Posted on 06/13/2019 9:04:43 AM PDT by God luvs America
DUBAI—Two tankers were damaged in attacks off the coast of Iran early Thursday, including one operated by a Japanese company, on a day when Tehran rebuffed attempts by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to ease a military standoff with the U.S.
The incidents sent oil prices sharply higher, reigniting fears of trade disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, through which over a third of the world’s seaborne crude oil is shipped. Brent crude, the international benchmark for crude prices, rose 4% on Thursday to $62.37.
The attacks appeared to use relatively sophisticated weapons, according to early assessments, and came within roughly 45 minutes of each other in the Gulf of Oman, where four tankers were attacked last month in an incident the U.S. blamed on Iran, which Tehran denied. The U.S. military has built up its military presence in the Persian Gulf in response to what American officials said were threats from Iran, sending an aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln, and its strike group to the region.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Iran is under US backed sanctions so I don't know whether they benefit much at all. Other than them, who benefits ?:
Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Indonesia. Driving the price up by something other than attacking tankers would be a lot easier since it's mainly insurance rates that will climb and stay higher for a while rather than the usual speculation bump this will cause.
Who doesn't want Japan's leader Abe, who is in Iran at the moment, talking with the Iranians is a better question.
One of the tankers hit is owned by a Japanese company the other was a Norwegian owned tanker en-route to Japan, a bit much for a coincidence.
I was also thinking that there are probably some people who really, REALLY do not like low-cost oil, AND there had been a big pronouncement by Trump just a day or two ago touting our energy independence.
You are also making a good point.
Hmm, even better, and “our” Deep State operatives likely have access to that type of info with which to assist in hitting the “right” targets.
Torpedoes usually mean ‘state actor’... not many small time terrorist bunches own torpedoes...
A shrink would have a ball with that response.
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is visiting Tehran today and one of the tankers was owned by Japan. A day earlier, Iran freed a U.S. resident imprisoned on espionage charges. It would make zero sense for Iran to do this now, much more likely one of our mideast allies were responsible as a way of trying to drag us into war with Iran. I hope Trump isn’t stupid enough o fall for this.
Gee ... who could it be?
High tech torpedoes do (in some cases) hit above the water line. There are some that swim for long distances then pop up and strike above the water. But this is not likely here.
Figure that this is likely two mines. They put a trip line attached to buoys that float just under the water surface. When the ship comes in contact with the line, it pulls the mine to its side. This may look like a torpedo because you would be able to see the mine coming at the side of the ship while not seeing the cable that its attached to.
This could also be magnet bombs placed at night by small boats. It also could be remote control boat drones. Or even flying drones. Russia may have helped with the equipment. Russia benefits in numerous ways. Oil prices rise. America gets a black eye as well as Japan. And Iran becomes more dependent on Russia.
Obama and his minions still siding with America's enemies.
I guess I’m old. I remember Torpedoes back in the old days that used to sink tankers, battleships, large ocean liners, aircraft carriers Etc. The two most recent that I remember is a British torpedo sank The General belgrano, an American World War II Cruiser. And the Norks Sanka South Korean Destroyer.
Torpedoes ain’t exactly what they used to be I guess. Now they have little hand grenade Warheads or something.
Or could it be John Bolton?
Nah, they're not all that different. If anything, the ones with shaped charge warheads are worse. It's a case of someone ringing the bell and Pavlov's dogs salivating, that's all.
JMHo
Who all get a cut of Arab oil $$$?
Never say Arab without saying oil.
Without oil, we would never hear of those Arab countries. We’d know Arabia for wool and honey and The 40 Thieves, like before oil.
Dear Ayatollahs;
Nantez and Bashir look like nice little places. Be real bad if something happened to them.
5.56mm
They usually took multiple hits to do that. USS Maryland (a 33,000 ton armored battleship), as an example, got her bow almost blown off by a single torpedo in the battle of Saipan. She returned to Pearl under her own power, was repaired in about a month, and returned to service. IJN Yamato was sunk … by hits from at least ELEVEN torpedoes and 6 bombs. Modern torpedoes, such as the US Mk48, will cut a destroyer in half, same as WWII torpedoes.
Something is fishy about this incident.
I thought oil tankers had to be double hulled, reinforced, non-distructive tested annually etc to keep their insurance... Maybe oil tankers are harder to take down.
It is obviously a false flag to me. It makes no sense from Iranian perspective to stir the pot this way. They have enough problems already.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.