Help support TMP


"Two Tankers Hit by "Torpedoes" in Gulf " Topic


37 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2009-present) Message Board


Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Showcase Article

Cheap Buys: London Taxi from Matchbox

"Hefty" metal die-cast cars are cheap this time of year.


Featured Profile Article

Checking Out a Boardgame, Episode II

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian looks for scenario material in a World War IV boardgame.


Current Poll


1,462 hits since 13 Jun 2019
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP13 Jun 2019 6:14 a.m. PST

This should certainly make things interesting in the Arabian Gulf:

link

Early reports are that two tankers have been hit by "torpedoes". Of course, I suspect that could have been mines instead.

Last time this happened, the results were predictable:

link

It will be interesting to see if history repeats itself.

I imagine we have a pretty good idea who did this.

Ultra-modern naval and air warfare fans will be able to generate a number of different scenarios from this. No doubt, the professionals are already doing this, or have completed their assessments using those games and studies of various options.

It's especially interesting since Japan's leader, Abe, is in Iran for talks, and the two tankers hit were carrying fuel for Japan, apparently. The timing is certainly suspicious.

Personal logo Andrew Walters Supporting Member of TMP13 Jun 2019 7:56 a.m. PST

I think Iran would have preferred those tankers were not hit during the meeting with Japan. But it's hard to believe they both accidentally ran into mines the same day.

I hope everyone remains calm.

toolsey213 Jun 2019 8:33 a.m. PST

Thresher you are right the USA

pzivh43 Supporting Member of TMP13 Jun 2019 9:42 a.m. PST

toolsey---don't think the USA mines these waters.

doug redshirt13 Jun 2019 10:30 a.m. PST

Saudis to set up the Iranians as the guilty party. Never trust the Saudis after they got away with 911.

Mkultra9913 Jun 2019 10:46 a.m. PST

Oh those CIA boys.. always great for a laugh

Walking Sailor Supporting Member of TMP13 Jun 2019 12:59 p.m. PST

Very early report was of one tanker hit above the water line. Jumping torpedo?
Single hull tankers are vulnerable to RPG's.

Lion in the Stars13 Jun 2019 4:48 p.m. PST

Torpedoes can jump (NUWC Keyport has a hilarious picture of a Mk46 lightweight torpedo that locked onto a helicopter's noise and came flying 50+ft out of the water), but I'd expect the above-hull hit to be an RPG (or a light anti-ship missile).

Also, those tankers were hit roughly amidships. USN mines are set up to detonate on either pressure wave (bow wave), acoustics (engine/screw noise), magnetic signature, or (most often) a combination of those. The Gulf of Oman is very deep, dropping rapidly from 200m to 2,000m deep, not a good place for bottom-laid mines.

Modern non-contact mines would have detonated towards the stern of the tankers, not amidships.

Also, an explosion underwater would have broken the back of the tanker.

The pictured damage is awfully limited for what's claimed to have done it.

SBminisguy13 Jun 2019 5:54 p.m. PST

Let's see:

1. Iran helped topple Yemen and install the Shiite Houthi into power

2. Iran armed Yemen with Scuds, Silkworm ASMs and other weapons.

3. Iran then launched a proxy war against its Gulf neighbors via Yemen, which launched Scud missiles against Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Yemen has also conducted multiple attacks on shipping using ASMs, damaging and sinking several ships, including a UAE patrol ship.

But it's not their fault this time???

And what else has happened recently?

1. The US sanctions on Iran are starting to bite. Iran is looking for ways to disrupt the US' focus. It has in the past sabre rattled when this occurred, with the goal of getting countries to relieve sanctions to lessen tension (basically buy off their aggression).

2. Iran has issued a number of inflammatory statements about punishing the US, that the sanction will hurt others more than Iran.

3. Western "allies" and even Democrats from the US have met with Iranian officials -- former SecState John Kerry MET with Iran to assure them that Trump would not be re-elected and that the Democrats would be more accommodating of Iran's concerns when they control the White House again. Say WHAT?!?

4. Media and Democrats start pumping Scary Warmonger Trump stories.

5. 4 tankers are damaged by limpet mines and naval mines in the Gulf.

6. Media and Democrats blame Trump for escalating tensions (while of course calling for impeachment, investigations, etc.)

7. Two more tankers are damaged by naval mines or other attacks.

8. Iran, parroted by media and Democrats, are blaming Trump for tensions. It's a false flag! Trump wants war!

So what I see is not Trump angling for war, but a convergence of US domestic political interests and Iranian interests. Iran has decided to escalate the level of violence while blaming Trump. John Kerry meets with Iran in April to tell them Trump is a one-term president, and in May we start seeing attacks on oil tankers with a media/political spin that Trump is to blame??

