[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Really? then where is this war?
I could have sworn that ships were reflagged during the Iran/Iraq war so they could claim neutral status. I wonder which sort of flags they chose as surely from a legal standpoint they wouldn't choose a neutral flag that was not a flag that was at war.

Yet the vessels were still attacked by the IRGCN and the IRIN. Attacking ships is an act of war.

Is Britain part of NATO?
Did NATO go to war against Argentina?

The US supplied missiles, tankers, logistical and SIGINT support.

Who said anything about proceedure?
I mean the contradictory statements made by the radio Op.
Those same condtradictions were repeated in the post incident circus by the military and politicians.

You mean the transmissions on TWO different channels? One which they are REQUIRED to monitor and is used by ships approaching one another of which five were approaching the US TF each one possibly equipped with radios.

Its to do with the legal status of the waters and the vessels.

Ah are you you are talking about the US forces in INTERNATIONAL waters engaged in transit passage or about the unflagging boats operated by a known terrorist origination?

But releasing information that you have just made up and presenting it as factual is.

Who says they made it up?

Disputed waters.


Disputed waters

Iran has published no claim over the waters. Nether had Iraq. Both sides agree WHERE the line is but nether side will conduct the survey as to where the line currently is. Vessels in the waters were heading to Iraq and running aground indicated the shipping channel have moved NE in to what was Iranian waters.

Not disputed just not known.

So you are trying to say that it says the operation didn't take place in waters that are not internationally recognised as Iraqi
Would you say that it also doesn't say that the event was the result of a lack of an agreed boundary

The boundary is agreed on. Coalition forces operated according to the current known boundary.

A line made up by the US Navy that has no status.

Neither does the Iranian boundary.

So the Op line is a made up line of no legal standing that is claimed to be an extension of a line that isn't established.

The line is established. It down the center of the Shatt's shipping channel.

A simple question to settle for once and all your attempt to make a non existant thing a real thing.
You cite the report which mentions the US invented line as a notional boundary......what does notional mean?

You are splitting up the term, Notational Boundary is a boundary assumed to exist.

Really, so laws don't matter?

No borders don't matter. Pirates and Tortures are considerd "Hostis humani generis" that is enemies of all mankind. Jurisdiction does not matter all nations have an obligation to stop such activity regardless of jurisdiction.

Errrrrr....combatting piracy is down to law, but you just said laws don't matter which means there is no piracy. besides which this incident was a matter of alledged smuggling of vehicles which is a police and customs mater an had bugger all to do with piracy.

The captain and crew were worried of Iranian interference with their ship or cargo incl. theft of said cargo (Something that commonalty occurs among Iraqi fisherman). Theft of cargo, inhibiting of trade or disrupting maritime communication are considered Piracy.

So in a routine check for contraband a threat of piracy was discovered changing the legal standing of an operation already in Iraqi waters. Subsequently small craft operated by a group known to engage in piracy forcefully captured the a vessel and crew of the Royal Navy.

Is there a reason you support nations engaged in state sponsored piracy Tribesman?