tanker attack, US official says

So now the Iranians fired a missile at a drone, the drone that took the "guilty video" apparently.

This thread seems to have died down....to match the silence online and news sites silence, or lack of info as to "what is happening next".

Hoping that the silence isn't war planning meetings going on, and coming up with a shock and awe for Iran.

Russia for one, I don't think they would sit idly by if Iran and the USA got at each others throat in war. Or if Iran started losing badly, Russia would "jump in" probably, is my guess.

It is such a shame the situations everywhere have gone so bad, from bad to worse even.

Pravdaseeker

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Theft of what? Iranian assets frozen in sanctions?

It's interesting people keep glossing over that fact..why do seemingly knowledgeable people do that?