Hormuz in the News

[Handspake]

A VLCC has been struck in Strait of Hormuz after US hit Iranian coastal positions

Tanker hit in Hormuz, threat level raised

US Carries Out Fresh Strikes Against Iran After Tanker Struck In Hormuz, Escalating Hostilities

“”" Like in 2017, we will again build the strongest military the world has ever seen. We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.

My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier. That’s what I want to be, a peacemaker and a unifier. “”

Never mentioned " the wars we will win "

Well Donny , Bibi got a different plan for U called : it will be my way or highway

[Steamer]

@seasmaster

It worked in NViet Nam in 1972

And the US lost that war in 1975 after 58,000 American and more than 3 million Vietnamese deaths resulting in total failure of the advertised objective to prevent a communist takeover by the North.

The US has lost this latest criminal escapade and killing a few million more isn’t going to make the USA a “shining light on the hill” in the eyes of a world that is awakening to the corruption and dissolution of the great democratic experiment we used to represent.

[ombugge]

@Hawespiper

War is hell. There’s never been an armed conflict with zero non -combatant casualties.
If they don’t like being bombed, stop being crazy.

Does that work the other way to?
How many American casualties - combatants or non-combatants - are acceptable, before you stop bombing other countries?

@seasmaster

I’m absolutely sure a lot of brain cells would be anaesthetised [European spelling for you!! LOL] over good adult beverages. . .

Sure, see you at Molo Brew when you are in Ålesund next: https://www.tripadvisor.com/Restaurant_Review-g190504-d12871261-Reviews-Molo_Brew-Alesund_More_og_Romsdal_Western_Norway.html

@seasmaster

How do you propose to keep the Iranians - or other countries at their choke-points - from knowing “tolls” will not be tolerated?

Well, the best solution would be to get back to “freedom of navigation” per UNCLOS, where nearly all maritime nations are member. (I probably don’t need to remind you of which countries are not)
In an ideal world talks would come first. Bombing should be last resort, after ALL other venues have been exhausted.

Unfortunately we are not living in an ideal world. The possibilites that was there after the end of the Cold war, has been squondered.
The developments during the last decade points more towards a new world war than to world peace.
PS: I was born in occupied Norway during WWII. I’m hopefully too old to see WWIII. My sons and grandchildren may not be so lucky.

Who is most at fault for the present situation can be discussed, but we are not likely to come to an agreement.
If history is anything to go by, the rise of an empire and the fall of another is a difficult time to be alive.

[seasmaster]

And the US lost that war in 1975

Steamer:

With respect that we won’t agree -

We didn’t lose - we quit in 1973 when the last combat troops left. In 1972, when I was there, we were winning militarily. Politically though, yeah, we were done.

Had we continued the Freedom Train Raids, and Linebacker strikes, and ARC Light raids, especially the Xmas bombing of 1972, there most likely would have been, a different outcome.

Let me conclude - It was indeed, from the view of 2026, a wasted action. However, from the lens of post WWII, and the expansion of communism, it was appropriate. However, we were so half-assed about it. . . And that is my fervent opinion. If the US is going to commit to military action, “all in”, NOT GRADUALISM, is the only method. And keep the ROE’s to a minimum.

[here’s a ROE story from 1972. I’ll try and keep it short.

Nixon has mined the waters; massive bombing; US Navy DD’s are lined up and down the coast conducting massive gun-fire support & strikes.

A Russian merchant is anchored of NVN, unloading supplies to barges which run to the beach. The barges are a legit target for my ship’s 5"-38’s. We sank some with direct fire, but the Ruskie Capt figures if he maneuvers his ship at anchor, he can shadow the barges from our guns.

Some gunnery officer figures out that we can light them up by INDIRECT fire [that means pointing the gun muzzles skyward and shooting like a motor]. All we need is a spotter. So the captain calls for a aircraft to spot.

When the a/c arrives, we start shooting; getting multiple hits lobbing the shells OVER the Russian and onto the targets. UNTIL, over the secure voice radio circuit, Washington DC orders us to cease fire. . . . And that’s the kind of ROE & half - assed measures that I continue to object to.]

And my point? Here we are in 2026, half-assing our way through this. It’s not about “should we have done it”, it’s all about, "we are here, and now we will finish it.

I don’t want my grand-kids getting nuked by Iran & I don’t want them to have to go into the sandbox for another conflict.

If that is being selfish, so be it. . .

[seasmaster]

@ombugge

In an ideal world talks would come first. Bombing should be last resort, after ALL other venues have been exhausted.

So, just to rattle your cage a little ,

@ombugge

How many American casualties - combatants or non-combatants - are acceptable, before you stop bombing other countries?

@ombugge

How may Iranian innocent Iranian civilians are you willing to kill to obtain your “noble” goals?

How many innocent seafarers will be caught up and killed in your effort to solve a problem that was created by the US-Israeli attack on Iran?

So far the US blocked have killed how many seafarers to stop unarmed merchant ships?

It appears from previous posts, you have previously been “a life saver”, so now that you’ve seem to have “evolved” and revised your position:

How many lives are you willing to sacrifice in the bombing that you now approve of?

That said, I can’t imagine your early life, but I share your concern about empires.

And my only visit to Norway, was in Harstad on a TAGOS vessel in 2002ish. Ate whale [great meal]at some restaurant that had a Nazi nautical chart as part of the “charm”. They wouldn’t let me purchase it. . . [I only wanted it cuz it was unique - not a political statement. Shit, I’d be in so much trouble now if I had it, LOL]

Bought “save the whales - for dinner” T-shirts for my kids in San Francisco. And that created such a ruckus at that time - Saving the whales was a big thing at that time. . . My kids learned then, and respect now, that their dad was & is a shit-disturber.

[Rock_Hill]

@seasmaster

It was indeed, from the view of 2026, a wasted action.

How many of the conflicts and military actions, both open and covert, over the last 60 years that the U.S. has been involved in, often starting themselves, fit this description? And yet here we are again.

I find it ironic that you use the word “civilized”. What is “civilized” about starting a war that kills thousands of civilians and upset the global economy with no true strategy or defined goal, claiming throughout the conflict that you are winning or have already won, only to capitulate with an outcome that on many levels is worse than before you started? While adjectives for this type of behavior come to mind, civilized is not one of them.

[freighterman1]

Conquering Iran and killing the leadership was never the problem. Keeping a proxy government in power is the problem.

Unless you slaughter 50% of the Iranian population that 50% will begin an insurgency the day after the USA declares victory. And the only way to stop the insurgency would be American troops. Thousands of Americans dead, mutilated and burned over years and years of occupation.

And the end result 20 years later would likely be the same result we had in Afghanistan.

That’s what all these knee-jerk-fantasist-bomb-Iran-to-a sea-of-glass types stubbornly refuse to consider: reality.

My last post on this subject. I’ve avoided posting on this thread for some time now. It’s always Groundhog Day.

[Hawespiper]

@freighterman1

Keeping a proxy government in power is the problem.

Unless you slaughter 50% of the Iranian population that 50% will begin an insurgency the day after the USA declares victory. And the only way to stop the insurgency would be American troops. Thousands of Americans dead, mutilated and burned over years and years of occupation.

And the end result 20 years later would likely be the same result we had in Afghanistan.

Facts. Which is why we would be foolish to put en masse boots on the ground.

Regime change would be ideal but it’s not what we NEED. What we NEED is no nuclear capability and SOH open. So choke them (no oil exports/blockade their imports) and strike their existing drone and missile capability. We’ll see who can stand it longer.

[Hogsnort]

In a democracy the election cycle works against the long term plans. Politicians are rearranging the deck chairs to remain in power come November. Those in power in Iran don’t care about their own people, there is no elections to worry about and they will outlast the will of the West no matter what the sacrifice.

The outlook is so dire I think a wee dram or perhaps 5 is called for.

[tugsailor]

Trump is a fool. The Iranian terrorist regime continues to play him like a fiddle.

Now that we are in a war, there is no other viable option except to win, and win decisively. Whatever it takes.

We need to use Iran’s topography against it. If we bomb the four major mountain passes and sever all the major road, rail, pipelines, and electric lines from the coast to the interior, that will pretty much be lights out for Iran’s weapons industry and for the regime.

If we destroy every boat capable of laying mines or attacking shipping, and take out the radars, missiles, drones, and supporting infrastructure along Hormuz, it can be reopened.

Needless to say, we should be vigorously going after the terrorist regime leadership and the IRGC troops. Bombing of the regime must continue until the people can overthrow them

The next time Iran attacks a commercial ship, we should sink a tanker alongside the dock at Kharg Island. We should let everyone know that right now.

The Iranian terrorist regime has never kept a promise, and it never will. There is no such thing as a valid and binding “deal” with an Infidel.

[ombugge]

@seasmaster

My kids learned then, and respect now, that their dad was & is a shit-disturber.

Should that last read; “Shit-stirrer”?

[ombugge]

@tugsailor

We need to use Iran’s topography against it. If we bomb the four major mountain passes and sever all the major road, rail, pipelines, and electric lines from the coast to the interior, that will pretty much be lights out for Iran’s weapons industry and for the regime.

Have you ever looked at the Geneva Convention?
What you propose would be a war crime of epic dimensions.
ICC next for whoever order such actions,

The days that the rest of the world would stand back a cheer any action the US military is long gone.
Wishful thinking you say? I wouldn’t bet on it.