Now, I'm not blaming the Democrats for coordinating with Iran on attacks, but I am blaming them for enabling and encouraging the attacks. I'm blaming them for Iran's reversal from diplomacy to threats, and for using these events to attack Trump.

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP14 Jun 2019 1:02 a.m. PST

The US released video tonight of Iranians playing with, and/or removing an unexploded bomb from one of the tankers, so…….

They've threatened to shut down the straits. Looks like they're carrying out that threat, despite denials to the contrary.

PraetorianHistorian14 Jun 2019 6:10 a.m. PST

You hit the nail on the head SBminisguy!

FatherOfAllLogic14 Jun 2019 6:49 a.m. PST

But you are blaming democrats, shame on you after all the news about this administrations cozy relationships with malignant forigners.

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP14 Jun 2019 7:00 a.m. PST

LOL FoaL.

Fake news, while a certain male, former Presidential candidate, and windsurfer, married to the Heinz heir is cozying up to our enemies, again.

ScoutJock14 Jun 2019 7:05 a.m. PST

Putting on my sceptic hat I find it pretty convenient that there just happened to be a USN P-3 with a video camera capturing the perps removing a mine from the hull of one of the tankers.

I don't trust the Saudis, they've been trying to get the US to take out the Iranian regime since the Shah was run out of the country.

If the Iranians wanted to sink a tanker, they could've.

Just saying.

Barin114 Jun 2019 7:22 a.m. PST

Some thoughts:
-these tankers were not actually carrying oil.
- If I was Iran I'd save tanker sinking till the war breaks, and then hit them hard. Half-baked attempts with all fingers pointing on them does nothing.
- As Iran oil exports are very low due to sanctions, they're not benefitting that much from oil price hike. However Gulf countries do.
- Iranians are not reckless. Not sure what is the benefit for them if their infrasctructure will be hit by US and Arab states.
- Nobody will take Iran's side in war, may be Hezbollah, but it will not make a difference. They need to be really stupid.

Mkultra9914 Jun 2019 7:42 a.m. PST

Scout and Barin got it right… Iran is an awfully convenient scapegoat. The math is simple, war = money.. money for whom? Who has the most to gain? (Please also included extra governmental entities) It certainly isn't Iran.

SBminisguy14 Jun 2019 8:26 a.m. PST

FatherOfAllLogic 14 Jun 2019 6:49 a.m. PST
But you are blaming democrats, shame on you after all the news about this administrations cozy relationships with malignant forigners.

I'm blaming them in this sense -- their actions helped spark this. Why do I say that? Let me explain. Do you recall why Saddam Hussein thought he could get away with invading Kuwait in 1990, that nobody would care? Because of a flippant remark by US Ambassador April Glaspie who said, when asked about Iraq's accusations that Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraqi oil fields -- "We have no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait…the Kuwait issue is not associated with America."

I think that was diplo-speak for being a fence-sitter, not wanting to anger either side. I'm sure she didn't mean how Saddam took it -- because what he heard was "Do whatever you want, we don't care."

So he invaded -- and we got the Gulf War, the horrors of genocide by Saddam against those who rose up afterwards, and another two decades of war. All because an American diplomat was too clever by far with their words.

I think that's exactly what's happened here. The Democrats, chiefly the former senior Obama officials like Kerry, are o blinded by their hatred of Trump and by their own domestic political ambitions that they do not care about the consequences of their words and actions. This is all they see:

1. We hate Trump, he shouldn't ever be. Period. Ever.

2. He's undoing our legacy deal with Iran that we worked so hard on and believe so fervently would result in Peace in our Time. After all, herr Ali Khamenei assures that all his actions are caused by Iran's fear of the US, that our history of being mean to them causes this fear, and they only want to feel safe. That's why they conduct terror attacks globally, foment civil war in Iraq and Yemen, support Hebollah attacks against Israel and started a nuclear weapons program. WE, the US caused all this -- so we will undo all the causes of conflict by helping Iran feel safe and comfy, and then peace will break out.

3. So we Democrats have an obligation to block Troglydite Trump's actions and assure world leaders that he's a flash in the pan, a one term president, a mistake, that we will correct -- and then the old deal is back on, we'll pay you more cash and take steps to make you feel comfy again.

So that's what John Kerry did -- a former SecState met with senior Iranian leaders to assure them that they only have to outlast Trump for a few more years, and then their buddies in the Democrat Party will be back in charge, and all will be well again.

