You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Navy to escort U.S. commercial ships near Iran
2015-05-01
CNN has learned that U.S. Navy warships will now accompany U.S.-flagged commercial vessels that pass through the Strait of Hormuz due to concerns that ships from Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps navy could try to seize a U.S. cargo ship.

Pentagon officials provided clarification Thursday afternoon that not every ship will necessarily be accompanied by the Navy. But this is still a significant change in the U.S. military posture in the Strait. The classified plan was approved by the Pentagon earlier Thursday, according to a senior defense official.
So don't tell anyone since it's classified...
While the Navy maintains a routine ship presence in the Persian Gulf and the North Arabian Sea, this new effort specifically requires an armed warship to be in the narrow channel between Iran and Oman when a U.S. commercial vessel passes through.
What about ships flying the flag of the Marshall Islands?
The decision to go ahead with this plan comes as Iran Revolutionary Guard ships harassed a U.S.-flagged vessel, the Maersk Kensington, on Friday and then later seized another cargo ship, the Maersk Tigris, flagged in the Marshall Islands.

The worry is that with the uncertainty around Iran's intentions, any seizure of a U.S.-flagged vessel could provoke an international incident with Iran.

"This is a way to reduce the risk of confrontation," the official told CNN.

The official emphasized the Navy is not trying to "play up" the current situation, but said the orders were approved "based on tensions in the region."

A second U.S. official said if it becomes necessary, U.S. warships are prepared to escort U.S. commercial vessels throughout the entire Gulf.

There are a number of U.S. ships and aircraft in the immediate vicinity, including four ships and several aircraft monitoring the status of the Marshall Island vessel, which remains in Iranian custody allegedly over a 2005 financial dispute. U.S. Navy ships will be moved in and out of the area depending on the transit schedule of U.S. cargo vessels.

Iranian officials said the seizure of the Marshall Islands-flagged ship Maersk Tigris was due to a court decision.
And if you can't trust the legal decision of an Iranian court...
Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said Wednesday that the ship had "some rather peculiar activity" in its past that resulted in court action, according to lawyers with whom his ministry has been in touch.

"Simply, our naval forces implemented the decision of the court," he added.

Rickmers Shipmanagement, the company managing the Maersk Tigris, a Maersk Line ship, said in a statement Thursday that the apparent issue dates back to 2005, when another Maersk Line vessel delivered a shipment to Dubai that was later disposed of when no one collected the containers.

A spokesperson for Rickmers Shipmanagement also said that 24 people -- none American -- are on board the Maersk Tigris and that they are all doing well. However, the company continues to "insist that the crew and vessel are released as soon as possible."
Posted by:Steve White

#6  More this sunny Guam AM ...

* DAILY STAR LEBANON > US MAY ACCOMPANY OTHER NATIONS' SHIPS IN STRAITS OF HORMUZ, agz burgeoning IRAN naval or maritime treat to trade.

VERSUS

* MEHR NEWS IRAN > NAVY COMMANDER [Iran Navy RADM. Habibollah Sayyari]: NO POWER COULD ISSUE WARNINGS ON IRAN DESTROYERS | IRAN WILL NOT TOLERATE FOREIGN WARNINGS AGZ ITS WARSHIPS.

* BIGNEWSNETWORK > [New = Obama-led] US-IRAN DETENTE' COULD BACKFIRE IN MIDDLE EAST.

* DEFENCE.PK/FORUMS > GULF STATES TO PUSH FOR US PLAN TO CONTAIN IRAN.

The Bammer = US already has a plan - ITS CALLED US-N-ONLY-US, UNILATERAL = SELF-IMPOSED, OWG GLOBALIST "RETREAT/FALLBACK IS WORLD PEACE".

SAVING AMERIKA FROM AMERICANS.

Again, PROBLEM/SNAFU/FUBAR = No one has yet answered the question how much is "too much", andor how far is "too far", etc. for the US to unilaterally give up or fallback, etc. across the World widout being EXISTENTIALLY THREATENED.

OWG-NWO OR NO OWG-NWO, Space Govt-Order or no Space Govt-Order, ...@etc. THE "GREAT GAME" OF GEOPOLITICS = SUBSTITUTION/REPLACEMENT OF ONE NATION BY ANOTHER(S) GOES ON IRREGARDLESS OF THE MERITS OR CIRCUMSTANCES. The "Game" nevar! ends.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2015-05-01 21:36  

#5  If the Iowas were still in commission this would never have happenened*



*'quantum effects you see
Posted by: Shipman   2015-05-01 19:13  

#4  Earnest Will was a low-key war. Not much of it made it into the media. It eventually evolved into Operation Praying Mantis.
BTW, some additional info on the Maersk Tigris.
Posted by: Pappy   2015-05-01 14:10  

#3  Would this be Earnest Will, The Sequel, perchance?
Except we don't have a strong man in the WH....
Posted by: USN, Ret.   2015-05-01 11:27  

#2  No 'international incident' over this one in 1968. I doubt our Champ is too concerned.
Posted by: Besoeker   2015-05-01 02:55  

#1  OTOH JAPAN TIMES > [2 ea.]IRAN DESTROYERS MOVE TO ENTRANCE TO KEY YEMEN STRAIT: TEHRAN.

Bab el-Mandab, a key or strategic strait into the Red Sea located between Aden + Djibouti.

Is it just me, or did anyone else get a sudden feeling its 1956, Eisenhower is POTUS + Krushchev is Premier of the USSR, + the Brits, French, + Israelis are about to invade the Suez Canal widout US-Soviet approval???
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2015-05-01 00:29  

00:00