BREAKING: Iran Forces Seize US Cargo Ship With 34 People On Board

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
a reply to: butcherguy
If Iran has a legitimate debt to collect, they are allowed under international law to arrest a vessel.

See page 17.

Thanks.
I missed the post about the debt and the court order.

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: bullcat

So they're free to go, as soon as they finish their tasty umbrella drinks?
They are 'captive'...as in being detained against their will...under force!
Geez...Lighten up, cowpoke.

Can you explain what a "cowpoke" is and why you need to use that in a post?

Grab a tasty umbrella drink, chill out...and look it up. It's not an insult.

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Thanks. Does this mean that it is still captive?

Captive? Nice choice of words to evilify Iran.

It is being legally detained.

Relax your hackles. The word applies...does it not?

Same as the "captives" in Guantánamo.

Prisoners of war no? Do you accept they are prisoners of war and subject to INTERNATIONAL law?

And Americans involved should stand trial in the INTERNATIONAL courts? No?

can.you.just.stop.bashing.America.once.and.focus? Freaking RT used the word "seized"

Now why and what is on that ship, I thought this was going to be a non-event, but seems not that way now

Ahh so the fact I mention Guantanamo is bashing America? So Guantanamo is not real? NOT happening? No captives there?

absolutely it's real. Wanna make a thread about it so we can discuss it there? Here I kind of want to talk about the update of the ship seized in Iranian port for speculated but unconfirmed reasons. This literally has nothing to do with the US other than the misleading thread title.

originally posted by: Neutrality
Now why and what is on that ship, I thought this was going to be a non-event, but seems not that way now

Standard and common goods?

They detained it because they claim the company, or owner, has owed a debt for nearly a decade and they had a court order from their courts to do so.

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: Neutrality

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

Thanks. Does this mean that it is still captive?

Captive? Nice choice of words to evilify Iran.

It is being legally detained.

Relax your hackles. The word applies...does it not?

Same as the "captives" in Guantánamo.

Prisoners of war no? Do you accept they are prisoners of war and subject to INTERNATIONAL law?

And Americans involved should stand trial in the INTERNATIONAL courts? No?

can.you.just.stop.bashing.America.once.and.focus? Freaking RT used the word "seized"

Now why and what is on that ship, I thought this was going to be a non-event, but seems not that way now

Ahh so the fact I mention Guantanamo is bashing America? So Guantanamo is not real? NOT happening? No captives there?

TErrorist technically under the geneva conventions are unlawful combatants and can be executed as spies. They have no rights under the conventions. We can let them go..Over the ocean at 36,000ft and be ok with it IF we call it a execution.
Currently we do nto send anyone to guantanimo now. Usually they are just killed now.

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

is this really a 100% legitimate source? Because I thought it was a Danish owned ship.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
a reply to: butcherguy
If Iran has a legitimate debt to collect, they are allowed under international law to arrest a vessel.

See page 17.

Thanks.
I missed the post about the debt and the court order.

Well, if they owed money and there was a court ordered seizure in place, then the seizure was lawful. At this point the matter is for the courts to hash out.

a reply to: yuppa

don't feed the troll plz

originally posted by: Neutrality
a reply to: yuppa

don't feed the troll plz

you mean the S H I L L S

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Neutrality
a reply to: yuppa

don't feed the troll plz

you mean the S H I L L S

That's right, everybody that has any inkling of disagreement with America or Americans is Russian obviously.

This really highlights the fact that there is only TWO sides on this world, AMERICAN, and NOT-AMERICAN. And being American is a very VARIABLE definition that seems to change WEEKLY.

It is like not being AMERICAN (by that weekly definition) is second rate, second class.

a reply to: Neutrality
What source?

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel
a reply to: Neutrality
What source?

It refers to the FARS story.

a reply to: AllSourceIntel

the fars one you linked about the debt owed.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: bullcat

So they're free to go, as soon as they finish their tasty umbrella drinks?
They are 'captive'...as in being detained against their will...under force!
Geez...Lighten up, cowpoke.

I am pretty sure Iran would have no problem letting the persons go, but I am also pretty sure the company is not going to just leave their ship behind either, they will challenge Iran on their claim if it isn't worked out diplomatically.

So they are not captive, they more or less are between a rock and a hard place.

Source info............

So, vessel operator (not necessarily Maersk - could be time charter, or bare boat charter) have not paid their navigation levies......and for quite some time itt seems.

Let me explain.....

In Australia - you enter our waters, you cough-up $$ - we have to maintain our navigational beacons, Racons, patrols, electronic warnings, anchorages, dredgings, etc etc and its pretty much a standard fee that our shipping agents pay on our behalf........It costs money to use our "roads"

Same with the PERSIAN gulf.

It appears Maersk / vessel operator have taken the piss for long enough and now it's crunch time.

a reply to: Neutrality
It comes from Iran itself, FARS is Iranian press, but they got that from one of their officials and it has been repeated by Foreign Affairs Minister Zarif.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

so essentially this ship/crew is just getting "taxed"? If that is common practice (seems as you said) then well time to pay up a lil $$$ and be on their way I would assume? I would guess the hold-up is negotiating the price?

originally posted by: Neutrality
a reply to: Sublimecraft

so essentially this ship/crew is just getting "taxed"? If that is common practice (seems as you said) then well time to pay up a lil $$$ and be on their way I would assume? I would guess the hold-up is negotiating the price?

No, the ship is collateral essentially until debt is paid or dispute is settled. The only taxing going on is upon the crews/ships/company's time.

It is not common practice, these things don't happen often enough to be considered common (any more I suppose), but it does happen time to time. It is standard protocol more or less though. Iran probably could have taken her with out a shot over the bow, but as long as their ROE respects international law, their procedure is their procedure.

I have never had a problem with the IRIN or IRGCN, both have been professional, the former more than the latter, and each doing what Navies do, test each other, but I have never had any real issues with them, just games.

a reply to: Neutrality

No - now Iranian Maritime officials are going through the vessel like a dose of salts, this will cost dearly - these vessels are charging / earning upwards of $100K US PER DAY.

Not to mention perishable cargo about to become useless...........big money game out here.......

a reply to: Sublimecraft
dose of salts ... that is a new one to me. Similar to fine toothed comb I imagine?