Oops. Like Saddam, Khamenei and his inner circle are like, "Cool! Screw this Trump guy, he's gonna be gone soon -- and let's speed things along. Let's rattle the cage and make some noise to show Trump and the world we're not to be messed with, and by appearing strong we'll make Trump look weak which can only help cause him to lose in 2020."

BOOM! Four tankers get hit by mines.

Media freak out -- look, Trump' sanction have escalated tensions! Trump the Warmonger is causing this. Democrats chime in, spin cycle gears up.

I think then Iran's like -- OK, that went pretty well. We're getting sympathy about the sanction, we're feeling pretty good about asserting ourselves -- and look, Trump's enemies are blaming HIM for OUR actions. Love it!!

Buncha weanie NATO countries start whining. Spain pulls its frigate out of the joint task force in the region.

BOOM. Two more tankers hit. Not sure if it's mines again, but some evidence it may have been drones.

Trump's enemies crank it up -- false flag, Trump wants war, impeach Trump! Orange man bad!

That's my take on it. Just like poorly chosen words gave Saddam the impression he could annex Kuwait, poorly chosen words and actions have given Iran's leaders the impression they could escalate without penalty.

SBminisguy14 Jun 2019 8:30 a.m. PST

- Iranians are not reckless. Not sure what is the benefit for them if their infrasctructure will be hit by US and Arab states.

LOL! Of COURSE the Iranians are reckless, because for years reckless action worked. What do you call seizing two US patrol boats in international waters and then parading capture US navy crew on TV? Does that sound like rational, well considered actions? Not to me -- but they judged that the Obama Admin wouldn't do anything. And they were right. They've been doing crap like this for years without getting called to account, so why would they stop doing what works???

SBminisguy14 Jun 2019 8:36 a.m. PST

The math is simple, war = money.. money for whom? Who has the most to gain?

1. Saudi Arabia is already at war with Iran. Who do you think is actually firing Scud missiles at Saudi cities? Did the desert nomad Houthi tribes that toppled the Yemeni government with Iranian support suddenly develop a ballistic missile R&D program?? Did they just somehow figure out how to build anti-ship missiles and attack drones??

2. How does Trump fare in a war with Iran? Facing the most insane domestic opposition from political opponents since president Lincoln, with a nearly lock-step media attack on him, and most of our allies seeking to both avoid confrontation with Iran and cut trade deals with them??

3. How does Israel fare, given that Iran will activate both Hamas and Hezbollah to assault them?

Occam's razor time -- Iran is playing the sabre rattling game 'cause it's always worked in the past. Last time it didn't work was, IIRC, 1987, when President Reagan called them on their actions.

Barin114 Jun 2019 9:21 a.m. PST

well, last time I've heard Iran seized the boats in 2016 when they were in Iran waters, and they've released the сrew in less than a day. Doesn't look as too reckless and confrontational to me.
link

SBminisguy14 Jun 2019 10:03 a.m. PST

Yeah, grabbing the naval crew of another power and then parading them on TV in violation of the Geneva Convention -- totally normal, not at all reckless or confrontational! Why the US does that with Canadian ships all the time!!

Personal logo Silurian Supporting Member of TMP14 Jun 2019 10:34 a.m. PST

Just because of the words and actions of others, the Iranians know Trump, are on the receiving end of what he's done already, so I'm not sure how they would get the impression they could escalate without penalty now.
Maybe they're that incredibly dumb, maybe not. We shouldn't be putting on the blinkers at this early stage in the investigation.

SBminisguy14 Jun 2019 11:50 a.m. PST

Never underestimate the stupidity of dictators.

So if Iran didn't do it for some of the reasons that make sense to me -- who did?

1. The Saudis are already basically at war with Iran. What do they get out of it?

2. The UAE is also basically at war with Iran. What do they get out of it?

3. Israel doesn't want to be at war with Iran, all that would get them would be a cloud of rockets and suicide attacks from Iranian-controlled Hezbollah and Hamas.

4. The US and Trump gets nothing out of it. And if you're saying this is a False Flag US plot to start a war with Iran, that means that US Navy Seals did it. With the help of other personnel -- pilots, boat operators, commanding officers, the chain of command all the way to POTUS, the SecDef, and so on. Do you think so poorly of US military personnel that they'd just say "Yes Siree Sir!" And attack allied and neutral ships, 'cause, orders??

And that this would happen in the age of the ubiquitous smartphone and social media accounts without anyone being the wiser?

So I'm going with Occam's Razor. If it wasn't direct Iranian action, it would likely be their Houthi proxies doing the attack. Crew on one of the ships says they saw something small flying towards the ship before they heard an explosion -- so maybe an explosives-armed drone, which the Houthi have using lately to attack Saudi and UAE oil facilities and pipelines.

Personal logo StoneMtnMinis Supporting Member of TMP14 Jun 2019 12:35 p.m. PST

And bear in mind, although it isn't reported by the fake stream media in this country. Iran is being rocked internally by almost weekly protests against the islamic theocracy and the mullahs.

The Iranians had a taste of freedom under the Shah, before he was thrown under the bus by carter. You go back and look at pictures of Iran during the Shah's reign and the street scenes look like any major western city. Not a body bag to be seen and women had a much greater level of equality.

So, saberattling and war are the usual methods dictators use to keep the rabble in line. And the mullahs are following this age old tactic.

Lion in the Stars14 Jun 2019 1:59 p.m. PST

Putting on my sceptic hat I find it pretty convenient that there just happened to be a USN P-3 with a video camera capturing the perps removing a mine from the hull of one of the tankers.

You'd better believe that just about every ship plane and helicopter in 5th Fleet scrambled to render assistance to those stricken tankers, ScoutJock.

That's a non-negotiable thing on the ocean. If someone is screaming mayday, you stop whatever the hell you were doing and go help. NOW.

I'm talking "go so fast you permanently bend things" go help NOW.

So yes, I expect that a USN P3 was orbiting overhead with every available camera looking at the water to look for personnel blown overboard.

ScoutJock14 Jun 2019 2:00 p.m. PST

This is all about the price of oil – nothing more, nothing less.

There are plenty of parties who will benefit from oil going to $80 USD/barrel or more over the next six months. Iran isn't one of them. They basically have zero refining capacity which is why all the oil they are sitting on does them no good because they can't export it and refine it into something useful.

The Saudis, otoh, are lamenting their loss of monopoly power over the price of oil, and would love to see oil back over $100 USD/barrel.

It is entirely possible that this was a false flag operation. Don't be so naive as to think the US would have to use regular or even SOF to pull a caper like this. There are plenty of "contractors" with the equipment, expertise and personnel to accomplish an operation of this nature, either at the direction of, or at least with the acquiescence of the US Government. Stranger things have happened. Personally I don't think that is the case though.

The Saudis have access to the same type of operators, and have not been shy about using them in the past.

Regardless of what the boys quoting state media are saying, the Iranians have a lot to lose and the Saudis have a lot to gain.

Don't forget, the Iranians didn't commit 9-11, our "allies" the Saudis did.

SBminisguy14 Jun 2019 7:25 p.m. PST

So 8 of y'all on this thread think Trump conducted a false flag attack…I think it's pretty pathetic to immediately blame the US for this.

False flag stuff is for a country who is either weaker than their adversary and they are trying to craft a political narrative to manipulate others, or for a leader who is a weasel and wants to do something while trying to avoid the responsibility of a public decision.

Trump is not a subtle guy.

He's a tell you to your face what he's gonna do, and then if you keep doing whatever, he'd just punch you in the face and then see if you were ready to change your mind.

Look at his track record -- he tells Syria to lay off the chemical weapon attack, they cross the red line and he blows up the airfield from which the attack was launched. No weasel words, no finesse, just smack. So in that, he's pretty predictable.

And what's the end game of a false flag? I don't see how the US, Trump personally or US allies the region profit from such a thing.

FatherOfAllLogic15 Jun 2019 8:16 a.m. PST

SB, I agree about Iraq/Kuwait and loose talk from a US official.

But Kerry is not a US official and I would be amazed if the Iranian leadership puts much trust in his words.

And I think your editorial opinion is highly partisan, but opinions are like that.

The current administration has been pushing the US to confrontation in the Straits and remember, Boltan has been beating the regime change drum for what, 30 years?

It's bad all the way around and at the end of the day, not enough is known to us.

Personal logo Silurian Supporting Member of TMP15 Jun 2019 8:51 a.m. PST

Jumping to conclusions because one is overly sensitive or maybe defensive about an issue is not very helpful in a discussion.

This applies to both sides of an argument.

However, in this case, I'm not seeing how 8 people on this thread think Trump did it.
If I was lumped in with those '8', then I should be clear that I think that likelihood very slim in deed. If I had to make a firm bet I'd go with Iranians making a very dumb decision. But every thinking person has to consider all possibilities. Look who's just called for a "rapid and decisive" response to this attack …

SBminisguy15 Jun 2019 9:28 a.m. PST

But Kerry is not a US official and I would be amazed if the Iranian leadership puts much trust in his words.

Why wouldn't they? He's the mouthpiece of the opposition regime in the US, he was the former senior-most US diplomat. So not only does he have that presumption of authority, but they also want to believe it. They want to believe that Trump won't be re-elected in 2020, so why not help that process along?

