Jump to content


Photo

Tanker War Redux


  • Please log in to reply
316 replies to this topic

#301 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,045 posts

Posted 15 August 2019 - 1226 PM

Glad to see this tanker thing might go away.  Hopefully and presumably the British ship will also be released.  


  • 0

#302 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 15 August 2019 - 1259 PM

Fiver says they will hold onto the British tanker.


  • 0

#303 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,064 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 15 August 2019 - 1321 PM

They probably will do for some more time, then release it just to show their power. Same thing they did with the US embassy hostages, holding onto them until Reagan was inaugurated as a final "fuck you" to Carter.


  • 0

#304 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,628 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 August 2019 - 1746 PM

Such a release would also allow cooler heads in Tehran to prevail and the more radical variety to save face.


  • 0

#305 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 16 August 2019 - 0115 AM

There arent any cool heads in Tehran, that is a myth that continues to endure. It was created by Western Politicians so they could convince themselves the people they were negotiating with were not part of the problem.


  • 0

#306 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0157 AM

Still there. Apparently the US is still attempting further court action.

https://af.reuters.c...s/idAFKCN1V609Z

 

And if there are any lingering doubts this was not undertaken on behalf of the EU....

https://www.express....est-news-update


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 17 August 2019 - 0200 AM.

  • 0

#307 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,064 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0404 AM

Huh?


  • 0

#308 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0421 AM

Iran has good as admitted it WAS going to Syria. In fact the team that went on board Grace 1 found evidence of it anyway, but nobody believed them.


  • 0

#309 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,064 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0442 AM

I don't think anybody ever doubted that. The doubts were about whether the EU sanctions applied to a third-party ship just passing through European waters.

 

If anything, the American legal intervention demonstrates the considerable US interest in the affair, though it's not exactly proof positive that the UK acted on their prompt either.


  • 0

#310 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 17 August 2019 - 0450 AM

I think the Yanks just saw some passing coattails and wanted to ride on it. I think they have more than enough warships to nobble Iranian tankers if they felt the need. Besides, It could have been the LCS's moment of glory. :)


  • 0

#311 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,813 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted Yesterday, 01:11 AM

Gibraltar release tanker, but it's awaiting new crew and is now an Iranian flagged ship. https://gcaptain.com..._eid=c9f44d7f09


  • 0

#312 Jeff

Jeff

    Godfather of Tanknet Birthday Greetings

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,909 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 01:12 PM

So what justification was there to release the ship that wasn't there not to take it in the first place? Just seems like naked capitulation to the mullahs with the hope that they release the british ship in return. The next time the Iranians start grabbing ships and there will be a next time, they will be sure to assume it will turn out the same way again. That's a dangerous assumption and makes a shooting war that much more likely in the future rather than less.This won't age well.


  • 0

#313 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted Yesterday, 01:43 PM

The logic is this, they have given an assertion (though they wont admit it) that it wont go to Syria. And if it does, we will be in a position to seize it again the next time it does it.

 

Is a point of principle worth starting a war over? In this case no. If they keep doing it, well yes. Though I think we are heading in that direction anyway.


  • 0

#314 Jeff

Jeff

    Godfather of Tanknet Birthday Greetings

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,909 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 02:03 PM

Yes, I'm sure they have no other aims, once given this latest demand. At least until the next demand. This movie seems very familiar. You don't avoid a war with a nation that seeks one, or at least doesn't fear one, by giving into their demands, you only postpone it slightly while making it ever more inevitable. The UK of all nations should understand this. How many conflicts in history have been made worse by ignoring them rather than acting in defense of principles too soon? You've argued this very thing in other topics. If the Iranians are willing to go to war over this one tanker then what will the next casus belli be for them? And the next? And the next? Free nations have gotten into more wars trying to avoid them than the reverse.


  • 0

#315 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,064 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted Yesterday, 02:55 PM

So what justification was there to release the ship that wasn't there not to take it in the first place?


That's the problem exactly. It's of course not the first time a court knocks down executive overreach, but when you're dealing with state actors - particularly of the type who are not restricted by rule of law themselves to take counteraction - you end up with lots of extra egg on your face.
  • 0

#316 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,117 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted Yesterday, 03:36 PM

. The UK of all nations should understand this. How many conflicts in history have been made worse by ignoring them rather than acting in defense of principles too soon? 

 

To be fair, historically, we do tend to show up for major global conflicts years earlier than some other countries...


  • 0

#317 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted Today, 01:37 AM

Yes, I'm sure they have no other aims, once given this latest demand. At least until the next demand. This movie seems very familiar. You don't avoid a war with a nation that seeks one, or at least doesn't fear one, by giving into their demands, you only postpone it slightly while making it ever more inevitable. The UK of all nations should understand this. How many conflicts in history have been made worse by ignoring them rather than acting in defense of principles too soon? You've argued this very thing in other topics. If the Iranians are willing to go to war over this one tanker then what will the next casus belli be for them? And the next? And the next? Free nations have gotten into more wars trying to avoid them than the reverse.

 

You say that as if the US wasn't doing exactly the same thing in the 1930's and the early 1940's. Google Charles Lindbergh.

 

We don't have the military capability to take on Iran. Even YOU don't have the military capability to take on Iran. So why are we engineering a confrontation where we will, at length, have to take on Iran? The Iranians know we don't have the capability to invade and pacify the country. So why are we insisting on engineering pissing contests of which the ultimately result will be a war requiring exactly that?

 

We were upholding EU sanctions. Since the EU dont seem to be remotely interested in our doing so, and since they have giving an undertaking not to go to Syria, I say let them go. And if they go ahead and take oil to Syria, next time we can all be wiser and actually have the EU and the US back us, rather than playing afternoon quarterback.


  • 0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users