Meaning that the US cannot protect vessels from the Iranian 'mosquito' fleet?

Interesting framing considering the US started this war, started a siege and literally stole Iranian ships. But Iran are the pirates?

You are actually trying to justify American war crimes. You have written a sentence which tries to connect a small boat to an RPG getting fired. Are you this disgustingly criminal? Or, when the trials reach you, your excuse will be "I never said the boat fired the RPG?"

How is this from the somali pirate playbook? Do you even know what that means? Are they going to ransom the ship too 🥴

Who could have anticipated this?? Man, really comes out of nowhere😑

who ever burn more things wins , that's basically what US is advertising Iran is just following .

Why use an expensive missile when that works?

It's called war and they did not start it.

Fair to call this an attack on civilian shipping. It is one. But so is the US sinking Iranian tankers, and so is a port blockade. Pick the standard and apply it to all three. “Somali pirates” for Iran and “interdiction” for the identical US acts isn’t a cleaner category, it’s just a selective one.

Iran will do anything necessary to keep the price of oil elevated. No surprises there. And at the moment there doesn't appear to be a damn thing the US administration can do about it.

Not really. Somali pirates sometimes carried RPG but they don’t fire at the target ship. They may fire warning shots but not at the vessel. Their model relied on taking over the vessel without causing damage and keep the crew hostage until ransom is paid.

Somali pirates invented commercial ship strikes? Somali pirates invented RPG? Somali pirates invented small boats? Nah. I think the people who invented these equipments prioneered it. Everyone else copied them.

This is bearish for oil

UKMTO Warning 175-26 puts the attack 78 nautical miles northeast of Al Jubayl, not in the Strait of Hormuz. The master reported an RPG from a small boat that damaged the aft port quarter; crew are safe and the full damage assessment is still open. For tankers loading Gulf crude, the risk now sits off the Saudi coast, far inside the Gulf.

That’s pretty normal you’re right

iran or?

🤯

Cry baby

UKMTO logged 12 incidents last week and says most attacked ships aren't even filing reports, so the real count is higher. An RPG hit deep inside the Gulf means the risk zone is no longer just the strait. War-risk cover gets repriced for the whole basin, and that premium shows up in Brent before a single barrel is actually lost.

Just like the old days.

Tanker risk premium just jumped again. @JohnWuestlbik2 has been tracking how this feeds into energy stocks.

Who started this trend of attacking tankers? I'll tell you who was the US when they did that to Venezuela and then to Iran as part of the war. Stop being a hypocrite