U.S. Navy says mine fragments suggest Iran behind Gulf tanker attack

[webfact]

U.S. Navy says mine fragments suggest Iran behind Gulf tanker attack

By Aziz El Yaakoubi

 

A general view of Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous tanker off the coast of Fujairah, United Arab Emirates June 19, 2019. REUTERS/Abdel Hadi

 

FUJAIRAH, United Arab Emirates (Reuters) - The United States sought on Wednesday to bolster its case for isolating Iran over its nuclear and regional activities by displaying limpet mine fragments it said came from an oil tanker damaged in an attack last week and saying the ordnance looked Iranian in origin.

 

Separately, a senior U.S. official said U.S. intelligence had confirmed that Iranian vessels had approached the damaged tanker, the Kokuka Courageous, as well as a second one, the Front Altair, prior to explosions that damaged their hulls last week.

 

Iran has denied involvement in explosive strikes on those two tankers in the Gulf of Oman last week and on four tankers off the United Arab Emirates on May 12, both near the Strait of Hormuz, a major conduit for global oil supplies.

 

But the incidents have fuelled tensions that flared with the U.S. pullout last year from world powers' 2015 nuclear accord with Iran, followed by fresh U.S. sanctions to stifle Tehran's vital oil trade, and a retaliatory Iranian threat this week to breach limits on its nuclear activities imposed by the deal.

 

Responding to Tehran's move, Washington on Monday said it would deploy about 1,000 more troops to the Middle East on top of a 1,500-troop increase announced following the May tanker attacks. The Pentagon said the new deployment will include Patriot missiles as well as manned and unmanned surveillance aircraft.

 

France and Germany said on Wednesday they would crank up efforts to halt any spiral towards conflict with Iran, but said time was running out and the risk of war could not be ruled out.

 

Iran's signal of preparedness to stockpile enriched uranium beyond the deal's limit, and refine uranium to a fissile purity higher than deemed necessary for civilian uses, prompted U.S. President Donald Trump to warn on Tuesday he was ready to take military action to stop Tehran developing a nuclear bomb.

 

The Islamic Republic denies having any such intentions.

 

Trump also left open whether he would support the use of force to protect Gulf oil supplies that Washington fears might be put in jeopardy by Iran in the brewing confrontation.

 

French President Emmanuel Macron's office said his top diplomatic adviser, Emmanuel Bonne, went to Tehran on Wednesday for talks to help ease the crisis. Bonne has been based in Iran in the past and is a Middle East expert.

 

Iran, where hardline foes of detente with the West have been strengthened by Trump's pressure campaign, said on Wednesday it would give European powers no more time beyond July 8 to save the nuclear deal by shielding its economy from U.S. sanctions.

 

President Hassan Rouhani said Iran’s actions were the "minimum" Tehran could undertake one year after the Trump administration withdrew from the deal, but that its steps were reversible "if they return to their commitments."

 

Iran's Foreign Ministry said later that senior diplomats from Iran, France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China - the remaining parties to the nuclear deal - would hold the next quarterly meeting of the accord's oversight commission in Vienna, where the U.N. nuclear watchdog is based, on June 28.

 

U.S. DISPLAYS MINE FRAGMENTS, MAGNET

In the United Arab Emirates port of Fujairah on Wednesday, the U.S. Navy exhibited pieces of limpet mines and a magnet it said its personnel extracted from one of the two oil tankers attacked in the Gulf of Oman last week.

 

The U.S. military earlier released images it said showed Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) removing an unexploded mine from the Japanese-owned tanker Kokuka Courageous, which was hit by blasts along with the Norwegian-owned Front Altair on June 13.

 

"The limpet mine that was used in the attack is distinguishable and also strikingly bearing a resemblance to Iranian mines that have already been publicly displayed in Iranian military parades," Sean Kido, commanding officer of an explosive ordnance dive and salvage task group in the U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT), told reporters.

 

Small fragments said to have been removed from the Kokuka Courageous were on display alongside a magnet purportedly left by the Revolutionary Guard squad allegedly captured on video.

 

The Japanese company that owns the Kokuka Courageous had said its ship was damaged by two "flying objects," but NAVCENT dismissed this account.

 

Kido also said NAVCENT had collected biometric information including fingerprints from the ship's hull that would help in crafting a criminal case against the assailants.

 

Separately, the U.S. special representative for Iran, Brian Hook, told U.S. lawmakers that "our intelligence confirms that Iranian vessels operating in and around the Strait of Hormuz on June 12th and 13th approached both the Front Altair and the Kokuka Courageous before each vessel suffered explosions."

 

"We assess this activity is consistent with an Iranian operation to attach limpet mines to the vessels," he added, saying that "a senior IRGC official confirmed that personnel – IRGC personnel – had completed two actions."

 

He gave no information on which Iranian official he was quoting, when they spoke or why the "two actions" referred to the tanker attacks.

 

ROCKET HITS WESTERN OIL SITE IN IRAQ

In another incident likely to fan tensions, a rocket crashed onto a site in southern Iraq used by foreign oil companies on Wednesday, including U.S. energy giant ExxonMobil, wounding three people.

 

There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack near the southern Iraqi city of Basra - the fourth time in a week rockets have landed near U.S. installations. There were no casualties or major damage in the earlier incidents.

 

An Iraqi security source said it appeared that Iran-backed groups in southern Iraq were behind Wednesday's Basra incident.

 

Iranian officials have made no comment about the attack but have denied all other allegations that Tehran has targeted energy tankers and facilities in the region.

 

(Reporting by Aziz El Yaakoubi; Additional reporting by Abdelhadi al-Ramahi, Sylvia Westall, Firouz Sedarat and Davide Barbuscia in Dubai, Aref Mohammed and Ahmed Rasheed in Iraq, Nayera Abdallah in Cairo, Bozorgmehr Sharafedin in London, John Irish and Michel Rose in Paris, Joseph Nasr in Berlin and Arshad Mohammed and Phil Stewart in Washington; Writing by Mark Heinrich and Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Andrew Cawthorne and Leslie Adler)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-06-20

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

[cornishcarlos]

Who to believe ?? 

Is it genuine, or press manipulation ??

Are we mushrooms !!

[YetAnother]

9 minutes ago, webfact said:

The United States sought on Wednesday to bolster its case for isolating Iran

they made up an Iraq war based on mythical evidence, Iran war looks next; all because of oil

[Odysseus123]

1 minute ago, YetAnother said:

they made up an Iraq war based on mythical evidence, Iran war looks next; all because of oil

"..a new world order."

[colinneil]

More bs from the US, Saddam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction, then proven to be BS.

They will say anything just to create hysteria around the world, and for what? Oil thats what.

[katana]

The US surveillance video claiming to prove Iranian responsibility showed the unexploded limpet mine being removed from several feet above the ship's water line. Seems a strange place to put it if you were intending to sink the ship.

[Odysseus123]

4 minutes ago, colinneil said:

More bs from the US, Saddam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction, then proven to be BS.

They will say anything just to create hysteria around the world, and for what? Oil thats what.

Yes.It is quite curious that-historically speaking-the region has been effectively destabilised since late 1914 when the British moved in to Mesopotamia to secure it's oil supplies for the Royal Navy.The Americans moved into Persia in the 1920's and set themselves up as direct competitors to the British...

[brokenbone]

i'm wondering how long the world will continue boycott

whomever USA tells us to boycott cause USA says so ?

[beechguy]

14 minutes ago, katana said:

The US surveillance video claiming to prove Iranian responsibility showed the unexploded limpet mine being removed from several feet above the ship's water line. Seems a strange place to put it if you were intending to sink the ship.

May have been at a different water level when it was planted, quite a difference between an empty and loaded ship.

[bluesofa]

24 minutes ago, colinneil said:

More bs from the US, Saddam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction, then proven to be BS.

They will say anything just to create hysteria around the world, and for what? Oil thats what.

I thought with Saddam it was weapons of maths destruction - because the facts didn't add up.

[OneMoreFarang]

There was a time when people believed officials from the USA. Now when anybody of them, but especially when the president of the most powerful nation of this word, opens his mouth it's BS BS or BS and maybe once in a while the truth. And soon he will say it's all fake news.

What happened to this word? When I was young somehow I thought things would get better over time ...

[nkg]

Jeremy Corbyn doesn't agree:

 

 

Edited June 19, 2019 by nkg
link

[ezzra]

Some one has to keep Iran at bay, otherwise the world will end up with another N. Korea, with the iranian much worse in attitude and expansions plans...

[canuckamuck]

If America is moving towards war, there will be war. It doesn't matter about the quality of the false flag attack. It will still serve as a pretext. The media is obedient to the narrative. The people are obedient to the media.

It make sense to go to war with Iran. They got oil, they don't have a Rothschild's bank, they threaten Israel, the war will be long and produce trillions in weapon sales, it's been on their bucket list for decades.

Edited June 20, 2019 by canuckamuck

[bristolboy]

31 minutes ago, beechguy said:

May have been at a different water level when it was planted, quite a difference between an empty and loaded ship.

But was the ship unloaded when the object was being removed?

47 minutes ago, katana said:

The US surveillance video claiming to prove Iranian responsibility showed the unexploded limpet mine being removed from several feet above the ship's water line. Seems a strange place to put it if you were intending to sink the ship.

Of course, the purpose of planting the mine (if that's what it was), may to cause enough damage to throw a scare into shippers without actually seriously endangering the ship.

[bluesofa]

16 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

{snipped}

It make sense to go to war with Iran. They got oil, they don't have a Rothschild's bank, they threaten Israel, the war will be long and produce trillions in weapon sales, it's been on their bucket list for decades.

You'd never make a politician, you seem to be too straight-talking.

[Cryingdick]

Of course Iran is behind the attack. Who else has a position in the strait? It's pretty obvious.

[alanrchase]

So next time someone anywhere in the world is killed by weapons manufactured by the USA we can blame the US government?

[FritsSikkink]

1 hour ago, ezzra said:

Some one has to keep Iran at bay, otherwise the world will end up with another N. Korea, with the iranian much worse in attitude and expansions plans...

We need to keep the USA at bay who are starting wars everywhere and forces other countries to boycott everybody they please.

[Emdog]

"Suggest" is a heck of a long way away from "Prove"

[Cryingdick]

Just now, Emdog said:

"Suggest" is a heck of a long way away from "Prove"

Who else could have done it in the Strait? Let's stop being stupid.

[bristolboy]

24 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

Of course Iran is behind the attack. Who else has a position in the strait? It's pretty obvious.

It could be that some other player is manufacturing incidents like this to incriminate the Iranians. According to U.S. intelligence, the UAE did precisely that in the case of Qatar.

[Cryingdick]

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

It could be that some other player is manufacturing incidents like this to incriminate the Iranians. According to U.S. intelligence, the UAE did precisely that in the case of Qatar.

They would be backed by Iran either way. Iran threatened to do exactly this and they can own it now. They can barely sell 100,000 barrels a day. On any given day they are one airstrike away from their refineries being taken out. After that the Israelis can bomb their nuke facilities.

 

Nobody is going to say a thing.

Edited June 20, 2019 by Cryingdick

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, Cryingdick said:

They would be backed by Iran either way. 

Do you mean that if the UAE did it, it was because they were backed by Iran?

[Cryingdick]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Do you mean that if the UAE did it, it was because they were backed by Iran?

Iran threatened to do so. If anything happens it's on them. They should have kept their mouths shut. They are one airstrike away from meeting Allah.

[bristolboy]

Just now, Cryingdick said:

Iran threatened to do so. If anything happens it's on them. They should have kept their mouths shut. They are one airstrike away from meeting Allah.

You mean so even if an enemy of Iran did it, it's Iran's fault?

[Cryingdick]

Just now, bristolboy said:

You mean so even if an enemy of Iran did it, it's Iran's fault?

Iran is it's own worst enemy now.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, Cryingdick said:

Iran is it's own worst enemy now.

So an attack on Iran for attacking ships would be justified even if it turns out they didn't carry out the attacks?

[Cryingdick]

Just now, bristolboy said:

So an attack on Iran for attacking ships would be justified even if it turns out they didn't carry out the attacks?

it's not even in doubt. Goodnight.

[alanrchase]

Who else could have done it in the Strait? Let's stop being stupid.

You have very little imagination. Where did the tankers set off from? Could the mines have been placed while the tankers were anchored? Which countries stand to benefit from Iran getting the blame?

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app