Anyone can use AIS they aren't tapping into it. They article you link to doesn't say the Iranian intelligence ship was operating in the red sea it says that ships were hit in the red sea Israel said Iran helped and Iran denied it. The article does however say that Israel has launched multiple attacks on Iranian ship in the Persian gulf and med.
Also why would the Houthis need radar to target military vessels in the red sea? The Bab AL Mandab straight is only twenty miles wide they can track visually besides if they did have radar as it got turned it would be like wave a big sign saying kill me.
Next the link for the "Iranian" says it's been used by Iraqi militias and Houthis it doesn't it was used by Iran in fact Israel says they have proof it was made by an Iranian company implying Iran was trying to use it as a denial able assist. So if it was this type of drone is the only proof it's an Iranian drone is an accusation from Israel?
Also why wouldn't Iran attack the ship when it went through the straights of hormuz instead waiting until was hundreds of miles away in the open ocean? Why hit at all unless it's with something that will cause more than superficial damage? Sounds fishy to me. Iran strikes a tanker coming from a Saudi port going to India makes no comment there's no evidence presented and the Ambrey an English company says its Israeli linked but won't elaborate.
<<<<<<hey article you link to doesn't say the Iranian intelligence ship was operating in the red sea it says that ships were hit in the red sea<<<<<
Everybody that knows anything at all about the what's happening there says the ship is an Iranian asset. They all state categorically that it is directing fire thoughout the area.
<<<<<why would the Houthis need radar to target military vessels in the red sea? <<<<
Radar is a cut above announcing .....hey, see that indistinct blob over on the horizon, that sure looks like an enemy ship to me..... Radar gives you exact speed, distance and course all at once in real time. The things you need if you going to attack a ship or try and evade it.
<<<<<f they did have radar as it got turned it would be like wave a big sign saying kill me.<<<<
Saudi Arabia and the U.S. have sporadically tried to kill the Houthis for over a decade and haven't succeeded. The Houthis have just gotten stronger. It isn't as simple as it might appear.
<<<<why wouldn't Iran attack the ship when it went through the straights of hormuz instead waiting until was hundreds of miles away in the open ocean?<<<<
Iran is not officially engaging western ships. The Houthis are doing so in support of Hamas. Attacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz would be an admission that it is Iran that is directly attacking ships not the Houthis forced to take some action on ships on their doorstep because of the current military conflict in the region.
<<<<more than superficial damage<<<<
Superifical damage is in the eye of the beholder. My understanding is that the crew has been removed from the ship and it is under tow.
<<<< tanker coming from a Saudi port going to India makes no comment there's no evidence presented <<<< The attackers don't care if their reasons make sense or not.
There is an issue of who are the financial backers of the ownership of a commerical vessel. Then there is the issue of who are the beneficial owners of the ship. Then there is the issue of who operates the ship. Then there is the issue of who chartered the ship. Then there is the issue of where the ship has been and who has booked it in the future. For many ot these ships, all of that has been deliberately obscured from public view. As a consequence, there will be false positives in addition to false negatives in the identification processs. As I said, the attackers don't care if they are right or wrong.
Also saying the attackers don't care if their reasons make sense or not is one if the most absurd arguments people make. Oh there crazy there illogical there madmen it doesn't matter if it'd totally illogical and makes no sense.
Obviously they don't care if it makes to me but there has to be a reason why it made sense to them. When starts flexing with shipping they don't launch a single scrappy slow drone to go after a ship that has already passed through through the straights of and is hundreds of km from its territorial waters.
They send IRG fast boats to swarm the ship and force it come into port. They've done it numerous times. And they announce why they are doing it.
Also the houthi aren't just targeting houthis registered ships they are shutting down all shipping to going through the red sea to stop imports going to Israel and its port on the red sea forcing them to go around Africa greatly increasing the transit time.
Finally Iran and Saudi Arabia have engaged in a huge change in their relationship and trying to reduce tensions attacking shipping coming from Iran for some vague reason would be idiotic.
