Trump says 'Iran did do it,' as U.S. seeks support on Gulf oil tanker attacks

[Longcut]

3 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

You ought to know about Canada's huge reserves of thick crude ideal for mixing with US light crude. More than all of Russia's reserves. Mixing is a convenience to help refine thick oil. Without any heavy oil, refineries would adjust to use light oil just fine.

 

Canada's oil reserves total more than 170 billion barrels, of which 164 billion barrels (or 96 per cent) can be recovered from the oil sands using today's technology. Canada has the world's third-largest oil reserves, [ahead of Russia]

Source: AER, 2017 and Oil & Gas Journal, 2017).

 

As a past speculator, I am well aware of it. That's how I made all my money.

[daveAustin]

Hillary would have been in by now.

 

Misdirection from Iran; perfect opportunity to make it look like a setup just before the Japanese PM due to visit and/or hoik oil prices - he would then tell Trump he's worried as prelude to easing sanctions. They already said they could nobble ships at will. Likely hard-liners in the Iranian regime, which to be fair needs change. Free the good people of Iran!

[rabas]

42 minutes ago, Longcut said:

• According to the most recent data, the top five oil-producing nations are the United States, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, and Canada.

  xports exceeded imports)

 

Production and reserves are different. I quoted reserves.

[Naam]

5 hours ago, Longcut said:

7 hours ago, RobbyXNorway said:

 

"Awash in oil"? LOL...its not. You might think so, but its not. Your shale oil will run dry in a few short years, and you are already in trouble because the shale oil is extremely light and needs to be mixed with heavy crude oil. Why did you think the US wanted to "regime change" Venezuela? A hint: Venezuelan oil is very heavy crude oil. Perfect to mix with US light shale oil.

 

As for this episode, its just another Gulf of Tonkin attempt. Disgusting warmongering. And not by Iran.

Having worked years in the oil and gas industry. I can honestly say, you don't know what you are talking about. That might be true for some grades of diesel. But, it has nothing to do with gasoline or home heating oil. Texas light crude, is the mainstay for clean burning fuels.

nope! Robby's explanation and assumption pertaining to Venezuela is correct. moreover, he did not refer to WTI but to shale.

[Destiny1990]

Give Trump his war.

So embarrassing being USA president without some war and also his weapons selling friends are demanding this surely.

[Longcut]

30 minutes ago, Naam said:

nope! Robby's explanation and assumption pertaining to Venezuela is correct. moreover, he did not refer to WTI but to shale.

There is no way of determining when or if shale oil will run out. Since "fracking" wells are commonly drilled and then capped until prices rise. Also, horizontal drilling is a common practice. I don't believe you can make that determination especially in the Bakkens oil fields. If you do know this, then you must be a very wealthy person or a fool for not acting on it.

[Morty T]

10 hours ago, Tug said:

Can’t find crew hostage on us news kinda strange normally they would be going bananas about something like that I did see video of a small boat alongside one of the vessels possibly picking something up

If It's not Trump's fault, US media isnt concerned. 

[Tug]

1 hour ago, Morty T said:

If It's not Trump's fault, US media isnt concerned. 

No that’s not true Iran taking hostages would be big news very big Donald would be joyous and bellowing from the White House lawn and would be in a twitter frenzy lol no more war if it’s that dangerous then escort and convoy hey you might catch them in the act but they probably wouldn’t attack a target that can defend itself 

[tlandtday]

5 hours ago, Longcut said:

The US has added close to 50 billion barrels over the last year and now holds an estimated 310 billion barrels of recoverable oil with current technologies, equal to 79 years of US oil production at present output levels.Jun 2018

And there are huge amounts off of Alaska not yet pumped.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, RobbyXNorway said:

Yes I am labeling the USA as a rogue nation, because it doesnt adhere to treaties it has signed and international law in general whenever it is deemed "not in US interests". Who is throwing around sanctions and tariffs unilateraly these days? The USA. Who is blocking the WTO and has effectively paralyzed the WTO (World Trade Organization)? The USA   https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-wto/wto-chief-sees-no-end-in-sight-to-us-blockage-idUSKCN1QA2IW

 

The USA is certainly not making many new friends these days.

 

You can mislabel and misuse any term you like, but it won't make it any more correct or to the point. By your "standards", both China and Russia are "rogue nations" as well - and probably others on the list as well. Not sure what labeling the three most powerful countries in the World as "rogue nations" will accomplish, or that it even means something coherent.

 

The Trump administration does have issues with international agreement and treaties. One of the reason the World strongly reacts to this is precisely because it deviates from previous policies. So if you want to go on about the Trump administration, you'd be somewhat correct - as a general argument regarding the USA - not so much. And Trump is not a permanent fixture, something some posters seem easy enough to forget, when it suits.

 

 

[meand]

4 hours ago, manarak said:

the situation is highly dangerous.

 

I don't really see Iran's benefits in escalating this into a war, but I can clearly see who would like the US to be dragged into one against Iran:

- Israel

- Saudis and cronies

 

There are also *many* very clear benefits for the US government to start a war:

- an economic crisis looms, a war can reseat the system

- the next election is up soon, Trump must be sensible to the political impact

- next step of "bringing democracy" to the middle east

- end the Iranian nuclear threat

- bring Iranian resources (oil) under Western political control, this is not so much to get the oil than to make it unavailable for countries dependent on Iran (Syria).