Lion in the Stars15 Jun 2019 11:57 a.m. PST

A successful military campaign usually helps get the sitting president re-elected.

The real problem in Iran is that the Revolutionary Guard does not listen (and is not supposed to listen!) to the elected president. The IRGC is there to keep the ayatollahs in power, and answers to the ayatollahs.

And the ayatollahs don't have a good grasp on how to be a national leader.

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP15 Jun 2019 2:11 p.m. PST

"Putting on my sceptic hat I find it pretty convenient that there just happened to be a USN P-3 with a video camera capturing the perps removing a mine from the hull of one of the tankers".

So, you don't think the USAF/USN and others are monitoring the Gulf region 24/7/365 even more intensely AFTER the first attack on the tankers there by the Iranians, and/or their proxies?

My you certainly give our military short shrift.

We've got P-3s, P-8s, drones, satellites, and no doubt other intelligence assets (probably Israelis and/or their agents embedded inside the IRGC as I'm typing this), monitoring the situation at ALL times.

My proof for that is the latest report that the Iranians (again acting stupidly) fired a SAM at one of our intelligence drones operating in international airspace, and missed. This apparently occurred before the second attack on the tankers, so you can bet our intelligence people were even more on their toes than usual, due to that.

Note, the Iranians aren't as bright as they think they are. These are the same clowns who put their Top Secret documents on their nuclear weapons program in a poorly, if not completely undefended and unmonitored storage locker near the coast for the Israelis to steal copies of.

"Nobody will take Iran's side in war, may be Hezbollah, but it will not make a difference".

Of course they will Barin. I suspect much of the EU will side with the Iranians, as usual, at least politically, if not militarily, since that's what they do, because they want cheap Iranian/Middle Eastern oil, and other things from Iran, and inexpensive natural gas from their Russian allies.

Instead of being an ostracized pariah like they should be, similar to North Korea (which still has too many supporters too China, Russia, Pakistan, and Iran to name but a few), Iran is supported by far too many on the world stage, and in the UN.

Things with the Iranians will not improve until there is a regime change there, and/or most if not all of the world's nations get on board with crippling economic sanctions against Iran.

ScoutJock16 Jun 2019 12:38 p.m. PST

<g>My you certainly give our military short shrift

Not undeserved, remind me again whose navy it was that killed over 300 people by shooting down a civilian airliner they thought was an Iranian F14?

Not that I think the US military had anything to do with this other than by being used by the culprits who did. I still say the Saudis are responsible.

The Japanese owner of the tanker that the video purports to show Iranians removing a mine from has stated that an object flew into the vessel. My scepticism grows.

Why didn't the aircraft that took the video find out where the boat went after removing the "mine"? They couldn't track and direct other surface or aerial assets to intercept the boat and get positive proof?

Why didn't they intervene? Doesn't international law allow military vessels and aircraft to aid and protect civilian ships under attack in international waters? Especially after four other tankers had been attacked previously?

Seems to me that if the US had as many assets in the area and the sophisticated sensors they're known to employ, there would be a lot more positive evidence than some grainy video of what looks like an Arab version of Mchale's Navy.

In the Gulf War, 28 years ago, JSTAARS could pinpoint Iraqi tanks half buried in the sand, but yet there is no evidence relating to where the boat came from and where it went?

Unless somebody didn't want the world to know…

wardog16 Jun 2019 2:01 p.m. PST

lion in the stars
any chance of a link to that mk46 torpedo jumping out of the water, love to see it

greatpatton16 Jun 2019 2:38 p.m. PST

<quote>Instead of being an ostracized pariah like they should be</quote>

Can you tell us, why they should be more ostracized than Saudi Arabia, an absolute monarchy using the same code of law as Iran (Sharia law). A country (and their friends the UEA) that is funding most of the terrorism across the planet through all the Sunni extremist group. First promoter of Wahhabism ,ensuring that an extreme version of Islam is taught all around the world and especially in western countries.
The next time a bomb is going to blow in a western country, the responsible is not going to be a Shia terrorist paid by Iran, but a terrorist lectured with the money of SA.

I understand that Israel have issue with Iran but the rest of the world just don't care.

Personal logo Silurian Supporting Member of TMP17 Jun 2019 9:55 a.m. PST

"Why didn't the aircraft that took the video find out where the boat went after removing the "mine"? They couldn't track and direct other surface or aerial assets to intercept the boat and get positive proof?"

I've wondered this. Extremely good question.

Lion in the Stars17 Jun 2019 1:11 p.m. PST

@Wardog: Haven't had any luck finding a picture online of it. May have to email the museum there and ask if they have a digital copy…

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.