![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dancesofthelight posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsIt's worth noting that this is a headline from May 13th of this year. There were ship attacks in May that literally replicated elements of the MO here. Holes blown in the ships, and in this case the Norwegians had no problems deciding that none other than the Iranians actively attacked their ship in these ports. Now why precisely Iran hates Norway so much to attack their ships twice is a different question. Has Norway in particular done something to antagonize the Supreme Leader lately?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-iran-oil-tankers-exclusive/exclusive-insurer-says-irans-guards-likely-to-have-organized-tanker-attacks-idUSKCN1SN1P7
The DNK based its assessment that the IRGC was likely to have orchestrated the attacks on a number of factors, including:
- A high likelihood that the IRGC had previously supplied its allies, the Houthi militia fighting a Saudi-backed government in Yemen, with explosive-laden surface drone boats capable of homing in on GPS navigational positions for accuracy.
- The similarity of shrapnel found on the Norwegian tanker to shrapnel from drone boats used off Yemen by Houthis, even though the craft previously used by the Houthis were surface boats rather than the underwater drones likely to have been deployed in Fujairah.
- The fact that Iran and particularly the IRGC had recently threatened to use military force and that, against a militarily stronger foe, they were highly likely to choose “asymmetric measures with plausible deniability”. DNK noted that the Fujairah attack had caused “relatively limited damage” and had been carried out at a time when U.S. Navy ships were still en route to the Gulf.
Both the Saudi-flagged crude oil tanker Amjad and the UAE-flagged bunker vessel A.Michel sustained damage in the area of their engine rooms, while the Saudi tanker Al Marzoqah was damaged in the aft section and the Norwegian tanker Andrea Victory suffered extensive damage to the stern, DNK said.
So if there is one validated attack, striking Norway, no less, it does point to the prospect that Iran might have decided for whatever fit of pique in the menchildren of the Supreme Leadership's higher echelons to single out Norway as the current Western boogeyman of choice. I mean seriously, why the fuck would they go after fucking Norway? Who, other than Norwegians, gives a flying fuck about Norway? It's fucking NORWAY. Well, maybe Russia or something but not any country that actually means something.
Well, the Iranians could be trying to retaliate for those sanctions against its attempted targeting of MEK agents in the EU, but why Norway? Why not Denmark, the Netherlands, France, or Germany? Or the UK, for that matter?
According to the Jerusalem Post, the USA is evidently planning its own equivalent of the Osirak raid.
https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how-israels-daring-1981-raid-on-iraqs-nuclear-program-h-1832211988
The Osirak raid, in case people have either forgotten or never heard of it, was an Israeli bombing raid on an Iraqi nuclear reactor that was evidently in the 1991 timeframe at least, a failed attempt to destroy an at one time genuine Iraqi nuclear weapons program. It was also one of the greater genuine feats of the IDF.
The USA, having decided that what Israel can do it can do better, is evidently mulling an Osirak of its own, heedless of Iran learning all about what the USA has done and how it's done it since 1979 and plenty of time to take and apply all those notes.
https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Iran-News/UN-officials-US-is-planning-a-tactical-assault-in-Iran-592832
According to the officials, since Friday, the White House has been holding incessant discussions involving senior military commanders, Pentagon representatives and advisers to President Donald Trump.
The military action under consideration would be an aerial bombardment of an Iranian facility linked to its nuclear program, the officials further claimed.
"The bombing will be massive but will be limited to a specific target," said a Western diplomat.
The decision to carry out military action against Iran was discussed in the White House before the latest report that Iran might increase the level of uranium enrichment.
The officials also noted that the United States plans to reinforce its military presence in the Middle East, and in the coming days will also send additional soldiers to the area.
The sources added that President Trump himself was not enthusiastic about a military move against Iran, but lost his patience on the matter and would grant Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who is pushing for action, what he wants.
The ever-truthful Trump Administration, which when it says the sky is blue one might want a raincoat, umbrella, and wading boots, proclaims that it is simply seeking a deterrent.
Clearly if the May and the June attacks are genuine and it appears the May attack actually was, then the USA's not deterring anything and might as well stop provoking more attacks with Iran deciding to call a bluff.
The USA also says that Iran fired a missile at one of its drones.
https://news.usni.org/2019/06/16/u-s-claims-iranian-missile-fired-at-drone-in-gulf-of-oman-incident
“On June 13, 2019, according to our assessment, a modified Iranian SA-7 surface-to-air missile attempted to shoot down a U.S. MQ-9 over the Gulf of Oman to disrupt surveillance of the IRGC attack on the M/T Kokuka Courageous,” Lt. Col. Earl Brown said the statement.
“The MQ-9 had arrived minutes earlier at 6:20 a.m. local time at the motor tanker (M/T) Altair and had observed the ship on fire.”
According to U.S. Central Command, the missile was ineffective and never came closer than a kilometer from the MQ-9.
Of course Central Command would say the missile was ineffective. All military high commands lie. If it was effective they're hardly going to encourage the Iranians to use a weapon that they would know would do damage. But this is an equally dangerous lie, if lie it is, and if true, it indicates the Iranian clerics, not so long removed from suppressing their second uprising in eight years are no challenged by two uprisings in eight years, but emboldened by them.Of course, it's worth putting that into the context as well that Iran, in the wake of the USA having that aircraft carrier so near to its waters is boasting it can and will hit that carrier with ease. The USA can fake surprise that taking military provocations is met with provocations in kind, but such is the leisure of Great Powers. That Iran is talking like this is also a rather salient reminder that there is a two-barreled eageneress for war here, which is a thing that can be but isn't necessary. There only needs to be one society willing to start a war to spark one.
https://taskandpurpose.com/iranian-revolutionary-guard-chief-irans-ballistic-missiles-can-easily-strike-carriers-in-the-sea
And when both are self-destructive and led by irrational actors, well.....
Whom the Gods would destroy, first They make mad.
(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 01:34 (UTC)TBH, I care about Norway because of its amazing tax and social investment systems :)
(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 04:10 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 04:32 (UTC)Doesn't explain why Iran would launch even a single proven attack against Norway, of all countries. Norway's literally done nothing at all to them. You'd think if it was those EU sanctions they'd attack one of the countries that actually passed them and not emulate the USA's bad habits of throwing darts at a board and declaring the random target the Jesus crucified on Golgotha for the sins of the American Empire.
(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 06:32 (UTC)1) Trump wants to bring Iran down.
2) Trump has recently commented about "listening" to dirt on campaign rivals, giving Norway as example, indicating that he admires that country.
3) Iran wants revenge on Trump.
Got my gist?
(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 06:36 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 06:42 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 14:57 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 18:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 18:56 (UTC)Even if this particular thing isn't a coincidence, the MOs of the events are somewhat different, and the UAE attack was explicitly projectiles, not mines. Which, of course, are what the actual reports on the attack said were used, where the USA insisted it was mines....
(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 14:56 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 17:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 18:58 (UTC)If I wanted to fuck the USA as badly as Nicholas II fucked Russia, an Iran War on a big scale would be precisely how I'd do it.
(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 19:02 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 20/6/19 23:20 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 21/6/19 12:13 (UTC)