<<<<<the attackers don't care if their reasons make sense or not <<<<
The attackers don't care if it makes sense or not because they have a goal, an objective they have chosen to try and achieve. Whether some action makes overall sense or not is irrelevant if it moves them along their chosen path. It doesn't make sense for them to risk attack from America, but it would move them along their chosen path so they don't care if it happens or not.
I'm not sure if you understand what is happening there. Both Saudi Arabia and Iran benefit from all the maritime confusion. Oil prices are up and are going to continue going up. Exactly what the major countries in the Middle East want. Especially what Saudi Arabia and Iran want.
The shipping companies are benefiting mightily because they are now getting paid to take a longer route at a time when new U.N. reguations have made it expensive to travel at anything beyond a slow cruising speed which is about about two thirds their normal fast cruising speed. Since the shipping companies were facing cratering shipping rates and an excess supply of ships, they are overjoyed at the prospect of a sudden slowdown that makes each ship take longer to complete its round trip and thus an increased demand for service. Bear in mind that no ships in the Red Sea area have been severely damaged or had significant loss of life.
The shipping companies also benefit from having the American public become convinced that now the U.S. Navy should and even must try to protect all the ships in the world. This, even though most of those ships are deliberately managed to avoid paying American taxes, hiring American workers, meeting American safety standards and subject to American business law.
Of course the so called dark or shadow fleet is unaffected by the attacks or the new U.N. regulations because they operate outside western jurisdiction, by definition. They are happy to continue with the old routes and the old operating conditions both of which are cheaper. Hiding in plain sight as it were. Under the current circumstances, no cares what they are doing with their Russian cargoes.
Everybody outside of North America and Europe is having a good laugh at America's expense in this situation.
Yes I know the houthis are hard men and have fought off the Saudis and the UAE. When I say turning on radar is a saying kill I mean it's a sign saying hi I'm radar kill me. Radar doesn't just you were targets it tells everyone where you are and become an instant target for all sorts of missiles from the fleet in the red sea and any aircraft. If the Iranian ship did it would immediately be proof Iran was directly involved.
World war two radar installations would be an easy target. Radars of the type that meet the Houthis minimal requirements are mobile. Flash em up, get the neccessary target info. Pass it on to the missile crew and then shut down and beat feet out of the area to the parking spot inside the local elementry school.
As if the local naval ship captain can just decide to start bombing a foreign country on his own anyway, regardless of the provocation. Also as if America has an endless supply of such missiles. So much so that they can expend them on minor irritants like two thousand dollar drones.
Not to mention, everybody in the area is running radars full time. That includes the Iranian asset stationed there. That is what all ships do all the time. That is what many land installations do all the time.
Perhaps you mean America should open a full on war against a Muslim, mostly civilian population because ships belonging to another country carrying goods going to another country are being interfered with. Make the Red Sea a war zone and compel everybody there to comply with America's requirements about movements, transmissions and anything else that comes into the minds of the American forces operating there.
The ship that the Iranians supposedly attacked with a drone of the coast was coming Saudi Arabia through the straight of Hormuz that's the ship is asking about why didn't the Iranians strike it there. Waiting till was 200km from India places well outside 1300km from Yemen and out of range. The straights of Hormuz are much closer to Yemen.
I never said the ship wasn't an Iranian asset I said it wasn't in the red sea. If it's not in the red sea it can't track targets in the red sea because there's land in the in the way ffs the radar isn't going to go through to track ships in the red sea.
The Iranian asset ship that people are referring to is called the Savitz. It is anchored off the coast of Yemen at the entrance to the Red Sea. It is constantly fully manned with sophisticated radars and electronic sensing devices. It has been anchored and operating there for three years.
<<<<<<the ship that the Iranians supposedly attacked with a drone of the coast was coming Saudi Arabia<<<<
But that is the whole point. It was not the Iranians who attacked the ship off the coast of India. It was the Houthis. A point made clear by means of not attacking it when it was passing by Iran. Instead it was attacked from another vessel a thousand miles away from Iran. Iran can quite reasonably claim the it wasn't them but maybe people should pay more attention to what the Houthis want because they appear to be some pretty heavy duty guys.
OK I got you. I don't totally agree with you but I do think it's definitely more plausible that the Houthis carried out the attack rather than Iran. Also I can't the response you got from the guy who writes this substance chasticening you for a long comment and telling not to write long comments.
