ResGeoPol flags US strikes on vessels

The real story here is not a mystery strike caught by an OSINT account. It’s a declared U.S. maritime enforcement campaign that has now moved into direct attacks on named ships. On May 8, U.S. Central Command said American forces disabled two Iranian-flagged oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman after they tried to enter an Iranian port despite the ongoing blockade. Two days earlier, U.S. forces had already disabled a third tanker. ### What actually happened? CENTCOM said M/T Sea Star III and M/T Sevda were disabled on May 8 before they could enter an Iranian port on the Gulf of Oman. The U.S. said both were Iranian-flagged, unladen oil tankers, and said an F/A-18 Super Hornet from USS George H.W. Bush fired precision munitions into their smokestacks to stop them. (centcom.mil) ### Was this a one-off? No — and that’s the key thing people can miss if they only saw the clips. CENTCOM also said Iranian-flagged M/T Hasna was disabled on May 6 while trying to sail to an Iranian port. In that case, an F/A-18 from USS Abraham Lincoln used 20mm cannon fire to disable the ship’s rudder. (centcom.mil) ### Why are U.S. forces doing this? Because Washington formally announced a blockade of ships entering or leaving Iranian ports on April 13. The order was broad, but the fine print mattered: U.S. forces said they would not block normal transit through the Strait of Hormuz to non-Iranian ports. So the campaign is supposed to target Iran-bound or Iran-origin shipping, not shut the whole waterway to everyone. (centcom.mil) ### Why does that make these strikes different? Because this is a step beyond shadowing, hailing, or turning ships around. Early in the blockade, CENTCOM and outside reporting focused on redirected vessels and attempted evasions, including AIS spoofing — basically ships transmitting false identity or location data to muddy tracking. Hitting smokestacks and rudders is a much more kinetic form of enforcement. (centcom.mil) ### Where does ResGeoPol fit in? ResGeoPol seems to have surfaced footage and identifiers that pointed people toward incidents already consistent with the broader U.S. campaign. But the load-bearing facts here come from official statements and follow-on reporting: named vessels, dates, methods, and the legal-military frame of blockade enforcement. If you’re trying to figure out whether the clips imply a secret new war phase, turns out they don’t. (abcnews.com) They fit an announced pattern. ### Is this only about tankers? Not anymore. The maritime picture widened on May 7, when three U.S. destroyers transiting the Strait of Hormuz came under Iranian missile, drone, and small-boat fire. The U.S. then struck Iranian facilities, including sites at Bandar Abbas and Qeshm, which shows the blockade has bled into direct state-on-state military retaliation. (centcom.mil) ### Why should anyone outside the region care? Because Hormuz is not just a map label. It is the chokepoint for Gulf energy exports and a major artery for commercial shipping. A blockade that starts as selective enforcement can still raise insurance costs, deter traffic, and create room for miscalculation — especially once ship disabling, port strikes, and naval clashes all start happening in the same week. (cbsnews.com) ### Bottom line? The biggest takeaway is simple: the vessel strikes flagged online were real enough in substance, but they were not isolated mysteries. They were part of a declared U.S. blockade regime that has now escalated from interceptions to disabling ships by force — and that makes every new clip from the Gulf potentially market-moving, not just viral. (centcom.mil) (abcnews.com)