Ships Seized By Iran In Straits Of Hormuz.

Iran seized 2 tankers, one British flag and other Liberian flag while sailing through the Straits of Hormuz. The Liberian ship was released. But, the British tanker, "Stena Impero" remains in Iranian port.

What's next?

Probably nothing: the ship will be released eventually and likely after some negotiations in which Iran will demand an end to the US embargo.

Just would like to point out the UK did the same thing to an Iranian tanker transporting oil to Syria.

Originally Posted by mattsmith48

Just would like to point out the UK did the same thing to an Iranian tanker transporting oil to Syria.

that is because it was a breach of EU sanctions.

So the plan to put Iran it is place is working really well!

It's amazing how some people seem to constantly side with known terror-states over western democracies. They go out of their way to validate the actions of these nations, and then make concoct conspiracy theories and red herrings to try to place the blame on their own. Idk the exact situation between the UK and Iran, but common-sense seems to say that I should side with the peaceful republic rather than the increasingly aggressive dictatorship until clear evidence says otherwise.

As for the ship-napping, I don't know Iran's endgame in all this. Is it about repealing US sanctions? Is it about judging western nations' response to Iranian aggression? Or is it just retribution for the tanker seized at Gibraltar? Hard to say. I doubt it's just the last one, Iran's game seems bigger than just avenging a seized tanker, but let's just wait and see.

I think that Iran's endgame is twofold. First, it's to pressure the world, especially the EU and others, to force the US to end their sanctions against Iran. Second, they want to be able to continue their enrichment program of uranium to weapons grade in order to make a nuclear device. Once that happens they will be in a position to dominate their neighbors and enemies in the Middle East, specifically Israel and Saudi Arabia. The seizure of the British tanker is just the beginning. It would be interesting how the new British PM will react on the seizure of one of their assests. Stay tuned.

Originally Posted by BlackParadePixie

that is because it was a breach of EU sanctions.

Illegal EU sanctions, condemned by the UN, and that are hurting and angering the population to help the US overthrow Assad.

Originally Posted by PlasmaHam

It's amazing how some people seem to constantly side with known terror-states over western democracies. They go out of their way to validate the actions of these nations, and then make concoct conspiracy theories and red herrings to try to place the blame on their own. Idk the exact situation between the UK and Iran, but common-sense seems to say that I should side with the peaceful republic rather than the increasingly aggressive dictatorship until clear evidence says otherwise.

Yeah obviously Iran is in the wrong here. I mean what are they doing setting up a country in the middle of all those innocent US military bases.

Iran is clearly the aggressor here.

It's amazing how people are still buying US propaganda after what happened/is happening with Iraq 2x, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Sudan etc. The US have the biggest terror program in the world, what act of terrorism as Iran done? Stealing a tanker after one of their own tanker was stolen? Iran is just defending themselves against US-Israeli aggressors.

You know who is constantly siding with terror-states? Western democracies! The US, Saudi Arabia (who funded the 9/11 terrorists) and Israel are the 3 biggest terror state in the world and all good friends with Western leaders.

Originally Posted by mattsmith48

Illegal EU sanctions, condemned by the UN, and that are hurting and angering the population to help the US overthrow Assad.



Yeah obviously Iran is in the wrong here. I mean what are they doing setting up a country in the middle of all those innocent US military bases. image

Iran is clearly the aggressor here.

What you clearly don't get is that Iran is a Persian country isolated between Arab countries.
What you don't get is that Shia Iran is in the middle of Sunni countries.

This is why Iran seeks power in neighbouring countries, favouring and helping Shiite governments or rulers, shiite revolutions and shiite minorities. This is why Iran is accused of terrorism. Oh yes, except in countries where Sunnis rule, Shiites are often persecuted - and Iran gives them power to fight unfair violences!
This is why Iran would want the nuclear bomb to be able to make Arab countries fear Iran.
Iran doesn't really give a shit about American bases.

Ever heard of the Iran - Iraq war ? Ever heard of the dispute about the Persian gulf name (moron Arab countries name it Arab gulf) ? Ever heard how Sunnis and Shiites often kill each other in Iraq (bomb cars, suicide bombings, etc) and elsewhere ?
No, you, as an American, only think about the US. It is the centre of the world.

Originally Posted by PlasmaHam

It's amazing how some people seem to constantly side with known terror-states over western democracies. They go out of their way to validate the actions of these nations, and then make concoct conspiracy theories and red herrings to try to place the blame on their own. Idk the exact situation between the UK and Iran, but common-sense seems to say that I should side with the peaceful republic rather than the increasingly aggressive dictatorship until clear evidence says otherwise.

As for the ship-napping, I don't know Iran's endgame in all this. Is it about repealing US sanctions? Is it about judging western nations' response to Iranian aggression? Or is it just retribution for the tanker seized at Gibraltar? Hard to say. I doubt it's just the last one, Iran's game seems bigger than just avenging a seized tanker, but let's just wait and see.

It’s worth pointing out here that only the cargo was detained, not the tanker itself. If there were a way of separating the cargo from its vessel, that would have been achieved. Gibraltar is a British Crown Dependency. The straits of Gibraltar are amongst the busiest shipping lanes in the world hence Gibraltar’s strategic importance. I’m not a politician (obviously) but the powers that ordered the seizure of said tanker were only following maritime legislation due to sanctions.

Originally Posted by mattsmith48

Illegal EU sanctions, condemned by the UN, and that are hurting and angering the population to help the US overthrow Assad.



Yeah obviously Iran is in the wrong here. I mean what are they doing setting up a country in the middle of all those innocent US military bases. image

Iran is clearly the aggressor here.

It's amazing how people are still buying US propaganda after what happened/is happening with Iraq 2x, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Sudan etc. The US have the biggest terror program in the world, what act of terrorism as Iran done? Stealing a tanker after one of their own tanker was stolen? Iran is just defending themselves against US-Israeli aggressors.

You know who is constantly siding with terror-states? Western democracies! The US, Saudi Arabia (who funded the 9/11 terrorists) and Israel are the 3 biggest terror state in the world and all good friends with Western leaders.

You must be a fan of Jimmy Dore

Originally Posted by Diable rouge

No, you, as an American, only think about the US. It is the centre of the world.

lol @mattsmith48 is not an ethnocentric, self-loathing American.
He's an America-hating Canadian.
The 'banana republic' to which he refers in his sig is the US. He's 'north of' that.

Originally Posted by Zika

lol @mattsmith48 is not an ethnocentric, self-loathing American.
He's an America-hating Canadian.
The 'banana republic' to which he refers in his sig is the US. He's 'north of' that.

Well said!
But, Matt does make a valid point about the US being a "banana republic". Just look at what's happening in Washington with our political parties and system.
But, I digress from the main topic.

Originally Posted by PlasmaHam

It's amazing how some people seem to constantly side with known terror-states over western democracies. They go out of their way to validate the actions of these nations, and then make concoct conspiracy theories and red herrings to try to place the blame on their own. Idk the exact situation between the UK and Iran, but common-sense seems to say that I should side with the peaceful republic rather than the increasingly aggressive dictatorship until clear evidence says otherwise.

As for the ship-napping, I don't know Iran's endgame in all this. Is it about repealing US sanctions? Is it about judging western nations' response to Iranian aggression? Or is it just retribution for the tanker seized at Gibraltar? Hard to say. I doubt it's just the last one, Iran's game seems bigger than just avenging a seized tanker, but let's just wait and see.

Well, Iran is a republic, while the UK is a monarchy, so...

In 1953, through a UK coup, the West installed the puppet Shah instead of a democratically elected PM in Iran. The reason was to protect UK and US oil interests in the region, since the elected PM wanted to nationalize Iranian oil. Seems logical, the people owning the resources in their country. Ever since the Islamic Revolution which was organized to overthrow the dictatorial Shah, the West is very bitter because, guess what? The people of Iran had enough with the western Shah and having their oil exploited by foreign powers. Of all the factions in the revolution, the Islamic one was victorious and in the beggining Iran was not that free, but now they are slowly liberalizing.

So you can essentially say that the West through their actions made Iran into what it is now.

Originally Posted by BlackParadePixie

that is because it was a breach of EU sanctions.

>be Syria
>exist in the Middle East which is located in Asia
>have civil war
>EU imposes sanctions on you
>a European Union, a union of European countries and Cyprus, a geographically Asian country, but very much European in culture imposes sanctions on an Arab Muslim country located in Asia
>said sanctions deepen the humanitarian disaster in the country, forcing more and more people to flee
>millions of people are displaced due to war and make their way into neighbouring countries, some even making a daring trek into Europe
>the EU is forced to negotiate with countries like Turkey because they don't want Erdogan to turn on the valve and let all the refugees come into the EU, further prolonging the suffering of the refugees

>be Iran
>Syria and Iraq are your friends, Syria a strategic ally, while Iraq an economic partner
>at the dawn of ISIS you sent troops and advisors to Syria to quell the terrorists
>nobody is giving you recognition for anything even though you were one of the first, if not the first foreign nation to send combat troops into Iraq and Syria and to send aid

Originally Posted by mattsmith48

Just would like to point out the UK did the same thing to an Iranian tanker transporting oil to Syria.

I like how all those sanctions are done in the guise of "weakening an evil regime". North Korea has been under sanctions for the most of it's existence and it doesn't seem the regime will fall any time soon, they even developed nuclear weapons. The ones affected the most by the sanctions? The people, the poor, the workers, the students, the farmers...

Also there was a whole fiasco of Turkish businessmen buying oil from ISIS-held oil fields and nobody answered for it.
Turkey is literally invading Syria now and nobody cares. The Kurds are endangered and yet again, nobody cares.

And when Saudi Arabia, a literal theocratic dictatorship invades Yemen, nobody cares, at least not until the Saudis' asses are kicked and they flee back and when someone attacks Saudi refineries for which the West is so willing to forgive their crimes against humanity.

Originally Posted by Stronk Serb

The ones affected the most by the sanctions? The people, the poor, the workers, the students, the farmers...

https://youtu.be/x1YcU7ggfpY?t=48

Rick Perry said it himself

Originally Posted by ShineintheDark

https://youtu.be/x1YcU7ggfpY?t=48

Rick Perry said it himself

Yep. This administration in the US is more and more antagonizing to the rest of the world.
Also the Iranians ar still bitter about that coup of 1953 when a democratically elected PM was overthrown in favor of the puppet Shah who was an autocrat.

I don't believe that the overthrow of Iranian PM, Mohammad Mossadegh, in 1953 by the USA and Britain is the root cause of bitterness in Iran today. I doubt that most Iranians living today remember that coup. I would propose that it's the USA and other western nations support of Shah Resa Palhavi and his tyrannical rule caused the revolution of 1979 and the coming to power of the Shia cleric, Ayatollah Khomeini, that forced the shah into exile. I'm not saying that the coup d'état of 1953 didn't play a part in the 1979 revolution. It was one of many clauses that led to the downfall of the shah and the rise of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Last comment. The coup d'état of 1953 wasn't about communism or any other ism. It was basically all about the oil!

Originally Posted by Falcons_11

I don't believe that the overthrow of Iranian PM, Mohammad Mossadegh, in 1953 by the USA and Britain is the root cause of bitterness in Iran today. I doubt that most Iranians living today remember that coup. I would propose that it's the USA and other western nations support of Shah Resa Palhavi and his tyrannical rule caused the revolution of 1979 and the coming to power of the Shia cleric, Ayatollah Khomeini, that forced the shah into exile. I'm not saying that the coup d'état of 1953 didn't play a part in the 1979 revolution. It was one of many clauses that led to the downfall of the shah and the rise of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Yes and no: by overthrowing a democratically-elected government and massively popular leader, the Shah recognised that the public would never be charmed into loving and accepting his rule and so enforced strict censorship and surveillance on the civilian population, from schools to workplaces to even public spaces like shops and cinemas. The ONLY place where the Shah would never dare infiltrate or desecrate was the mosques, meaning all anti-Shah rhetoric and discussion happened within the mosques and by well-respected clerics. That in turn created the powerbase of Ayatollah Khomeini that ultimately put him into power in the revolution. As such, whilst, yes, the coup didn't ITSELF cause the Islamic Revolution, it did technically cause the pieces to fall into place for it to occur.