US Naval vessels harassed in International waters.

[DeepIron]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7175325.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/01/07/iran.us.navy/index.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0739039120080107

"I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes," the Iranians said in a radio transmission, according to the officials.

I'm not alarmist, but this kind of thing is really stupid, IMO. Tensions are already high, the Iranian government is confused, and Bush would dearly love to have the winter White House in Tehran. What is with these people? :damn:

I'm confused: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7170381.stm

[CCIP]

No, they're just trying to cook up some propaganda again. What they really want is for the US ships to get serious and dispatch them, and then go "LOOK AT THE BIG BULLY! BAD BUSH!". It's got less to do with their foreign policy and more with just getting an excuse to keep their population under control by maintaining the appearance of a constant threat hanging over them.

[Blacklight]

Yeah. Iran has had a nasty habit of pulling crap like this to try to give the US a black eye for YEARS.

"I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes,"
:rotfl:
I just might have to make this my battlecry when playing Dangerous Waters, Harpoon, or SH III (or any of my military games for that matter !):rotfl:

[Herr_Pete]

what is iran playing at. messing about with a frigate, cruiser and Destroyer. Taunting them. Bush will love an excuse for him to send america against Iran and all Iran is doign is inviting them.

[Chock]

'I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes' LMAO what's next? 'Somebody set us up the bomb! You have no chance to survive, make your time!' 'Take off every Zig for great justice!':rotfl:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Aybabtu.png

:D Chock

[Blacklight]

'I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes' LMAO what's next? 'Somebody set us up the bomb! You have no chance to survive, make your time!' 'Take off every Zig for great justice!

You know what you doing !! MOVE ZIG FOR GREAT JUSTICE !!!

Rofl... I'm so tempted to start using Fraps to reccord Dangerous Waters and SHIII footage to put to the "All Your Base" thing.

A little stoy. A long while ago there was this Japanese on-line battle game (I forget the name but it was a giant robot space shoot-em-up/RPG for PC). Some friends of mine and I got into it when it was still in beta. We formed a team, and all we did was talk in "All Your Base" speak to the other players.

[U49]

:hmm: Better do not dig into the radio archives about what "talk" was exchanged at certain opportunities between Warsaw Pact and NATO armed forces...

I would expect some seriously more irritating transmissions ... :hmm:

[August]

During an Army field exercise back in 82 we wrote terrible insults in Russian on huge banners and laid them out on top of our comms rigs. We knew their satellites would be looking down at us and we wanted to send the Kremlin our love...

[Wave Skipper]

As I recall the Twin Towers were under harbor authority. War of 1812 was about US sailors being pulled off of merchant ships by the Brits (or so the later story went), The war with Mexico did not involve the sea, only the imagined crossing of a river by Mexican troops. Back to the Civil War America fell into its normal form: the Union had been removing its troops from all its Southern forts, one by one until it came to Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor. Until that time all the northern states wanted to just allow the souther states to withdraw from the Union (as their right), but suddenly Lincoln decided to keep Fort Sumter. The southerners stupidly took the bait rather than just wait. The next big war - Spanish American War - the American warship Maine was supposedly blown up by unknown agents, Spain was blamed by mere suggestion of the American President. Modern research into the sunken ship shows that it was at worst an accident caused by a coal bunker fire. Next we have WWI. Everyone who studies this knows that the RMS Lusitania was carrying ammunition and that the Germans had posted a warning about it in the papers before it sailed. It was sunk in 1915, but was made the chief cause for war by 1917.

Then we come to Pearl Harbor. Likely you already know about the book and theory that FDR planned for it ahead of time thinking that Japanese torpedoes could not be used by planes in such shallow water. I don't take sides in this argument. But this much is known:

1. WHo attacked who first without a declaration of war? After Dec. 7th 1941 the whole US was buzzing with: "The'h dur'ty Japs attacked us without declaring war!" But by the late 1980s certain classified documents were released by the US government that showed that FDR and the US Government had ordered US fliers and had sent weapons and money to the Flying Tiger unit BEFORE THE WAR secretly! Even though this was denied at the time. These Flying Tiger pilots shot down many Japanese pilots WITH OUT A US DECLARATION OF WAR AGAINST JAPAN!
So who really attacked who first without declaring war??? The USA did.

2. The USA cut oil sales to Japan (Japan had been depending on the USA for 80% of its oil) and the USA cut steel too. Back in the early 70s Arab Oil Embargo, those who read Time Magazine would have read that the US was drawing up plans to invade Saudia Arabia to sieze the oil fields it needed to maintain itself. You don't slash a nations vital oil link - a life line - and not expect war.

3. The USA had already violated the neutrality act: "Shifting warships from a neutral United States to Britain was a flagrant violation of the neutrality obligations." http://www.apnotes.net/ch35.html

4. FDR had already launched an unofficial war against Germany by encouraging USA ships to attack German U-boats. Hitler ordered his U-boats to avoid conflict at all costs.

Who really attacked who first? Who really broke international laws first?

Korean War. This was not launched on the basis of the sea.

Vietnam War: It is now fairly proven and agreed that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a total fabrication created by the US so that President Johnston would have an excuse to start ramping up the Vietnam 'Police Action' to war levels.

1st Gulf War: not apparently caused by sea action - was always a war of choice - unless you recall that Iraq supposedly accidently launched two French made Exocet missiles that all but destroyed the USS Stark on May 17, 1987.

Bombing in the Balkans, another war (a small war-let) of choice.

Great Generations Long War Against a war tactic (Terror): Buildings run by the New York Port authority were destroyed by planes using strange physics and unexplained lack of US defenses.

First Major Battle of this was: Afghanistan

Second Major Battle of Great War - 2nd Gulf War: this time admitted to be a true war of choice.

New War: Upcoming - Attack on Iran (not part of the Great Generations Long War Against a war tactic (Terror) since Iran had nothing to do with 9-11 nor could lies be invented to make this appear so, as had been done to Iraq.

Likely fuse: small Iranian boots will be accused of scratching the paint on some US ships.

:arrgh!:

[Molon Labe]

Does anyone know where the rest of the Tarawa ESG was while the 3 tin cans were playing with our Iranian friends? Is it normal for ESGs to get split up during their deployment?

[baggygreen]

They were probably sitting a bit furthur outside the gulf, i cant see the tarawa getting through the strait without being harrassed on a newsworthy-scale

Like someone already said, they're trying to provoke the US into attacking them so they can claim they're the victims and try to garner international support, including the left-wingers who will jump on the "warmonger!" bandwagon.

Funny thing is, it'd work, too/

[Blacklight]

4. FDR had already launched an unofficial war against Germany by encouraging USA ships to attack German U-boats. Hitler ordered his U-boats to avoid conflict at all costs.


Technically, FDR didn't tell US ships to ATTACK German U-Boats. That came after the war started (or of course unless the U-Boats opened fire on the US ship directly, it could defend itself).

He did a sly little thing to get around this so that the US wouldn't be breaking it's neutrality. He told US ships that if they found a U-Boat, they should track, persue it, stay on top of it, and radio it's location to the British so the British ASW ships would show up and actually engage, depth charge, and sink the U-boat. In this way, the US could claim that it was not violating neutrality by not ACTUALLY DOING the attacking and sinking of the U-boat.

Nice little loop hole in the treaty.

[Skybird]

Stupid, unnecessary, unlogical.

[Blacklight]

Call it illogical and stuped.. but that's what they did. US ships were under orders to not engage the U-Boats, but to radio the positions of U-boats to the British. This makes them a part of the attack in my book, but I guess this was a little loop hole that kept us still neutral, but still friends with Great Britain as well.

[baggygreen]

I think sky meant the iranian actions...;) just a guess

[Blacklight]

Oh. Agreed. VERY illogical and stuped. hehehehe:D

[RickC Sniper]

Calling it a case of "misidentification" is absurd. I agree with illogical.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22537199/

Iran's response
But Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammed Ali Hosseini played down the incident, suggesting it was an issue of misidentification. He did not comment on the U.S. claims of the Iranian boats’ actions.
“That is something normal that takes place every now and then for each party, and it (the problem) is settled after identification of the two parties,” he told the state news agency IRNA.
The incident was “similar to past ones” that were resolved “once the two sides recognized each other,” he said.

[JSF]

As I recall the Twin Towers were under harbor authority. War of 1812 was about US sailors being pulled off of merchant ships by the Brits (or so the later story went), The war with Mexico did not involve the sea, only the imagined crossing of a river by Mexican troops. Back to the Civil War America fell into its normal form: the Union had been removing its troops from all its Southern forts, one by one until it came to Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor. Until that time all the northern states wanted to just allow the souther states to withdraw from the Union (as their right), but suddenly Lincoln decided to keep Fort Sumter. The southerners stupidly took the bait rather than just wait. The next big war - Spanish American War - the American warship Maine was supposedly blown up by unknown agents, Spain was blamed by mere suggestion of the American President. Modern research into the sunken ship shows that it was at worst an accident caused by a coal bunker fire. Next we have WWI. Everyone who studies this knows that the RMS Lusitania was carrying ammunition and that the Germans had posted a warning about it in the papers before it sailed. It was sunk in 1915, but was made the chief cause for war by 1917.

Then we come to Pearl Harbor. Likely you already know about the book and theory that FDR planned for it ahead of time thinking that Japanese torpedoes could not be used by planes in such shallow water. I don't take sides in this argument. But this much is known:

1. WHo attacked who first without a declaration of war? After Dec. 7th 1941 the whole US was buzzing with: "The'h dur'ty Japs attacked us without declaring war!" But by the late 1980s certain classified documents were released by the US government that showed that FDR and the US Government had ordered US fliers and had sent weapons and money to the Flying Tiger unit BEFORE THE WAR secretly! Even though this was denied at the time. These Flying Tiger pilots shot down many Japanese pilots WITH OUT A US DECLARATION OF WAR AGAINST JAPAN!
So who really attacked who first without declaring war??? The USA did.

2. The USA cut oil sales to Japan (Japan had been depending on the USA for 80% of its oil) and the USA cut steel too. Back in the early 70s Arab Oil Embargo, those who read Time Magazine would have read that the US was drawing up plans to invade Saudia Arabia to sieze the oil fields it needed to maintain itself. You don't slash a nations vital oil link - a life line - and not expect war.

3. The USA had already violated the neutrality act: "Shifting warships from a neutral United States to Britain was a flagrant violation of the neutrality obligations." http://www.apnotes.net/ch35.html

4. FDR had already launched an unofficial war against Germany by encouraging USA ships to attack German U-boats. Hitler ordered his U-boats to avoid conflict at all costs.

Who really attacked who first? Who really broke international laws first?

Korean War. This was not launched on the basis of the sea.

Vietnam War: It is now fairly proven and agreed that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a total fabrication created by the US so that President Johnston would have an excuse to start ramping up the Vietnam 'Police Action' to war levels.

1st Gulf War: not apparently caused by sea action - was always a war of choice - unless you recall that Iraq supposedly accidently launched two French made Exocet missiles that all but destroyed the USS Stark on May 17, 1987.

Bombing in the Balkans, another war (a small war-let) of choice.

Great Generations Long War Against a war tactic (Terror): Buildings run by the New York Port authority were destroyed by planes using strange physics and unexplained lack of US defenses.

First Major Battle of this was: Afghanistan

Second Major Battle of Great War - 2nd Gulf War: this time admitted to be a true war of choice.

New War: Upcoming - Attack on Iran (not part of the Great Generations Long War Against a war tactic (Terror) since Iran had nothing to do with 9-11 nor could lies be invented to make this appear so, as had been done to Iraq.

Likely fuse: small Iranian boots will be accused of scratching the paint on some US ships.

:arrgh!:


LMAOOOOOOOOOO...........:lol: :lol: :lol: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Enigma]

One thing is for sure. The fact that their are not Iranian boats screeching from the depths in a ruptured mess shows the proffesionalism of the US Navy.

[Enigma]

Oh, and, some of you smoke crack.

Thanks,

[swifty]

There is allot more to this story than we are being told. Firs you do not charge at a US DDG, in the Middle East, Say I'm going to blow you up, unless you have a death wish. Especially after the Cole. The Nave suspects they were Iran SF so they would be to valuable to be suicide bombers. I suspect Iran was preforming submarine maneuvers or installing sonar/espionage devices and needed the US ships to ship change attention/change course. The boats dropped whit boxes in plain view in front the path of the task force. From a tactical pint of view this makes no sense. Luckily cooler head prevailed.:|\\

[baggygreen]

One other interesting point that says to me the Iranians are full of sh!t in this case is the comment "as soon as the vessels are recognised everything is good again".

Who else but the US would send a destroyer, frigate and cruiser into the gulf? they're some big bloody ships, you don't need to be 200 yards from them to ID them....

[mapuc]

The next harassement, would be when the iranian scrambler about 50-60 jetfighters and send them toward the Carrier, that are stationed in the gulf and just before the innerzone is reached they return back to their bases again.

Markus

[Zachstar]

Drunk Drunk double Drunk... No screw that. Its got to be the happy medicine they are taking.

That isn't courage. Thats thinking the ships are giant happy whales that can find them with uber sonar.

I just found it amazing that they did not eat several thousand rounds and a round of MK-48s

[sonar732]

I haven't seen any reports on exactly how close they were, but more than likely the Navy would've used the 5 inch guns to take them out. On another note...President Bush during his press conference today labeled it "a provocative act".

Cooler heads prevailed has nothing to do with it. The SOP was about to be enforced as the US Navy was about ready to fire as to protect their ships. The Iranians probably saw the 5 inch guns trained on them and thought...ok...we got their attention, now...let's leave..like quickly.

I also agree that it's a way for the Iranians to push some buttons on how the US is a provocative country themselves.

[Skybird]

I think sky meant the iranian actions...;) just a guess
:yep: ;)

Judging by the image I get from this report alone and without having the details, I even would have answered with more display of aggression, no matter global public opinion going amok. Probably no Iranian boat would have made it back to harbour - with me having had a word in it.

It's about establishing a clear communication code. The incident with those british sailors operating in a rubber boat outside the combat range of their FF or DD and getting abudcted obviously messed up comms with Iran a bit. So one needs to redefine the meaning of some vocabulary.

[Zachstar]

They have a Kilo. Had they wanted to scare people they ought to have approached and surfaced close enough to safely moon the ships. (Ala that scene in K-19)

Had we opened fire on those speedboats it could have led to an air invasion leading to the deaths of hundreds of their countrymen and the destruction of their Air and Navy forces.

So they ought to be jailed by their .gov

[mapuc]

They have a Kilo. Had they wanted to scare people they ought to have approached and surfaced close enough to safely moon the ships. (Ala that scene in K-19)

Had we opened fire on those speedboats it could have led to an air invasion leading to the deaths of hundreds of their countrymen and the destruction of their Air and Navy forces.

So they ought to be jailed by their .gov

The army would not even sneeze, without any permission from the iranian government.

Markus

[Zachstar]

So why is the Navy going nuts then?

Any major attack will start in the AIR not the sea. This is not WW1 here.

[baggygreen]

Firstly the Kilo will never surface in the face of the US - if they do that, it gives a confirmed location which they can then be tracked much easier from.

Second, the navy worries because its a small area of water n the iranian rep. guards have a helluva lotta boats. they dropped white boxes this time.... next time they drop mines. it only takes 1 mine to wreck a BIG ship.

[CCIP]

Here's some footage that was released of the incident. Certainly doesn't tell me much except that those suckers were close :p
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=02f_1199833174

[Skybird]

Here's some footage that was released of the incident. Certainly doesn't tell me much except that those suckers were close :p
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=02f_1199833174
Too close. there is one short perpsective shown, where you see the rail fo the US ship from whose deck the video was taken, and behind it the open sea with one of the boats - looks VERY close in that perspective. Much too close, considering the nature of relations between both nations. Taking such a risk after past experiences with the RGs sounds unacceptable to me, even more so since they are no offcial navy, but an elite of fanatics, and an army inside the army, and even a state inside the state - you can never say that they are under control of the official policy-makers.

On the video site I also saw a link to a message saying that on last monday two F-18 have crashed in the gulf. Nothing on it in the media here, or in the places I use to visit. Although yesterday I was away all day long.

[Oberon]

Cool heads on those US warships, I'd have put those speedboats on the bottom well before they got to that kind of range. Particularly after the Cole. Kudos to those US Skimmers.

Snag is, we can't do anything in return to Iran without them screaming 'bully' and bringing the entire world down on the US and UK. Gotta love the media, bout time they woke up and realised this ain't Cowboys and Cossacks any more. :nope:

[Oberon]

On the video site I also saw a link to a message saying that on last monday two F-18 have crashed in the gulf. Nothing on it in the media here, or in the places I use to visit. Although yesterday I was away all day long.

http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=34212

[Sea Demon]

Snag is, we can't do anything in return to Iran without them screaming 'bully' and bringing the entire world down on the US and UK. Gotta love the media, bout time they woke up and realised this ain't Cowboys and Cossacks any more. :nope:

Rules of Engagement may need to be changed again. I'm glad this didn't amount to real action, but no doubt the Iranians are trying to learn how we react. And how long it takes to react. If we continue to keep the same ROE or operate in the same posture, their intel probe of our SAG's will be helpful to them. We need to change the game plan. Hopefully, we've got people doing this right now.

[Foxtrot]

Now we should punish them. We should rename "Persian Gulf" to "Gulf of Bush"

[sonar732]

Now we should punish them. We should rename "Persian Gulf" to "Gulf of Bush"

That is just plain ignorant.

Do you forget Operation Earnest Will, Operation Praying Mantis, and Operation Prime Chance?

[TteFAboB]

Here's some footage that was released of the incident. Certainly doesn't tell me much except that those suckers were close :p
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=02f_1199833174

Thanks for the link. :up:

[Wave Skipper]

Normally I would have thought such a video was faked - but the videos combined with Iran's statements made me trust the films - at first. I found it hard to believe that the US ships did not fire. But since Iran did not deny the story - other than to say that there was no danger my next question was why didn't the US ships fire. Isn't this what Bush has been hoping for for several years? And what was going through Iran's head? As an American I found myself saying to the US ships as I watched it: "Shoot! Shoot!"

The suggestion that the Iranians were trying to cover for something else they did not want the Americans to see does not entirely explain all the events seen on the video. The small boats did not need to make the verbal message threats that they did nor come as close as they did to divert American attention. Why would Iran seek to force the US to attack its boats and risk giving Bush his excuse to attack?

There are so many possible reasons:
1. Iran was merely testing Bush's resolve and real intent. Thus, if the US ships had taken out the speed boats Iran would not have responded but just left everything hanging, but it would know what Bush's resolve was - especially since the event took a fairly long time and Bush was no doubt in the loop before it was over.

2. The main part of the event was to simply track US radio traffic during the incident to see how the command structure would show up and display itself.

3. The events seen on the video are faked. The Iranian boats did get near the US ships, but not near enough to trigger a US attack response. Iran knows their boats did get a bit near, but not that near. Thus, Iran answers the news headlines by saying in effect: 'What is the US talking about - nothing dangerous or serious took place' (but in saying this they seem to support the US claim that something did happen). Then as the world stews over all this, 24 hours later the US intel is able to produce a film of boats making near runs at 3 US ships (not hard to create) and the video has a silly sounding dubed in voice making wacky threats at the US ships. THIS now prepares the world to believe that in the NEXT incident - the one where fireworks will take place - is indeed a repeat of Iranian aggression; for Bush has now seemingly depicted to the world that the US was willing to bend over backwards to avoid a war, but will be justified the next time if our ships shoot.

MOST UNLIKELY:
4. That Iran was sitting ready with its missiles in the event that their boats were fired upon.

[joea]

Then we come to Pearl Harbor. Likely you already know about the book and theory that FDR planned for it ahead of time thinking that Japanese torpedoes could not be used by planes in such shallow water. I don't take sides in this argument. But this much is known:

1. WHo attacked who first without a declaration of war? After Dec. 7th 1941 the whole US was buzzing with: "The'h dur'ty Japs attacked us without declaring war!" But by the late 1980s certain classified documents were released by the US government that showed that FDR and the US Government had ordered US fliers and had sent weapons and money to the Flying Tiger unit BEFORE THE WAR secretly! Even though this was denied at the time. These Flying Tiger pilots shot down many Japanese pilots WITH OUT A US DECLARATION OF WAR AGAINST JAPAN!
So who really attacked who first without declaring war??? The USA did.

2. The USA cut oil sales to Japan (Japan had been depending on the USA for 80% of its oil) and the USA cut steel too. Back in the early 70s Arab Oil Embargo, those who read Time Magazine would have read that the US was drawing up plans to invade Saudia Arabia to sieze the oil fields it needed to maintain itself. You don't slash a nations vital oil link - a life line - and not expect war.

3. The USA had already violated the neutrality act: "Shifting warships from a neutral United States to Britain was a flagrant violation of the neutrality obligations." http://www.apnotes.net/ch35.html

4. FDR had already launched an unofficial war against Germany by encouraging USA ships to attack German U-boats. Hitler ordered his U-boats to avoid conflict at all costs.

Who really attacked who first? Who really broke international laws first?



Not taking sides? More BS from you buddy, the Flying Tigers first saw combat on December 20th, 1941 AFTER Pearl Harbor. Opps first point shot donw.

Second, the oil embargo was in response to the Japanese aggresion against China, oh yes Japan started shooting first, they just were shooting Asians not Americans at first.

Oh and the US had commited to helping Great Britain and other victims of Nazi aggression (which Japan had allied with don't forget) including the USSR. Good or bad, I don't know, but it was the Axis that had initiated actual hostilities and certainly could be seen as more threatening than the other cases you mentioned.

Whatever, the FSM will bless you anyway.

[AntEater]

1. Those little boats look mighty dangerous. Unless they're EMBs (explosive motor boats) and actually ram the US ships, there's nothing these things could to to endanger a US warship. RPGs could do some topsides damage and take out radars, kill or wound some personell on deck, but nothing more.
And if they are EMBs, in that sea state a modern DDG is about as fast as such a small boat, so they would have problems hitting one.

2. These things happened every day in the cold war.
I recently read an interesting article about west german navy operations in the Baltic and contacts with warsaw pact vessels. Soviets were quite friendly most of the time unless you showed up near Leningrad, but mostly they rendered passing honours and often sent friendly messages via blinker or flag. Poles were not friendly at all and the Volksmarine was about as friendly as the Iranians are to the US.
A good deal of insulting took place between the two german navies and such speedboat "attacks" were an almost daily occurance. And GDR speedboats, contrary to those iranians DID carry heavyweight torpedoes which could kill a warship.

So that is just the usual behaviour between two navies with strained relations.

But the "you will explode in a few minutes" is surely a classic.
:rotfl:

[sonar732]

1. Those little boats look mighty dangerous. Unless they're EMBs (explosive motor boats) and actually ram the US ships, there's nothing these things could to to endanger a US warship. RPGs could do some topsides damage and take out radars, kill or wound some personell on deck, but nothing more.
And if they are EMBs, in that sea state a modern DDG is about as fast as such a small boat, so they would have problems hitting one.

USS Cole?????

[Onkel Neal]

But the "you will explode in a few minutes" is surely a classic.
:rotfl:

No kidding! :lol: Man, I would have given the order to open fire and clear the deck immediately.

There is the question of the validity of the videotape, though.

[AntEater]

USS Cole was in port, a stationary target.
At high sea, I suppose Cole would've just left the EMB in her wake.
Actually the attack was to be filmed by a terrorist remaining on the other side of the port, but he fell asleep!
EMBs are not effective against moving targets, especially at rough seas.

I would've replied "yeah, and we fart in your general direction!", but that is maybe reserved for the french navy
:rotfl:

[Abd_von_Mumit]

I would've replied "yeah, and we fart in your general direction!", but that is maybe reserved for the french navy
:rotfl:
At most! The best tactics in such a situation (in my opinion) is to stay alerted and pretend you don't actually give a ****. :) Like fighting trolls on Forums. Broadcasting the message "our ships were starting undertaking appropriate measures" (or similar) is (in my opinion) a sign that US is willing to engage with Iran. And I wish Iranians the best if Iran is attacked (and if Iran attacks first, I wish them not so good :) ).

Here, in Europe, we have similar "provocations" almost on a weekly basis. The most popular way of testing enemy patience is sending a squadron of strategic bombers as close to enemy's boarder, as possible – Russia did it again a week or so ago. And what? And nothing, they send bombers, we send jet fighters, the pilots get some experience and after that all go back home to eat a pizza, pierogis or whatever.

Actually I strongly doubt the video and the voice are true. It would be an absolute absurd to provoke anyone like this. And I know preparing such a fake 'facts' is like farting twice for G.W. Bush (if in doubt, inspect Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, Iran's nuclear bomb programme - lol).

I almost totally agree with Wave Skipper in what he said.

[baggygreen]

Yep Abd von mumit, the whole event is a fabrication...

thats why iran has even acknowledged something happened. cos they're in on the joke as well...:down:

[RickC Sniper]

USS Cole was in port, a stationary target.
At high sea, I suppose Cole would've just left the EMB in her wake.
Actually the attack was to be filmed by a terrorist remaining on the other side of the port, but he fell asleep!
EMBs are not effective against moving targets, especially at rough seas.

I would've replied "yeah, and we fart in your general direction!", but that is maybe reserved for the french navy
:rotfl:


Those speedboats look pretty fast. Why do you think one loaded with explosives would be ineffective?

I think the video is authentic considering the Iranian government's response to it.

[U49]

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleinkampfmittel

sorry, non-german-reading folks; I couldn't find any comparable english translation ... :( (maybe someone else has more luck?)

But the idea is ...Q: Did it work ...? A: Nope!

[Blacklight]

"I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes !"

"Well that's dirty !! Do you guys watch too much porn in your navy ?"

[U49]

Here, in Europe, we have similar "provocations" almost on a weekly basis. The most popular way of testing enemy patience is sending a squadron of strategic bombers as close to enemy's boarder, as possible – Russia did it again a week or so ago. And what? And nothing, they send bombers, we send jet fighters, the pilots get some experience and after that all go back home to eat a pizza, pierogis or whatever.


:hmm: I thought it was gone.... *sigh* can you point us to some more material about this? (in english would be best, here ... :yep:)

[Wave Skipper]

:cry:
I sense your anger young Skywalker....look, here is a light-saber on the chair beside me. Good you see it. Go ahead, pick it up. Give in to your hate and destroy me young Skywalker. Embrace the power of the Dark Side.

"Second, the oil embargo was in response to the Japanese aggresion against China, oh yes Japan started shooting first, they just were shooting Asians not Americans at first."

You know, that was what the Arabs said when they cut off the oil shipments to the USA during the 1973 war. American aggression. But that did not stop the US Joint Chiefs of Staff preparing a new update for the President for the US invasion of the Arab oil fields in case the trouble was not resolved. That was what Time Magazine later ran a story about after the thing blew over. By the way where were you in 73?

But you are right about the Flying Tigers - my mistake. I had gotten that idea from Saburo Sakai's book that America was fighting before Dec. 7th. But you know I read that like 3 decades ago and I could be wrong about that - I'll have to find that book and check - years play tricks on memory (or the universe changes from time to time). What really put the idea into my head was a report by Paul Harvey back in 1989 on the radio where someone had used the Freedom of Information Act to get secret FDR records of the 40s. Basically somehow FDR was supplying the Chinese with weapons and from what I remember also US volenteers BEFORE WWII. But yes, it appears I am wrong about the Flying Tigers....hmmm I'll have to research that....

And I suppose you also found proof that the Union was trying to return Fort Sumter even as the Confederate artillery was beginning their shelling. ANd I suppose you have proof that Mexico's army did cross into US territory. Or that Spain did sink the Maine! Or that the Vietnamese did attack the US Navy and start the war? Or that it was LEGAL for a neutral country to hand over DDs to the Brits? Or that even though FDR ran on a platform of keeping the US out of the war - he secretly always intended to get in the war?

You know Joea-Skywalker, anger can blind one to truth. Fear leads to anger and anger leads to hate and hate leads to the Dark Side. However it does give one much energy - easier than trying to be happy and kind, because it is so much easier to get angry than it is to be upbeat.

Now as for taking sides, did I say I thought it was wrong for the USA to take on Japan and Nazi Germany? Even though my Grand parrents were anti war in 1940, my family like all the other moo cows fell into place by 42. I lost a cousin (much older than I - we had a huge family) to the Japs. They killed him in a POW camp. But heck I don't hate the Japanese and Germans. I think it was a good idea we took out Hitler before he died and a nazi more talented took over and made Germany really dangerous. I'd have hated to grow up in a world where the US faced off with a nuclear armed Third Reich instead of the nuclear armed Stalin-slave-society. (hmmm... I could be wrong there - the Cold War killed more of my family and is said to have killed 125 million people worldwide).

Yes, Japanese AGRESSION was almost as bad as that of Europe in the 19th century. You seem blind to the so-called like sins of Europe and America of that earlier period. You seem a bit robotic. But I mean that in a nice way. :) I mean that in the way Einstien spoke of when he described how in his youth he saw soldiers marching like robots and how this caused him to cry. :cry:

But I really could care less in that way - cause young Einstien was not an objective realist when he shed those tears. Later would become a scientist - and stop trying to see everything from subjective impulses. Mostly.

So you were wrong about me. Since my early days when I began seeking the Way of Zen, and even when I later became a preacher for a small bible banging cult, and then later when I broke with that and became a simple deist (actually a complex one who worships Ptah), I have tried to strive toward synthetic objective realism. I say synthetic, because humans are not built to be objective. They are built to eat, drink, f, and sleep. I would suggest you to seek the way of Zen....Satori - its the next best thing to objective realism. But yes, I am subjective - for only one who has not objective realism would declare subjectivity to be unlawful.

SInce I am dying - doctors tell me I may live 2 years - I am trying harder to strive toward objective realism. Trying to see things from the myriad quantum possiblities that are and not just as I WISH THEY WERE. And I combine this with my old philosophy taken from the days when I tried to leave society to live in the wilderness (early 70s) as I once posted on my SH3 VMOD site:

I am not a sympathizer of Nazis or the SS. It is not my intention to condone what they did during Hilter’s regime. I view this political persuasion as archaic history of the last century with little relevance to our present time. Since I am personally, by philosophy, into primitivism, considering myself to be an individualistic savage, I view civilization in general as a malfunction of the biosphere and an ill symptom of the overpopulated human specie. Obviously, therefore, I would not have been one to surrender myself to the Nazi leadership principle and its inherited Prussian militarism.

blah blah and blah

[Wave Skipper]

Iran seems to have woke up to the fact that it was taken to the cleaners. Apparenlty they claimed the video was fabricated. I must admit the voices of the so-called Iranian attackers seemed quite silly. Not that any of the story made much sense. Iran had little to gain from a war. Of course there are guys in any military who go out of bounds.

In any event Iran denies the video as real truth, and it could very well be that the US cooked a normal incident into being a big one. Iran stupidly fell into the trap by simply replying yesterday that the incident was nothing dangerous. Only today did they realize the trap they had fell into by admitting an incident at all.

If any one wants some really cheap property I have some in Iran I could sell you...how about a bridge that is not long to last in this world?

[Abd_von_Mumit]

Here, in Europe, we have similar "provocations" almost on a weekly basis. The most popular way of testing enemy patience is sending a squadron of strategic bombers as close to enemy's boarder, as possible – Russia did it again a week or so ago. And what? And nothing, they send bombers, we send jet fighters, the pilots get some experience and after that all go back home to eat a pizza, pierogis or whatever.

:hmm: I thought it was gone.... *sigh* can you point us to some more material about this? (in english would be best, here ... :yep:)
Sure, here you got a BBC news from Sep last year (not the latest incident, but the scenario is the same): http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6981541.stm
It's the first hit after googling "Russian bombers Norway", followed by many other.


Wave Skipper: We are all dying, it's only the matter of how long it takes for an individual. As a forgotten (by me) philosopher said, the only reasonable effect of one's enlightement is a strong wish to commit suicide. I wish you health, and if that's not possible, I wish you enlightement.

Long live reason and sense!

[joea]

:cry:
I sense your anger young Skywalker....look, here is a light-saber on the chair beside me. Good you see it. Go ahead, pick it up. Give in to your hate and destroy me young Skywalker. Embrace the power of the Dark Side.

"Second, the oil embargo was in response to the Japanese aggresion against China, oh yes Japan started shooting first, they just were shooting Asians not Americans at first."

You know, that was what the Arabs said when they cut off the oil shipments to the USA during the 1973 war. American aggression. But that did not stop the US Joint Chiefs of Staff preparing a new update for the President for the US invasion of the Arab oil fields in case the trouble was not resolved. That was what Time Magazine later ran a story about after the thing blew over. By the way where were you in 73?

But you are right about the Flying Tigers - my mistake. I had gotten that idea from Saburo Sakai's book that America was fighting before Dec. 7th. But you know I read that like 3 decades ago and I could be wrong about that - I'll have to find that book and check - years play tricks on memory (or the universe changes from time to time). What really put the idea into my head was a report by Paul Harvey back in 1989 on the radio where someone had used the Freedom of Information Act to get secret FDR records of the 40s. Basically somehow FDR was supplying the Chinese with weapons and from what I remember also US volenteers BEFORE WWII. But yes, it appears I am wrong about the Flying Tigers....hmmm I'll have to research that....

And I suppose you also found proof that the Union was trying to return Fort Sumter even as the Confederate artillery was beginning their shelling. ANd I suppose you have proof that Mexico's army did cross into US territory. Or that Spain did sink the Maine! Or that the Vietnamese did attack the US Navy and start the war? Or that it was LEGAL for a neutral country to hand over DDs to the Brits? Or that even though FDR ran on a platform of keeping the US out of the war - he secretly always intended to get in the war?

You know Joea-Skywalker, anger can blind one to truth. Fear leads to anger and anger leads to hate and hate leads to the Dark Side. However it does give one much energy - easier than trying to be happy and kind, because it is so much easier to get angry than it is to be upbeat.

Now as for taking sides, did I say I thought it was wrong for the USA to take on Japan and Nazi Germany? Even though my Grand parrents were anti war in 1940, my family like all the other moo cows fell into place by 42. I lost a cousin (much older than I - we had a huge family) to the Japs. They killed him in a POW camp. But heck I don't hate the Japanese and Germans. I think it was a good idea we took out Hitler before he died and a nazi more talented took over and made Germany really dangerous. I'd have hated to grow up in a world where the US faced off with a nuclear armed Third Reich instead of the nuclear armed Stalin-slave-society. (hmmm... I could be wrong there - the Cold War killed more of my family and is said to have killed 125 million people worldwide).

Yes, Japanese AGRESSION was almost as bad as that of Europe in the 19th century. You seem blind to the so-called like sins of Europe and America of that earlier period. You seem a bit robotic. But I mean that in a nice way. :) I mean that in the way Einstien spoke of when he described how in his youth he saw soldiers marching like robots and how this caused him to cry. :cry:

But I really could care less in that way - cause young Einstien was not an objective realist when he shed those tears. Later would become a scientist - and stop trying to see everything from subjective impulses. Mostly.

So you were wrong about me. Since my early days when I began seeking the Way of Zen, and even when I later became a preacher for a small bible banging cult, and then later when I broke with that and became a simple deist (actually a complex one who worships Ptah), I have tried to strive toward synthetic objective realism. I say synthetic, because humans are not built to be objective. They are built to eat, drink, f, and sleep. I would suggest you to seek the way of Zen....Satori - its the next best thing to objective realism. But yes, I am subjective - for only one who has not objective realism would declare subjectivity to be unlawful.

SInce I am dying - doctors tell me I may live 2 years - I am trying harder to strive toward objective realism. Trying to see things from the myriad quantum possiblities that are and not just as I WISH THEY WERE. And I combine this with my old philosophy taken from the days when I tried to leave society to live in the wilderness (early 70s) as I once posted on my SH3 VMOD site:

I am not a sympathizer of Nazis or the SS. It is not my intention to condone what they did during Hilter’s regime. I view this political persuasion as archaic history of the last century with little relevance to our present time. Since I am personally, by philosophy, into primitivism, considering myself to be an individualistic savage, I view civilization in general as a malfunction of the biosphere and an ill symptom of the overpopulated human specie. Obviously, therefore, I would not have been one to surrender myself to the Nazi leadership principle and its inherited Prussian militarism.

blah blah and blah



WS piss off with your patronising ****. The Arab Embargo and WWII are two different things....I see you are twisting definitions almost as much as the "dark forces" you accuse. The Arabs didn't speak of US aggression but of assistance to Isreal I believe. They were within their rights to do so, as much as the US in the 1930s.

WTF did you get I was condoning what the Europeans did in the 19th century? Nor did I say anything about the other "facts" you state to be true.

Forget debating, you only seem to enjoy throwing insults and sitting back in your so-called enlightened superiority over us poor sheep. I am sorry you are sick, but I can't condone your behaviour, arrogance or moral relativism.

The part in bold says it all, you are the one who is angry and who hates the human race.

[AntEater]

Those speedboats look pretty fast. Why do you think one loaded with explosives would be ineffective?

I think the video is authentic considering the Iranian government's response to it.
Not ineffective per se, but ineffective in that tactical situation.
Small battle units Kleinkampfmittel in German like EMBs, midget subs, frogmen and the likes are extremely effective against stationary targets but nearly useless against moving targets in open seas.
You see how these boats were working in quite moderate seas, while the destroyer remained steady?
These speedboats might have a theoretically higher top speed as an Arleigh Burke class DDG, but in the slightest swell, a large, fast ship will leave them behind.
If these Iranians were EMBs and they had moved in to attack, all the US captain would have to do was turn tail and order flank speed.
Gas turbine ships like a modern DDG accelerate very fast compared to even Diesels.
And even the wake of a DDG at flank speed might've given these boats some trouble.
Even if the boats were faster, it would've been only a few knots with the Iranians slowly catching up, giving the US commander time to reconsider the situation, maybe radio command and get official permission to fire.
Might sound not gung ho enough for some, but would be sensible. Like it or not, in today's globalized world, news travel so fast that in a "short of war" situation military forces have to be micromanaged. When the shooting starts, it is a different matter, but as long as it hasn't, cool heads should prevail.
Today, Captain Hornblower can't just capture a spanish man of war because he didn't know a peace treaty was signed and expect to get away with a sincere apology... ;)

Not to mention that it would be tactically totally useless from the iranian perspective to start a war like that.
And since the iranians have been using small battle forces in combat before, I suppose their commanders are well aware of tactics and limitations.

As I said, violating safe passage rules, Shouting insults over Megaphone or Radio and fake collision courses are all a well reharsed dance between navies with strained relations at least since the invention of the steam engine
:D

[Wave Skipper]

Perhaps you come from the dissing generation....I don't know. Why did you repeat my diatribe anyway? I didn't call you a liar even the second time and I never called you a name. But you did accuse me of that - first.

I sensed your anger. I still sense it.

So what do you think I feel about this Iranian event? Or the Japanese and Nazi events?

YOU KNOW - for a long time it has been stated by very wise men that if humans ignore hsitory they will be doomed to repeat it.

Now consdier what you stated about me bringing in older historical situations? What school did you say you attended?

In fact Joea at no time before you attacked me as a liar (BSing) did I ever address you or your ideas at all. Truth is, you jumped on my opinions and tried to crush them down - and all but told me to get out of here. You are not very nice since you picked the fight with me and I did not pick a fight with you.

[bradclark1]

They have been off the news for a while. They wanted to be back on the news. Be seen wagging the tail of the dog. Any publicity will do. Should never have reported on any of it. Just feeds them.

[Abd_von_Mumit]

Yep Abd von mumit, the whole event is a fabrication...

thats why iran has even acknowledged something happened. cos they're in on the joke as well...:down:
I never said it IS a fabrication, I said I strongly DOUBT it is true. I'll probably never know, so I can only guess, basing on previous experiences (like mentioned WoMD or nuclear bomb). It is only my OPINION and I do not try to pretend what I say is a fact, as I lack the power of creating big political reality. :)

And, as we allready know, Iran DID deny the "provocation". There is a huge gap between a "provocation" as described by US Navy and "inspection" as described by Iran. Somebody lies here and (im my OPINION) it's probably not the Iran.

[Skybird]

Put two frogman into such a boat, load it full with exlosives, hide it in a fjord, near a bottleneck in waterways. then ride the boats like a torpedo, have them lined up, and jump over board.

What weapon would be used against such boats? Gatling guns? I don't know. the gatlings probably get them, I assume, if they can catch up with incoming missiles. but if having the moment of surprise, or coming in from various directions simultaneously - who knows. Too many eventualities for my taste, that's why I would have ordered to open fire - earlier than just at below 200 m. In a potentially lethal confrontation, I would hate to react. I'd prefer to act.

[Wave Skipper]

The big financial boys are placing their oil future's bets that by the end of the year oil will be $200 per barrel.

[kiwi_2005]

ANyone read that one of a US aircraft carrier having an argument with a lighthouse:D The captain didn't know it was a lighthouse just told him to move out of the way as they were showign on radar and his taskforce was heading striaght for him. The LH responded with 'No you move out of the way'!. Didn't go down to well with the Captain so he went on to tell him this is the USS forgot the name Carrier with a taskforce of so and so ships i order you to move out of the way otherwise we will take action. Reply: This is a lighthouse.

[Gorduz]

Yes Kiwi I have read the joke, funny :). I agree with AntEater, this is standard procedure and when I was in the navy we practiced on these situations alot. For example to stop a ship you have to turn in front of it so that the ship is coming from left according to your referenceframe. If you keep turning in to him he has to turn as well since you have the right of passage ;). And the right way to remove this threat would be as you said to just give them a huge wake and make them flip over. Then no one can blame you for beeing agressive ("hey I tried to run away ;)" ).

[RickC Sniper]

Put two frogman into such a boat, load it full with exlosives, hide it in a fjord, near a bottleneck in waterways. then ride the boats like a torpedo, have them lined up, and jump over board.

What weapon would be used against such boats? Gatling guns? I don't know. the gatlings probably get them, I assume, if they can catch up with incoming missiles. but if having the moment of surprise, or coming in from various directions simultaneously - who knows. Too many eventualities for my taste, that's why I would have ordered to open fire - earlier than just at below 200 m. In a potentially lethal confrontation, I would hate to react. I'd prefer to act.

That was my line of thought. Or dropping "boxes" or a possible bomb in their path........making the ships zig to avoid them and then have numerous of those speedy boats coming in from various directions.

[Sea Demon]

That was my line of thought. Or dropping "boxes" or a possible bomb in their path........making the ships zig to avoid them and then have numerous of those speedy boats coming in from various directions.
I only hope this type of conversation is going on in the halls of the top naval brass. Were these Iranian boats conducting a dry run? Testing tactics maybe?

[TwistedFemur]

I wonder if those white boxes they dumped in the path of the U.S. warships where so they could get a range for future use.

Or maybe some sort of recording device

just a wondering

[Zayphod]

Calling it a case of "misidentification" is absurd. I agree with illogical.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22537199/

Iran's response
But Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammed Ali Hosseini played down the incident, suggesting it was an issue of misidentification. He did not comment on the U.S. claims of the Iranian boats’ actions.
“That is something normal that takes place every now and then for each party, and it (the problem) is settled after identification of the two parties,” he told the state news agency IRNA.
The incident was “similar to past ones” that were resolved “once the two sides recognized each other,” he said.

This guy just pinned, and then broke, the needle on my BS meter.
Someone send him a shovel.
And a bill for a new BS meter.

[sonar732]

It's opportunities of watching video like this in which I wish I had my DSL back instead of 28.8kbs max dial up. Before someone tries to troubleshoot, I live in the middle of no where 7 miles from the nearest town.

[SubSuck]

LOL! I love that quote. "I'm coming at you, you will explode in a couple of minutes."

[baggygreen]

It's opportunities of watching video like this in which I wish I had my DSL back instead of 28.8kbs max dial up. Before someone tries to troubleshoot, I live in the middle of no where 7 miles from the nearest town.Have you tried upgrading to a 56.6 k modem....??:rotfl: sorry couldnt resist!

[Stealth Hunter]

One thing is for sure. The fact that their are not Iranian boats screeching from the depths in a ruptured mess shows the proffesionalism of the US Navy.

"Professionalism" isn't exactly the word I'd use considering the Americans are losing to a rabble of Islamic extremists lacking body armor, tanks, and jets.:rotfl:

Iran is more professional than the terrorists, too. Assuming they did go to war, I'd doubt these generals Bush has put into office could do much more than sit back and wait for the sequel to Operation Iraqi Freedom (thousands dead, wounded, and maimed over years and years).

He's playing a dangerous game with these people, and I doubt he REALLY knows what he's going up against...

[August]

He's playing a dangerous game with these people, and I doubt he REALLY knows what he's going up against...

Bah. Iran is not a challenge to us unless we allow it to be. The Navy should have blown them little boats right out of the water and shot the pieces again before they splashed down.

[Stealth Hunter]

And then you've got Russia to deal with, Iran's ally in arms.

Iran's military would kill many, many American soldiers. In fact, taking everything into consideration, there'd probably be over 50,000 casualties in 4 years (not counting the number of kills the Ruskos could inflict).

I've served in Iran's army, and these people are worse than the Japanese during World War II (and look how many they killed). You'd not only be squaring off against Russian and Iranian soldiers, but also Iranian civilians who would do drastic things in the name of Allah.

[baggygreen]

Russian technology, not russian troops.

important to note that difference.

there is utterly no way the Russians would risk a conflict with the US.... they're not that stupid. Sure, they do sell and will continue selling weapons systems to the Iranians. That wont change.

I also dont see a land invasion taking place - not enough troops atm, and no western allies will help - unless something extremely drastic happens with incontrovertible proof it was Irans doing.

[Stealth Hunter]

Well, Iran does provide the U.S. with oil as does it Russia, so I wouldn't say it would "never" enter combat with the U.S. However, if the Americans did invade, then Iran would just burn the oil wells and leave them nothing to take but empty desert and a couple of cities, but nothing useful or valuable.

As you said, though, it's highly unlikely an invasion would take place, let alone a declaration of war. The Congress is getting tired of war, as are the people. The country probably wouldn't follow up with it, and the economy wouldn't fare well, either.

I still think it's pretty funny how pissed over our government is getting over the Iranians provoking them with these little practical jokes.

[Skybird]

Iran can - by mentality of the public - easily afford many, many times as many casualties, than america can. The society is young, the population dominated by energetic, easy to motivate yound male adults. So, Iran can simple outsit any American attack. At sea, America probably would gain some kind of control sooner or later, but not without serious initial costs, and the Gulf propably opnly could be considered "safe" when controlling the land at the strait of hormuz, and much of the Iranian coast, which means a widespread invasion on a long front. The airspace would be american. The ground would be battlefield for more asymmetricall warfare - just carried out by trained troops (army) and skilled fanatics (RG), and practically unlimited support by civilian population, and hardly to stop massive support with weapin and modern military technology (money anyway). Any president being amateurish enough to order the ground invasion of Iran should be shot right in place, before he does more catastrophic damage of this kind.

All in all, Iran would be much, much harder to establish and maintain control, and the issue would be several times as costly as Iraq and Afghanistan together. If America wishes to take Iran out of the international game, it would need to totally destroy it. So the only two questions are if you think there is sufficient reason to destroy Iran, and if you think the international, poltiical and military blowback America would suffer for that is worth it. Currently, the answer must be No.

[Foxtrot]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7182637.stm



It has worrying similarities with the incident in 1988 when, in the same Strait of Hormuz, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, having failed to monitor the radio traffic properly.

The crew of the Vincennes became wrongly convinced that the airliner, an Airbus with 290 people on board, all of whom died, was an Iranian fighter jet.

The Iranian government said that the destruction of the plane was done in full knowledge of what it was.


'Scenario fulfilment'


The US government later suggested that one factor at play on the Vincennes was a condition called "scenario fulfilment" in which military personnel are under such pressure that they expect and then execute a particular scenario, as if in an exercise.

Whether the same expectation was at play in this latest incident is not clear.


What is clear is that there are grave doubts about who uttered the warning picked up by the US ships. A deep voice was heard to say: "I am coming at you. You will explode after a few minutes."


The video released by the US implied that the warning was part of a series of transmissions to the ships from the Iranian craft.

It turns out that the warning was added onto the video. It was a radio recording made separately.

Experts say it could have come from another ship in the area or from a radio transmitter on shore. The channel used by the Iranian vessels to make their inquiries is an open one.


Iranian version

The Iranians later issued their own video, in which one of their sailors, in a much higher and quite different voice from the one which issued the "warning", asks the US ships who they are and what course they are on.

He gets a dusty reply that the US vessels are in international waters.

The Iranian video does not show their boats buzzing close (200m or so) to the Americans.

The US said that in any case the Iranian speedboats acted aggressively. Iran's version is that this was a routine check by its sailors.


Something is very fishy going on :hmm:

[sonar732]

I agree with Stealth Hunter regarding Russia. Think how Putin has been taking jabs at American "expansion". If we committed ground troops, Russia would ask the UN for a resolution against the invasion. They would commit troops to help the Iranians as they would be worried about the oil. It is already at record prices, imagine what will happen if we even used only air strikes?

The typical allies of Russia and China would block any resolution the US would try. I think Great Britain would support us because of the soldiers being paraded on Iranian TV a while back, but France is a question mark of which way they would go.

[Ishmael]

I've followed this story with some interest having served in those waters thirty+ years ago. Having watched the video here are a few comments from me.

1. The latest reports are now suggesting the voice over may have been fabricated.

2. I did not see any of these speedboats flying Iranian colors. The ships involved could have called them "Pirates" and sank them legally like they're doing off the Somali coast(any survivors could be hanged from the yardarms for practicing Piracy.

3. The Iranian government is not stupid. They know Bush is just looking for any excuse to attack, so other than a probe of defenses/ESM drill, there is no Iranian purpose for doing this. These boats would have been painted with fire control radar locks long before coming into visual range. The Iranians also know that if the US attacks, they will overwhelm any warships in the Persian Gulf with massive assaults of hundreds of Sunburn and Yakhonts missles, sinking most of them. This was the scenario the OPFOR commander used in the last war games there and he won. So the Navy changed the rules so the OPFOR would lose.

4. The Iranians don't have to do a damn thing. The US is frantically pouring it's blood and treasure into two holes in the sand already, Iraq and Afghanistan, to little or no effect in either location. All they have to do is sit back and watch us wage our war on a tactic right into national bankruptcy. Hey! it worked on the Soviet Union. Plus, with Iraqi oil now effectively off the world markets, their oil is worth that much more.

5. The Barksdale Nuke incident was meant to be a nuclear sneak attack first strike on Iran to coincide with the Israeli reactor strike in Syria. The only fly in the ointment was that my Air Force compatriots in the Brotherhood of Fear safeguarded those weapons from an unauthorized use by the White House. Witness how the WH rhetoric changed in the immediate aftermath of Barksdale.

6. The White House wants to strike Iran with nuclear weapons, they're just too cowardly to try to make a convincing case to the public and deal with the political fallout from it. The leitmotif of the Bush admin. has been to lie, fabricate evidence and accept no responsibility for any of the bonehead things they have done. They know they can't make the case because the vast majority of Americans know them for the inveterate liars that they are.

[sonar732]

Well...it would seem that the Iranians were doing this last month also. There were warning shots fired that time though.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080111/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_us_navy (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080111/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_us_navy)

[Julius Caesar]

Let's see:
Iraq: 430.000 km2, population 26 mil.
Iran: 1.650.000 km2, population 70 mil.

Also note that people in Iran are more united than people in Iraq.

Land invasion is out of the question for any army.

[U49]

Land invasion is out of the question for any army.

Not especially troublesome, if you have a clear goal, a strategy and are perpared with appropriate tactics ....:hmm: I'm afraid very few on earth are able to formulate the required "goal" ... and much less of those few are able to provide an usable "strategy" (not going any further, it doesn't make sense)
:rotfl:

Edit:
The last guy who was properly prepared was Alexander, the great?

[Stealth Hunter]

"Bush is just looking for an excuse to attack . . ."

Definite fact. He's got plans for the Middle-East that could change world history. I think with Iraq he thought he could not only gain oil, but he could also control the new weak and noobish government in place like a pawn in a game of chess; the board is the deserts of that general area.

Unfortunately, Bush's intelligence and arrogance will be his downfall...

[Skybird]

"Bush is just looking for an excuse to attack . . ."

Definite fact. He's got plans for the Middle-East that could change world history. I think with Iraq he thought he could not only gain oil, but he could also control the new weak and noobish government in place like a pawn in a game of chess; the board is the deserts of that general area.

Unfortunately, Bush's intelligence and arrogance will be his downfall...
Downfall? He will regularly end his presidency after having been given the maxium time possible, and nobody stepping in when he did the dmage over those 8 years. He will not fall at all, unfortunately. what has fallen is the remains of reason in democracy, and that after his first term he even was allowed a second one hardly can be seen as his downfall. If anything, then it was not exactly a compliment for the voters.

[Thunder]

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40747

[Stealth Hunter]

No, they're just trying to cook up some propaganda again. What they really want is for the US ships to get serious and dispatch them, and then go "LOOK AT THE BIG BULLY! BAD BUSH!". It's got less to do with their foreign policy and more with just getting an excuse to keep their population under control by maintaining the appearance of a constant threat hanging over them.

OR it's Bush that's wanting to start a war, not Iran...

"The Pentagon INSISTS the vessels were in international waters." -BBC [first link provided]

Show me proof, and I'll believe you. Show me a video of the Iranians doing this, and I'll believe you. Talk is cheap, especially when you've got a liar in office who's wanting to pick a fight...

"Officials say . . ."

With those two words, I stop trusting the article. Officials also said that Iran had nuclear weapons. Wrong. Their program has been down since 2003. Officials also said that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction that were going to be found. Wrong. None were found, and we know now that he disposed of them in 2000. Officials say much, but they never show any proof...

[squigian]

I'm none too sure why the hawks are so desperate to attack Iran. Aside from the supplying of insurgents, which can be dealt with at borders (why did we disband the border police in Iraq again?) and within the two countries, the only reason I can think of is wanting to link up Iraq and Afghanistan into one big theatre of war.

[Stealth Hunter]

"Bush is just looking for an excuse to attack . . ."

Definite fact. He's got plans for the Middle-East that could change world history. I think with Iraq he thought he could not only gain oil, but he could also control the new weak and noobish government in place like a pawn in a game of chess; the board is the deserts of that general area.

Unfortunately, Bush's intelligence and arrogance will be his downfall...
Downfall? He will regularly end his presidency after having been given the maxium time possible, and nobody stepping in when he did the dmage over those 8 years. He will not fall at all, unfortunately. what has fallen is the remains of reason in democracy, and that after his first term he even was allowed a second one hardly can be seen as his downfall. If anything, then it was not exactly a compliment for the voters.

His downfall will be in the history of politics, not by impeachment. It's too late for that. We voted him in twice, and he's in twice. Nothing we can do now. What's really going to hurt him is when the United States starts to decline and the politicians look for someone to blame it on (and Bush will be their first choice for his little war and it initiating an economic recession).

Although he did win by electoral vote, he did not win by popular vote. The electoral vote is one of the most idiotic inventions of the American Congress. It should be as simple as "one person, one vote, one winner".

EDIT:

Iran is no more supplying the insurgents than my ass is purple. They HATE the insurgents and know how dangerous they are. They don't want to even associate themselves with them, let alone supply them against the United States. Bush was just throwing out more bull**** to give us another reason to attack Iran, as he always does. The stubborn jackass just won't give it up.

[Skybird]

His downfall will be in the history of politics, not by impeachment.
So what. :lol: It has no effect. Nobody really cares after the deed is done. He will not be the first one living very well with a bad historical reputation.

[sonar732]

EDIT:

Iran is no more supplying the insurgents than my ass is purple. They HATE the insurgents and know how dangerous they are. They don't want to even associate themselves with them, let alone supply them against the United States. Bush was just throwing out more bull**** to give us another reason to attack Iran, as he always does. The stubborn jackass just won't give it up.

Iran has been linked to the US embassy and Marine barracks bombings of '83, along with Khobal Towers in Saudi Arabia.

[Jimbuna]

<Going back to the first post>
The response should be "Don't bother, your about to blow up.....now!" http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/pirate.gif

[Stealth Hunter]

Iran has been linked to the US embassy and Marine barracks bombings of '83, along with Khobal Towers in Saudi Arabia.

Links?:roll:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

im happy to see another Iran supporter here :()1:

Im surprised and dissapointed as to why bush hasnt been assasinated...i think if he goes to war with iran that will be the last straw for him...:-?

[Stealth Hunter]

I'll drink to that!




:()1: :/\\chop

[sonar732]

Iran has been linked to the US embassy and Marine barracks bombings of '83, along with Khobal Towers in Saudi Arabia.
Links?:roll:
9-11 Commission Report with Khobar Towers/Iranian Link (http://www.meforum.org/article/670)

9-11 commision section devoted to Iranian support of terrorism (http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/hearings/hearing3/witness_gasiorowski.htm)

UN Report with Hezbollah Spokesman Admitting Funds From Iran (http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=26242)

Judgement issued by US Judge Linking Iran to Marine bombing (http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/iran.barracks.bombing/)

Wiki Result Showing Pro-Iranian Islamic Jihad Proclaiming Responsibility for '83 Embassy Bombing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_1983_U.S._Embassy_bombing)

I'm sorry that being in dial-up has limited my search result, but the link is obvious and numberous.

[Tchocky]

A heckling radio ham known as the Filipino Monkey, who has spent years pestering ships in the Persian Gulf, is being blamed today for sparking a major diplomatic row after American warships almost attacked Iranian patrol boats.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2240533,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

[Etienne]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Philipino Monkey, Philipino Monkey, This is Banana Radio, over

Banana Radio, Philipino Monkey, Go ahead.

Philipino Monkey, Banana radio, do you require bananas? I have lots of bananas for filipino monkeys, over

Rinse, lather and repeat until some Philipino OOW gets pissed and unleash a load of profanity over whatever channel you're on. The Philipino Monkey been a recurring radio joke for years. And now it's apparently all part of an organization of insulting ham operator? Come on. This is hillarious.

In the Med, it's Mario. ("Maaaario... I want to f... you Maaaaario"); I'd heard the Monkey joke, but I didn't know there was a geographic element to it.

Seriously, I alway suspected the "You will explode" voice was someone just doing an anonymous intervention over the channel. It happens - Usually it's just "Shut up already." or "I read you loud and clear. Now be quiet." or "Get the f... off sixteen", but I guess some people just aren't smart.

The only place in the world where that kind of things doesn't happen is the US, because the USCG will get on the channel within second with their usual shut-up-and-use-a-different-frequency spiel.

ETA : This is like Bernard causing an international incident in real life. Seriously, that article is on that level of hillarious.

[Seadogs]

im happy to see another Iran supporter here :()1:

Im surprised and dissapointed as to why bush hasnt been assasinated...i think if he goes to war with iran that will be the last straw for him...:-?
ORLY? Didn't play out so well for Iran in 1988.

By the way, nice racist sig. Good luck with your internet politics.

You're sick.

[Abd_von_Mumit]

Philipino Monky - ROTFL! One of the funniest Bush's jokes. :rotfl:

im happy to see another Iran supporter here :()1:

Im surprised and dissapointed as to why bush hasnt been assasinated...i think if he goes to war with iran that will be the last straw for him...:-?
ORLY? Didn't play out so well for Iran in 1988.

By the way, nice racist sig. Good luck with your internet politics.
I inspected elite hunter's sig, but cannot notice anything racist in it. :hmm: One can boycott any country, Israel is not different in this matter from, say, Egypt, USA, Russia or China, or is it?

Or maybe you wish to say that boycotting Israel is antisemitism? :D If so, is disagreeing with Israel's politics antisemitism too? If so, are almost half Israel's Jewish population antisemites? ;)

[baggygreen]

Lets leave that stuff alone in this thread and try focussing on the topic

[Takeda Shingen]

Let's see if anyone remembers what this means:

http://mwrop.org/W_Needham/Pictures/EasternGraySquirrel_Columbia_051104.jpg

The Management

[sonar732]

Let's see if anyone remembers what this means:

http://mwrop.org/W_Needham/Pictures/EasternGraySquirrel_Columbia_051104.jpg

The Management

Something that I'm looking down the barrel of my 410. JK!

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[Abd_von_Mumit]

And a tip for those who don't remember? :hmm:

[Tchocky]

Let's see if anyone remembers what this means:

http://mwrop.org/W_Needham/Pictures/EasternGraySquirrel_Columbia_051104.jpg

The Management

*raises hand*

I remember!

[Sea Demon]

*raises hand*

I remember!

Care to let us in on it.

[Tchocky]

*raises hand*

I remember!
Care to let us in on it.

