Gulf of Oman incidents
Discussion
Mastodon2 said:
If we're talking about WWII era US navy ships that would be useful, some Atlanta class cruisers would be more suited to hunting down small boats full of Iranians and limpet mines.
Wasn’t the Atlanta class primarily an anti air warship?But yeah, the 12” armoured hull would take a fairly large limpet mine to damage it!
The 16” rifles would be useful against a small boat I recon
I think the Iowa and Wisconsin are maintained so that they can still be returned to service if required!!
Saudi crown prince tells Iran: 'We won't hesitate to deal with any threat'
Guardian said:
According to an interview for pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, published on Sunday, the crown prince said: “We do not want a war in the region ... But we won’t hesitate to deal with any threat to our people, our sovereignty, our territorial integrity and our vital interests.
“The Iranian regime did not respect the presence of the Japanese prime minister as a guest in Tehran and responded to his [diplomatic] efforts by attacking two tankers, one of which was Japanese.”
“The Iranian regime did not respect the presence of the Japanese prime minister as a guest in Tehran and responded to his [diplomatic] efforts by attacking two tankers, one of which was Japanese.”
BlackLabel said:
Saudi crown prince tells Iran: 'We won't hesitate to deal with any threat'
Call me cynical but who benefits most from a Japanese tanker being attackedGuardian said:
According to an interview for pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, published on Sunday, the crown prince said: “We do not want a war in the region ... But we won’t hesitate to deal with any threat to our people, our sovereignty, our territorial integrity and our vital interests.
“The Iranian regime did not respect the presence of the Japanese prime minister as a guest in Tehran and responded to his [diplomatic] efforts by attacking two tankers, one of which was Japanese.”
“The Iranian regime did not respect the presence of the Japanese prime minister as a guest in Tehran and responded to his [diplomatic] efforts by attacking two tankers, one of which was Japanese.”
1. The Iranians who are holding talks with one of their biggest customers and desperately need a way for the pressure being put on them to be relaxed
2. The Saudis/UAE/USA who want to increase the pressure and are actively looking for a casus belli and to get the japanese annoyed at the iranians
It's a definite headscratcher, that one......
Just in case anbody doesn't realise..... there is no doubt that Iranians will definitely get their backsides kikced in any conventional war. Their response will NOT be conventional. I hope we rememeber that when the NeoCon elements in the West talk about them hating our "Freedom, democracy, and way of life...."
t for what it is. But no-one can do anything about it.
Starting to think Pompeo and co might be telling the truth and Iran are actually “escalating tensions”.
I mean they did build their country right in the middle of all these American and British military bases.... how dare they.
“The United Kingdom is deploying a contingent of Royal Marines to protect their warships in the Persian Gulf as tensions rise between the United States and Iran.
Using speedboats and helicopters to protect Royal Navy warships and U.K. merchant vessels, 100 Marines will form Special Purpose Task Group 19 and patrol the region from Britain’s new naval base in Bahrain, according to The Sunday Times.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/uk-sending...
I mean they did build their country right in the middle of all these American and British military bases.... how dare they.
“The United Kingdom is deploying a contingent of Royal Marines to protect their warships in the Persian Gulf as tensions rise between the United States and Iran.
Using speedboats and helicopters to protect Royal Navy warships and U.K. merchant vessels, 100 Marines will form Special Purpose Task Group 19 and patrol the region from Britain’s new naval base in Bahrain, according to The Sunday Times.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/uk-sending...
nikaiyo2 said:
Wasn’t the Atlanta class primarily an anti air warship?
But yeah, the 12” armoured hull would take a fairly large limpet mine to damage it!
The 16” rifles would be useful against a small boat I recon
I think the Iowa and Wisconsin are maintained so that they can still be returned to service if required!!
The Atlanta class were primarily escort cruisers used with defence from aircraft in mind but their 5" rifles, all 16 of them, would be highly effective at engaging light surface targets. With the configuration of the turrets, which were dual purpose allowing for flat firing angles for surface engagement and the ability to get 14 of the 16 guns trained onto one target, coupled with a rate of fire of 15 rounds per minute on each gun, that is going to put a lot of holes in any target!But yeah, the 12” armoured hull would take a fairly large limpet mine to damage it!
The 16” rifles would be useful against a small boat I recon
I think the Iowa and Wisconsin are maintained so that they can still be returned to service if required!!
Of course, it's all just deck-launched guided missiles these days. Perhaps even more likely that a drone would be used to strike the target so as not to risk damaging or losing a ship.
“No other state or non-state actor could plausibly have been responsible”.
We’ve gone from ‘Iran most likely did it’ to ‘there’s no way that anyone other than Iran did it.’
We’ve gone from ‘Iran most likely did it’ to ‘there’s no way that anyone other than Iran did it.’
Downing Street said:
"No other state or non-state actor could plausibly have been responsible," said Mrs May's spokesman. "These latest attacks build on a pattern of destabilising Iranian behaviour and pose a serious danger to the region. That is why we have called on Iran to cease all forms of destabilising activity."
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/defence/news/104637/theresa-may-warns-iran-over-breaching-nuclear-deal-and-oil-tankerEdited by BlackLabel on Monday 17th June 15:33
BlackLabel said:
“No other state or non-state actor could plausibly have been responsible”.
We’ve gone from ‘Iran most likely did it’ to ‘there’s no way that anyone other than Iran did it.’
So basically no one knows who actually did it, but we can safely assume it was Iran (which it may have been of course), so we will proceed as if it actually was Iran.We’ve gone from ‘Iran most likely did it’ to ‘there’s no way that anyone other than Iran did it.’
Downing Street said:
"No other state or non-state actor could plausibly have been responsible," said Mrs May's spokesman. "These latest attacks build on a pattern of destabilising Iranian behaviour and pose a serious danger to the region. That is why we have called on Iran to cease all forms of destabilising activity."
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/defence/news/104637/theresa-may-warns-iran-over-breaching-nuclear-deal-and-oil-tankerEdited by BlackLabel on Monday 17th June 15:33
No one really knew where Saddam's WMDs were, but we safely assumed he had them and proceeded as if he did.
It's difficult to see what we gain by being in the vanguard of all of this anyway, at a stage where we aren't directly affected, at a stage where the evidence appears circumstantial at best, at a stage when we have our own house to put in order and may be on the cusp of challenging times. Perhaps this is just 'jaw jaw' & PR, but I doubt there's much appetite amongst the people for more foreign adventures, nominal or otherwise.
Even the Japanese are sceptical about the American narrative and it was their tanker which was involved.
https://japantoday.com/category/national/japan-dem...
https://japantoday.com/category/national/japan-dem...
BlackLabel said:
Downing Street said:
"No other state or non-state actor could plausibly have been responsible," said Mrs May's spokesman. "These latest attacks build on a pattern of destabilising Iranian behaviour and pose a serious danger to the region. That is why we have called on Iran to cease all forms of destabilising activity."
Not high functioning when it comes to reflective, cognitive or introspective skills, our Theresa!
Octoposse said:
So the Prime Minister of the UK, who in 2003 voted in favour of the invasion of Iraq, accuses Iran of destabilising the region . . .
Not high functioning when it comes to reflective, cognitive or introspective skills, our Theresa!
Trumps puppet. If she (and half the government) wasn't then we should be rebuking half the crap he comes out with as facts. Not high functioning when it comes to reflective, cognitive or introspective skills, our Theresa!
At this rate we are going to blindly follow the USA into another war nobody wants, based on dubious intelligence.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff