US - Iran Flare Up

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
It's a frame up. Simple as that. Why would Iran resort to such measures with its back against the wall and knowing full well, any such act in today's circumstances clearly invites suspicion on them.

The question is after issuing footage like this, what would the US reaction be? Are they planning on destroying Iranian coastal defences or it's Navy? Coz with the forces deployed there, nothing more than that seems possible.
Same reason they still continue to support The Houthis and Hezbollah under the exact same set of circumstances.

That's why the nuclear deal failed. Just because you're not developing nukes doesn't mean you get to develop the methods of delivering them and support terrorists on two fronts instead.
 

_Anonymous_

Senior Member
Dec 4, 2017
13,046
8,525
Mumbai
Same reason they still continue to support The Houthis and Hezbollah under the exact same set of circumstances.
Mining those waters gets you the entire navies of nations you don't want in your backwaters. It also restricts your ability to manoeuvre besides creating a clear and present danger. Arming groups in distant countries is a different matter, altogether. It's not even an analogy.Now these are the Iranians we're talking about. Not the Irish where your logic would be applicable.


That's why the nuclear deal failed. Just because you're not developing nukes doesn't mean you get to develop the methods of delivering them and support terrorists on two fronts instead.

I don't for a minute believe the Iranians have given up on building a N bomb. That's their ultimate aim and the Obama sponsored N deal merely postponed the inevitable. By a decade of not more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackOpsIndia

BlackOpsIndia

Team StratFront
Dec 1, 2017
3,060
3,774
127.0.0.1
Trump really does not want a war, it was expressed in his campaign and he has fairly vehemently strived to stick to that.
Is that so? You are not aware of things in public domain expecting you to think about big picture by connecting dots without proper information will be foolish of me. Just FYI there was a full attack simulation ordered by White House on Iran, Mattis was the one who opposed it and asked for another simulation and plan instead of approving or encouraging attack, in the end was successful in delaying it for whatever time he can. Anyway I have experience of debating with you, you don't read, you don't agree and stays with what you have said irrespective of how many facts are presented so you can believe whatever you can I am not going to contest it beyond a point.

higher oil prices for Russia too, which also helps their ally Venezuela and hinders US/Europe economically.
You have said it twice now so I am quoting you US Gov Data only.

Screenshot_2019-06-16-00-48-51-0818672170.png


What countries are the top producers and consumers of oil? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
Is that so? You are not aware of things in public domain expecting you to think about big picture by connecting dots without proper information will be foolish of me. Just FYI there was a full attack simulation ordered by White House on Iran, Mattis was the one who opposed it and asked for another simulation and plan instead of approving or encouraging attack, in the end was successful in delaying it for whatever time he can. Anyway I have experience of debating with you, you don't read, you don't agree and stays with what you have said irrespective of how many facts are presented so you can believe whatever you can I am not going to contest it beyond a point.


You have said it twice now so I am quoting you US Gov Data only.

View attachment 7401

What countries are the top producers and consumers of oil? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
There were simulations for an attack on the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War too. There were many nuclear war simulations too. It means nothing.

It's not about how much oil you produce though, it's about the dependence of your economy on oil. The figure missing from that table is the % GDP comprised of oil production. If you rank based on that figure the US wouldn't even be in the list. 18m barrels/day at current price ($55 average between WTI and Brent) is $990m/day or ~$360bn/year. That is <1.7% of current US GDP, which is smaller than annual growth. For Russia 11.4m barrels/day works out to ~15%, for Iran it's 17%, for Saudi Arabia 12.4m bbls/day is around 1/3rd of GDP. For Venezuela, near 50% of GDP is oil. If you look at the portion of the economies that benefit from cheap oil, then the results are the opposite. $150/bbl oil prices were the thing that triggered the 2008 crash. The extent/severity of it was caused by bad debt, but high oil prices were on of the triggers.
 
Last edited:

BlackOpsIndia

Team StratFront
Dec 1, 2017
3,060
3,774
127.0.0.1
There were simulations for an attack on the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War too. There were many nuclear war simulations too. It means nothing.

It's not about how much oil you produce though, it's about the dependence of your economy on oil. The figure missing from that table is the % GDP comprised of oil production. If you rank based on that figure the US wouldn't even be in the list. 18m barrels/day at current price ($55 average between WTI and Brent) is $990m/day or ~$360bn/year. That is <1.7% of current US GDP, which is smaller than annual growth. For Russia 11.4m barrels/day works out to ~15%, for Saudi Arabia 12.4m bbls/day is around 1/3rd of GDP.
US needs oil to be above $50 to be profitable and whenever crude plunges below that US shale start closing down en masse. Saudis are profitable even at $30/barrel that's why OPEC didn't do much when oil went below 50 as it was hurting US and denying market access to largest producer of the world. Check the US production that time and today when oil is above $60/barrel you will understand high oil prices benifit whom.

This is about US oil industry and lobby I am talking about that wields considerable power over every administration don't confuse it with US as country, that's not how it works. Check production stats with crude price you will get the idea.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
US needs oil to be above $50 to be profitable and whenever crude plunges below that US shale start closing down en masse. Saudis are profitable even at $30/barrel that's why OPEC didn't do much when oil went below 50 as it was hurting US and denying market access to largest producer of the world. Check the US production that time and today when oil is above $60/barrel you will understand high oil prices benifit whom.

This is about US oil industry and lobby I am talking about that wields considerable power over every administration don't confuse it with US as country, that's not how it works. Check production stats with crude price you will get the idea.
The US does not give a crap about high oil prices. Only fracking profits depend on such a price level, but fracking only came about to offset the power of OPEC, and fracking represent only a fraction of US oil production, i.e. a fraction of that 1.7% of US GDP. More affected are the millions of businesses using gas-generated electricity and heating and retailers selling less because people are spending more money of fuel.

The Saudis are profitable at a lot less than 30%/bbl, but their economy is not sustainable at that price level, or even the current price level.

Administrations rise and fall on the economy, the oil lobby is far less powerful than other lobbies. High oil prices triggered the 2008 crash. The extent of it was caused by bad debt but the high oil prices were what realised the problem. You don't understand crap if you think North America and Europe want $100/bbl oil prices. If they did, then they would just buy the fracking fields and shut them down.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
Mining those waters gets you the entire navies of nations you don't want in your backwaters. It also restricts your ability to manoeuvre besides creating a clear and present danger. Arming groups in distant countries is a different matter, altogether. It's not even an analogy.Now these are the Iranians we're talking about. Not the Irish where your logic would be applicable.




I don't for a minute believe the Iranians have given up on building a N bomb. That's their ultimate aim and the Obama sponsored N deal merely postponed the inevitable. By a decade of not more.
It's not a different matter when everyone knows you're doing it.

The Obama deal simply gave them time to develop the delivery methods and design first.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
Saudi crown prince accuses rival Iran of tanker attacks

Saudi crown prince accuses rival Iran of tanker attacks


DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said in remarks published Sunday that the kingdom will not hesitate to confront Iranian threats to its security. He joined the U.S. in accusing its bitter rival Iran of being behind the attacks on two oil tankers traveling near the Strait of Hormuz, a vital trade route for Arabian energy exports.

Tensions in the Persian Gulf have escalated since the U.S. sent an aircraft carrier strike group and other military assets to the region in what it says is defensive posturing against alleged Iranian threats. The crisis takes root in the Trump Administration's decision to re-impose punishing economic sanctions on Tehran and its oil exports, after unilaterally withdrawing the U.S. from the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers.

The U.S. alleges Iran used limpet mines to target the tankers on Thursday, pointing to black-and-white footage it captured that American officials describe as an Iranian Revolutionary Guard vessel removing an unexploded mine from the Japanese-operated tanker Kokuka Courageous.

The Japanese tanker's crewmembers appeared to contradict the assertion that mines were used. They described "flying objects" as having targeted the vessel.

In his first public comments regarding the attacks, the powerful Saudi prince, who is also defense minister and oversees all major levers of power in the country, said the incident "confirms the importance of our demands of the international community to take a decisive stance" against Iran's behavior.

"The kingdom does not seek war in the region," the prince said, speaking with the Arabic-language newspaper Asharq al-Awsat. "But we will not hesitate to deal with any threat to our people, sovereignty and vital interests."

The prince claimed Iran had planned the attack's timing to undercut the Japanese prime minister's diplomatic efforts, during his visit to Tehran last week, to reduce regional tensions.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
US releases new photos it says incriminate Iran in tanker attacks

US releases new photos it says incriminate Iran in tanker attacks


AFPJune 17, 2019



The US Department of Defense released this picture among others which it says incriminate Iran in the June 13, 2019 tanker attacks in the Gulf of Oman (AFP Photo/-)

More
Washington (AFP) - The United States military on Monday released new photos it says incriminate Iran in an attack last week on a tanker ship in strategic Gulf waters.

The US argument centers on an unexploded limpet mine on the Kokuka Courageous ship it says was removed by Iranians on a patrol boat.

"Iran is responsible for the attack based on video evidence and the resources and proficiency needed to quickly remove the unexploded limpet mine," the Pentagon said in a statement accompanying the imagery.

The US released a grainy black and white video last week it said showed the Iranians removing the mine, but has not provided an explanation for why they allegedly did so while the US military was observing them.

One of the photos released Monday shows what the Pentagon described as "the remnants of the magnetic attachment device of (an) unexploded limpet mine," while others picture the place where the mine was allegedly attached.

Additional images picture damage from what the US says was a limpet mine that did explode on the same ship, and others are said to show the Iranians removing the unexploded mine and the patrol boat they traveled on.

Tehran has vehemently denied any involvement in the attack on the Kokuka Courageous and another ship, and hinted that Washington itself could have done it to pile pressure on the Islamic republic on top of economic sanctions.

The crew of the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous reported that they saw a "flying object" before a second blast on board, the head of the shipping company said Friday.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
U.S. releases photos reportedly show Iranians removing unexploded mine from oil tanker

U.S. releases photos reportedly show Iranians removing unexploded mine from oil tanker
Published: June 17, 2019 6:21 p.m. ET

U.S. Department of Defense via Associated Press

This image released by the U.S. Department of Defense shows what the Navy says are members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy removing an unexploded limpet mine from the M/T Kokuka Courageous.
WASHINGTON — In an effort to bolster its public case against Iran, the Pentagon on Monday released new photos that officials said show that members of Tehran’s Revolutionary Guard were responsible for attacks last week on two oil tankers near the Persian Gulf.

The images, many taken from a Navy helicopter, show what the Pentagon said were Iranian forces removing an unexploded mine from the side of the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman.

Officials last week said the move appeared to be an attempt to remove forensic evidence from the scene of the attack. But it’s not clear if examination of the mine would have made it definitively clear that the device was planted by the IRGC.

Other photos show a large hole on the side of the Courageous, above the water line, that officials say appears to have been caused by another similar mine.

The release of the photos came as the U.S. works this week to convince members of Congress and allies that the accusations against Tehran are true. Iran has denied involvement in the tanker attacks and has accused America of promoting an “Iranophobic” campaign. Tehran, however, has repeatedly threatened to close the vital Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world’s oil flows.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said he made a number of calls Sunday and Monday to international leaders, trying to convince them that keeping the Strait of Hormuz safe and open is a problem they all must deal with.

Relations between the U.S. and Iran have deteriorated in recent months, as the Trump administration restored crippling sanctions and designated the Revolutionary Guard as a foreign terrorist organization.

That increased pressure preceded a string of attacks that the U.S. has blamed on Iran. In late May, four oil tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates were attacked with what appeared to be mines, and there was a rocket attack in Baghdad. Last week, similar attacks were launched against the Courageous and the Norwegian-owned MT Front Altair in the Gulf of Oman.

The U.S. military has also accused Iranian Revolutionary Guard troops of trying but failing to shoot down a U.S. drone to disrupt surveillance of the tankers during the attacks.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
Kenneth Timmerman: Pompeo is right to warn Iran -- Don’t target Americans

On April 19, a respected Iranian internet news agency reported that Iran’s Supreme Leader had just fired the intelligence chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) after “classified documents and information leaked to Israel and the U.S. regarding Iran’s nuclear program and secret missile bases.”

The fired intelligence chief, Brig. Gen. Ali Nasiri, was said to have taken refuge in a U.S. embassy or consulate in a nearby Persian Gulf state, where he turned over sensitive documents and intelligence information to the Americans.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
4,063
6,519
Bangalore
Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard force said Thursday it shot down a US "spy drone" over its territory, Iranian state television reported.

An anonymous US official later told news agencies an American naval drone was downed over international airspace.

"The US-made Global Hawk surveillance drone was brought down" in the country's southern coastal province of Hormozgan, the Revolutionary Guard was quoted as saying by the English-language Press TV.

"It was shot down when it entered Iran's airspace near the Kouhmobarak district in the south," the force's website said.

State television did not provide images of the aircraft.



International airspace?
The US military initially denied the report.

"There was no drone over Iranian territory," Navy Captain Bill Urban, a US Central Command spokesman, told The Associated Press. He declined further comment.

However an American official, speaking on condition of anonymity, later said a US Navy MQ-4C Triton drone was brought down by an Iranian surface-to-air missile in international airspace over the Strait of Hormuz

No further details were immediately available, including the time of the shootdown.

A senior Iranian security official said on Wednesday that Iran would "strongly respond" to any violation of its territory.

"Our airspace is our red line and Iran has always responded and will continue to respond strongly to any country that violates our airspace," the semi-official Tasnim news agency quoted the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security council as saying.

Thursday's shootdown comes amid heightened tensions between Iran and the United States after President Donald Trump last year pulled out of a historic 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and major powers and reimposed sanctions on the country.

The US military has sent forces, including aircraft carriers, B-52 bombers and troops to the Middle East. However, Trump said he does not seek war with Iran.

Escalating tensions
Fears of conflict have risen after two oil tankers came under attack a week ago near the Strait of Hormuz - a major oil shipping route where one-fifth of the world's oil passes from the Middle East to world markets.

The US and its regional allies - Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) - have accused Iran of being behind the series of blasts in the Gulf.

Tehran has denied involvement and instead suggested Washington could be responsible, using it to justify force against Iran.

On Wednesday, the US Navy said recovered fragments from one of two tanker ships bore a "striking resemblance" to mines seen during Iranian military parades.

Iran has repeatedly denied any responsibility in the June explosions, as well as similar blasts on May 12 off the coast of the UAE that targeted four oil-carrying vessels.

Meanwhile, US Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook headed to the Middle East for meetings in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Kuwait and Bahrain to discuss "Iran's regional aggression", the State Department said.

"He will also share additional US intelligence on the range of active threats Iran currently poses to the region," it said in a statement.

In protest at Trump's "maximum pressure" sanctions strategy, Iran announced in May it would start enriching uranium at a higher level unless European signatories to the nuclear deal protected its oil and banking sectors within 60 days.

The United States has vowed that Iran will never possess nuclear weapons

Iran's Revolutionary Guard shoots down US drone



 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackOpsIndia

Arsalan123

Active member
Jun 3, 2019
1,390
201
Sindh, Pakistan
Irgc wants war but why they want war is a totally different story.too many provocative moves by irgc! I think Americans don't want this war but they are forced to fight a war.look at economic situation of Iran and look at their aggression! Very alarming.
 

Volcano

Senior member
Mar 11, 2018
1,555
1,321
India, Kerala
Irgc wants war but why they want war is a totally different story.too many provocative moves by irgc! I think Americans don't want this war but they are forced to fight a war.look at economic situation of Iran and look at their aggression! Very alarming.


If it is shot down over iranian territory or territorial water, its just an act of self defence and aggressor is not Iran
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackOpsIndia

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,507
1,342
Probably didn't want it to find the boat used to remove an unexploded mine from the tanker.