Your response to my comment was about the same length at and he didnt chastise me. Furthermore the statement readers prefer short comments over long comments I can say I definitely do not. I do disagree with your perspective but I was interested in hearing and discussing both of perspectives. Furthermore readers are on here to read the blog not the comments if they don't what read a long comment they don't have to. Since Stephen Bryer has apparently has a problem with how his readers engage on the comment section I will no longer write comments or subscribe to this blog.
The reason for brief comments is to not discourage others from saying something. I am not "this guy" and by the way my name is not "Bryer." I am happy you won't be around any longer. Make sure you live up to your promises.
The USA uses $2 million dollar missiles to destroy $2,000 drones. This is a good article about tracking ships, but the author says the USA needs to deal with the drones, but does not say how. If the Houthis have a large supply of drones the USA will run out of $2 million dollar anti-missiles. Then what?
MIght be a translation issue on the part of the person issuing the report.
China has always said that Taiwan is a part of China and that the current anomolous situation will one day be resolved. Taiwan agrees. As did America until a couple of years ago and that it still the official policy although ignored now by Biden.
The only differnce of opinion about the issue is who will be in charge when it is finally resolved. For almost the entire world except for Biden and a few D.C. neo cons, Taiwan and mainland China will become one de facto as well as one de jure state sometime soon.
I think you may have drank too much spiked eggnog today. Where did you come up with a "translation issue" as possibly being what behind that report was about? This isn't the 1800s.
And what's your source(s) for Taiwan readily agreeing to be part of the current nation of communist China? Also, I'm not sure where you found the sources for America agreeing to a takeover of Taiwan by communist China - especially when Taiwan is the majority source of the high-tech semiconductors for the United States. Unless you're ready and willing to go back to writing actual letters with pencil or pen to Substack, you might want to consider that whole semiconductor issue and what's going to happen to that phone or laptop on which you're writing. While I can appreciate a discussion on any topic, I really think it's rude to just assume that your sources (eggnog induced or not) are the only ones that are correct and that the rest of us are just relying on the gossip in the grocery line.
One China is the official policy of the U.S. and most of the world. It has been the policy for over fifty years. In the last couple of years, Biden has talked as if there are two China's even though there has been no official change American policy. There are ony a half dozen small countries that recognize Taiwan as a country. Taiwan is not a member of any U.N. organization because the U.N. believes that there is only one China and its representative is already present there. Taiwan itself believes that there is only one China and that they should be recognized as the true, legitimate government of that China, to the exclusion of any other claimant.
>>>>At the height of the Sino-Soviet Split, and at the start of the reform and opening of People's Republic of China, the United States strategically switched diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China (ROC) to the People's Republic of China (PRC) on January 1, 1979, to counter the political influences and military threats from the Soviet Union. The US Embassy in Taipei was 'migrated' to Beijing and the Taiwanese Embassy in the US was closed. Following the termination of diplomatic relations, the United States terminated its Mutual Defense Treaty with Taiwan on January 1, 1980<<<<
This policy supported by a Congressional act is still in force.
From Wikipedia
<<<<After the United States established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1979 and recognized Beijing as the only legal government of China, Taiwan–United States relations became unofficial and informal following terms of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which allows the United States to have relations with the Taiwanese people and their government, whose name is not specified.<<<<
In 2021, Biden amended the policy to allow high level government officials to formally visit Taiwan. Which is why you see a lot of upset in the region about such newly allowed visits. They are taken as a sign that the U.S. may be moving to recognize Taiwan as an independent country and not a territory soon to be reunited with Mainland China.
I will terminate this and other such conversations at Steve Bryen's request.
Anyone can use AIS they aren't tapping into it. They article you link to doesn't say the Iranian intelligence ship was operating in the red sea it says that ships were hit in the red sea Israel said Iran helped and Iran denied it. The article does however say that Israel has launched multiple attacks on Iranian ship in the Persian gulf and med.
Also why would the Houthis need radar to target military vessels in the red sea? The Bab AL Mandab straight is only twenty miles wide they can track visually besides if they did have radar as it got turned it would be like wave a big sign saying kill me.
