Story here. The Iranians call it an “ordinary occurrence”; Condi Rice calls it “provocative and dangerous.” I’ve pretty much stopped worrying Bush will attack Iran in his time remaining – he’s shot his bolt; and this incident has nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear program, interference in Iraq, or any other important point of conflict – we don’t, I hope, really much care about how many miles offshore Iran claims. Still . . .
Can you say Gulf of Tonkin?
I knew you could.
Well, thank God it wasn’t one of those scary Iranian airliners, or it’d be in the drink now.
Difficult as it is to add to such a substantive OP with a clear topic to be debated…
(ahem)
It certainly doesn’t seem to be a routine event, unless anybody can provide a cite for American ships routinely being notified “I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes,” in the context of dropping unidentified containers in front of the American ships. Now, of course, the specific source of the transmissions cannot be confirmed. So even without an explicit threat that an attack was about to commence, buzzing another nation’s ships and dropping strange containers into the water in front of them is certainly something other than routine.
Unless, of course, you consider claims such as a handfull of cases where there was aggressive maneuvering on the part of possible Iranian ships. But even those reports are sketchy and apparently substantially divergent.
Behavior like that is likely to get you fired on. Add to that the fact that this went down in international waters, and there are some serious problems. Possibly, it was an attempt to draw a US response in order to point to the US as evil warmongering imperialists, or what have you. And as the OP seems stumped by the context, it’s also worth pointing out that the Strait of Hormus is a conduit for upwards of 40% of the world’s oil. “or any other important point of conflict” indeed. :rolleyes: That it may have been a tacit threat to the continued viability of the Strait of Hormuz, a vitally important oil shipping route, shouldn’t be overlooked in any calculations. Nor should the fog of war be overlooked, and the possibility that both sides are jumpy and need to review their SOP and ROE.
Any way you slice it, it’s dangerous and reckless for the Iranian Navy (or Revolutionary Guard if it turns out to be their boats) to act in such a manner. And even with good ROE’s, this sort of thing can quite possibly lead to blood. And that’s the real story here.
Some, of course, will be at a loss for how to view this since it can’t be fit into a “America is teh uber evil war lovers” meme. Or, on preview, I see that silenus seems to have found a way to work this event into that paradigm, too.
The general event certainly did occur, with Iranian internal press claiming (in English but not Farsi) that the events “had been a warning to the American vessels to stay away from Iran’s territorial waters.” Odd, of course… but not necessarily mutually exclusive, when considered along side of Iranian claims that this was a routine event where they simply checked the flag the ships were flying under. Additionally, the Pentagon has claimed that the Iranian ships did not respond to hails. I’m sure that the usual suspects will claim all sorts of sinister motivations and allege conspiracies of various sorts on the part of the American Navy. But let’s be a bit honest here. If the Navy wanted to fake an incident where Iran attacked us and gave us a casus belli? They’d have done it.
And hell, as long as I’m at it… Rick, the Vincennes downed Iran Air Flight 655 and they did indeed have good reason to find its launch ‘scary’ although they investigation ultimately found that crew error was to blame for the events. The fog of war is never pretty.
Still, there is no real comparison between those events and the events under discussion here.
I’m still not clear on what the OP thought he was going to be debating, if anything.
Ah well.
I should’ve been clearer. The issue is where, if anywhere, this incident will lead. I did not intend to weigh in on which navy was in the right or the wrong.
Ah, that’s clearer: this incident will lead pretty much nowhere, at all. There won’t be war. There won’t be additional sanctions.
There will undoubtedly be a close review of the ROE’s that American ships operate under in this region. There may possibly be a pragmatic set of strategic decisions made in Tehran as to whether or not the chance of even honest misunderstandings that might lead to is worth it, and perhaps, a revision of their own SOP. And these events might potentially lead to a increased risks should such an event happen again. Then again, they could conceivably lead to tightened ROE’s where American captains wouldn’t authorize the use of anything (even a warning shot) unless they were fired upon now.
As American ROE’s are classified in most cases, we’re unlikely to know unless something like this occurs again.
Aside from the ROE’s of both Navies, it’s doubtful that we’ll see any actual fallout from this. It’s saber rattling, at best. If Iran wanted to attack us, they could have. If the US wanted to stage an Iranian attack, they could have. I’d expect to see diplomatic protests, maybe even some harsh language… but this is highly unlikely to escalate beyond posturing.
/$.02
From your fingertips!
If the idea was to provoke a violent American response by a particular Iranian political faction, which seems likely, then it seems likely to me that provocations may continue and escalate until there is such a response.
As for Bush and war with Iran, I expect that if he does so, he’ll wait until shortly before he’s due to leave office before starting the war.
Couldn’t he just put Superglue on the West Wing keyboards?
It’s all part of the post-Labor day strategy to drum up war-with-Iran hysteria.
I’m not sure what your point is, can you elaborate? Cosgriff’s comments indicate that the captains didn’t feel that firing warning shots weren’t warranted, I already cited an article that said that ships didn’t reach the point of firing warning shots. Cosgriff also said that according to news reports, one of the captains may have been considering firing on the Iranian ships, while he hadn’t spoken to that captain.
Do you disagree that dropping objects which might be mines and/or threatening to blow up American ships is likely to get one shot at?
Or, also from Cosgriff (and also in blue 
)
Perhaps the quibble is that I should’ve said that behavior of that sort will quite possibly get you fired on, instead of likely fired on?
No, because that wouldn’t get us stuck in a war that the neocons want.
Just something that’s been bugging me: ships don’t fire “warning shots”, they fire “a shot over the bow.” I mean, shit, navies have the coolest terminology in the world, why not use it?
I’ve no quibble with you. Just the damned ‘journalists’. They should stick more closely to what their sources say, rather than insert colorful phrases about the Iranians ‘fleeing’ as the US prepared to ‘blast them out of the water’.
This early report has not been improved by the addition of color commentary, but that commentary has spawned loose talk about how the Navy was within seconds of firing on these shitheads … Remember 9-11-2001? Remember the USS Cole?.
I happen to think the goals of the Iranians were tactical in this case. They were waiting to see what happened and how quickly. They may have been trying to see what frequencies the American radars were on, or trying to get other ELINT information for later use.
The Iranians will continue this sort of provocation. They’ve been doing it off and on for over twenty years. I was part of a USN Carrier battle group in 1985 and 1987 and they were doing this sort of thing back then.
Ah, I grok. I’m not sure if someone got more information from a well placed phone call than Cosgriff got from his general reports, or if this really is a colorful phrase gone too far. Cosgriff also did make it sound that our current ROE for such a situation include the possibility of escalating to violence… assuming that he wasn’t being deliberately vague/misleading about classified information. I’d be interested to see if this story develops and, of course, if any sources are identified.
True… but it’s also spawned formulaic responses about the “Gulf of Tomkin” and Iran Air Flight 655. Folks on both side of an Iran discussion are generally willing to go hog wild with a shred of data and spin it to their personal favorite worldview.
And while I’m at it:
That should teach me not to post and/or not to edit via cut and paste when I’m tired. Either that, or that I need to get Fuzzy Lumpkins to do the voiceover for my typos.
My questions are on the Iranian side of the conflict. Why? Which faction? Who would benefit most from an incident?
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seems closely allied with the Revolutionary Guard who were alleged to be involved in the incident. He is not the only force in Iranian politics. There seems to have been some reining in of the Guard’s activities recently in arming factions in Iraq. The Ayatollahs of the ruling council have taken some swipes at Ahmadinejad and his positions of late. Was it a provocation? What level authorized it? Simply tactical or with strategic goals? How closely were the boats controlled? Sign of internal rifts?
I and others sometimes err in assuming a single Iranian position or entity. The fracturing of Yugoslavia, Kosovo, and Iraq when an efficient (ruthless?) ruling power was removed is a current lesson on over simplification of national identity and policies.
The issue with things like these is that they aren’t really causes in and of themselves more that they are symptoms of rising tensions. Wars can be started over these sorts of things. If US Navy HAD fired upon them, then the people in the boats might have been tempted to sink one of our ships. The thing to remember is that when they are on the open sea warships are heavily armed steel boxes manned with people who have decision making authority. If those boats were armed with explosives that can rip a hole in the hull of a ship, it is possible that in the heat of the moment someone could decide to sink the enemy ship. We aren’t talking about the leaders of the nations sitting in their plush offices, we are talking about people under duress out in the field. If Iranian troops sank a US Navy ship, we’d be bombing the f*** out of Iran by morning. There would have to be retaliation. At that point the desires of the leadership would be rendered moot. War breaks out often when communication breaks down. That’s one of the great tragedies of it. It can happen even if neither side truly wants it, though once it’s broken out oftentimes both sides suddenly want it very very badly.
So because nothing actually happened, nothing will happen but if something like this happens again, who knows what triggers will actually be pulled in the field?
Other than an acknowledgement that something happened, the Iranians have been pretty quiet about this. There’s been none of the fervor like we saw over the siezure of British sailors last year.
The piece in today’s Tehran Times lacks much fire: Persian Gulf incident part of U.S. psyops: Majlis speaker