When I link his comment to his earlier post #52, I fail to detect any sarcasm there. I still don't detect it when seeing both replies in context of the immediate previous postings by people.

Im not poking at you or anything, The trouble is - Sarcasm can be hard to interpret in written text, throw someone with English as a second language in to the mix and its twice as hard.

Russia didn't come to Serbia's aid (as far as I remember) during the Kosovo crisis and they have much closer ties culturally than they do with Iran.


I would be more worried that a bombing campaign would trigger a ground war with those clowns. I think Iran would lash out with terrorist attacks everywhere and it would spiral out of control.

I kind of think that sarcasm isn't as big a thing in Germany as it is here? Or it doesn't translate well?



If you take what the left is laying on verbatim the right isn't allowed to use jokes, sarcasm, or anything of that sort EVER. :har:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49053383

And Iran got a UK-flagged tanker, as I feared they would: only a question of time. Symbolic station presence and one or two ships scattered across a way too huge ocean just is not the way to go.

Arm those damn merchants and tankers and have firing crews on them, missiles and heavy MGs, and snipers with heavy callibre rifles that can penetrate light armour, the likes of M107 and similar callibres. These teams can be shuttled onto deck and off deck again via helicopter, jumping from one ship to the next as needed for transit. One has to fight the Iranians where they attack, not where one wants them and hopes them to be. I am sure there are small missiles types the likes of Milan that can be used with great effect not against tanks, but speed boats like the RG uses them, that get moved by two-man teams only and are easy and fast to mount and demount. There are missiles for every task. ASM may be too heavy, with weights from 100 to 700 kg, but why not ATGMs: with fragmentation warheads or HE warheads that are launched form shoulder or from tripods? Sounds about right against ships the size of RG speed boats. And of ATGMs there are more than enough models and types. Their range usually is somewhere between ~ 1 and 4.5 km - perfect for the task at hand.

Also: convoys, why don't they form escorted convoys but just sit and hope and waste time...? The first incident should have been a warning, this defeat - thats what it is - now was completely needless. Another nail in the coffin of European approach to the Iran matter.

Also, I would choose traffic routes for tankers as far north and as close to Iranian borders as legally possible - to maximise the chance that any tanker spilling oil will present the Iranians the pleasure of dealing with a formidable oil pest on their coastline.

And another tanker, belonging to a British ocean carrier, has been taken, though has been released some time later and currently moves on.



Somebody is dancing on somebody else's nosetip.

Iran captures British Oil Tanker and lets another one go
 

Now, what is going to happen? I wish that we would do something to stop Iran from messing with ships passing though the area in the Persian Gulf. :Kaleun_Mad:

U.S. military has begun reestablishing air base inside Saudi Arabia

Here we go.

are there any british troop or equipment deployments to the region?

Conversion of merchant ships into warships:
During the maritime warfare, merchant ships can’t be converted into warships. According to the practice of Britain, the conversion of merchant ships into warships can be made by the belligerent state in its own port. It can’t be made in a neutral port.

I don't think the merchant marine allow for arming their ships ...

Russia and China do it in waters infested by African pirates.They stationed firing teams on deck for the duration of passages.


Also, I do not care for ink pissing and paragraph riding if it is about the safety of own merchants and crews that travel through waters where hostile nations act as hostage takers and hijackers.


The alternative to my suggestions is much jigher naval and air presence and convoy forming. As long as that does not happen, I stay pragmatic: push me, and I push back a lil' stronger. Shoot at me, and I shoot back a lil' bit more. Try to overwhelm my resistence, and I send th air force and have your coastline installations flattened.


This is the ordinary and well-accepted form of communicating in certain parts of the world.

Fully agree :yep:

This wouldn't be happening if they were Russian or Chinese flagged.

Nice one and hopefully the UK will step up to the plate with whatever means we have in the area.

There must be many EU countries whose shipping uses these lanes (there certainly was when I was there in the late seventies) so lets see them sharing the burdon with military means and not leave the lions share of said burdon on the few as was so often the case during the last world war.

Diplomacy isn't working so perhaps matters need to be addressed in a way there can be no misunderstanding that piracy in international waters will never be acceptable.

We were supporting them diplomatically and we did send in paratroopers to Prishtina.


And we were much weaker back then and we believed that we can work together with the West at that time.

Iran doe snot hide the intention behind its actions: the influential Guardian Council, which is practically synonymous with the highest authority there is, ayatollah Ali Chamenei, gets quoted by Germna media with having said that the tanker action is in direct "retaliation" for the British seizing of a tanker at Gibraltar. This terminology was used, says the news - diplomatic sweet-talking and hide-and-seek playing was not even tried.


Whatever it is worth, it was reported that Germany formulated a "strong" an d "determined" reply that demanded the release of the British tanker. I am sure that this made a strong impression in Teheran. :shucks: