HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » UAE Says Four Commercial ...

Sun May 12, 2019, 04:17 PM

UAE Says Four Commercial Vessels Targeted by 'Sabotage Operations' Near Iran

Source: Haaretz

Four commercial vessels were targeted by "sabotage operations" near the territorial waters of the United Arab Emirates, the UAE foreign ministry said in a statement on Sunday, adding that there were no victims.

[****]

A spokesperson for the U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet said they had no comment at this time when contacted by Reuters.

Tensions are running high in the region after the U.S. military sent forces, including an aircraft carrier, to the Middle East to counter what the White House says are "clear indications" of threats from Iran to its forces there.

Read more: https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/uae-says-four-commercial-vessels-targeted-by-sabotage-1.7225373



Persian Gulf of Tonkin Incident?

12 replies, 1542 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 12 replies Author Time Post
Reply UAE Says Four Commercial Vessels Targeted by 'Sabotage Operations' Near Iran (Original post)
Ramsey Barner May 12 OP
paleotn May 12 #1
yaesu May 12 #2
B Stieg May 12 #3
Hotler May 13 #11
Maxheader May 12 #4
melm00se May 13 #10
Roy Rolling May 12 #5
JunkYardDogg May 12 #6
McKim May 12 #7
WhiteTara May 12 #8
nitpicker May 13 #9
muriel_volestrangler May 13 #12

Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Sun May 12, 2019, 04:33 PM

1. My thought exactly.

Seems some wars get willed into existence. Usual by those who should know better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Sun May 12, 2019, 04:43 PM

2. UAE helping tRump with the escalation, not surprised at all. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Sun May 12, 2019, 04:58 PM

3. Somewhere, John Bolton is smiling.

And the dog is starting to wag, furiously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to B Stieg (Reply #3)

Mon May 13, 2019, 09:00 AM

11. Chaney the Dick is wispering in his ear. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Sun May 12, 2019, 07:00 PM

4. Can the yellow haired traitor send in americun troops without congressional approval?


I fear the bastard may try...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maxheader (Reply #4)

Mon May 13, 2019, 08:22 AM

10. This is one of the contradictions in the US Constitution.

Under Article II, section 2, the President is invested with the power as "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States".

On the other hand, under Article 1, section 8, Congress has the power to declare war.

This creates an interesting question:

Does the President have command authority over the Armed Forces before a Congressional declaration or after? and if so why?

Looking back to the days that the Constitution was drafted, if Congress was not in session, it might take days or weeks to assemble Congress to declare war which creates an issue in the case of a sneak attack. This would require that the President be able to act without Congress' war declaration.

In today's environment (and arguably in the last 50+ years), this is not the case. Congress can convene and hold a declaration of war vote within hours.

As to why: A war cannot be commanded by Congressional committee. There must be a single command authority and that power has been invested in the President.

In an attempt to reconcile this issue, Congress passed the War Powers Act in 1973. This limited the President's power to as C in C of the Armed Forces and put it more under the control of Congress. It's passage was not without controversy. Congress passed it, the President vetoed it and Congress overrode the veto.

There is a significant Constitutional issue at play here (who has power over the military?) and neither side is really willing to submit this to Supreme Court adjudication. One side or both run the risk being neutered when it comes to the use of military depending upon how the Supreme Court might rule so they will sit on their hands until they can no longer do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Sun May 12, 2019, 07:51 PM

5. What Curiously Bad Timing!

So unusual for the UAE to have mysterious problems that can only caused by Iran.

Annnnnnndddddd, here it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Sun May 12, 2019, 08:29 PM

6. Guess who reported this incident

The eyewitness to this violent attack was Nayirah al- Sabah, daughter of former Kuwaiti Ambassador to the U.S., she of the infamous Iraqis baby tossing testimony, which got the U.S. into the 1st Gulf War. Snark warning

This won't be the last phoney "incident" report. They will keep at it until they have a bogus reason to attack Iran.

Read this, it explains everything :

"Bolton Is Spinning Israeli ‘Intelligence’ to Push for War Against Iran"

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/bolton-is-spinning-israeli-intelligence-to-push-for-war-against-iran/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Sun May 12, 2019, 09:09 PM

7. This Stinks.

This stinks. I can’t wait to see how the Main Stream Media reports this or not. I am sickened and frightened. Trump so needs a war to get his supporters pumped up to watch it on TV and as a distraction from his present troubles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Sun May 12, 2019, 11:23 PM

8. You took the words off my keyboard

Indeed a clumsy Gulf of Tonkin in Vietnam

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Mon May 13, 2019, 03:06 AM

9. Saudi Arabia: Oil tankers damaged in 'sabotage attack'

https://www.dw.com/en/saudi-arabia-oil-tankers-damaged-in-sabotage-attack/a-48712009

Saudi Arabia: Oil tankers damaged in 'sabotage attack'

Saudi Arabia said on Monday that two of its oil tankers were targeted in a "sabotage attack" off the coast of the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

The announcement comes amid increased tensions in the region between the United States and Iran, although no details have been released on the nature of the sabotage or who may have been responsible.

Saudi Arabia's Energy Minister Khalid al-Falih said two of its oil tankers were the target of a "sabotage attack" off the coast of Fujairah.
He said that one tanker was on its way to the kingdom to be loaded with crude oil to be sent to the US.
There were no casualties and no oil was spilled, but the incident caused "significant damage" to the two ships.
UAE officials said earlier that an alleged sabotage attack targeted four boats.
(snip)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ramsey Barner (Original post)

Mon May 13, 2019, 07:02 PM

12. "Gulf of Tonkin" mentioned by knowledgeable people on Twitter

The port itself denied anything significant happened; others think charges just large enough to produce a visible hole for photographs, without doing any notable damage, were used on a couple of ships. They suspect Saudi operatives. See this post with many tweets: https://www.balloon-juice.com/2019/05/13/this-business-will-get-out-of-control-it-will-get-out-of-control-and-well-be-lucky-to-live-through-it-tanker-attack-rashomon-edition/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread