Jump to content


Photo

Tanker War Redux


  • Please log in to reply
99 replies to this topic

#81 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,207 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:47 PM

I actually really value the opinions of both you guys and hope you keep it up, just maybe on one thread. :)
  • 0

#82 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted Yesterday, 02:57 PM

Well it keeps us off the streets I guess....

https://news.sky.com...waters-11766673
The Foreign Office is "urgently seeking" further information after Iran claimed to have seized a British-flagged tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

Owners of the Stena Impero have confirmed the vessel was approached by unidentified small crafts and a helicopter as it passed through the Strait of Hormuz at around 4pm UK time.

A statement from the ship's owner and management firm said it was "in international waters".

It added: "We are presently unable to contact the vessel which is now heading north towards Iran.

"There are 23 seafarers aboard. There have been no reported injuries and their safety is of primary concern to both owners and managers

"The priority of both vessel owner Stena Bulk and ship manager Northern Marine Management is the safety and welfare of the crew."

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard told state TV they had seized the Stena Impero for "violating international maritime rules".


Probably wasn't displaying a tax disc.....
  • 0

#83 Tim the Tank Nut

Tim the Tank Nut

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,722 posts
  • Interests:WW2 Armor (mostly US)

Posted Yesterday, 02:58 PM

so one tanker in Iranian hands or two?

where were the escort ships?


  • 0

#84 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted Yesterday, 02:59 PM

2,one panamanian, one British.

As for escorts, look how busy the place is. Your navy doesn't even have frigates anymore to fulfil the role.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith, Yesterday, 03:01 PM.

  • 0

#85 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted Yesterday, 03:05 PM

Confused reports on BBC of a possible second British tanker seized.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith, Yesterday, 03:05 PM.

  • 0

#86 wendist

wendist

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 669 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Skåne,Sweden

Posted Yesterday, 03:06 PM

The owners of the ship are Swedish! Even though there is a British flag at the stern of that ship why should the UK act?


  • 0

#87 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,207 posts

Posted Yesterday, 03:11 PM

Lol these Trump quotes are hilarious https://www.cnn.com/...2019/index.html
  • 0

#88 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,461 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 03:25 PM

The Iranians are showing an ability to establish a naval presence with essentially the equivalent of WW2 PT-boat technology.

 

Impressive and worthy of some respect.


Edited by Nobu, Yesterday, 03:26 PM.

  • 0

#89 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,749 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted Yesterday, 04:07 PM

Stopped transmitting 4 hrs ago 


  • 0

#90 Daan

Daan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,040 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where both sea and skies are grey.

Posted Yesterday, 04:08 PM

Iran's naval forces comprise quite a bit more than just the speed boats with which it is harassing and captured unarmed civilian vessels. For the decidedly unimpressive latter task, it could have used nearly any type of ship.


  • 0

#91 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,749 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted Yesterday, 04:08 PM

The Iranians are showing an ability to establish a naval presence with essentially the equivalent of WW2 PT-boat technology.

 

Impressive and worthy of some respect.

It's maintaining that presence when the other side starts reacting with more than words


  • 0

#92 Anixtu

Anixtu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,055 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Afloat

Posted Yesterday, 04:50 PM

Declare open season on IRGCN pirates outside of Iranian TTWs and invite the IRIN out to play.
  • 0

#93 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,914 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted Yesterday, 05:25 PM

Likewise.
  • 0

#94 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,384 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted Yesterday, 05:55 PM

So Stuart, the best you can come up with is harassment of Vietnamese fishing vessels vs the hundreds of thousands of lives conflicts we have electively participated in have taken at vast expense on our parr. That's not self flagellation Stuart. It's trying to apply morality and common sense to our foreign policy.
Sensibly, we are not getting into an unwinnable naval arms race with China. Why should we? The Japanese aren't sending forces to help contain Russia on our doorstep, are they?. It would also cost us far more to project power there than for Japan to build and maintain it or equivalent deterrent power in situ. Now remind me what % of GDP Japan spends on defence.


Going to keep it short because of recent news.

Russia is Japan's neighbor too and has island claim dispute with them. Their bombers fly near Japan sovereign territory, once in a awhile, flying into it.

Japan's 1% is like typical NATO countries 2%.

Japan just changed over to new defense laws 4 years ago. The defense budget is going up.

Pressure on Russia in the East would dampen any expansion idea in the west.
  • 0

#95 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,461 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 06:06 PM

They are certainly causing more problems at sea than their technology level would indicate.

 

It's maintaining that presence when the other side starts reacting with more than words

 

The Iranians may be hoping for such a reaction. An MH17 incident would be a nightmare, and one Tehran might try to orchestrate.


  • 0

#96 Dawes

Dawes

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,546 posts

Posted Yesterday, 06:45 PM

Where's Jack Bauer and CTU when you need them?


  • 0

#97 sunday

sunday

    Bronze-age right-wing delusional retard

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,705 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Badalona, Spain
  • Interests:Technology, History

Posted Yesterday, 07:21 PM

Rule, Irania!
Irania, rule the waves
And Persians never, never, never shall be slaves.
Rule, Irania!
Irania, rule the waves.
And Persians never, never, never shall be slaves.

 

Will Iranian naval supremacy be a fact in the 22nd century?


Edited by sunday, Yesterday, 07:21 PM.

  • 0

#98 Tim the Tank Nut

Tim the Tank Nut

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,722 posts
  • Interests:WW2 Armor (mostly US)

Posted Yesterday, 09:11 PM

a BBC article on their website seems to say that a military solution is off the table.

Given the transparency of Iran's actions it appears to me that preemptively removing that option is counter productive.

The right solution is to keep cracking down on every economic lever but always keep the military option open.

Perhaps Europe can begin to see Iran for what they really are?


  • 0

#99 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,749 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted Yesterday, 11:22 PM

They are certainly causing more problems at sea than their technology level would indicate.

 

It's maintaining that presence when the other side starts reacting with more than words

 

The Iranians may be hoping for such a reaction. An MH17 incident would be a nightmare, and one Tehran might try to orchestrate.

Lot's of Iranian targets to take out without directly attacking Iran, play their game and wipe out one of their proxy groups in Syria.


  • 0

#100 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 56 minutes ago

a BBC article on their website seems to say that a military solution is off the table.

Given the transparency of Iran's actions it appears to me that preemptively removing that option is counter productive.

The right solution is to keep cracking down on every economic lever but always keep the military option open.

Perhaps Europe can begin to see Iran for what they really are?

 

But what options? Due to the clueless actions over the past 20 years, we have successfully removed all the military options that might have worked. Even the QE as we have seen is in a body and fender shop, and we only have 14 combat aircraft for it anyway.

 

From what I heard last night, the tanker is in Bandar Abbas, and like as not, they have removed the crew onshore. So shore of landing 3 Commando brigade, we really dont have a lot of options. When it was at sea, there was the potential to land a RM Commando  section, but thats  passed now. Taking a tanker out of an Iranian port is going to be so difficult i have to doubt even the USN would manage it.

 

Course we could TLAM the tanker in port just to make a point of spite, but I doubt that is going to be very popular.

 

 

 

What would I do? Break off diplomatic relations, and take the embassy staff home. Because the way this is going, its not long before they are going to end up hostages anyway.


  • 0




4 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Chris Werb