Next the link for the "Iranian" says it's been used by Iraqi militias and Houthis it doesn't it was used by Iran in fact Israel says they have proof it was made by an Iranian company implying Iran was trying to use it as a denial able assist. So if it was this type of drone is the only proof it's an Iranian drone is an accusation from Israel?
Also why wouldn't Iran attack the ship when it went through the straights of hormuz instead waiting until was hundreds of miles away in the open ocean? Why hit at all unless it's with something that will cause more than superficial damage? Sounds fishy to me. Iran strikes a tanker coming from a Saudi port going to India makes no comment there's no evidence presented and the Ambrey an English company says its Israeli linked but won't elaborate.
<<<<<<hey article you link to doesn't say the Iranian intelligence ship was operating in the red sea it says that ships were hit in the red sea<<<<<
Everybody that knows anything at all about the what's happening there says the ship is an Iranian asset. They all state categorically that it is directing fire thoughout the area.
<<<<<why would the Houthis need radar to target military vessels in the red sea? <<<<
Radar is a cut above announcing .....hey, see that indistinct blob over on the horizon, that sure looks like an enemy ship to me..... Radar gives you exact speed, distance and course all at once in real time. The things you need if you going to attack a ship or try and evade it.
<<<<<f they did have radar as it got turned it would be like wave a big sign saying kill me.<<<<
Saudi Arabia and the U.S. have sporadically tried to kill the Houthis for over a decade and haven't succeeded. The Houthis have just gotten stronger. It isn't as simple as it might appear.
<<<<why wouldn't Iran attack the ship when it went through the straights of hormuz instead waiting until was hundreds of miles away in the open ocean?<<<<
Iran is not officially engaging western ships. The Houthis are doing so in support of Hamas. Attacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz would be an admission that it is Iran that is directly attacking ships not the Houthis forced to take some action on ships on their doorstep because of the current military conflict in the region.
<<<<more than superficial damage<<<<
Superifical damage is in the eye of the beholder. My understanding is that the crew has been removed from the ship and it is under tow.
<<<< tanker coming from a Saudi port going to India makes no comment there's no evidence presented <<<< The attackers don't care if their reasons make sense or not.
There is an issue of who are the financial backers of the ownership of a commerical vessel. Then there is the issue of who are the beneficial owners of the ship. Then there is the issue of who operates the ship. Then there is the issue of who chartered the ship. Then there is the issue of where the ship has been and who has booked it in the future. For many ot these ships, all of that has been deliberately obscured from public view. As a consequence, there will be false positives in addition to false negatives in the identification processs. As I said, the attackers don't care if they are right or wrong.
Also saying the attackers don't care if their reasons make sense or not is one if the most absurd arguments people make. Oh there crazy there illogical there madmen it doesn't matter if it'd totally illogical and makes no sense.
Obviously they don't care if it makes to me but there has to be a reason why it made sense to them. When starts flexing with shipping they don't launch a single scrappy slow drone to go after a ship that has already passed through through the straights of and is hundreds of km from its territorial waters.
They send IRG fast boats to swarm the ship and force it come into port. They've done it numerous times. And they announce why they are doing it.
Also the houthi aren't just targeting houthis registered ships they are shutting down all shipping to going through the red sea to stop imports going to Israel and its port on the red sea forcing them to go around Africa greatly increasing the transit time.
Finally Iran and Saudi Arabia have engaged in a huge change in their relationship and trying to reduce tensions attacking shipping coming from Iran for some vague reason would be idiotic.
<<<<<the attackers don't care if their reasons make sense or not <<<<
The attackers don't care if it makes sense or not because they have a goal, an objective they have chosen to try and achieve. Whether some action makes overall sense or not is irrelevant if it moves them along their chosen path. It doesn't make sense for them to risk attack from America, but it would move them along their chosen path so they don't care if it happens or not.
I'm not sure if you understand what is happening there. Both Saudi Arabia and Iran benefit from all the maritime confusion. Oil prices are up and are going to continue going up. Exactly what the major countries in the Middle East want. Especially what Saudi Arabia and Iran want.
