Soldato
Why is there what appears to be a van in the middle of the Med?
It's Clarkson, May and Hammond filming a challenge for the next season of TGT.
Ships under attack in the middle east
- Thread starter XeNoN89
- Start date
It's Clarkson, May and Hammond filming a challenge for the next season of TGT.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,453
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48882455
Told you it was just going to set a terrible example to Iran that they were going to exploit
Told you it was just going to set a terrible example to Iran that they were going to exploit
Soldato
So because of the fear of repercussions should we just allow criminal activity to occur to appease the offenders?
Just to breakdown the timeline of events so far -
Iran fills ship with oil to sell to Syria (illegal act) - Ship enters EU waters with illegal cargo (another illegal act) - ship gets caught by the Police using military help (police action) - Iran say "no fair! We're going to hurt you by carrying out even more criminal activities" - people lose their minds!
Iran tried to break international UN applied sanctions but got caught. It's been internationally embarrassed which they don't care about too much but more worryingly for the leaders of Iran, it's own population can access this story via the internet so it needs to say/do something strong to appease it's population (usually by blaming Israel/USA/UK - understandably in some cases) so it rattles the sabre hard and uses provocative and/or threatening language whilst, I'm 100% certain, tasking the IRGC with a feasibility study into capturing or damaging a UK registered ship as "revenge" for being embarrassed.
Just to breakdown the timeline of events so far -
Iran fills ship with oil to sell to Syria (illegal act) - Ship enters EU waters with illegal cargo (another illegal act) - ship gets caught by the Police using military help (police action) - Iran say "no fair! We're going to hurt you by carrying out even more criminal activities" - people lose their minds!
Iran tried to break international UN applied sanctions but got caught. It's been internationally embarrassed which they don't care about too much but more worryingly for the leaders of Iran, it's own population can access this story via the internet so it needs to say/do something strong to appease it's population (usually by blaming Israel/USA/UK - understandably in some cases) so it rattles the sabre hard and uses provocative and/or threatening language whilst, I'm 100% certain, tasking the IRGC with a feasibility study into capturing or damaging a UK registered ship as "revenge" for being embarrassed.
Caporegime
Wonder how many UK registered oil tankers exists which use the strait of hormuz.
Due to tax reasons probably not many / any?
Due to tax reasons probably not many / any?
Soldato
Just to answer this point. I’ve not fully looked up all of the vessel’s particulars, but the one that jumps out to me is her length, at 330 metres overall. That’ll put her firmly into the VLCC (very large crude carrier) bracket, she’d be far too big for the Suez, as vessels that size have a draft of about 30 metres or so when fully loaded.
The only way for one of those to make into from the Gulf into the Med would be via the straits of Gib.
Soldato
If was Iran, I wouldn't look to be so obvious as that, I'd use their military "advisors" currently in Libya to cross over to the waters around Gib instead and do some silly things to the shipping there instead, as it's much easier to carryout vs the risk of getting caught in the Gulf trying to hit a rare UK tanker.
Caporegime
They run the Suez. What they do though is discharge to reduce the draft and then take it back on board once they're through
Adds a lot to the cost.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,453
We cherry pick which nations to apply international "law" to
Assad isn't a criminal, he just isn't liked by the "good" guys who fund and arm terrorists like ISIS
The US & UK should be under sanctions for arming rebels/terrorist in sovereign states if we're going to be fair and throw international "law" around
I don't think we have any right morally or legally to tell Iran who they can or can't sell their own products to and it's only going to create more problems than solve
Soldato
Let me guess.... FALSE FLAG?!
I mean the ship is traveling from Iran to Syria, the ship is confusingly owned by god knows who (starts with a Russian company no less), it just seems like either Iran or Russia has made this occur or as is more likely the crew are idiots.
I strangely think that's more likely than Britain going into Moroccan/Spanish waters to drag it to Gibraltar.
Last edited:
Soldato
EDIT - I got the EU and UN mixed up in the reply below. It's the EU who have sanctions alongside the US and not the UN, sorry for the mistake!
This has been explained to you several times but I'll give this ago - The UN has created sanctions against Iran and Syria. The ship was breaking these sanctions which means it was breaking the law so the police stopped it.
"We" (the UK) didn't cherry pick, "we" (the UK) did what the UN said which is to stop and arrest people who are breaking sanctions, which we did when we had proof it was happening.
Yet again "we" (the UK) are only enforcing the sanctions that all 193 Nations in the UN voted on (for/against/abstained) which gives the UN the "moral right" to decide what is the right level of punishment for the offences Iran has committed. In this situation "we" are the Police and the UN is the Law Maker, so complaining about the Police for upholding a law you don't agree with is just a waste of everyone's time.
You seem to be struggling with the difference between what the UN has done (made sanctions, told people to arrest anyone breaking them) and what the UK has done which is enforcing the sanction as you keep saying "we" like the UK did this all by itself.
Last edited:
Well this is an issue isn't it, because it's a unilateral US sanction regime instead, there are no official UN sanctions on Iran as they were lifted 3 years ago.
The EU also has similar sanctions to the US bar the now seemingly pointless (because of whiny orange man bad) deal which is unlikely to be salvaged now.
Last edited:
Soldato
Yeap, my mistake I got EU and UN mixed up from reading earlier stories but I should have checked before posting as I look silly now but good spot StriderX!
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,453
Before you spout utter garbage, it is EU sanctions, not UN sanctions as Russia and China keep giving veto's to any resolutions we and our fellow bullies try to draft through the UN
So yes, in this case we are cherry picking who to bully and who to allow to commit human rights atrocities (Saudi Arabia for example)
Soldato
It's easy to make a mistake, it's less easy to own up to making one as I have done above, but thanks for the classy response anyway.
In this case there are UN sanctions against Syria - which preclude anyone whether Iran or anyone else from sailing an oil tanker into the supposed destination port of this ship - as such slightly iffy grounds in terms of seizing the ship unless they can prove that was the intended destination with the intention of breaching the sanctions in effect.
On the other hand not many places where the vessel could be heading, while under the Iranian flag, from where it was that wouldn't be in breach of various sanctions so a bit hard for them to justify its position and heading.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,453
Link ?
Because all I can find on UN sanctions against Syria is this
https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/peace-rights-and-security/sanctions/
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regu...medreg_syria+cultural+property_resel_25_h&p=1
No mention of oil
You are right - looking it up the UN is looking at a new effort to implement them after being veto'd by Russia. For some reason I thought they'd passed and it was just the press naming them as EU sanctions.
Our Government is an embarrassment.
Engaging in an act of piracy to please our US masters and now we have (C)Hunt threatening a much more powerful country than us, China, with sanctions when they should be an important trading partner after Brexit.
I despair.
Engaging in an act of piracy to please our US masters and now we have (C)Hunt threatening a much more powerful country than us, China, with sanctions when they should be an important trading partner after Brexit.
I despair.
I the words of Mags "Just LOL"
How is it an "act of piracy" for a government to detain and search a civilian vessel in their own territorial waters?
Gibraltar is part of the EU, the EU has sanctions related to supplying oil to Syria, this has nothing to do with the US policy/sanctions related to Iran's oil exports in general (which the UK doesn't currently support).
This vessel is, IIRC, registered in Panama and owned by a company based in Singapore. The crew is a mix of Indians, Pakistanis and Ukrainians.
Seemingly it was carrying Iranian oil, that alone isn't the reason for its seizure by the government of Gibraltar (and by extension the UK/British Military) but rather the suspected destination itself - Syria... which, as mentioned already, is subject to EU sanctions, an organisation that the UK (and by extension Gibraltar) are still members of!
The vessel supposedly was transporting oil from Iraq though in reality tracking data shows it coming from Iran, also it took the long way around Africa to get into the Med, deliberately avoiding the Suez where it might again have come under scrutiny.
Gibraltar has every right to do this within their waters, it isn't an act of piracy, their customs officers and police are investigating, the Royal Marines are no longer present and a Gibraltarian judge in their court has authorised the continued detention of the vessel for 14 days.