Iranian Navy in Running for Darwin Award

kuzadd · January 17, 2008

Actually Kuzzad what you just posted confirms that the ships did indeed go to action stations. Standard procedure when unidentified craft close in an aggressive manner is to close up and go to action stations. The deviation from course further confirms this. As I said earlier the crews of the ships deserve credit for exercising restraint. Even without radio transmissions the actions of the small boats in itself is tantamount to an act of war. Once again I will repeat that this is standard Navy doctrine, not exceptional or limited to the States alone. In Canada we follow the same procedural process in such instances.

The crew themselves feel they were not threatened in any way. as stated in the article.

My point Angus, (i won't call you Argus, LOL!)

This was blown way out of proportion, if you read the article in it's entirety, you will read there have been previous situations similar to this one, that never blew into this kind of side show of propaganda for the (m)asses.

This was a great psy-op for the freak show of Bush's trip to the middle east for "peace talks"(as I stated from the get-go)

The Pentagon media puppet, leaked a nice little drama to the press, which as demonstrated, the people who want war, all the time, jump& shout , "look bomb Iran" (or Iraq) (or Pakistan).

It was intentional, to sway opinion ,cause fear, etc.,

The Navy immediately started retracting and denying the allegations in the psy-op.

Too late though , damage done.

People have to be more rational and not jump the gun so quickly.(literally)

or the sh*t could hit the fan in way's we can not even begin to imagine (russia & china involvement)

Edited January 17, 2008 by kuzadd

weaponeer · January 17, 2008

The crew themselves feel they were not threatened in any way. as stated in the article.
My point Angus, (i won't call you Argus, LOL!)

This was blown way out of proportion, if you read the article in it's entirety, you will read there have been previous situations similar to this one, that never blew into this kind of side show of propaganda for the (m)asses.

This was a great psy-op for the freak show of Bush's trip to the middle east for "peace talks"(as I stated from the get-go)

The Pentagon media puppet, leaked a nice little drama to the press, which as demonstrated, the people who want war, all the time, jump& shout , "look bomb Iran" (or Iraq) (or Pakistan).

It was intentional, to sway opinion ,cause fear, etc.,

The Navy immediately started retracting and denying the allegations in the psy-op.

Too late though , damage done.

People have to be more rational and not jump the gun so quickly.(literally)

or the sh*t could hit the fan in way's we can not even begin to imagine (russia & china involvement)

Russia & China are NOT going to fight a war over Iran. Get over it, they could care less about them. They are not going to destroy planet earth to protect some Islamic nut who gets his assed bombed by the USA for being an idiot!!! Russia & China would fight a war over Russia & China being attacked, and rightly so.

AngusThermopyle · January 17, 2008

In this case I happen to agree with you Kuzzad. As I mentioned though, it wasn't just Washington being obvious wankers here. Iran has acted the part of the wanker too many times to count. It was a provocative move to make, designed to cause a strong response.

I don't doubt the crews were not feeling threatened. With the fire power they had at hand and the state of alertness they were at they had just about zero to worry about. Like I said before those boats would have become fish homes in less than 30 seconds had the order been given.

Once again, out of all the parties involved the only ones who displayed any common sense were the sailors.

M.Dancer · January 17, 2008

In this case I happen to agree with you Kuzzad. As I mentioned though, it wasn't just Washington being obvious wankers here. Iran has acted the part of the wanker too many times to count. It was a provocative move to make, designed to cause a strong response.
I don't doubt the crews were not feeling threatened. With the fire power they had at hand and the state of alertness they were at they had just about zero to worry about. Like I said before those boats would have become fish homes in less than 30 seconds had the order been given.

Once again, out of all the parties involved the only ones who displayed any common sense were the sailors.

Boghammers are quite fast (45 knots) and could carry quite a lot of explosives. And seeing they were already at 200 meters what they could (if that was their goal) is to dart fast enough to get under the arc of fire from the ship. At 45 knots it would only be a mater of a handful of seconds before they were in deadly range to re-enact the USS Cole.

In other words they would have been a little nervous...

AngusThermopyle · January 17, 2008

Sure they're fast but do you honestly believe they weren't being painted during their fun and games? Not to mention the ships secondary weapons would have been trained on them as well. Sorry to disagree with you but I still maintain those boats would not have been able to strike effectively.

As soon as they throttled up and set intercept vectors they would have become greasy smudges. That is if the ships crews were competent, which I do believe they are. Not as good as Canadians, but still good none the less. :lol:

M.Dancer · January 17, 2008

Sure they're fast but do you honestly believe they weren't being painted during their fun and games? Not to mention the ships secondary weapons would have been trained on them as well. Sorry to disagree with you but I still maintain those boats would not have been able to strike effectively.
As soon as they throttled up and set intercept vectors they would have become greasy smudges. That is if the ships crews were competent, which I do believe they are. Not as good as Canadians, but still good none the less.

In have never argues the iranians are smrt....but, there were how many? 5 boghammers? It would have been foolhardy not to take it as a serious threat if 5 crews were determined to die. It is not beyond the ralm of possibility one could have made it to the target.

AngusThermopyle · January 17, 2008

Okay, now I see what you meant. Sure, they do present a threat, not in this particular scenario though. I agree it would have been suicide for them to press any sort of attack. They probably knew that as well, or at least you would think so. Still, perhaps all their parents were playing in the shallow end of the gene pool when they were conceived. You never know.

I forgot to add. Any vessel approaching closely without identifying itself clearly is construed as a serious threat and treated as such. There really is no other way to see it.

Edited January 17, 2008 by AngusThermopyle

jbg · January 18, 2008

Actually Kuzzad what you just posted confirms that the ships did indeed go to action stations. Standard procedure when unidentified craft close in an aggressive manner is to close up and go to action stations.

With some posters, it's 'always "radical Muslims good, US bad".

jbg · January 18, 2008

I rest my case.
See Angus???? There are lots of folk here who can't wait for another blood soaked war!!

And others who can't wait to see planes crashing into skyscrapers or nutkabooms blowing themselves up on trains and subways for the sole purpose of creating havoc and carnage.

kuzadd · January 18, 2008

I think another interesting aspect of this is how the mainstream media , read their appropriate scripts, and that's it.

They blew this story relentlessly, unquestioningly, but the retractions, were carried far more via the foreign press, or in a very small manner via the western MSM.

In fact, I did a little experiment myself. People I know, who get there news via t.v.,only and asked them.

Did you know about the incident with Iranian boats? YES, they knew.

did you know it was the "filipino monkey"(ham radio operator) ? Did you know the US withdrew their complaint?

Nope, none of them knew.

Now granted it was only a few people, but they they all knew about the incident as it was shown repeatedly via MSM.

But not one of them knew of the voice recording being added later and being the filipino monkey, nor did they know the US withdrew the complaint. Wasn't it exclaimed repeatedly? Apparently not.

Also interesting to note the MSM media dutifully reported their script and didn't bother to do any additional work to verify wether this was accurate etc.,

Just an observation, on the media's portrayal of this incident.

DogOnPorch · January 19, 2008

Again... more than anything...it was 5 boats coming within 200m of the US warships that caused alarm. Flip monkeys aside.

------------------------------

I seem to smell the stench of appeasement in the air.

---PM Margaret Thatcher

obsidian · January 19, 2008

As I said before Russia and China are allies and members bound in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. Iran is an observing member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and therefore and allie of Russia and China (a rather strong one considering the amount of oil traded between them). For the first time since the cold war Russia has put its long range bomberson patrol and is sending an aircraft carrier to the persian gulf. China has recently rejected any US naval vessel from entering her ports, even on a scheduled thanksgiving port call last year. Russia is building S-400 Triumf (SA-21 Growler) surface to air missiles that have twice the range of the U.S. MIM-104 Patriot, and 2.5 times that of the S-300PMU-2 to counter the US missile defense system in Europe.

"We do not intend to attack anyone, but consider it necessary that all our partners clearly understand, and that no one has any doubts, that the Armed Forces will be used to protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia and its allies, including preventative action, and including the use of nuclear weapons."

-The Chief of the Russian General Staff, Gen. Yury Baluyevsky, January 19th, 2008

An preemptive air strike or invasion with a later occupation would undermine Russia's "sovereignty and territorialial integrity of [Russia and] its allies.

; \

Edited January 19, 2008 by obsidian

DogOnPorch · January 19, 2008

Russian carriers are a joke. Old jump-deck machines whose aircraft can barely get off the deck let alone carry large amounts of weaponry. Red China even bought one...first to be used as a casino...but then lo...refited to service status...or in the process. See: Varyag

Russian rocket technology is of course comparabe to the US's but their electronic warfare/jamming abilities lag seriously behind. The result is that few SAMs ever get to their targets. The Americans have also perfected what is known as Wild Weasel tactics re: SAMs. They actually bait the SAM site into firing then use a special homing missile to destroy the site.

Russia isn't allied to anyone, really. Very much the lone poker player. They certainly wouldn't risk the farm over Iran.

But, that's just my take...

------------------------------------------------

Ho-Ho-Ho...Green Giant.

buffycat · January 20, 2008

Russia isn't allied to anyone, really. Very much the lone poker player. They certainly wouldn't risk the farm over Iran.
But, that's just my take...

------------------------------------------------

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

obsidian · January 22, 2008

One of the main contributing factors to China's growth and Russia's regaining of status is the fact that they were able to get more oil. They were able to get more oil by trading with Iran. As China and Russia recieve oil Iran is recieving more military technology and hardware. Russia may not be as capable as the United States, but what has technology done for them in Iraq...Afghanistan...Both have experimented with directed energy weapons, Russia has the worlds largest thermobaric bomb (equivalent to a smaller nuke, no fallout), and Russia can outproduce the United States by making weapons at far cheaper costs. They still have all of their ICBM's hidden in silo's, they even have over 12 on a mobile train. Remember the United States invaded Iraq because she supposedly threatened the worlds oil supply (ie. supply to US) by having "weapons of mass destruction" which she didn't, the real threat was that Iraq started selling Oil by the Barrel in euros's instead of petrodollars(USD). Attacking Iran would be an act of war and would jeopradize Irans soveirgnty, which Russia and China have promised to protect. Attacking Iran would cause the exact same motivation that caused the United States to invade Iraq, a threat to Russia's oil supply. And its getting awfully close as I've heard before all options are on the table and Iran is now selling oil in euro's contrary to OPEC.

Edited January 22, 2008 by obsidian

obsidian · January 22, 2008

Even more Iranian oil deals with Russia, just on January 15th..

http://en.rian.ru/world/20080115/96933558.html

Interactions between Civilizations and their Mutual Assistance

Heartland Expanding, or The Shanghai Cooperation Organization

Gen. Leonid Ivashov

General Leonid Ivashov is the vice-president of the Academy on geopolitical affairs. He was the chief of the department for General affairs in the Soviet Union’s ministry of Defense, secretary of the Council of defense ministers of the Community of independant states (CIS), chief of the Military cooperation department at the Russian federation’s Ministry of defense and Joint chief of staff of the Russian armies

"....- To establish a second pole of global power with the life philosophy and attitude to environment different from those in the West, a pole assigning greater priority to spiritual and moral values, to collectivist tendencies;

- To harmonize the relations between countries and civilizations;

- To create a security system based on a balance of powers and potentials..."

How much longer will the world stay unipolar? When it is America's sworn goal to remain the sole superpower through economic subjugation and military intimidation.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization aims to counter the SPP in the west. Are post-cold war relations as nice and fuzzy as they seem? Wake up your living in a dream. Russia withdrew its support of the US in anti-terror as soon as they invaded Iraq. Lets keep in mind Russia knows what the US is doing...they tried it in the 80's. If they controlled the geopolitical assets in the middle east they would of won the cold war, it was their motive between invading afghanistan.

Gen. Leonid Ivashov also believes that there is no terrorism in the sense that American's are spinning terrorism.

He also believes that the US are going to attack Iran with nuclear weapons.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...;articleId=5309

But hey what does the ex former Chief of Staff of the entire Russian Armed Forces know...?

Edited January 22, 2008 by obsidian

bush_cheney2004 · January 22, 2008

....He also believes that the US are going to attack Iran nuclearly.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...;articleId=5309

Are you serious...N-U-C-L-E-A-R-L-Y ????

But hey what does the ex former Chief of Staff of the entire Russian Armed Forces know...?

Not much...he is the EX former Chief! I mean come on...Nikita said they were going to "bury the West" over 50 years ago!

obsidian · January 22, 2008

The main issue the West has with Iran is its nuclear program. Russia is supplying Iran its uranium and the majority of the technology.

Russia has just doubled its number of conscripts while reducing the term to 1 year. Do they foresee something coming up in the next year? By autumn call-up will be "full-scale".

http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/politics/28.htm..._issue=11950147

NATO is now saying a nuclear first strike is a key option with dealing with its problems. If the US nuked Iran do you really think no one would do anything? It would become WW3.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/nato/story/0,,22...ed=networkfront

Another China-Iran Gas deal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1200961840...=googlenews_wsj

China-Iran-Russian axis challenging the Unipolar world.

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4904

Russia, China, and Iran are energy partners.

Bush has vowed to have peace in the middle east by the end of his term...how does he plan to attain this?

Edited January 22, 2008 by obsidian

DogOnPorch · January 22, 2008

The main issue the West has with Iran is its nuclear program. Russia is supplying Iran its uranium and the majority of the technology.

Yes...and Pakistan as well. Mostly stolen technology, ironically. Even more ironic is that the basics were given to Iran back in the 50s as part of the old 'Atoms For Peace' program.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran

http://www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/1819.html

All of Iran's rocket technology is based on both Russian and Red Chinese versions...well N Korean, too. They have some capable missiles; one capable of sending a warhead sized object into orbit...which is indeed a worry. They will likely launch a satellite using their own technology soon enough. They already have a satellite launched from Russia on a Kosmos rocket. I'm not sure if it is still functioning.

Russia has a tradition of arming America's enemies. What I'll point out to you and buffy is that Russia has never come to the direct aid of these 'allies'. Russia just likes stirring the pot...then seeing if it can take advantage of the resulting chaos. But I can see what you're after here...Russia hand in hand with the Islamic world...lol. Don't forget that Russia is also in a war against Islamic fundimentalism.

In my opinion, a well armed Iran equals a cocky Iran...willing to poke the US in the butt. Russia is all too aware of this...

You watch 'em...they're tricky...lol They play both ends against the middle like the cloak n' dagger experts they are.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Anyone who doesn't regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains.

---Vladimir Putin

obsidian · January 28, 2008

yup, just like the united states. China is considering building a military base in Iran to ensure geopolitical and geo-economic security in the region. Hmm, now it is that if you attack Iran you attack China literally (well soon enough). If anything just considering this option shows China's posotion of support and Iran. Russia and China have been opposing the sanctions on Iran. Russia just finished its last shipment of uranium to Iran.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JA29Ak03.html

jbg · January 29, 2008

yup, just like the united states.

Your off-topic cheap shot of the day against the United States? Is this the Canadian's leftist sport of zero-cost anti-Americanism? Edited January 30, 2008 by jbg

obsidian · January 30, 2008

"You watch 'em...they're tricky...lol They play both ends against the middle like the cloak n' dagger experts they are."

JBG why don't you call that a cheap shot to Russia? I am just saying American has been in enough black operations and has been behind many CIA invasion and coups that they should not maintain their perfect image. America can't always be trusted. Look at the war in Vietnam...false flag, there was no attack in the gulf of tonkin. Look at the war in Iraq...no wmd's=no reason for invasion. They also play both ends: the US financed the rise of hitler, they played iran against iraq, they financed "al qaeda", and they also helped finance the Bolshevik Revolution.

I don't see how it was off topic as it pertained to repercussions and facts that are related the the straight of hormuz incident.

Edited January 30, 2008 by obsidian

moderateamericain · January 30, 2008

"You watch 'em...they're tricky...lol They play both ends against the middle like the cloak n' dagger experts they are."
JBG why don't you call that a cheap shot to Russia? I am just saying American has been in enough black operations and has been behind many CIA invasion and coups that they should not maintain their perfect image. America can't always be trusted. Look at the war in Vietnam...false flag, there was no attack in the gulf of tonkin. Look at the war in Iraq...no wmd's=no reason for invasion. They also play both ends: the US financed the rise of hitler, they played iran against iraq, they financed "al qaeda", and they also helped finance the Bolshevik Revolution.

I don't see how it was off topic as it pertained to repercussions and facts that are related the the straight of hormuz incident.

TO blame the US for the rise of Hitler is to take history and warp in beyond all contextual basis. Yes we financed the reconstruction effort post world war 1. But if you recall we stopped about the time of the great depression for obvious reasons. Furthermore Hitler was not only elected times man of the year, but was praised by European countries roundly in the early 30's for turning Germany around. TO put that mad man's rise to power squarely on the shoulders of the US is like saying Its my fault someone broke into my house disarmed the security alarm system and killed my wife. Furthermore Hitler would have never risen to power had the French and English dealt more evenly with the Germans post world war 1. The conessions they demanded from them were outlandish at best.

jbg · January 30, 2008

JBG why don't you call that a cheap shot to Russia? I am just saying American has been in enough black operations and has been behind many CIA invasion and coups that they should not maintain their perfect image. America can't always be trusted. Look at the war in Vietnam...false flag, there was no attack in the gulf of tonkin. Look at the war in Iraq...no wmd's=no reason for invasion. They also play both ends: the US financed the rise of hitler, they played iran against iraq, they financed "al qaeda", and they also helped finance the Bolshevik Revolution.

Your post isn't worth responding to, except to say it's yet another zero-cost anti-American cheap shot.

Rue · January 30, 2008

Man this Iranian navy post ended up with blaming the US for Hitler. Makes sense.

I think Iran is a wonderful role model for Canada and our Canadian Navy should attack the Americans with speed boats to protect the Northern passages. We should also send people with Anne Murray and Celine Dion cd's to the US and strategically plant them bombarding Americans with their songs. You want terrorism, that is how you do it.