Mike Pompeo: UK must look after its own ships

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Politico

‘The United States has a responsibility to do our part but the world’s got a big role in this too.’

By PAUL DALLISON 7/22/19, 5:25 PM CET



U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo | Natacha Pisarenko/AFP via Getty Images


U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made clear that it is up to the U.K. to ensure the safety of its own ships in the Gulf.

Pompeo was asked during an interview Monday on Fox News about the Iranian capture on Friday of the British-flagged Stena Impero oil tanker. “The responsibility in the first instance falls to the United Kingdom to take care of their ships," he said.

Calling Iran a "bad regime," Pompeo said "they've now conducted what amounts to national piracy, a nation state taking over a ship that’s traveling in international waters.”

"The United States has a responsibility to do our part but the world's got a big role in this too, to keep these sea lanes open."

Read more: https://www.politico.eu/article/us-secretary-of-state-mike-pompeo-uk-must-look-after-its-own-ships-iran/

[msongs]

1. translation - we want brits to fire the first shots so we can blame them for the following mess nt

[bucolic_frolic]

2. "national piracy" -- is that a political party hijacking an election with foreign help?

just askin'

[left-of-center2012]

3. Trump turning his back on our allies

The UK always had our back.
Now they get Trump's middle finger.

NATO will be next.

[Igel]

9. Or stating the obvious.

We overlook "in the first instance."

Primary responsibility for protecting British ships is properly the British navy. For it to be otherwise would be weird, assuming Britain has a navy.

Now, if there's a Trinidadian tanker in the Arabian Gulf (I say that just because it pisses off the Persians, who insist on "Persian Gulf" as a matter of Persian jingoism), I'd expect the Trinidad navy not to have first responsibility.

[magicarpet]

4. Mike,... no golden carriage ride for you either. Hope you don't mind taking a cab/hackney carriage..

.... to Buckingham.

[MyOwnPeace]

5. Well, sure.............

just because IQ45 and company do their best to destabilize the Middle East doesn't mean that our used-to-be allies should expect us to act like we should care about them.
Doesn't anybody understand foreign policy - "they're foreign, screw them!"

[berni_mccoy]

6. This is an outright violation of NATO.

An attack against one ally is an attack against all allies. Period.

[hack89]

13. Go look at article 5 of the NATO charter again

You will find an important limitation.

[SunSeeker]

16. NATO's support of member states has not been limited to European or North American soil.

Though Article 5 has only been officially invoked once, NATO has taken collective defensive measures in other situations, including deploying missiles on the border of Turkey and Syria in 2012. https://www.history.com/.amp/news/nato-article-5-meaning-history-world-war-2#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

NATO is not limited by Article 5. It is first and foremost a defensive alliance.

[hack89]

17. But it is not automatic as you implied

When you consider all the conflict various NATO countries have been involved in where article 5 was not invoked it is pretty clear your original post was incorrect.

[SunSeeker]

20. I didn't post the "original post." I was correcting your misleading post.

Article 5 does not act as a "limitation."

[hack89]

23. It was not an "outright violation of NATO"

That was your post and it was incorrect. NATO could get involved but Art 5 says they are not obligated to do so.

[SunSeeker]

24. That was not my post, that was berni_mccoy's. Look again hack89.

I was addressing your statement.

[hack89]

25. You are correct. My bad

But my post was a correct answer to his post.

[SunSeeker]

27. Your answer was misleading. NATO Article 5 is not a "limitation."

And even if not an explicit violation, telling the UK basically that they're on their own is a violation of the spirit of NATO. And makes us look like we're being assholes to one of our closest allies.

[hack89]

28. Ok. You win. Have nice evening. Nt

[Trenzalore]

7. That sure projects strength for the supposed negotiations you plan on having

[procon]

8. Fair weather friends indeed.

Trump and his minions are burning the bridges behind them and undoing centuries of mutual trust, friendship and joint aid.

How much longer will it be before our allies will not trust the US to be a reliable partner?

[Mr.Bill]

14. I think that's already happened. n/t

[LiberalFighter]

10. Could someone give him a yacht that takes him to Iran?

[Roy Rolling]

11. Moron

Last edited Mon Jul 22, 2019, 10:29 PM - Edit history (2)

The U.K. seized an Iranian ship because of pressure from the U.S. Then, Iran pays back the favor to the U.K. by seizing a British tanker.

And our response? “Sure, we got you into this. But now you’re on your own.

[TomVilmer]

31. Yep!

- How Trump's arch-hawk lured Britain into a dangerous trap to punish Iran.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/20/britain-lured-into-deadly-trap-on-iran-by-trump-hawk-john-bolton

[Marcuse]

12. "So the Brits think the trump administration is inept and clumsy. Well, we will show them."

[SunSeeker]

15. Pompeo you dillhole, UK ships are being attacked because the US breached it's Iran Agreement.

Pompeo, YOU and your Dear Leader created this mess. You threw away a perfectly functioning Iran Nuclear deal, all to spite Obama. That started the tit for tat with Iran that culminated in the UK ship seizure. You own this, Pompeo.

[Rene]

18. where did this a**hole come from?

[JohnnyRingo]

19. The US is the only country in the world with nuclear aircraft carriers.

The only one.

We need them because our currency is the Petro Dollar, the value of which depends largely on keeping that black gold flowing out of the Middle East to the rest of the globe. I guess this president doesn't see that as a priority anymore.

If OPEC switches to the Euro to afford protection from NATO, the US will see an economic crash never before seen in history. Move over Herbert Hoover, there's a new sheriff in town.

[Captain Zero]

21. sounds like he is repeating it exactly as Putin phoned it into them...nt

NT

[Vinca]

22. So much for NATO.

[napi21]

26. What a slime ball! All of our allies jumped on board to help us when the Towers were destroyed. I

don't remember ANYONE saying "the US has to defend it's own country". I don't believe we should immediately send our troops to fight Iran, but I sure would have preferred hearing "I've been talking with England and committed to help them in whatever they decide to do to counter Iran's confiscations."

[soryang]

29. This statement is intended for other countries

Bolton is in Asia trying to get allies to sign on to a "freedom of navigation coalition" in the Persian Gulf/ Gulf of Oman region. The US and UK are out front on provoking Iran and the fake disagreements are intended to drum up support for the anti-Iranian policies they've adopted.

[jpak]

30. Pompeo to UK - You Are On Your Own

Putin smiles.

Yup

[trof]

32. Yeah, fuck NATO.