The shipping companies are benefiting mightily because they are now getting paid to take a longer route at a time when new U.N. reguations have made it expensive to travel at anything beyond a slow cruising speed which is about about two thirds their normal fast cruising speed. Since the shipping companies were facing cratering shipping rates and an excess supply of ships, they are overjoyed at the prospect of a sudden slowdown that makes each ship take longer to complete its round trip and thus an increased demand for service. Bear in mind that no ships in the Red Sea area have been severely damaged or had significant loss of life.
The shipping companies also benefit from having the American public become convinced that now the U.S. Navy should and even must try to protect all the ships in the world. This, even though most of those ships are deliberately managed to avoid paying American taxes, hiring American workers, meeting American safety standards and subject to American business law.
Of course the so called dark or shadow fleet is unaffected by the attacks or the new U.N. regulations because they operate outside western jurisdiction, by definition. They are happy to continue with the old routes and the old operating conditions both of which are cheaper. Hiding in plain sight as it were. Under the current circumstances, no cares what they are doing with their Russian cargoes.
Everybody outside of North America and Europe is having a good laugh at America's expense in this situation.
Ron
if you want to write your own articles why not get a Substack? Readers appreciate brief comments, not commentaries.
Ok. Thanks
Yes I know the houthis are hard men and have fought off the Saudis and the UAE. When I say turning on radar is a saying kill I mean it's a sign saying hi I'm radar kill me. Radar doesn't just you were targets it tells everyone where you are and become an instant target for all sorts of missiles from the fleet in the red sea and any aircraft. If the Iranian ship did it would immediately be proof Iran was directly involved.
<<<<<it's a sign saying hi I'm radar kill me.<<<<
World war two radar installations would be an easy target. Radars of the type that meet the Houthis minimal requirements are mobile. Flash em up, get the neccessary target info. Pass it on to the missile crew and then shut down and beat feet out of the area to the parking spot inside the local elementry school.
As if the local naval ship captain can just decide to start bombing a foreign country on his own anyway, regardless of the provocation. Also as if America has an endless supply of such missiles. So much so that they can expend them on minor irritants like two thousand dollar drones.
Not to mention, everybody in the area is running radars full time. That includes the Iranian asset stationed there. That is what all ships do all the time. That is what many land installations do all the time.
Perhaps you mean America should open a full on war against a Muslim, mostly civilian population because ships belonging to another country carrying goods going to another country are being interfered with. Make the Red Sea a war zone and compel everybody there to comply with America's requirements about movements, transmissions and anything else that comes into the minds of the American forces operating there.
The ship that the Iranians supposedly attacked with a drone of the coast was coming Saudi Arabia through the straight of Hormuz that's the ship is asking about why didn't the Iranians strike it there. Waiting till was 200km from India places well outside 1300km from Yemen and out of range. The straights of Hormuz are much closer to Yemen.
I never said the ship wasn't an Iranian asset I said it wasn't in the red sea. If it's not in the red sea it can't track targets in the red sea because there's land in the in the way ffs the radar isn't going to go through to track ships in the red sea.
<<<<I said it wasn't in the red sea.<<<<
The Iranian asset ship that people are referring to is called the Savitz. It is anchored off the coast of Yemen at the entrance to the Red Sea. It is constantly fully manned with sophisticated radars and electronic sensing devices. It has been anchored and operating there for three years.
<<<<<<the ship that the Iranians supposedly attacked with a drone of the coast was coming Saudi Arabia<<<<
But that is the whole point. It was not the Iranians who attacked the ship off the coast of India. It was the Houthis. A point made clear by means of not attacking it when it was passing by Iran. Instead it was attacked from another vessel a thousand miles away from Iran. Iran can quite reasonably claim the it wasn't them but maybe people should pay more attention to what the Houthis want because they appear to be some pretty heavy duty guys.
OK I got you. I don't totally agree with you but I do think it's definitely more plausible that the Houthis carried out the attack rather than Iran. Also I can't the response you got from the guy who writes this substance chasticening you for a long comment and telling not to write long comments.