22nd post :)

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=117349

Never thought I'd search "squirrel" on this site

[Skybird]

Let's see if anyone remembers what this means:

http://mwrop.org/W_Needham/Pictures/EasternGraySquirrel_Columbia_051104.jpg


Must we care...?

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/7408/72107armysquirrelno6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

:-j

[Abd_von_Mumit]

O, I see now, another way of laughing at people who don't share the views of the majority! :up:

It's much better to make fun than too shoot, though. :yep:

[Foxtrot]

How dare those scumbags harassed our huge ships with their tiny little boats :mad:
We must send the most patriotic soldier from our army with his modified AK-47 and unlimited ammo. :smug:

Here is his footage when he was in Columbia to disarm evil regime and bring democracy to Colombian folks
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gQDt4PHbrPI

[Tchocky]

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JA15Ak02.html

Interesting piece, apparently there is not International water in the Strait of Hormuz

[Takeda Shingen]

O, I see now, another way of laughing at people who don't share the views of the majority! :up:

I was trying to get a point across without being as harsh as I am reputed to be, but this appears to have failed. Thus, let me be more blunt: It means get civil or the thread gets locked. Your views are of no interest to me in as far as moderation goes. I am interested in your conduct. I hope that this is much clearer.

And for the record, I am not laughing.

The Management

[Jimbuna]

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JA15Ak02.html

Interesting piece, apparently there is not International water in the Strait of Hormuz

Notwithstanding the canals (Panama, Suez etc) it's gotta be one of the most frequently sailed bottlenecks in the world. As far as the transporting of oil goes anyway. :hmm:

[baggygreen]

Good find tchocky

Interesting read, I failed to see how there could be international waters in such a narrow strait of water. A point I made much earlier in the thread remains though, which is that how hard is it to identify 3 big grey ships, especially one the size of a cruiser!

[Col_Klink]

Good find tchocky

Interesting read, I failed to see how there could be international waters in such a narrow strait of water. A point I made much earlier in the thread remains though, which is that how hard is it to identify 3 big grey ships, especially one the size of a cruiser!

Based on past expierence, The Iron Colonel will put his 20' boston whaler up against a few frigates and destroyers any day of the week. I will explode you with my 5 gallon gas can, I am not skeered of your harpoons or your carriers with enough firepower to turn my backyard into a 6' thick sheet of glass. Politics suck

[TheSatyr]

The saddest part of all this is that some idiot Ham Operator almost managed to get the US Navy to shoot at the Iranian boats. There was even a mention in an article I read about this incident,that says that a guy on one of the Iranian boats tried to use a megaphone to get the US to switch to a different channel,since they knew it wasn't them making the threats. The writer of the article also hinted that the US and Iranian ships usually are in voice contact during these kinds of incidents,just to make sure neither side crosses the line.

Besides,the Iranian gov can use it to claim the US is bullying Iran,while the US gov can use it to claim they are being harassed by the Iranians. It's a win/win situation for propaganda for both govs. I doubt either side wants any shooting to happen.

[Stealth Hunter]

I doubt either side wants any shooting to happen.

Perhaps with the soldiers, but the politicians in Washington (mainly Bush) are the ones I think would disagree with that statement. That man has been picking a fight with them for months now. I think the best lie I've ever heard from him was the one regarding Iran's nuclear program. Claims he has all this evidence to show they're building nukes and then BAM, he gets the facts down his throat that Iran's nuclear program has been down since 2003. Then he says that it doesn't make a difference that it's been down for 4 years. IT MAKES A HELL OF A DIFFERENCE. You claim they're dangerous, that you've got evidence to back this up, you nearly provoke war with them, and you say it doesn't matter? I'm not saying the Iranian government is consisting of angels, but still...

So many lives would be lost if the United States went to war with Iran. So much death, so much destruction. How many men does the president think he should waste on these lies he's spat out (like Iraq and Saddam's WMD's)? How many lives?

[mrbeast]

I doubt either side wants any shooting to happen.

Perhaps with the soldiers, but the politicians in Washington (mainly Bush) are the ones I think would disagree with that statement. That man has been picking a fight with them for months now. I think the best lie I've ever heard from him was the one regarding Iran's nuclear program. Claims he has all this evidence to show they're building nukes and then BAM, he gets the facts down his throat that Iran's nuclear program has been down since 2003. Then he says that it doesn't make a difference that it's been down for 4 years. IT MAKES A HELL OF A DIFFERENCE. You claim they're dangerous, that you've got evidence to back this up, you nearly provoke war with them, and you say it doesn't matter? I'm not saying the Iranian government is consisting of angels, but still...

So many lives would be lost if the United States went to war with Iran. So much death, so much destruction. How many men does the president think he should waste on these lies he's spat out (like Iraq and Saddam's WMD's)? How many lives?

I doubt the US can afford to go to war with Iran.

[nimitstexan]

Bush has not lied about WMDs in Iraq. At worst he (along with the rest of the Western leadership and intelligence community) was mistaken. Either way, Saddam Hussain had to go.

Israeli intelligence still claims that Iran is seeking to weaponize its nuclear material. Certainly it is continuing its uranium enrichment program, despite the Russian providing all the nuclear fuel necessary for civilian applications. The ongoing uranium enrichment program is at best suspicious, and could easily be idicative of a continuing clandestine nuclear weapons program. Some elements in the American and British intelligence communities, citing recent evidence, have indicated that the most recent formal intelligence estimates claiming Iran abandoned its nuclear weapon program are completely in error.

[Lt West]

We seriously shoud've blown them out of the water stupid iranians

[Stealth Hunter]

Bush has not lied about WMDs in Iraq. At worst he (along with the rest of the Western leadership and intelligence community) was mistaken. Either way, Saddam Hussain had to go.

Israeli intelligence still claims that Iran is seeking to weaponize its nuclear material. Certainly it is continuing its uranium enrichment program, despite the Russian providing all the nuclear fuel necessary for civilian applications. The ongoing uranium enrichment program is at best suspicious, and could easily be idicative of a continuing clandestine nuclear weapons program. Some elements in the American and British intelligence communities, citing recent evidence, have indicated that the most recent formal intelligence estimates claiming Iran abandoned its nuclear weapon program are completely in error.

A: Bush claimed he had "exceptionally detailed evidence".
B: Saddam kept the terrorists out of Iraq, then Bush comes along and takes Saddam out, letting the terrorists in.


Yeah, the Israeli's would. They're afraid of the Iranians, and it pays to be. However, the two nations have played this little game for years now. Israel cries out for help because of how inferior it is, and because it carries grudges against the Iranians for their past history with Israel. Seen it before, and they're back at it again.

I will say it again, you can't keep on making outlandish claims before you have TOTAL evidence. Bush was looking for a fight. That's a fact. He said that the government had evidence of an Iranian nuclear program that was still on-line. Then, when evidence comes out that it's been off-line since 2003, he says that it doesn't make much of a difference... when it does. Making false claims like that can get you into a ****-load of trouble, even war. The fact is that Bush is going to keep this up until he finally leaves The Hill. And don't think the American government is so innocent when it comes to nuclear activities as it claims to be, either...

We seriously shoud've blown them out of the water stupid iranians

What flawless and concrete logic you have...:rotfl::roll:
Methinks someone is trigger-happy.:hmm:

[Foxtrot]

We seriously shoud've blown them out of the water stupid iranians
I blame Hollywood movies for that

[August]

I've been saying we should hit the Iranians ever since the '79 hostage crisis.

[Jimbuna]

I've been saying we should hit the Iranians ever since the '79 hostage crisis.

We in the UK have had our moments with them as well http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/7178/uowprofuriousoi0eq1.gif

http://www.eliteukforces.info/special-air-service/sas-operations/iranian-embassy/

[August]

I've been saying we should hit the Iranians ever since the '79 hostage crisis.
We in the UK have had our moments with them as well http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/7178/uowprofuriousoi0eq1.gif

http://www.eliteukforces.info/special-air-service/sas-operations/iranian-embassy/

A beautiful pice of work the SAS did there. You guys ought to be very proud of them.

[Jimbuna]

I've been saying we should hit the Iranians ever since the '79 hostage crisis.
We in the UK have had our moments with them as well http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/7178/uowprofuriousoi0eq1.gif

http://www.eliteukforces.info/special-air-service/sas-operations/iranian-embassy/

A beautiful pice of work the SAS did there. You guys ought to be very proud of them.

We are sir, we are http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

Not wishing to open a debate, but many around the world consider them the best anti terrorist medicine in the world.

[Dowly]

US is too fricking dramatic on these things! Let's say, we have a Finn patrol boat approached by Estonian boat. We MIGHT hear it on news, but that's it. But when it's US in question, they are all like AWWW KILL THEM ALL WE ARE THE BEST"!!!!!! NUKE THE BASTARDS!!! Go back to US and leave the rest of the world alone OR stop crying when everyone is against you.

One more thing, I've wanted to say this for a looooong time. You US ppl talk about "freedom" all the time, so may I ask you, when have you EVER fought against a FOREIGN invader and really fought for your freedom (and no, "what ifs" or "Pearl Harbor" dont count, that wasnt even near!). Werent you the guys that CONQUERED the land from the Indians???? You guys really have made the word "freedom" sound like a curse in not just my ear.

And lastly, I can assure you that ALOT of the world feels just like me. I'm so sickened to read posts like "Oh, break into my house and I'm happy to shoot you" when I hear most of you "God Bless America"! Right, if there is God, you guys will be the last to be saved! God says, dont kill! THere's no laws of man to excuse that, but yet you kill. Iraq, Afghanistan, how fricking many innocent have been killed by US bombs. Just because of "FREEDOM" and "DEMOCRACY"???

Please, US, just let the world be and concentrate on your internal problems.

Oh and dont mention 9/11, because then it gets ugly.

[Morts]

US is too fricking dramatic on these things! Let's say, we have a Finn patrol boat approached by Estonian boat. We MIGHT hear it on news, but that's it. But when it's US in question, they are all like AWWW KILL THEM ALL WE ARE THE BEST"!!!!!! NUKE THE BASTARDS!!! Go back to US and leave the rest of the world alone OR stop crying when everyone is against you.

One more thing, I've wanted to say this for a looooong time. You US ppl talk about "freedom" all the time, so may I ask you, when have you EVER fought against a FOREIGN invader and really fought for your freedom (and no, "what ifs" or "Pearl Harbor" dont count, that wasnt even near!). Werent you the guys that CONQUERED the land from the Indians???? You guys really have made the word "freedom" sound like a curse in not just my ear.

And lastly, I can assure you that ALOT of the world feels just like me. I'm so sickened to read posts like "Oh, break into my house and I'm happy to shoot you" when I hear most of you "God Bless America"! Right, if there is God, you guys will be the last to be saved! God says, dont kill! THere's no laws of man to excuse that, but yet you kill. Iraq, Afghanistan, how fricking many innocent have been killed by US bombs. Just because of "FREEDOM" and "DEMOCRACY"???

Please, US, just let the world be and concentrate on your internal problems.

Oh and dont mention 9/11, because then it gets ugly.

:up::up:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

I've been saying we should hit the Iranians ever since the '79 hostage crisis.
gotta love the average american :roll:

why dont you just nuke them and get it over with.. after all that IS what you want to do no??? :roll:

wait.. i have an even better idea.. lets nuke those crazy commie north koreans, those vietnamese, or how about the syrians??? :roll:

Are you Mccain with an alias posting on the net??? :o:roll:

"world peace" "freedom" "democracy" "promoting democracy in iraq" :rotfl::rotfl: sounds like the type of fecal matter hitler spewed out in the 30s...:roll:

[Dowly]

I've been saying we should hit the Iranians ever since the '79 hostage crisis.
gotta love the average american :roll:

why dont you just nuke them and get it over with.. after all that IS what you want to do no??? :roll:

wait.. i have an even better idea.. lets nuke those crazy commie north koreans, those vietnamese, or how about the syrians??? :roll:

Are you Mccain with an alias posting on the net??? :o:roll:

EH, I've been supporting you in the background for along time. Not because of your views, but you have the guts to take on the majority of the ppl who visit here. And I raise my hat to you.

[Jimbuna]

Must get settled and comfortable http://imgcash2.imageshack.us/img223/820/popcorn3yv1.gif

[Morts]

yea
its gonna be quite the show when some of the americans read this

[Dowly]

yea
its gonna be quite the show when some of the americans read this

Digging my anti-BS trench already mate. :up:

[Morts]

yea
its gonna be quite the show when some of the americans read this
Digging my anti-BS trench already mate. :up:
make room for me
i think im gonna join ya:)

[Dowly]

yea
its gonna be quite the show when some of the americans read this
Digging my anti-BS trench already mate. :up: make room for me
i think im gonna join ya:)

Plenty of beer & popcorn here. :up:

[elite_hunter_sh3]

I've been saying we should hit the Iranians ever since the '79 hostage crisis.
gotta love the average american :roll:

why dont you just nuke them and get it over with.. after all that IS what you want to do no??? :roll:

wait.. i have an even better idea.. lets nuke those crazy commie north koreans, those vietnamese, or how about the syrians??? :roll:

Are you Mccain with an alias posting on the net??? :o:roll:
EH, I've been supporting you in the background for along time. Not because of your views, but you have the guts to take on the majority of the ppl who visit here. And I raise my hat to you.
cheers!! :()1::|\\

American Foreign Policy/ government = makings of the "4th reich" :shifty:

[RickC Sniper]

This thread sure has a promising future.

:p :p

[Blacklight]

DowlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Morts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dowly
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morts
yea
its gonna be quite the show when some of the americans read this


Digging my anti-BS trench already mate. :up:

make room for me
i think im gonna join ya:)

I know I'm an American and all, but do you think there's room in that trench for me ? :D

[Happy Times]

US is too fricking dramatic on these things! Let's say, we have a Finn patrol boat approached by Estonian boat. We MIGHT hear it on news, but that's it. But when it's US in question, they are all like AWWW KILL THEM ALL WE ARE THE BEST"!!!!!! NUKE THE BASTARDS!!! Go back to US and leave the rest of the world alone OR stop crying when everyone is against you.

One more thing, I've wanted to say this for a looooong time. You US ppl talk about "freedom" all the time, so may I ask you, when have you EVER fought against a FOREIGN invader and really fought for your freedom (and no, "what ifs" or "Pearl Harbor" dont count, that wasnt even near!). Werent you the guys that CONQUERED the land from the Indians???? You guys really have made the word "freedom" sound like a curse in not just my ear.

And lastly, I can assure you that ALOT of the world feels just like me. I'm so sickened to read posts like "Oh, break into my house and I'm happy to shoot you" when I hear most of you "God Bless America"! Right, if there is God, you guys will be the last to be saved! God says, dont kill! THere's no laws of man to excuse that, but yet you kill. Iraq, Afghanistan, how fricking many innocent have been killed by US bombs. Just because of "FREEDOM" and "DEMOCRACY"???

Please, US, just let the world be and concentrate on your internal problems.

Oh and dont mention 9/11, because then it gets ugly.

Iraq was a mistake in that Saddam was good at keeping Islamists in check. But Taleban in Afganistan is every westerners enemy. So are the goverments of Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, that fund the terrorists that hate our culture and want to kill us. This is something we cant forget up here in our safe country. We should fight them there rather than wait we have to fight in our own streets. We should stop hiding behind the backs of others. Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Estonia are fighting the fight. Only pussy politicians in Finland.:nope:

[Dowly]

US is too fricking dramatic on these things! Let's say, we have a Finn patrol boat approached by Estonian boat. We MIGHT hear it on news, but that's it. But when it's US in question, they are all like AWWW KILL THEM ALL WE ARE THE BEST"!!!!!! NUKE THE BASTARDS!!! Go back to US and leave the rest of the world alone OR stop crying when everyone is against you.

One more thing, I've wanted to say this for a looooong time. You US ppl talk about "freedom" all the time, so may I ask you, when have you EVER fought against a FOREIGN invader and really fought for your freedom (and no, "what ifs" or "Pearl Harbor" dont count, that wasnt even near!). Werent you the guys that CONQUERED the land from the Indians???? You guys really have made the word "freedom" sound like a curse in not just my ear.

And lastly, I can assure you that ALOT of the world feels just like me. I'm so sickened to read posts like "Oh, break into my house and I'm happy to shoot you" when I hear most of you "God Bless America"! Right, if there is God, you guys will be the last to be saved! God says, dont kill! THere's no laws of man to excuse that, but yet you kill. Iraq, Afghanistan, how fricking many innocent have been killed by US bombs. Just because of "FREEDOM" and "DEMOCRACY"???

Please, US, just let the world be and concentrate on your internal problems.

Oh and dont mention 9/11, because then it gets ugly.
Iraq was a mistake in that Saddam was good at keeping Islamists in check. But Taleban in Afganistan is every westerners enemy. So are the goverments of Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, that fund the terrorists that hate our culture and want to kill us. This is something we cant forget up here in our safe country. We should fight them there rather than wait we have to fight in our own streets. We should stop hiding behind the backs of others. Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Estonia are fighting the fight. Only pussy politicians in Finland.:nope:

Oh yeh, the fighting is going reeeaaal nicely. :shifty:

[Foxtrot]

Iraq was a mistake in that Saddam was good at keeping Islamists in check. But Taleban in Afganistan is every westerners enemy. So are the goverments of Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, that fund the terrorists that hate our culture and want to kill us. This is something we cant forget up here in our safe country. We should fight them there rather than wait we have to fight in our own streets. We should stop hiding behind the backs of others. Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Estonia are fighting the fight. Only pussy politicians in Finland.:nope:

Which branch of Westboro church you said you were from? :D
How exactly Estonia is fighting the fight? By stealing wires from electric poles? :hmm:

[Takeda Shingen]

We're far from topic, and I am about ready to close this one. Wrap it up.

The Management

[Tchocky]

I've been saying we should hit the Iranians ever since the '79 hostage crisis.
We in the UK have had our moments with them as well http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/7178/uowprofuriousoi0eq1.gif

http://www.eliteukforces.info/special-air-service/sas-operations/iranian-embassy/

Well, to be fair, that was organised by Iraq.

At that stage, no one knew that Iraq had trained and armed the gunmen to embarrass its enemy Iran, and that the drama about to be played out in Princes Gate was a dramatic prelude to the Iran-Iraq war that was to explode four months later and send millions of young men to their graves.

SAS have a..mixed...reputation where I come from. Quite a few times, SAS operatives were found in the Republic of Ireland, chasing IRA members across the border without letting anyone know.

[bradclark1]

SAS have a..mixed...reputation where I come from. Quite a few times, SAS operatives were found in the Republic of Ireland, chasing IRA members across the border without letting anyone know.

They probably felt that the IRA wouldn't hang around and wait while the SAS made a phone call to see if they could cross. It's also probably not good public relations letting a soveriegn nation know that their border is routinely violated. It's easier and faster to say sorry than ask for permission. Thats my take on it anyway.

[Tchocky]

If the country you're going into is also involved in working against terrorism, then there should be no sneaking around. I can appreciate operational realities not being so accomodating, but there's no reason to violate sovereignty.
British security forces have a bad rap here anyways, not as bad as the IRA, but still.

[Jimbuna]

If the country you're going into is also involved in working against terrorism, then there should be no sneaking around. I can appreciate operational realities not being so accomodating, but there's no reason to violate sovereignty.
British security forces have a bad rap here anyways, not as bad as the IRA, but still.

I should bloody well hope not!!.......the British security forces have never been suspected of assisting the IRA or the Germans in the last war for that matter http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/5158/winkbigid2.gif

[Tchocky]

I should bloody well hope not!!.......the British security forces have never been suspected of assisting the IRA
The IRA, no. Loyalist terrorist groups, lots of times. All quite vague, but allegations have been made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles#Collusion_-_security_forces_and_loyalist_paramilitaries

[Jimbuna]

I should bloody well hope not!!.......the British security forces have never been suspected of assisting the IRA
The IRA, no. Loyalist terrorist groups, lots of times. All quite vague, but allegations have been made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles#Collusion_-_security_forces_and_loyalist_paramilitaries

What in heavens name is the "Nuzhound" http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/621/thinkbigsw1.gif Hardly a paragon or irrefutable source of information I suspect http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3060/gigglebigtb9.gif

That covert operations were carried out is not in question.....what is though is the tactics used and in particular the indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets without any thought for the innocent lives of children.
I think in hindsight the British government should have seriously considered pulling out. That however, was never an option when you consider the bloodbath that would have ensued.
I thank God the troubles now appear to be a thing of the past. http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/2649/praydl5.gif