Japanese ship owner contradicts U.S. account of how tanker was attacked

[sooda]

...And? What's your point?

Its possible that they attacked the Japanese and Norwegian tankers.

 

[Milton Platt]

An artillery shell that large couldn't be fired from very far. Why did the crew not identify the ship supposedly firing upon them? Notice that all of the ships were quickly surrounded by Iranians. Odd coincidence. Also notice that the Japanese owner ordered the crew not to board Iranian vessels, so they boarded the US destroyer. Why?

How did you determine the size of the shell? some artillery can be fired from as much as 10 miles away.

 

[Road Warrior]

How did you determine the size of the shell? some artillery can be fired from as much as 10 miles away.

Adults know there are people called "engineers" who understand the laws of "physics". Certainly you can understand it's impossible to put a 10lb bowling ball through a 2 inch hole.

 

[Watchmen]

You’re ignoring the numerous times “they” told the truth.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

W. H. Y. would Iran want to intimidate Japan? How do they expect to materially benefit? Note also your "explanation" fails to address the fact that Iran is strongly denying responsibility. That seems counter productive if they're trying to intimidate anyone.

It is an interesting question. Abe is definitely a reflection of a resurgence of Japanese nationalism, and it could give him a door to open discussions into Japan once again having a conventional military, with a potential to roughen relations between America and Japan. Regardless, they need to proceede very carefully because Bin Laden probably isnt the only one capable of trolling a super power into an unwinnable war that is economically devastating and politically/socially destabilizing.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

How did you determine the size of the shell? some artillery can be fired from as much as 10 miles away.

Ballistics analysis. I dont know all the fine details myself, but it involves the size and shape of the hole to basically deduce what it was based on what is there. Its sort of like, in a way, being able to read something like hieroglyphics, but in a language of math instead of pictures.

 

[Milton Platt]

Ballistics analysis. I dont know all the fine details myself, but it involves the size and shape of the hole to basically deduce what it was based on what is there. Its sort of like, in a way, being able to read something like hieroglyphics, but in a language of math instead of pictures.

Right...but where do you get the information that 1) an artillery shell could not have made that hole 2) an artillery shell could have not been fired from a distance further that the naked eye can see?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Right...but where do you get the information that 1) an artillery shell could not have made that hole 2) an artillery shell could have not been fired from a distance further that the naked eye can see?

It would basically come down to the size of the holes made, distance from the shore, weight and size of an artillery shell to make a hole like that at that distance, and narrowing down the potential culprits. Its all knowing the weight and size of shells and what it takes to cause damage to those structures. In forensic anthropology, this would be a certain lattern of cracks and breaks in the bones that suggest blunt force trauma or multiple healed fractured which can suggest abuse or a high risk life style. With ballistics, its about the same idea roughly, but very different in practice as it deals with bullets and explosions rather than bones.

 

[Milton Platt]

It would basically come down to the size of the holes made, distance from the shore, weight and size of an artillery shell to make a hole like that at that distance, and narrowing down the potential culprits. Its all knowing the weight and size of shells and what it takes to cause damage to those structures. In forensic anthropology, this would be a certain lattern of cracks and breaks in the bones that suggest blunt force trauma or multiple healed fractured which can suggest abuse or a high risk life style. With ballistics, its about the same idea roughly, but very different in practice as it deals with bullets and explosions rather than bones.

Do you have possession of such evidence? Do you have information pertaining to the size, weight, explosive capability and firing distance of the weapons used? Or is this just conjecture? I know for a fact that artillery shells can be fired from up to ten miles, depending on the weapon in question.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Do you have possession of such evidence? Do you have information pertaining to the size, weight, explosive capability and firing distance of the weapons used? Or is this just conjecture? I know for a fact that artillery shells can be fired from up to ten miles, depending on the weapon in question.

As I said earlier, I don't know all the details. I know there are mathematical formulas for determining various things, but I don't know what those formulas are. Its basically a process of elimination and deduction based on what produces the evidence left behind. As was also said earlier, you camt fit a 10 pound ball in a 2 inch hole. Thats about the most simplistic way of looking at it.

 

[Wandering Monk]

This is not from an armor piercing shell. HE might do this, but I get the impression of a limpet mine after all.

US boosts Middle East troops amid Iran tensions

 

[Road Warrior]

It would basically come down to the size of the holes made, distance from the shore, weight and size of an artillery shell to make a hole like that at that distance, and narrowing down the potential culprits. Its all knowing the weight and size of shells and what it takes to cause damage to those structures. In forensic anthropology, this would be a certain lattern of cracks and breaks in the bones that suggest blunt force trauma or multiple healed fractured which can suggest abuse or a high risk life style. With ballistics, its about the same idea roughly, but very different in practice as it deals with bullets and explosions rather than bones.

Agreed that science will determine the cause. Many ships from many nations have been hit. Their own countries will examine the damage and determine the cause. The results will determine the truth. If the US military is lying, which I strongly doubt they are, then it will be revealed to the world. Only the anti-American conspiracy theorists will disagree with the results.

 

[Lyndon]

Russia Says It Doesn't Know What Happened in Gulf, But U.S. Photos Do Not Prove Iran's Role

 

[Watchmen]

Russia Says It Doesn't Know What Happened in Gulf, But U.S. Photos Do Not Prove Iran's Role

So you believe Russia now? Noted.

 

[Lyndon]

So you believe Russia now? Noted.

What are you going to turn me in or something, tell Trump about me?????

 

[Watchmen]

What are you going to turn me in or something, tell Trump about me?????

*eyeroll*

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Agreed that science will determine the cause. Many ships from many nations have been hit. Their own countries will examine the damage and determine the cause. The results will determine the truth. If the US military is lying, which I strongly doubt they are, then it will be revealed to the world. Only the anti-American conspiracy theorists will disagree with the results.

It will be interesting. Good or bad, it cause stir some nasty things. They were shot, who exactly did it? If they were bombed, thats not much of a threat but it can kick the hornets nests of certain highly insecure world leaders. But its a big question of if Iran, then why deny it?

 

[Road Warrior]

It will be interesting. Good or bad, it cause stir some nasty things. They were shot, who exactly did it? If they were bombed, thats not much of a threat but it can kick the hornets nests of certain highly insecure world leaders. But its a big question of if Iran, then why deny it?

"Plausible deniability". Again, this is just showmanship. So far, no ships have been sunk and no one killed. Is there any doubt that whoever did this (the Iranians ) could have placed those mines under the waterline?

 

[Wandering Monk]

"Plausible deniability". Again, this is just showmanship. So far, no ships have been sunk and no one killed. Is there any doubt that whoever did this (the Iranians ) could have placed those mines under the waterline?

If these were double-hulled tankers, as most are these days, the holes in the pictures don't seem to suggest that the explosives were large enough to penetrate both hulls. Even if they had been placed below the waterline, I think the vessels would stay afloat.

 

[Road Warrior]

If these were double-hulled tankers, as most are these days, the holes in the pictures don't seem to suggest that the explosives were large enough to penetrate both hulls. Even if they had been placed below the waterline, I think the vessels would stay afloat.

Excellent point. Again, the Iranians have the ability to sink those ships but they didn't. Why? Because this is about intimidation and an assertion of force. Iran is saying "Respect us or we will hurt you". Iran shutting down the Gulf would hurt their economy but it would devastate the global economy. They're leaders are religiously based; they aren't thinking in terms of capitalism like Westerners.