New Attacks on Oil Tankers

[aceplace57]

Limpet mines have to be attached to the hull?

How does an attack like this work? Are the Iranians approaching the tankers while its moving and attaching the mines?

I saw in the video it was attached above the water level. Frogmen would have attached them under the water.

I don’t understand the thinking behind this attack on tankers. It’s not going to accomplish anything in resolving conflicts with the US.

They can intimidate and threaten the world’s oil supply? That accomplishs what?

[GreenWyvern]

The Military Times has a good balanced article:

Why would Iran attack two tankers near the Strait of Hormuz?

While Iran is often seen as instigator of conflict in the region — whether through harassing U.S. naval vessels at sea with fast boats or arming Houthi rebels in Yemen with anti-ship missiles — there are a number of groups and countries that have motives for orchestrating Thursday’s attacks.

“I would not write off any possibility until there is a lot more information,” a former chief of staff with U.S. Central Command told Military Times on condition of anonymity. The former CENTCOM official spoke to Military Times prior to Pompeo’s press conference.

“It could be anything from some other state that has an interest in instigating a conflict with Iran and the U.S. or the other Gulf States, you know, doing an act that could logically be attributed to Iran," the former CENTCOM official said.

It’s possible the attacks were carried out by the IRGC, whose actions have in the past been unhelpful in the Persian Gulf; or the Saudis, who have been “aggressively pushing the United States to take military action against Iran," among others, Trita Parsi, a professor at Georgetown University, told Military Times. Parsi is also the author of “Losing an Enemy: Obama, Iran, and the Triumph of Diplomacy.”

“We are in a scenario in which there are a large set of actors whose motives and whose conduct has been of such nature that one should be very careful to take their words at face value," Parsi said.

Iran is aware it is overmatched in the region by the might of the U.S. military, so its defense is organized primarily through asymmetry and deterrence to raise the cost of conflict. That often makes proving Iran culpable for attacks in the region difficult.

The IRGC is structured and designed to purposely make such kinds of attacks difficult to trace, the former CENTCOM official said. “I suspect that our intel community is working pretty hard to figure it out," he said.

[aceplace57]

The Military Times article is very informative. Thank you for posting.

The strategy behind this attack is puzzling. Someone may be trying to instigate conflict between the US and Iran.

[Ludovic]

“We are in a scenario in which there are a large set of actors whose motives and whose conduct has been of such nature that one should be very careful to take their words at face value," Parsi said.

Good times, man. Good times.

[bobot]

As long as we’ve got a guy like Pompeo on our side, who directly blames Iran hours after the attack, then we’re in good hands, right? :eek:

[not_what_you_d_expect]

A story I saw yesterday on deep fake videos has me feeling rather at a loss as to what proof I’d actually believe these days.

It’s kind of frightening to think about.

[Walken_After_Midnight]

Trump points finger at Iran (Fox News):

In an interview with “Fox & Friends” Friday, President Trump said of Iran’s alleged involvement: “We don’t take it lightly”.

“Iran did do it and you know they did it because you saw the boat,” he said, before pointing to video that showed an Iranian vessel removing an unexploded mine attached to a Japanese-owned oil tanker, the Kokuka Courageous.

Trump said the limpet mine had “Iran written all over it.”

It’s kind of galling to see news sites portraying the video as a “smoking gun”, when it’s no such thing.

[Gray_Ghost]

@HurricaneDitka

CENTCOM released pictures and video of the purported limpet mines, and an Iranian patrol boat removing an unexploded one from the hull of Kokura Courageous:

https://twitter.com/W7VOA/status/1139344244924194816/photo/1

Removing unexploded ordnance like that seems insanely risky—anti-tamper switches are a thing—unless you know exactly how to disarm it, because your team was the team that placed it in the first place. I’m curious how EOD pros would approach this situation.

AIUI, personnel from the USS Bainbridge did not attempt to remove the limpet, but did rescue personnel from the MV Kokura Courageous. As to how the mines were placed, my guess is that something like a RHIB approached the tankers while they were steaming, moved alongside, and personnel in the RHIB placed the mine(s). Divers can place mines as well, but usually require the target to be at anchor. Or put it another way, I wouldn’t want to have to try and match speeds underwater next to a moving tanker, no matter what sort of minisub or propulsor unit the diver was using to attain the speed of the moving tanker.

Also AIUI, the day prior to these latest attacks,sanctions were placed on an Iraqi group that is suspected of being a financial conduit for the IRGC. Further, as noted upthread, the IRGC is suspected of being independent of the regular IRI chain of command, and their forces are considerably more bellicose than IRIN or IRIAF. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if these attacks originated from a rogue element of the IRGC. It also wouldn’t surprise me if another nation was responsible, albeit the video of an IRGC fast boat casually removing the limpet is awfully damning, IMHO.

[Walken_After_Midnight]

@Gray_Ghost

Removing unexploded ordnance like that seems insanely risky—anti-tamper switches are a thing—unless you know exactly how to disarm it, because your team was the team that placed it in the first place. I’m curious how EOD pros would approach this situation.