@tugsailor

The next time Iran attacks a commercial ship, we should sink a tanker alongside the dock at Kharg Island. We should let everyone know that right now.

What about next time the US attack, or capture a merchant ship?
Any proposal for a suitable revenge?

[Steamer]

@Hawespiper

We’ll see who can stand it longer.

Oh, you mean the Putin plan?

[tugsailor]

Iran does not care about the Geneva Convention. They are terrorists that mostly target civilians, and they have been doing it for 50 years. They don’t play be the civilized rules. So they cannot be defeated by anyone playing by the rules. We must fight fire with fire, like we did in WWII, not fight with one hand tied behind our backs.

If we had fought Hilter in the gentile manner you propose, we would all be speaking German now.

Industrial capacity is dual use. So is keeping the lights on to run the missile cities.

Roads, rails, pipelines and electric lines can be easily and quickly repaired once the bombing stops. Disrupting electric line and pipelines is nothing like destroying power plants and refineries.

I’ve never seen Putin or any Iranian officials on trial at the ICC.

No doubt our false and feckless European “allies” would love to see Americans on trial, but the US does not recognized the ICC.

[Hawespiper]

@Steamer

you mean the Putin plan?

If you can’t identify or acknowledge the differences between the two conflicts, then I can’t (won’t) help you.

[ombugge]

@tugsailor

Iran does not care about the Geneva Convention. They are terrorists that mostly target civilians, and they have been doing it for 50 years.

Even if Iran doesn’t care, is that a good reason for USA not to care?
Who are “terrorists” and who are “freedom fighters” depends on who’s side you are on.
If Iran is a “terrorist stat”, do we have to lower ourselves to the same level? Bombing civilian targets are against the Geneva Convention, no matter who is doing it.

The bombing of Iran in March - April killed a lot of civilians, but “the attacks have been directed at military and political targets, the parties themselves say.”
Israel and the US claim they are only attacking military and political targets in Iran.

Entire neighborhood destroyed

– There are many, many thousands of missiles that have hit built-up areas in Iran. This has had enormous civilian consequences.
This is according to Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council, Jan Egeland. He himself was on a trip to Iran earlier in June.
– People are afraid and hope for peace.
Egeland tells of entire neighborhoods in Tehran that have been destroyed in missile attacks.
He nevertheless emphasizes that the attacks on Iran cannot be compared to the attacks on Gaza or Lebanon.

Source: Stor kartlegging: Slik er sivile blitt rammet av Iran-krigen – Urix

@tugsailor

the US does not recognized the ICC.

Nor UNCLOS, but still claim rights according to it.

[Binbag_the_Saylore]

@tugsailor

“… terrorists that mostly target civilians…”

I’m confused…
… do you mean the US and civilian boats, large and small?
… or do you mean Israel and anyone who’s not Israeli?

[Chopshopscotty]

You’re missing the whole point guy. This IS REVENGE. Although, I don’t think our bombs, missiles and guns are doing enough damage currently. Maybe we can mix it up with an EMP if that’s even a thing?

@ombugge

What about next time the US attack, or capture a merchant ship?
Any proposal for a suitable revenge?

[tugsailor]

The despotic Iranian Islamic fundamentalist regime has been the primary sponsor of terrorism in the World for 47 years. It continues to be, and intends to persist.

The Iranian terrorist regime must be thoroughly defeated at all costs, whatever it takes. No viable and enforceable “deal” is possible.

Regardless of whether we should have started this war, we are in it now. The Iranians are holding the World economy hostage. There is no other viable option to the US and Israel decisively winning the war in Iran, whatever it takes.

All of you foreign America haters who are cheering for the Iran, and hoping that America will lose, need to realize that if the Iranian Islamic fundamentalist terrorist regime wins, it will damage your countries’ economies a lot more than the US economy.

By the way, the Iranian regime and its sponsorship of terrorism is the primary reason that Europe is overrun with problematic and costly Islamic refugees.

[ombugge]

Sorry to bring in facts:

A group called Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the bombings and said that the aim was to force the MNF out of Lebanon.
According to Caspar Weinberger, then [United States Secretary of Defence, there is no knowledge of who did the bombing.

Some analysis highlights the role of Hezbollah and Iran, calling it “an Iranian operation from top to bottom”. There is no consensus on whether Hezbollah existed at the time of bombing.

The attacks eventually led to the withdrawal of the international peacekeeping force from Lebanon, where they had been stationed following the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) withdrawal in the aftermath of Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon.

PS: This resulted in the “Weinberger Doctrine”. This doctrine outlined strict tests before the United States commits combat troops abroad, emphasizing clearly defined political/military objectives and a clear exit strategy