- reaffirm waning US power

- destroy as much Iranian infrastructure as possible to have it rebuilt by Western companies

 

I don't think Iran is looking forward to be attacked by the US. So it's not quite clear to me what they would achieve by mining tankers above the line of water and especially operating a IRGC boat in broad daylight, especially as these tankers certainly have cameras on board.

 

Speaking of which, the Japanese prime minister was meeting the Iranian government as the tankers, among which one Japanese ship, were attacked.

Incidentially, the Japanese ship's crew denied having been hit by a bomb or mine. coincidence?

or did Japan instruct their people to make that statement to defuse tension?

 

considering how many parties are involved and their interests, I wouldn't say it's certain that Iran attacked those tankers.

on the other hand, Iran also knows that the US nowadays probably need a little bit more than wiggling a lab tube in front of the UN to start a war, so they might play on that.

That is a cool post but you are thinking too much. 

 

Rich people in the USA get richer when there is a war (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halliburton). The US came out right after this incident and said with pretty much 100% certainty it was Iran. What more do you need to know? How could they possibly be so certain so quickly? Not too many more dots to connect. Look at the gulf of tonkin it was almost a carbon copy. 

 

THAT is what amazes me. They do the same exact thing over and over and over, the pattern is right there, and everyone refuses to see it or they are too afraid to confront the US political and military force. 

[Ozman52]

10 hours ago, bristolboy said:

One big problem with your assertion: it's not at all clear the Iran is responsible. The crew of the boat say the ship was hit by a projectile, not  damaged by a limpet mine. And the damage is centered on a point way above where a limpet mine could be attached.

In addition, when Pompeo made his accusation, there was something curiously missing: the confidence level of intelligence agencies in assigning the blame to Iran.

The alleged mine was shown in the photo to be at the same height as the damage, and the guys in the boat had no problem removing it. Perhaps the tide was in (satire). The crew were also inclined to abandon ship when a foreign object was detected attached to the hull after the initial explosion - what could it have been?

 

But assuming it wasn't a mine, any explanations of why an Iranian patrol boat was hard up against a disabled ship?

[metisdead]

Some off topic posts and replies have been removed.

 

A post containing trolling representations of Trump's name has been removed as well as the replies.

[rabas]

5 minutes ago, Ozman52 said:

The alleged mine was shown in the photo to be at the same height as the damage, and the guys in the boat had no problem removing it. Perhaps the tide was in (satire). The crew were also inclined to abandon ship when a foreign object was detected attached to the hull after the initial explosion - what could it have been?

 

But assuming it wasn't a mine, any explanations of why an Iranian patrol boat was hard up against a disabled ship?

Not all Limpet mines are the same shape. This one looks roughly like one sold by India.  Maindeka Advanced Limpet Mine. Personally, I would read the instructions carefully before placing or removing one.

 

 

 

[FritsSikkink]

13 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

I guess video tape of Iran trying to hide the mines plastered to the side of the boat isn't enough for some people. They are also making more interference with tug boats today. For all the criticism Trump isn't quick to go to war. Iran is literally begging for an airstrike.

 

Never mind it now seems that Iran has taken the Norwegian crew hostage. This is how Iran has always been.

BS

The owner of the boat says that the WH is full of shit: 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-oman-gulf-tanker-attack-oil-japan-kokuka-courageous-strait-hormuz-a8958916.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR07qgBMmdAiwa5sBrZeqAB_709EqHwFaUQ2cvgey0m3sHDtC7wTml98kJk#Echobox=1560522324

 

The USA wants to start another oil war with bogus claims

[Enki]

13 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

I guess video tape of Iran trying to hide the mines plastered to the side of the boat isn't enough for some people. They are also making more interference with tug boats today. For all the criticism Trump isn't quick to go to war. Iran is literally begging for an airstrike.

 

Never mind it now seems that Iran has taken the Norwegian crew hostage. This is how Iran has always been.

Iran was an open and friendly country until in the 1970ths america started to  mess with them (Hint: the Sha refused to sell onyl for US$ when Nixxon demanded it).

 

Regarding the mine ... where is the mine in that movie? There is nothing. This smells like a american false flag operation. Actually a no brainer, Iran has nothing to win in a war.

[Jack100]

Teheran Trump Tower sounds a good trade off to avoid war . Pity about the booze !

[FritsSikkink]

1 hour ago, tomazbodner said:

Let me ask this question... In the middle of Japanese PM's visit to Iran, in which Japan wants to help Iran out of trouble, Iran goes and bombs a Japanese owned tanker on the way to Thailand... The crew of the tanker says that just before they got hit, they saw projectiles flying towards their ship and they are confident that they did not hit mines but instead something hit them from the air.

 

But the above 2, of which 2nd was sworn testimony of tanker crew, are completely ignored and fingers pointed at Iran.