I don’t know enough about limpet mines to comment much on this. I would say, though, that whoever orchestrated these attacks appears to have done so with the aim of causing disruption, rather than sinking the ships or causing loss of life on them. So, if the mines did have anti-tamper switches, I would be surprised if they had been set to go off.

[Gray_Ghost]

@Walken_After_Midnight

I don’t know enough about limpet mines to comment much on this. I would say, though, that whoever orchestrated these attacks appears to have done so with the aim of causing disruption, rather than sinking the ships or causing loss of life on them. So, if the mines did have anti-tamper switches, I would be surprised if they had been set to go off.

And you’d bet your life on that chain of inferences? I wouldn’t. I am not an EOD professional, but I doubt any of them would either. The video shows Iranian personnel simply removing the mine, instead of using one of several ways that armed explosive ordnance has been dealt with in the past: use of a robot or even an EOD suit to get distance from the device, disruption of the fuze or device as a whole, and, should nothing else work, blowing the thing in place.

Instead, they sailed up to it, unattached the mine from the ship, and sailed away with it. The simplest explanation is that the people that removed it was affiliated with the team that placed it, and they wished to remove possible evidence of Iranian manufacture.

It is true that in all of these attacks on tankers so far, the size of the ordnance has been calculated to not inflict catastrophic damage on shipping, but rather to put a hole in at least one of what are typically double-hulled vessels. More of a demonstration of capability than anything else, while calculated to minimize casualties or environmental damage to the surrounding area.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Gray_Ghost

Removing unexploded ordnance like that seems insanely risky—anti-tamper switches are a thing—unless you know exactly how to disarm it, because your team was the team that placed it in the first place. I’m curious how EOD pros would approach this situation.

… the video of an IRGC fast boat casually removing the limpet is awfully damning, IMHO.

This was my thought when I saw the video: those guys are awfully damn cavalier about yanking a mine off the hull, at least if it’s supposed to be of unknown origin and status.

[carnivorousplant]

@HurricaneDitka

This was my thought when I saw the video: those guys are awfully damn cavalier about yanking a mine off the hull, at least if it’s supposed to be of unknown origin and status.

My thought is that various factions in Iran may be working against each other.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@aceplace57

The strategy behind this attack is puzzling. Someone may be trying to instigate conflict between the US and Iran.

:eek:

That is a totally shocking and hitherto un-seen possibility! Kudos to you for ferreting that out!

[Ravenman]

@carnivorousplant

My thought is that various factions in Iran may be working against each other.

But all the organizations in Iran that would be capable of such attacks report to the Supreme Leader. Iran is not a country where military and intelligence establishments just sort of go off and do things on their own.

[carnivorousplant]

@Ravenman

But all the organizations in Iran that would be capable of such attacks report to the Supreme Leader. Iran is not a country where military and intelligence establishments just sort of go off and do things on their own.

I was under the impression that it was.

[aceplace57]

The Military Times article reports there are multiple groups in Iran that don’t always work together.

Conflict with the US would strengthen the Hardliners power in Iran…

I’m not sure what the US can or should do. Any show of force will trigger all out war. We can’t just bomb a training camp or weapons factory and think that’s the end of it.

There are rifts between the IRGC and President Hassan Rouhani’s administration over economic reforms that have sought to strip the military group’s economic power in the country, and also fallout following America’s abandonment of the nuclear accord, known as Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

The IRGC has been known to act in its own interest and “operate outside what appears to be Tehran’s policy," and there is a history in Iran hardliners trying trying “sabotage diplomacy,” Parsi said. Though, Parsi added, that really hasn’t been the norm for the IRGC for several years.

[HMS_Irruncible]

@Velocity

Sure, but who’s going to invoke Article 5 over a sunk ship? It’s not like, say, Russia sending armored divisions into Poland.

John Bolton has wanted an Iran war for years. Donald Trump could use the distraction.
Mike Pompeo has shown a talent for toadying up to whatever Trump wants. Collectively they have proven they will lie about anything.

They also control a security apparatus that faked a naval incident as rationale for the Vietnam War. Oh, we found unexploded limpet mines? How convenient that “they” left an attributable calling card. Otherwise we might not know who to target.

This stinks heavily of a Gulf of Tonkin scenario. More research and skepticism is highly, highly warranted.

[Shodan]

Or maybe somebody wants to drive up the price of oil.

Regards,
Shodan

[Ravenman]

@carnivorousplant

I was under the impression that it was.

@aceplace57

The Military Times article reports there are multiple groups in Iran that don’t always work together.

The Supreme Leader and the moderate President Rouhani are not always on the same page – but Rouhani does not control the military and intelligence apparatus. The idea that the IRGC (or whomever) went off and started attacking foreign ships without the Supreme Leader is as implausible as the Russian intelligence agencies interfering in our election without Putin knowing. It’s just not realistic.

[VinylTurnip]

@HMS_Irruncible

John Bolton has wanted an Iran war for years. Donald Trump could use the distraction.
Mike Pompeo has shown a talent for toadying up to whatever Trump wants. Collectively they have proven they will lie about anything.

If this were a false flag operation masterminded by Trump himself, it’d be a duck boat with “IRANIEN NAVEY” painted sloppily on the hull.