Trump appears to be the main source but the article is treating it as fact.
Thanks for that. That seems to be how all of the reporting of our war is going.
What do you expect them to do? It’s not like they can interview Iranian eyewitnesses. Especially for incidents that occurred in the middle of the strait.
“Trump claims without evidence” was their go to for a while, maybe they can bring that back. Or “known liar Donald Trump says, and we’re unable to verify, that…”
Wait for a reliable secondary source to confirm that this actually happened. Since Trump is having imaginary negotiations (that always result in everything he wants), he could also be capturing imaginary ships.
I’m sure Iran will make a statement soon enough but we’re still living in the timeline where everything that comes out of Trump’s mouth has to be fact checked.
I suppose that’s because Hegseth banned all but his chosen few news agency from the Pentagon.
And Trump is now threatening genocide again.
If the only source that can check Trump’s statement is Iran, then the fact is that there is no “reliable secondary source that can confirm this actually happened”, is there?
I disagree. Iran’s leadership is not in permanent election campaign mode like Trump is.
'Trump says x happened.
Iran says x did not happen.
We, A News Source, have been unable to independently confirm either statement.’
— I often see news sources say they’ve been unable to independently confirm something. It’s very much too bad to have to apply that disclaimer to statements by the POTUS; but it’s also quite clear that what he says can’t be trusted.
Aren’t there lots of civilian sources in the shipping industry which keep track of ship traffic?
Over the past few months, I’ve seen lots of articles about disrupted oil supplies, shipping routes, etc, often illustrated with graphics .
Don"t ships use transponders similar to aircrsft?
Sure, there’s various OS INT chatter about this just like anything else that happens.
I certainly wouldn’t take everything Iran says at face value but in this particular case, I can’t imagine them lying about what would be a victory for the US. So if they put out a statement to the effect of “we condemn the US attack on our ship” I wouldn’t see any reason to disbelieve that. In any case, it looks like we have secondary sourcing now, assuming one can trust CENTCOM any more than they can trust Iranian officials.
The What’s Going on With Shipping? guy on You Tube explains some of the CENTCOM video.
I feel your frustration.
Earlier today, Trump says that Vance, Hegseth and some other toady is heading to Pakistan for intense negotiations on Monday. Iran says “uh, there are no negotiations planned sorry buddy.”
I mean, who the heck do we believe? Does ANYone in power know what is actually going on, or is it all just “Trump says”?
So they started this war with no mission and no plan, and they still have no mission and no plan to finish or end it. How can anyone support a war that was started with no mission and no plan, and is ongoing causing death and economic chaos and still has no mission and no plan?
Eh, at this point the mission is to re-open the strait.
“A return to status quo” is pretty pathetic, mission-wise. But there you go.
This, I absolutely agree with. As others have noted, Trump’s only strategy for “winning” is bluster. At some point (which we’ve long passed), that doesn’t work.
I tend to believe Iran over Trump, which is disgraceful.
Summary
I would believe Pinocchio over Trump at this point.
Summary
No one believes Trump. About anything.
And you shouldn’t. Ask any NYC contractor, or Melania.