Your response to my comment was about the same length at and he didnt chastise me. Furthermore the statement readers prefer short comments over long comments I can say I definitely do not. I do disagree with your perspective but I was interested in hearing and discussing both of perspectives. Furthermore readers are on here to read the blog not the comments if they don't what read a long comment they don't have to. Since Stephen Bryer has apparently has a problem with how his readers engage on the comment section I will no longer write comments or subscribe to this blog.
The reason for brief comments is to not discourage others from saying something. I am not "this guy" and by the way my name is not "Bryer." I am happy you won't be around any longer. Make sure you live up to your promises.
The USA uses $2 million dollar missiles to destroy $2,000 drones. This is a good article about tracking ships, but the author says the USA needs to deal with the drones, but does not say how. If the Houthis have a large supply of drones the USA will run out of $2 million dollar anti-missiles. Then what?
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/19/missile-drone-pentagon-houthi-attacks-iran-00132480
I think there is something up with the link for the US defense department saying it was an Iranian drone it doesn't go to it it opens gmail
I will check the link.
should be https://www.foxnews.com/world/iran-appears-have-struck-ship-off-indian-coast-drone-us-official
I will fix
Cheers
Fascinating merry Christmas
Different topic but your take is always informative. What's your take on China's Xi telling Biden they're going to takeover Taiwan one way or another?
MIght be a translation issue on the part of the person issuing the report.
China has always said that Taiwan is a part of China and that the current anomolous situation will one day be resolved. Taiwan agrees. As did America until a couple of years ago and that it still the official policy although ignored now by Biden.
The only differnce of opinion about the issue is who will be in charge when it is finally resolved. For almost the entire world except for Biden and a few D.C. neo cons, Taiwan and mainland China will become one de facto as well as one de jure state sometime soon.
I think you may have drank too much spiked eggnog today. Where did you come up with a "translation issue" as possibly being what behind that report was about? This isn't the 1800s.
And what's your source(s) for Taiwan readily agreeing to be part of the current nation of communist China? Also, I'm not sure where you found the sources for America agreeing to a takeover of Taiwan by communist China - especially when Taiwan is the majority source of the high-tech semiconductors for the United States. Unless you're ready and willing to go back to writing actual letters with pencil or pen to Substack, you might want to consider that whole semiconductor issue and what's going to happen to that phone or laptop on which you're writing. While I can appreciate a discussion on any topic, I really think it's rude to just assume that your sources (eggnog induced or not) are the only ones that are correct and that the rest of us are just relying on the gossip in the grocery line.
One China is the official policy of the U.S. and most of the world. It has been the policy for over fifty years. In the last couple of years, Biden has talked as if there are two China's even though there has been no official change American policy. There are ony a half dozen small countries that recognize Taiwan as a country. Taiwan is not a member of any U.N. organization because the U.N. believes that there is only one China and its representative is already present there. Taiwan itself believes that there is only one China and that they should be recognized as the true, legitimate government of that China, to the exclusion of any other claimant.
Maybe there was a translation issue with the person that gave you that info.
From Wikipedia
>>>>At the height of the Sino-Soviet Split, and at the start of the reform and opening of People's Republic of China, the United States strategically switched diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China (ROC) to the People's Republic of China (PRC) on January 1, 1979, to counter the political influences and military threats from the Soviet Union. The US Embassy in Taipei was 'migrated' to Beijing and the Taiwanese Embassy in the US was closed. Following the termination of diplomatic relations, the United States terminated its Mutual Defense Treaty with Taiwan on January 1, 1980<<<<
This policy supported by a Congressional act is still in force.
From Wikipedia
<<<<After the United States established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China (PRC) in 1979 and recognized Beijing as the only legal government of China, Taiwan–United States relations became unofficial and informal following terms of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which allows the United States to have relations with the Taiwanese people and their government, whose name is not specified.<<<<
In 2021, Biden amended the policy to allow high level government officials to formally visit Taiwan. Which is why you see a lot of upset in the region about such newly allowed visits. They are taken as a sign that the U.S. may be moving to recognize Taiwan as an independent country and not a territory soon to be reunited with Mainland China.
I will terminate this and other such conversations at Steve Bryen's request.
I think if the Iranians hit something in the Strait Iran will be in a world of hurt.
You mean like Afghanistan?