US Navy releases video of Iranian boat incident

[sabra]

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4104881

[slackmaster]

1. Tagged for when I am on a computer capable of running the video

:argh:

ETA my brother is a Naval officer. They're taking more and more videos of this kind of thing. I've seen some very cool things that I unfortunately cannot share.

Suffice it to say that any Navy warship is easily capable of turning that kind of boat into splinters in a matter of seconds out to a few thousand yards.

[gateley]

18. And I'm sure the Iranians were aware of that - which is why it was baffling to

me WHY they did it?

[slackmaster]

22. Apparently Iranians don't care about human life

Not even their own.

:hide:

[LakeSamish706]

2. If authentic, it certainly makes one ask why the Iranians would do...

such a thing? Seems much like a Volkswagen playing chicken with a Semi at a high rate of speed!

[TomInTib]

4. No kidding. The M240's would disintegrate those small craft instantly. nt

[slackmaster]

13. The CIWS does a much more thorough job

:nuke:

[TomInTib]

36. Pretty wicked-sounding business.

I had never heard of them.

But I have been away from any of that stuff for well over three decades.

I always love the reality part, though...

from wikipedia:
February 25, 1991, during the first Gulf War, the USS Missouri and the Phalanx-equipped USS Jarrett were in the vicinity of an Iraqi Silkworm missile (often referred to as the 'Seersucker') that had been fired, either at Missouri or at the nearby British destroyer HMS Gloucester. After Missouri fired its SRBOC chaff, the Phalanx system on Jarrett, operating in the automatic target-acquisition mode, fixed upon Missouri's chaff and fired a burst of rounds (not destroying the incoming missile). From this burst, four rounds hit Missouri which was two to three miles (5 km) from Jarrett at the time. There were no injuries.<2> The Silkworm missile was then intercepted and destroyed by a Sea Dart missile launched from Gloucester. Incidentally, this is the first validated, successful engagement of a missile by a missile, during combat at sea.

[killbotfactory]

20. My guess is that they would be testing our response times

[goodgd_yall]

24. How about wanting them to know they're being watched

It's not like the U.S. has friendly intentions toward Iran.

[gateley]

3. Jesus - my heart was in my throat watching this. What on earth was Iran

thinking?

Did the boats respond when our ship asked them to ID themselves?

That was really scary --

[Strelnikov_]

21. I don't think it was 'Iran' in that it was not a operation directed by Tehran

I agree with Juan Cole that it was probably a local Guards commander going off-script.

Considering their 'navy', like ours, is mostly young men, I think the radio message could well have been some poorly commanded young sailor shooting off his mouth. We are talking about the IRGC, after all.

http://www.juancole.com/

Iran IRGC Ships confront US Navy

That the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps coast guard would play chicken with the US Navy is not that surprising. Enemies at sea often taunt one another, and I think there were similar feints by Soviet subs in the old days. (A kind reader pointed out that it even happened more recently with China.)

What is harder to understand is the Iranian government explanation, which was that the IRGC did not recognize the US naval ships as such. That isn't plausible, and besides, what other naval ships would the IRGC have a problem with?

It is the kind of explanation you would give when your nerdy crazy second cousin threatened to beat up a guest twice his size at your cocktail party. I.e., I don't think the incident was ordered from Tehran, but was some gung-ho local IRGC commander who'd been at sea way too long. I presume they thought the US was in Iranian waters (and the Iranians claim more offshore territory than the standard in international law).

Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei recently said that while it wasn't desirable right at the moment, Iranian diplomatic relations with the US in the future were not out of the question. So if anything the top leadership has been trying to ratchet down the tensions.


He does include a link to a counter point.

Farideh Farhi weighs in on the issue of the Iranian gunboats making a run at US naval ships. She feels that if the radio intercepts were accurate, it is highly unlikely that these were local units acting alone-- as I had suggested.

http://icga.blogspot.com/2008/01/irans-unduly-provocative-act-against-us.html

[rug]

5. Gilligan almost stared WWIII.

[Benhurst]

6. The horror! The horror!

Their stupidity obviously gives us not choice but to bomb them off the face of the earth, even at the risk of starting WWIII.

[RL3AO]

7. I guess the words "USS Cole" have no meaning to you?

[rug]

11. How about the "S.S. Minnow"?

[Benhurst]

17. They looked more idiotically confrontational than threatening.

If they had been on a mission to blow up one of our ships, they would have more likely gone in quietly, quickly, and attempted to attract as little attention as possible. Still, it puts our people in a difficult position. The Iranians are playing into the neo-con's hand.

[gateley]

19. That's what I was thinking while I was watching this. I think the USN showed

restraint.

[goodgd_yall]

26. How about Gulf of Tonkin "Incident" n/t

[RL3AO]

33. If they wanted Gulf of Tonkin 2, they would have fired at them.

[Benhurst]

35. I agree. If the navy had been looking for an excuse to follow the neo-con

agenda, this would have been a perfect opportunity for them. They could have fired on the Iranians and after all was said and done, it would have been impossible to say their reaction wasn't justified.

The restraint the navy showed is reassuring. But the Iranians were fools to beard the lion and were playing into the hands of their enemies.

[goodgd_yall]

44. It doesn't matter

What matters is Bush's build up of this as a an aggressive threat toward to U.S.

[paparush]

8. Wow..those CIA guys really know how to handle a small boat.

[bahrbearian]

12. Chimpy taught them up at Kennybunkport.

"And then you take this long pole thingy, and you can use that to fling buggers at them"

[ORDagnabbit]

9. sadly in this day of fake osama bin laden videos and other things you can believe video anymore

[slackmaster]

14. I'll see if I can get a confirmation on the authenticity of that one

And I probably can.

[slackmaster]

41. The video is real

According to sources.

[Greyskye]

10. didn't see any of the 'white boxes'

that they were supposedly dropping.

I'm now laughing at those reports I heard this morning of "Iranian warships" confronting our Naval vessels. Yep, single outboard warships. :eyes:

[bahrbearian]

16. It was their empty,Lucky Strike boxs

Those little boats where Smoke'in

[slackmaster]

23. They did look like cigarette boats

:rofl:

[bahrbearian]

15. "Coalition War Ship"?

Well that could be anybody, why use that Phrasings?
Why not Identify yourself?

[goodgd_yall]

27. I was wondering if any of the Iranian boaters had a grasp of English.

Does the U.S. Navy really think they were understood? Besides, it ain't nuthin' but a pretense for escalation of U.S. bellicosity against Iran.

[Pavulon]

30. They know what the us navy is..

They know we have shelled their ski boats before.

[goodgd_yall]

31. Woo-hoo

The bad ol' U.S. Navy.

[lonestarnot]

40. How do you know they were Iranians?

[goodgd_yall]

25. With Bush's overblown reaction, this smells a lot like

the Gulf on Tonkin incident.

Ooo....speed boats! Like they can really do anything to warships.

[Pavulon]

29. Except This

After loosing life and our history of sinking these guys they are quite lucky. Navy showed restraint.

[goodgd_yall]

32. They better have

U.S. is in enough trouble as far as world opinion goes.

[wuushew]

34. You know if our ships weren't in that part of the world they would not be at risk

n/t

[Strelnikov_]

28. Now, after seeing the video, I really have questions as to motive.

1) 'Attack' during daylight hours?

2) Paint your stealthy 'fast attack boats' blue (when speed and stealth are the only advantage you have)?

I think a number of young men, in a poorly commanded unit, were fucking around.

Or . . . ???

[SyntaxError]

43. That would be a rather dangerous prank to play...

[RedCappedBandit]

37. Probably just some young adults

being idiots.

Such is the norm for young adults

:evilgrin: :hide:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. "...nations should avoid the pin-pricks that precede cannon shots." Napoleon Bonaparte

"Do you know what astonished me most in the world? The inability of force to create anything. In the long run the sword is always beaten by the spirit. Soldiers usually win battles and generals get the credit for them. You must not fight too often with one enemy, or you will teach him all your art of war. If they want peace, nations should avoid the pin-pricks that precede cannon shots." - Napoleon Bonaparte

[lonestarnot]

39. We can't identify anyone from dat video. For all we know crashcart might have been in the lead boat

They sure got a little close there w/o being fired on looks like to me. They had plenty of time to launch something.

[slackmaster]

42. The people who shot the video got a much better look

And they have much better videos and still photos.