Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2018
- Posts
- 13,162
I think he is calling for a hunger strike.
Ships under attack in the middle east
- Thread starter XeNoN89
- Start date
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 45,042
I meant more in terms of relations. Not sure Russia would want to get drawn into this particular conflict.
3 Type-45s, I know it's a moot point as we have six of the things but it's worth pointing out.
If China invaded Ireland with the purpose of overthrowing the Irish government and setting up a communist state that took its marching orders from Bejing would we sit back and do nothing just because China are tougher than us? From Russia's perspective it's the same thing
Eh? We have HMS Duncan (a type 45 Destroyer) headed out there and HMS Montrose (a type 23 Frigate) is already there in Bahrain.
What’s the 3 in reference to?
Iran's small arms missile focus could likely eliminate our entire fleet without much bother, it's the US they're mostly afraid of. They don't really need an airforce so the T45 is largely pointless other than for it's gun battery. It's just a big patrol vessel alone unfortunately, too bad our aircraft carrier is leaky (which was expected...).
Soldato
Pretty apt that the RN have just successfully tested the Martlet system aboard HMS Sutherland. Will be an absolutely deadly system when used in conjunction with the 30mm cannon against the small ships that Iran favours.
Soldato
We have 16 of the Type-23, and if the gloves ever do come off and things get all shooty, those 'dinghys', as you put it, won't get within range of a warship to do any damage.
That it would take 3 type-45 destroyers to counter Iran's air force, a couple of people were saying that just one of them could counter the whole Iranian air force, so just pointing out that it would take three but it's not an issue as we have six.
Hardly going to send every ship we have :/
Lots of talk of war here (which we can't win) so here's a novel idea as someone else has already said:
How about we give them back the ship we seized under orders of the US and they give us back ours?
Remember: we started this.
De-escalation is the best way forward unless you want a war with a well-armed country which can strangle the world's economy and can rely on Russia as an ally?
Our wonderful hi-tech ships in the gulf that you are talking about? Sitting ducks against anti-shipping missiles.
Why are so many people here keen on war with Iran? We picked this fight. Do you want hundreds of dead British sailors?
Over what exactly? We started it by seizing their tanker! Why can't we have good relations with Iran? We have wonderful relations with a much, much, much worse country after all: Saudi Arabia. They make Iran look like Sweden yet they are our best buddies.
We got into this mess by following the orders of the US.
All these flag-waving patriots on this thread gunning for Iran yet have zero problems with being a vassal of the US who got us into this mess. Laughable.
Rule Britannia, Britannia ru....oh dear, our destroyers just got sunk by an Iranian missile.
How about we give them back the ship we seized under orders of the US and they give us back ours?
Remember: we started this.
De-escalation is the best way forward unless you want a war with a well-armed country which can strangle the world's economy and can rely on Russia as an ally?
Our wonderful hi-tech ships in the gulf that you are talking about? Sitting ducks against anti-shipping missiles.
Why are so many people here keen on war with Iran? We picked this fight. Do you want hundreds of dead British sailors?
Over what exactly? We started it by seizing their tanker! Why can't we have good relations with Iran? We have wonderful relations with a much, much, much worse country after all: Saudi Arabia. They make Iran look like Sweden yet they are our best buddies.
We got into this mess by following the orders of the US.
All these flag-waving patriots on this thread gunning for Iran yet have zero problems with being a vassal of the US who got us into this mess. Laughable.
Rule Britannia, Britannia ru....oh dear, our destroyers just got sunk by an Iranian missile.
Last edited:
Of course they are, what on earth makes you think they aren't???
EU sanctions are enforceable against anyone, don't like them/agree with them then don't visit any EU territories or try to make use of any EU entities while breaking them. Simples
LOL
What a surprise you don't seem to be condemning the seizure...
We didn't "start" anything. Iran was causing issues in this region with regards to shipping already - they've already physically attacked vessels on two occasions.
The enforcement of EU sanctions in Gibraltar (i.e. something with a legal basis) isn't cause to just arbitrarily seize a vessel in revenge without any legal basis. They attempted to do this already and were sent away by a RN vessel they then succeeded with some small tanker involved in bunkering operations and seemingly again with two British related tankers just now.
Look at the Iranian statement:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49053383
If you're going to consider that comparable then you're just letting yourself get gaslighted by the likes of infowars, RT, press TV etc...
The only international legal body capable of issuing such sanctions whereby Iran would be obligated to comply by them are those made by the UN Security Council...newsflash: there are no UN Security Council sanctions against the export of oil to Syria.
No, EU sanctions are not enforceable against anyone unless you want to dismantle the entire concept of international law. If EU sanctions 'are enforceable against anyone' then there's nothing stopping Iranian law being 'enforceable against anyone' on the basis of a whim and hence we have the law of the jungle. This is why we have the UN.
Given your interesting legal views I take it you approve of the Iranians seizing the British ship today on the basis of 'maritime law irregularities' or whatever nonsense they came up with?
The amusing thing is that you actually think this is about EU sanctions and not about the US trying to destroy Iran. You think we seized that ship because of EU law? Really? Why haven't any other EU countries done it? Or could it possibly be because the US told us to do it as the Spanish government has suggested?
Why weren't Iranian ships carrying oil stopped in the several years since the introduction of the EU sanctions you treat like holy tablets carried down from Mount Sinai?
Really, did they? I heard about those incidents yet the Royal Navy have not given any evidence of it which is strange don't you think? RN destroyers don't have video cameras on board?
We did start this. We seized their ship first on the orders of the US.
Last edited:
I'm confused, Dowie.
Earlier in this thread you fully supported the UK's actions in seizing an Iranian tanker based on it breaching EU laws.
Why aren't you in favour of Iran seizing a British ship based on its breaches of maritime law as alleged by Iran?
Some consistency would be nice.
What's the difference? I think both sides' legal arguments are absolute ********, but I would love to hear your mental gymnastics justifying our actions over that of the Iranians' identical retaliatory actions.
P.S. Why would I condemn Iran's actions? They didn't start it, we did.
Earlier in this thread you fully supported the UK's actions in seizing an Iranian tanker based on it breaching EU laws.
Why aren't you in favour of Iran seizing a British ship based on its breaches of maritime law as alleged by Iran?
Some consistency would be nice.
What's the difference? I think both sides' legal arguments are absolute ********, but I would love to hear your mental gymnastics justifying our actions over that of the Iranians' identical retaliatory actions.
P.S. Why would I condemn Iran's actions? They didn't start it, we did.
Last edited:
Of course they are. What are you smoking? you are aware that UK law exists and EU law exists and is enforced in UK/EU territories right?
nope.
If you hadn't noticed Spain is a bit miffed in general re: Gibraltar and doesn't seem to uphold its international commitments too well re: Syria.
Yes the legal basis for seizing the the ship was the enforcement of EU sanctions relating to Syria. We can't just seize a ship simply because the US desires it and we don't currently support the US sanctions on Iran so if the vessel was clearly headed elsewhere in the Med then we'd have to release it.
Can you cite an example of such a ship that was allowed to break EU sanctions and stopped in EU waters?
The ship wasn't seized in Iranian waters and this was quite blatantly a revenge operation so stop being silly...
Yes, I am aware UK and EU law exists. Explain to me how this is different to Iranian law existing and being enforced such as we have seen today with the seizure of a British tanker?
This is why we have the UN. If you want to ignore international law, fine, this is what happens. A British tanker has now been seized as a result of our gov's stupid actions - nice one. What a result...
Why not? We have done far worse under orders of the US: see Iraq. We are a vassal of the US desperate for a trade deal...at this point we will do anything even ridiculous actions like this which has left British shipping and sailors in danger.
I don't need to, it's obvious. Are you telling me no Iranian ships carrying oil have passed through EU waters since the sanctions were introduced in 2011? This was their first attempt 8 years later? And the first EU country to take action is one that is leaving the EU shortly? Are you having a laugh? You see no connection at all with our current aggressive stance and that of the US?
I find all this deflection and drivel interesting.
It's obvious to anyone with an IQ above room temperature that Iran's actions are a response to us seizing their tanker first. We are to blame for this...why is this so difficult to understand?
@EvilSooty im more concerned that you don't think we are capable of waging a war on Iran..
We would destroy Iran in a couple of weeks bud, what comes after is irrelevant.
We would destroy Iran in a couple of weeks bud, what comes after is irrelevant.
The ship wasn't seized in Iranian waters and this was quite blatantly a revenge operation so stop being silly...
As if it mattters. The UK seizure of an Iranian ship had nothing to do with law and all to do with geopolitics likewise with the Iranian seizue of a UK ship.
Let's stop pretending this has anything at all to do with law. It doesn't.
You can't see the wood for the trees.
Last edited:
I'd take this more seriously if this was the first time Iran had done anything like this - but it isn't and they don't need any excuse to do it.