It Becomes Serious: Iranian Mines Likely Caused UAE Tanker Blasts

[pinto + 293]

U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday that naval mines “almost certainly from Iran” were used to attack oil tankers off the United Arab Emirates this month, and warned Tehran against conducting new operations.Bolton said the “prudent and responsible” approach taken by the United States, which has beefed up its military presence in the region, had made it clear to Iran and its proxies that such actions risked a “very strong” U.S. response. He was speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi ahead of emergency summits of Arab leaders in Saudi Arabia on Thursday called to discuss the implications of the tanker attacks, and drone strikes two days later, on oil pumping stations in the kingdom. Tehran has denied involvement in either attack and Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi dismissed Bolton’s latest remarks as a “ludicrous claim”, Fars news agency said.

[francoba + 93]

Gulf of Tonkin?

[ThunderBlade + 231]

Usually "likely" means a nothing, except when you have something else on your mind...

[50 shades of black + 254]

3 minutes ago, ThunderBlade said:

Usually "likely" means a nothing, except when you have something else on your mind...

When asked to provide evidence for the claim that Iran attacked tankers in the Gulf of Oman, Bolton says: "Who else would you think was doing it? Somebody from Nepal?

[Pavel + 384]

One thing is certain: the tensions grow, instead of the other way around

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

17 minutes ago, pinto said:

U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday that naval mines “almost certainly from Iran” were used to attack oil tankers off the United Arab Emirates this month, and warned Tehran against conducting new operations.Bolton said the “prudent and responsible” approach taken by the United States, which has beefed up its military presence in the region, had made it clear to Iran and its proxies that such actions risked a “very strong” U.S. response. He was speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi ahead of emergency summits of Arab leaders in Saudi Arabia on Thursday called to discuss the implications of the tanker attacks, and drone strikes two days later, on oil pumping stations in the kingdom. Tehran has denied involvement in either attack and Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi dismissed Bolton’s latest remarks as a “ludicrous claim”, Fars news agency said. 

Grab your popcorn; it's going to be a good show!

 

[Guillaume Albasini + 851]

1 hour ago, pinto said:

U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday that naval mines “almost certainly from Iran” were used to attack oil tankers off the United Arab Emirates this month, and warned Tehran against conducting new operations.Bolton said the “prudent and responsible” approach taken by the United States, which has beefed up its military presence in the region, had made it clear to Iran and its proxies that such actions risked a “very strong” U.S. response. He was speaking to reporters in Abu Dhabi ahead of emergency summits of Arab leaders in Saudi Arabia on Thursday called to discuss the implications of the tanker attacks, and drone strikes two days later, on oil pumping stations in the kingdom. Tehran has denied involvement in either attack and Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi dismissed Bolton’s latest remarks as a “ludicrous claim”, Fars news agency said.

 

John Bolton has a strong bias against Iran and is known for cherry picking intelligence, only selecting what supports his own beliefs.

So the "almost certainly from Iran" could be translated as "Bolton would be very happy if it was from Iran but has no strong evidence to offer".

https://www.propublica.org/article/john-bolton-national-security-adviser-intelligence

[Rodent + 1,424]

18 minutes ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

 

John Bolton has a strong bias against Iran and is known for cherry picking intelligence, only selecting what supports his own beliefs.

So the "almost certainly from Iran" could be translated as "Bolton would be very happy if it was from Iran but has no strong evidence to offer".

https://www.propublica.org/article/john-bolton-national-security-adviser-intelligence

I think the pentagon came to this same conclusion. Not that that means it's 100% correct, just saying I don't think Bolton is on an island here. 

If not Iran, then who? Who has motive and means? Who benefitted, who lost? 

[Andrew Grosset + 1]

Of course it couldn't possibly be a 'false flag'....could it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag