PDA

View Full Version : US Navy Fires Warning Shots at Iranian boats.


JediAthos
01-11-2008, 06:58 PM
CAIRO, Egypt - The U.S. Navy said Friday that one of its ships fired warning shots at a small Iranian boat in the Strait of Hormuz in December during one of two serious encounters that month.


The USS Whidbey Island fired the warning shots on Dec. 19 in response to a small Iranian boat that was rapidly approaching it, said a U.S. Navy official.

"One small (Iranian) craft was coming toward it, and it stopped after the Whidbey Island fired warning shots," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

It was the first official confirmation that the United States had fired warning shots in any recent confrontation with Iran in the Gulf.

In the second incident that month, the USS Carr encountered three small Iranian craft on Dec. 22, two of which were armed, said the official. The USS Carr did not fire warning shots, but sent warning blasts on the ships whistle, which caused the boats to turn around.

The reports come a day after the United States lodged a formal diplomatic protest with Iran over an incident Sunday in which Iranian speedboats harassed U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf.

Adm. William J. Fallon, the top U.S. military commander in the Mideast, said Friday that Iran runs the risk of triggering an unintended conflict if its boats continue to harass U.S. warships in the strait.


It seems that Iran is intent on goading the United States into a conflict. I was in the US Navy for 10 years and I can tell you that we don't fire warning shots unless a craft gets VERY close to our ships. Not only that but warnings are broadcast over radio frequencies and over the ship's external loudspeakers as well.

I know that the US won't hesitate to defend its ships especially after the USS Cole incident several years ago. It seems Iran is saying one thing claiming they want to talk, and yet continuing to attempt to pick a fight.

Achilles
01-11-2008, 07:11 PM
Three words: Gulf...of...Tonkin

Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident)

JediAthos
01-11-2008, 11:01 PM
I'm quite familliar with the Gulf of Tonkin incident despite the fact that it occurred prior to my being born. This isn't the first time the Iranians have messed with ships in the Straight of Hormuz though. They've been messing with both civilian and military ships in that area for the last few years.

Web Rider
01-11-2008, 11:06 PM
And unforunately very few people find anything coming out of either government's mouth to be trustful enough to believe any particular side of the story.

It's strange though, I heard about the "almost" incident all over the news, papers, ect...but none made mention of this one where they actually fired "at" them.

JediAthos
01-12-2008, 12:19 AM
That's true about the trust thing..though when I was in I found Admiral Fallon to be a straight shooter for the most part. That was my impression of him anyway without actually having met him. That and I would tend to trust the US government more than Iran because I'm relatively sure that whomever is in charge over there is certifiably crazy.

Jae Onasi
01-12-2008, 12:20 AM
Taking the video at face value (which may or may not be accurate), I have to say I'm surprised the Captain didn't give the order to fire on the one little boat that threatened to blow up our ship.

Corinthian
01-12-2008, 01:09 AM
You know, I can only assume the above is sarcastic, to which I must reply....

High explosives. In particular, C4. As well as low-grade nuclear weapons, although if anyone starts deploying those against U.S. Naval vessels, we're going to have far more serious problems on our hands, like, you know, a big hole where the White House used to be.

Web Rider
01-12-2008, 02:53 AM
You know, I can only assume the above is sarcastic, to which I must reply....

High explosives. In particular, C4. As well as low-grade nuclear weapons, although if anyone starts deploying those against U.S. Naval vessels, we're going to have far more serious problems on our hands, like, you know, a big hole where the White House used to be.

Wait....how is the WH going to be destroyed if people(Iran in this case) attack our ships? Would not if say, Iran, attacked our ships, there be a big hole where their governing building is?

Q
01-12-2008, 07:57 AM
Three words: Gulf...of...Tonkin

Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident)
I was thinking the same thing.

Corinthian
01-12-2008, 01:24 PM
*Sigh* When terrorist states get their hands on Nukes and start using them, they're going to have better things to do with them than use them to destroy U.S. Naval ships. That's what I meant.

True_Avery
01-12-2008, 06:09 PM
Iranian Side:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FaLQ4QXfOI

Footage from both sides:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iId4FmS3cAY

Same Footage with threats at the end (Note that the threats are made when the video footage stops, and the man over the radio suddenly sounds different with better english):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bg-iSIEdSIA

American Version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLEPO42QY8U&feature=related

After looking at all of these, I am leaning more into believing that the footage shown on USA news was fabricated.

JediAthos
01-12-2008, 07:04 PM
The problem with Iran is that they have stated before that parts of the Straight of Hormuz are Iranian waters which is not the case. I don't know about threats, but I wouldn't be utterly surprised if they got that close to the Navy destroyers. If they did, they're lucky they were still floating afterwards.

Jae Onasi
01-12-2008, 07:38 PM
Same Footage with threats at the end (Note that the threats are made when the video footage stops, and the man over the radio suddenly sounds different with better english):Easily explained since there was more than 1 Iranian in the boat--one guy could have handed a mic to another guy.

After looking at all of these, I am leaning more into believing that the footage shown on USA news was fabricated.I don't see any intelligent reason for the US to do that. The probability of it being true is still higher for me than it not being true.

Totenkopf
01-12-2008, 08:07 PM
Three words: Gulf...of...Tonkin

Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident)


Say, I didn't know Rosie O'donnel was a member of these forums... :lol:

Frankly, given the damage done to the Cole in Yemen by explosives on a dinghy, the IRGC boats should have been blown out of the water with little hesitation. They are clearly trying to provoke something and want to test how close they can get before they really are "dispatched" or manage to cause an even more ugly incident. I seriously have no doubt they would like to do something and then try to cite Tonkin as a justification for their claims.

@True--as english is an international language, and many from Iran have been educated in the west, it's not so suspicious.

Ctrl Alt Del
01-12-2008, 08:18 PM
*Sigh* When terrorist states get their hands on Nukes and start using them, they're going to have better things to do with them than use them to destroy U.S. Naval ships. That's what I meant.
Then you're just assuming that the Iran government is a Terrorist State.

Web Rider
01-12-2008, 10:24 PM
*Sigh* When terrorist states get their hands on Nukes and start using them, they're going to have better things to do with them than use them to destroy U.S. Naval ships. That's what I meant.

You specifically stated the "terrorist group" would use "nuclear" and "C4" weapons against "US ships." Hence why I was curious why, if they are using them against US ships, would we have to worry about the White House.

Additionally, I do not believe Iran to be a terrorist state, not in the same context as say, Afghanistan was. While they may turn a blind eye to terrorists within their country, I don't think that makes them inherently terrorist, the Middle East has a variety of socio-economic/political/religious reasons they can't directly deal with terrorist organizations. I don't think these are good reasons, but they are done for the stability of the region, which I think currently outweighs dealing with a few terrorists, the whole of the Middle East in turmoil would lead to MORE terrorists.

In any case, if such a "terrorist group" attacked the US with nukes and was directly allied with a particular nation, I have a feeling that nation wouldn't be around for much longer, ie: glass crater.

Tommycat
01-14-2008, 05:38 AM
In any case, if such a "terrorist group" attacked the US with nukes and was directly allied with a particular nation, I have a feeling that nation wouldn't be around for much longer, ie: glass crater.
And Rand McNally gets the fun task of redesigning maps, globes, redrawing boundary lines, coming up with a cute name for it(I'm voting for Bugs Bunny crater-formerly know as Iran):D

Having been a Navy man myself, there's so much paperwork involved in firing a weapon, I'd be very suprised that they would fire a warning shot without provocation. When every bullet has to be accounted for, every little detail has to be logged. Every radio com recorded. Every order given being written down in at least 2 logs, I find it very hard to believe that they would make that up. You may not trust the government but I would certainly give credit to the Navy personnel. They don't just fire warning shots all the time.

I hope next time they pump Sanitary Tank #2 in their direction.

JediAthos
01-14-2008, 08:28 AM
lol..Sanitary Tank #2..lol...

I'm with you on that Tommycat....I can't imagine why anyone in the Navy would fire a weapon willingly and without a VERY good reason. That poor captain will likely be buried in paperwork for months!

*EDIT* As I mentioned previously I was in as well for ten years

Web Rider
01-14-2008, 03:10 PM
And Rand McNally gets the fun task of redesigning maps, globes, redrawing boundary lines, coming up with a cute name for it(I'm voting for Bugs Bunny crater-formerly know as Iran):D

Having been a Navy man myself, there's so much paperwork involved in firing a weapon, I'd be very suprised that they would fire a warning shot without provocation. When every bullet has to be accounted for, every little detail has to be logged. Every radio com recorded. Every order given being written down in at least 2 logs, I find it very hard to believe that they would make that up. You may not trust the government but I would certainly give credit to the Navy personnel. They don't just fire warning shots all the time.

I hope next time they pump Sanitary Tank #2 in their direction.

I don't doubt the Nazy is doing it right, what I don't trust is the politicians to show the media, and the media to show the people, anything that would undermine their own political stance.

And I'm quite certain dumping human waste into the Persian Gulf would cause FAR for international *drumroll* ****, for the US.

John Galt
01-14-2008, 06:17 PM
I trust the commanders on the ground(or on the ship in this case) to make the right call. There is no other proper way to deal with the specific situation other than to trust the individual in charge. It's not the gunners, captain, or admiralty I'm afraid of, it's the media and politicians that bother me. Give them a picture(or photoshop one convincingly) and they WILL sell us another war.

JediMaster12
01-14-2008, 06:17 PM
I am inclined to listen to our forumites that were Navy men about firing shots across bows and such as warnings. Incidentally with police shootings, they log things two and account for every bullet and such. So that wouldn't suprise me that the Navy would keep an accurate record.

As to the news media, I hesitate to have confidence in. This being because that all the major broacasts in America are corporate owned and are dedicated to putting a "spin" on things. I am not going to say that other media like BBC and Aljazeera don't do the same. They do but with the way our current pop culture is...no suprise there.

Frankly what Iran is doing is going to get is a boatload full of trouble. Somehow I am under the impression that this is similar to the incident with Cuba and our dealings with Japan before Pearl. Iran, at least her govt. wants to be the newest bad boy on the block.

RobQel-Droma
01-14-2008, 06:47 PM
If they want to harass our ships and take the risk that we might not take to kindly with it, be my guest. IMO, the our people did exactly the right thing. I don't care what old incidents you want to dig up from ancient history, or how you want to make yourself believe that it was all a US conspiracy. Especially since this has happened before: remember the Cole?

As far as the bigger situation, I agree with JM12. Maybe the problem might be solved if Iran got out from under the leadership of the crazy Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.... I don't know.

Three words: Gulf...of...Tonkin

Four words: No...relevance...to...discussion

Web Rider
01-14-2008, 07:43 PM
Especially since this has happened before: remember the Cole?

except: the USS Cole was stationary. Not performing maneuvers. Not part of a war effort. And the attackers blew themselves up and didn't drop stuff into the water saying "we'll blow you up", if that's what they did say.

RobQel-Droma
01-14-2008, 07:59 PM
except: the USS Cole was stationary. Not performing maneuvers.

I'm not getting the relevance....

Not part of a war effort.

Last time I checked, we weren't at war with Iran.

And the attackers blew themselves up and didn't drop stuff into the water saying "we'll blow you up", if that's what they did say.

Big difference.... :xp:

Tommycat
01-14-2008, 08:46 PM
I don't doubt the Nazy is doing it right, what I don't trust is the politicians to show the media, and the media to show the people, anything that would undermine their own political stance.

And I'm quite certain dumping human waste into the Persian Gulf would cause FAR for international *drumroll* ****, for the US.
Not really. Do you realize how much waste is pumped overboard as it is? Sure they can't pump oily waste overboard, but fecal matter, it's bio-degradable. Just think of it like this... where to the sea animals put their waste? San #1 might be a problem as it contains detergent, but San 2 is generally just toilets(not sure about the skimmer pukes, but that's how it was for us bubbleheads). Wow I can't believe I still remember the trim and drain schematics for the boat.... It also wouldn't be the first time something like that was done.

Oh sure there are even funnier things you can do, but pumping san on them would be effective in two ways: It would convince them to leave without killing them. It would give the sailors a great story to tell their friends(And you could say it is a "No ****ter"<- bound to be censored but its funny as heck)

Web Rider
01-14-2008, 10:27 PM
I'm not getting the relevance....
Then you really need an education.

Last time I checked, we weren't at war with Iran.
We weren't at war with AL Queda when the Cole was hit, point?

Big difference.... :xp:

you know I really can't think of any more responses to you that won't get me banned.

Web Rider
01-14-2008, 10:29 PM
Not really. Do you realize how much waste is pumped overboard as it is? Sure they can't pump oily waste overboard, but fecal matter, it's bio-degradable. Just think of it like this... where to the sea animals put their waste? San #1 might be a problem as it contains detergent, but San 2 is generally just toilets(not sure about the skimmer pukes, but that's how it was for us bubbleheads). Wow I can't believe I still remember the trim and drain schematics for the boat.... It also wouldn't be the first time something like that was done.

Oh sure there are even funnier things you can do, but pumping san on them would be effective in two ways: It would convince them to leave without killing them. It would give the sailors a great story to tell their friends(And you could say it is a "No ****ter"<- bound to be censored but its funny as heck)

It's not really the fact that it's waste, but what goes into it. Human waste is known to be one of the most chemically polluted kinds of waste out there. Right up there with Chicken dookie and dog poop.

Tommycat
01-14-2008, 10:47 PM
My point was that it is already being dumped. If it can take a Navy Ship, it's gonna get Navy Sh... Poo. Besides, would you rather get sprayed with poo, or get hit with a round from the guns. Both are effective at getting people out of your way, one is more fun, and the other leaves them covered in poo:D(Just kidding).

edit: There is another advantage of pumping San 2... Captain can say, "Well we were performing routine maintenance, and I guess they were just too close."