 

I'm not by any means Iran backer, and their history of sponsoring and performing destructive acts abroad is alarming, but logically, I cannot believe they would be so stupid to do something like that, to a Japanese tanker of all, during the time Japanese PM is there talking with their supreme leader (saw that coverage on NHK).

 

There's no motive for them to do it. There's nothing good that could get out of it for them. There's only bad that could come out of it for them. Why would they do it? Makes no sense at all.

 

Why the other side would want to stage something like that provides quite a substantial motive, and smells of many incidents orchestrated by John Bolton. Who's John Bolton? The guy who threatened safety of children of Jose Bustani (then director-general of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons that found none in Iraq) unless he resigns, stating "they know where his children live". Bustani resigned, Bolton's newly appointed team reversed all the findings around Iraqi chemical weapons, and that was used as pretext for Iraq invasion.

 

Hence I'm sorry. But while US accuses Russia to "not produce news but disseminate propaganda", what US is doing is nothing other than propaganda to push the World into yet another catastrophic armed conflict orchestrated by probably World's most dangerous and evil person of influence.

 

Just listen to what he says in the first minute of this Fox News interview about Venezuela - that it would make a big difference to America economically if we could have American companies investing and producing oil in Venezuela...

 

 

Here's more on Bolton: https://www.businessinsider.com/who-is-john-bolton-architect-iraq-war-pushing-action-against-iran-2019-5

 

And what does Guardian call him? The most dangerous man in the World who has been pushing for war with Iran for over 2 decades: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/16/john-bolton-trump-iran-nuclear-deal-danger

 

On the side note - Bolton also believes armed conflict with China would be beneficial according to article I can't find now (it was from US-based outfit), however could find this, which paints a similar picture: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/2141183/us-security-head-bolton-would-risk-military-conflict-china-achieve-goals

 

Hence this isn't looking good for any of us, except possibly American oil companies... And US military contractors and suppliers. And those who profit from war. There isn't much profit to make if nukes start flying, though.

 

Only good news in all of this is that Bolton is at age when candles cost more than the cake they're put on...

The crew never said they were bombed by Iran.

[metisdead]

Off topic conspiracy posts regarding 9/11 have been removed. 

[rabas]

31 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

The crew never said they were bombed by Iran.

 

Would you while being held by Irani?

 

 

[meand]

Look at this topic another way:

 

American citizens, check a box.

 

Go to war with Iran and make corporations like Halliburton more rich

 

Don't go to war with Iran and instead put the funds to things like healthcare for all of your citizens

 

We know what the government and the rich want. And we also know what the people (should) want. The key is waking them the <deleted> up. 

[FritsSikkink]

16 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

Would you while being held by Irani?

 

 

Who is "being held"?

[Morch]

3 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

BS

The owner of the boat says that the WH is full of shit: 

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-oman-gulf-tanker-attack-oil-japan-kokuka-courageous-strait-hormuz-a8958916.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR07qgBMmdAiwa5sBrZeqAB_709EqHwFaUQ2cvgey0m3sHDtC7wTml98kJk#Echobox=1560522324

 

The USA wants to start another oil war with bogus claims

 

The owner wasn't on the tanker, and he relates alleged reports by the crew. Not exactly very solid either. Especially not the part about bullets causing the explosion. This doesn't make the video footage evidence provided by the USA stronger, but neither does it provide much of an explanation of insight as to what took place.

[Thechook]

The U.S should but out it's not one of their tankers its Japanese.  Leave it to Iran and Japan to sort it out diplomatically.  Keep your nose out of other peoples affairs or are you really itching to start another war that again you wont win.

[Tug]

19 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

If I am right, you agree to be quiet?

 

Well looks like the crew isent In Iran anymore that’s a good thing and nobody got bombed killed or maimed that’s good as well if it’s that dangerous escort and convoy just don’t start another war!

[wilcopops]

Trump is claiming that only Iran is capable of such a "sophisticated" operation.

Surely the USA  and Israel could do this too?

[Tug]

Any idiot with a speed boat could do it nothing high tec about it

[Morch]

3 hours ago, wilcopops said:

Trump is claiming that only Iran is capable of such a "sophisticated" operation.

Surely the USA  and Israel could do this too?

 

That was Pompeo. Trump probably avoids big, tricky words like "sophisticated".

It's wouldn't be super sophisticated for Iran, UAE, SA or the USA. All got forces directly in the area. The not getting caught bit (vs. carrying out an attack) is something else. In Israel's case, "sophisticated" would apply given distance, lack of obvious assets and the need to keep them covert.

[wilcopops]

6 hours ago, Tug said:

Any idiot with a speed boat could do it nothing high tec about it

That's not what Trump is saying....however the "idiot" part fits in with US capability

[bristolboy]

15 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The owner wasn't on the tanker, and he relates alleged reports by the crew. Not exactly very solid either. Especially not the part about bullets causing the explosion. This doesn't make the video footage evidence provided by the USA stronger, but neither does it provide much of an explanation of insight as to what took place.

I have yet to see any reference to bullets as being what damaged the ship. The owner said his crew saw something flying towards the ship. They'd have to have remarkable eyesight to see bullets. The news reports I have read refer to a "projectile" or "projectiles.".