Will Trump encourage the revival of Iran?

  • That is good news. The crew committed no crime.

    UK took our ship, we took a ship of theirs.

    The Iranian ship was released and what happened, it went straight to Syria and the Iranian regime still retained the British registered ship until a few minutes ago.


    So, as for trusting the Iranian regime again, I think Britain or America will be far more cautious from now on.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • That is good news. The crew committed no crime.

    The Iranian ship was released and what happened, it went straight to Syria and the Iranian regime still retained the British registered ship until a few minutes ago.


    So, as for trusting the Iranian regime again, I think Britain or America will be far more cautious from now on.

    1. Iran has evry right to trade oil with Syria. The EU is not a supranational organisation. EU sanctions do only apply on EU countries. This was made clear even by the EU. EU foreign secretary Mogherini said that Iran did not violate any law. Iran is not a EU member and not bound by EU law.


    2. The british ship was hold until our own ship was secure. There is little to no trust to british authorities here. Beside that our president said clearly we would release the british ship in a few weeks.



    3. As for the crew of Stena Impero...they switched off their transponder when entering Iranian waters and also did drive on the wrong way. Thats a crime. They also rammed a finishing vessel when they tried to escape our coast guard. Those are facts. I assume they did so to avoid our attention in this times but the result was just, that they became a target.


    The good thing though is, that the next 2 tankers are on their way to Syria now. The UK wont dare to raid those now, knowing the consequences. The people of Syria need fuel and Iran will deliver it. Our tankers will avoid Gibraltar and drive through spanish and moroccan waters.

  • Well, if they sail through Spanish waters, that does come under EU law and they could get seized, especially if the destination is Syria.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Well, if they sail through Spanish waters, that does come under EU law and they could get seized, especially if the destination is Syria.

    Wrong, EU says Iran violated no law. Sanctions only apply to EU members. The EU cant unilateral make laws for other countries. For that reason spain did not act. For same reason EU showed Zero Support for UK.

  • .... Boris using that swimming pool metaphor just went over their heads in that video. Sometimes, he needs to curb the jokes.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • 'Explosion' on Iranian oil tanker off Saudi coast - reports

    An explosion has caused a fire on an Iranian tanker near the coast of Saudi Arabia, Iranian media say.

    The vessel, from Iran's national oil company (NOIC), was 60 miles (97km) from the Saudi port city of Jeddah when the incident took place, reports said.

    The ship's two main storage tanks were said to be damaged, causing an oil spill into the Red Sea, but no-one was injured.

    NOIC claimed the vessel was hit by missiles, but did not provide evidence.

    As if this region needed another major war, but it looks like the Saudis have taken their revenge for the attacks on their oil facilities last month.


    The proxy was the Iranians and Saudis have been fighting for ages, might finally be turning into a direct war between them. Should the West do anything? Personally, I think we should stay out of it.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • What was the point? The fact that is there is so little damage to the tanker makes me wonder if it was a set up Iranian job, purely to invoke direct conflict. I'll wait to hear the Saudi response.


    I agree that the UK should stay out of it. If they want to, let them kill one another, but we don't want British forces to be sacrificed for the aggression in the ME.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • I agree that the UK should stay out of it. If they want to, let them kill one another, but we don't want British forces to be sacrificed for the aggression in the ME.

    +1.


    We've got burnt too many times trying to do good and at best making a bog of it.


    Any way if the Saudi's get going then they'll need some more jets.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • What was the point? The fact that is there is so little damage to the tanker makes me wonder if it was a set up Iranian job, purely to invoke direct conflict. I'll wait to hear the Saudi response.

    Could be Fidget, but these two have been fighting each other indirectly via their various proxies for ages, so seem to want to avoid direct conflict, or at least until now they have. Perhaps that will change now.

    +1.


    We've got burnt too many times trying to do good and at best making a bog of it.


    Any way if the Saudi's get going then they'll need some more jets.

    ^^


    But seriously, any direct conflict and the Iranians would beat them in a second, that's assuming the West stays out of it.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Iran already passed the nuclear treshold. We developed evrything needed to build a nuke. We enrich uranium and even up to Plutonium.


    And i believe for Iran thats the best option. Chose the japan option. To be a nation capable to build a nuke but dont actually do it.

  • Or Iran could just engage peacefully engage with the world and just use your vast oil supplies instead of having anything nuclear.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Or Iran could just engage peacefully engage with the world and just use your vast oil supplies instead of having anything nuclear.

    Burning oil of creating electricity is idiotic.


    Nuclear power is more effective, creates no CO2 and is more stable. Beside that nuclear power is also needed for medical treatment. Where you think comes the stuff from used in x-ray machines and cancer treatment?


    You also want that we treat cancer patients with our "vast oil supplies"?


    The UK has 15 nuclear power plants. You have not a single plant burning oil to create electricity.


    You too have vast amounts of oil. So tell me, if oil is good enough for us to create power, why is it not good enough for you?


    I just read UK wants build 8 new nuclear power plants. Why dont you build oil power plants?


    By "engaging peaceful with the world and have nothing nuclear" you mean Iran should be a poverty ridden 3rd world country without advanced energy production? I really would like to know.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment.