PDA

View Full Version : Iran Seizes 2 US Navy Boats & 10 Crewmen



Rainmaker
01-12-2016, 09:13 PM
"Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said on MSNBC that the pending release of the sailors shows how diplomacy between U.S. and Iranian officials "is working."

"Hopefully this will be resolved, and it won't be an issue that we're talking about in a couple of hours," she said"

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pentagon-2-u-s-navy-boats-held-iran-military-n495031



So, Does this mean that Ketchup Kerry and SuckNav Ray Mabus will have them back in time to hear Obama Bragging about the "Iranian nuclear deal" at the State of the Union address tonight?

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/marines-slam-secnav-facebook-politically-correct-policies/

MikeKerriii
01-12-2016, 09:36 PM
"Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said on MSNBC that the pending release of the sailors shows how diplomacy between U.S. and Iranian officials "is working."

"Hopefully this will be resolved, and it won't be an issue that we're talking about in a couple of hours," she said"

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pentagon-2-u-s-navy-boats-held-iran-military-n495031



So, Does this mean that Ketchup Kerry and SuckNav Ray Mabus will have them back in time to hear Obama Bragging about the "Iranian nuclear deal" at the State of the Union address tonight?

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/marines-slam-secnav-facebook-politically-correct-policies/

Do you have any idea whose waters those boats were in? If they were in Iranian waters Iran acted just as we would have.

Rainmaker
01-12-2016, 09:47 PM
Do you have any idea whose waters those boats were in? If they were in Iranian waters Iran acted just as we would have.

All hands Person your battle stations!

efmbman
01-12-2016, 11:16 PM
Do you have any idea whose waters those boats were in? If they were in Iranian waters Iran acted just as we would have.
Agreed. And as more information is coming out, it appears one of the boats had a mechanical problem and could not reach safe harbor. From what is being reported, this is nothing more than another country rendering maritime aid. Interested to see how this plays out, but this is not even close to an act of war.

Rainmaker
01-13-2016, 12:59 AM
Agreed. And as more information is coming out, it appears one of the boats had a mechanical problem and could not reach safe harbor. From what is being reported, this is nothing more than another country rendering maritime aid. Interested to see how this plays out, but this is not even close to an act of war.

Being a Flyboy, Rainmaker don't really know much about the navy .. But, something just seems off here..... Is it considered normal for 2 boats to both lose contact with the fleet, suffer mechanical problems and drift into Iranian waters? a week after they test fired rocket within 1,500 yards of a carrier?

waveshaper2
01-13-2016, 02:45 AM
Agreed. And as more information is coming out, it appears one of the boats had a mechanical problem and could not reach safe harbor. From what is being reported, this is nothing more than another country rendering maritime aid. Interested to see how this plays out, but this is not even close to an act of war.

This incident sounds fishy to me and there's not enough info available on what really happened. If in fact one boat was broke down then why didn't the crews of both boats take some kind of action before they drifted into Iranian waters? see below;
1. The operational boat could've towed the disabled boat out of harm's way before they drifted into Iranian waters.
2. They could've transferred the crew of the disabled boat to the operational boat/then scuttled the disabled boat before they drifted into Iranian waters.
3. ?

Maybe the US Navy has contracted out towing services for US Navy vessels and if so then apparently there's no Sea Tow or BoatUS towing services in the Persian Gulf.

Some recent Iranian history on how they've handled situations like this in the recent past.
1. In 2007 the Iranians captured 15 Brits -14 male/1 female (8 Royal Navy Sailors/ 7 Royal Marines/one small boat) that were from the HMS Cornwall. They were held for 13 days for entering Iranian waters before they were released. Some of them were forced to make written confessions for their transgressions.
2. in 2004 the Iranians captured 6 Royal Marines, 2 Royal Navy Sailors, and 2 small RIB boats. They were held for 3 days for entering Iranian waters before they were released and they were subject to torture/mock executions/etc. Their weapons/boats were confiscated and never returned, currently one of these boats is on display in a museum in Tehran.

efmbman
01-13-2016, 10:34 AM
Well... they've been released:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/13/politics/iran-us-sailors/index.html
Navigation system failure is what is being reported. They are on the USS Anzio getting checked out.

MikeKerriii
01-13-2016, 11:17 AM
Being a Flyboy, Rainmaker don't really know much about the navy .. But, something just seems off here..... Is it considered normal for 2 boats to both lose contact with the fleet, suffer mechanical problems and drift into Iranian waters? a week after they test fired rocket within 1,500 yards of a carrier?

They drifted int Iranian water in narrow seas, Iran had every right to seize the boats and crews if they wanted to do so, and were not obligation at all to return the boats. Your trying to somehow make Iran the villain of this particular piece with the evidence available does provide comic relief though. I looks like Iran was following normal international law,and even being a bit generous in its application.

Rainmaker
01-13-2016, 02:19 PM
They drifted int Iranian water in narrow seas, Iran had every right to seize the boats and crews if they wanted to do so, and were not obligation at all to return the boats

Did I miss something? When did the Obama administration start suddenly concerning themselves with respecting a hostile country's sovereignty?

in case you haven't noticed, The Nobel Peace prize winner in chief has supported coups to overthrow regimes in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Yemen, Syria (ongoing), and the Crimea


Your trying to somehow make Iran the villain of this particular piece

Nope. I'm just asking questions about the official narrative.

I find it unlikely that both boats had Commo failures and mechanical issues. Is it possible the Iranians disabled them?

What are the ROE that led to this happening? Like I said, I'm not familiar with Navy SOP. In the AF we have redundancy of communications.

We also know where the fuck we're flying and when we violate someone else's airspace, usually it's on purpose.

Has training gotten so bad that our sailors have forgotten how to rig a tow line?

Whatever they were doing there, Hopefully they at least destroyed the crypto before they were boarded.


I looks like Iran was following normal international law,and even being a bit generous in its application.

That's Mighty white of them. glad that the Persians are seemingly more pragmatic than the Neocon maniacs that we have polluting our own institutions.

Mjölnir
01-13-2016, 04:53 PM
They drifted int Iranian water in narrow seas, Iran had every right to seize the boats and crews if they wanted to do so, and were not obligation at all to return the boats. Your trying to somehow make Iran the villain of this particular piece with the evidence available does provide comic relief though. I looks like Iran was following normal international law,and even being a bit generous in its application.

Mostly right. Despite the vessels drifting into Iranian waters, Iran is / was obligated under international maritime law to return the vessels since the vessels were not derelict (abandoned). Had they kept them that would be considered piracy.

Rainmaker
01-13-2016, 07:26 PM
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2016/01/13/us-sailor-apologizes-iran-propaganda-video/78744270/

Well that didn't take long......Propaganda video's already out......

Sailors Not exactly channeling John Paul Jones......

Sheez.... Is that a new technique they teach in Ray Mabus' LGBTQ/Diversity/SERE training course?

And WTF are these dudes doing carrying passports on a mission?

Mjölnir
01-13-2016, 09:51 PM
For ref: I have done many small boat ops and flown about 120 missions on the EP-3 over the Arabian Gulf.

Transit: if they were transiting south from Kuwait (probably KNB) to Bahrain (NSA Bahrain) the normal transit route takes them close to IR TTW. If they went DIW, currents in the NAG this time of year would push them toward Farsi Island from overly direction except the east (which if not the standard route.)

Towing: The patrol boat is capable of towing another patrol boat. Typical mooing lines would not work for towing, not sure if they had towing cables onboard.

Comms: these boats have comms, even redundant comms ... But nothing near what we put in a single seat aircraft or cargo plane. The equipment is rather shitty, gets exposed to the elements and seeing that the vessels were transiting to BAH, likely were rotating off ops for a maintenance period. Best equipment likely remained at KNB.

Resisting boarding: This would have likely been a bad idea. We aren't at war with Iran, hostile relationship for sure but not war. 10 Sailors (not VBSS, SeALS etc but SWCC - so think basic weapons quads and about 2 dozen IRGCN Sailors with weapons drawn pull up in their own waters. Resisting aid ... Even assertive aid would likely have gotten them all killed, probably severely escalated the already tense relationship.

Passports: they were transiting from Kuwait to Bahrain. When I flew out of AUAB we had to clear customs for every flight ... Huge pain. Likely this is a requirement in this situation as well.

General: again, we are not at war with Iran ... Go the "name, rank, SSN" route (wartime posture while in a peacetime detention ... You will escalate the situation. There are actually different SERE courses for war time and peacetime detention (I have been to both.). Most, the vast majority of the SWCC Sailors don't go to either.

I would love to have read these guys figured a way out of the situation, they did not. Many people think these guy should have made a stand a la Butch Cassidy & Sundance ... But to what end? Especially considering that they were in IR TTW, making an armed stand would provide Iranian propaganda mills more than they already have.

For now, I have to be content to let the commander Fifth Fleet conduct an investigation and figure it out.

garhkal
01-13-2016, 09:56 PM
This incident sounds fishy to me and there's not enough info available on what really happened. If in fact one boat was broke down then why didn't the crews of both boats take some kind of action before they drifted into Iranian waters? see below;
1. The operational boat could've towed the disabled boat out of harm's way before they drifted into Iranian waters.
2. They could've transferred the crew of the disabled boat to the operational boat/then scuttled the disabled boat before they drifted into Iranian waters.
3. ?

Maybe the US Navy has contracted out towing services for US Navy vessels and if so then apparently there's no Sea Tow or BoatUS towing services in the Persian Gulf.

Some recent Iranian history on how they've handled situations like this in the recent past.
1. In 2007 the Iranians captured 15 Brits -14 male/1 female (8 Royal Navy Sailors/ 7 Royal Marines/one small boat) that were from the HMS Cornwall. They were held for 13 days for entering Iranian waters before they were released. Some of them were forced to make written confessions for their transgressions.
2. in 2004 the Iranians captured 6 Royal Marines, 2 Royal Navy Sailors, and 2 small RIB boats. They were held for 3 days for entering Iranian waters before they were released and they were subject to torture/mock executions/etc. Their weapons/boats were confiscated and never returned, currently one of these boats is on display in a museum in Tehran.

And if the Iranians were "rendering aid to boats in distress" why then was there no distress calls made, and why were the sailors held captive as if they were taken prisoner?



And WTF are these dudes doing carrying passports on a mission?

My thoughts exactly.. Even when on ship, we never had our passports ON us, they were always locked up.

Rainmaker
01-13-2016, 10:45 PM
For ref: I have done many small boat ops and flown about 120 missions on the EP-3 over the Arabian Gulf.

Transit: if they were transiting south from Kuwait (probably KNB) to Bahrain (NSA Bahrain) the normal transit route takes them close to IR TTW. If they went DIW, currents in the NAG this time of year would push them toward Farsi Island from overly direction except the east (which if not the standard route.)

Towing: The patrol boat is capable of towing another patrol boat. Typical mooing lines would not work for towing, not sure if they had towing cables onboard.

Comms: these boats have comms, even redundant comms ... But nothing near what we put in a single seat aircraft or cargo plane. The equipment is rather shitty, gets exposed to the elements and seeing that the vessels were transiting to BAH, likely were rotating off ops for a maintenance period. Best equipment likely remained at KNB.

Resisting boarding: This would have likely been a bad idea. We aren't at war with Iran, hostile relationship for sure but not war. 10 Sailors (not VBSS, SeALS etc but SWCC - so think basic weapons quads and about 2 dozen IRGCN Sailors with weapons drawn pull up in their own waters. Resisting aid ... Even assertive aid would likely have gotten them all killed, probably severely escalated the already tense relationship.

Passports: they were transiting from Kuwait to Bahrain. When I flew out of AUAB we had to clear customs for every flight ... Huge pain. Likely this is a requirement in this situation as well.

General: again, we are not at war with Iran ... Go the "name, rank, SSN" route (wartime posture while in a peacetime detention ... You will escalate the situation. There are actually different SERE courses for war time and peacetime detention (I have been to both.). Most, the vast majority of the SWCC Sailors don't go to either.

I would love to have read these guys figured a way out of the situation, they did not. Many people think these guy should have made a stand a la Butch Cassidy & Sundance ... But to what end? Especially considering that they were in IR TTW, making an armed stand would provide Iranian propaganda mills more than they already have.

For now, I have to be content to let the commander Fifth Fleet conduct an investigation and figure it out.

Thanks Admiral Kirby.

Having flown numerous missions over the Persian( yes we're calling it that again) gulf as well.

The dual GPS malfunction story is Bullshit.

But, I wouldn't expect them to say anything otherwise. They have to say that.

Honestly, I'm surprised the Pentagram didn't use this opportunity to fabricate a story about the girl overpowering the Republican guard while the men hid in the corner (ala Pvt. Jessica Lynch)

Mjölnir
01-13-2016, 11:09 PM
Thanks Admiral Kirby.

Having flown numerous missions over the Persian( yes we're calling it that again) gulf as well.

The dual GPS malfunction story is Bullshit.

But, I wouldn't expect them to say anything otherwise. They have to say that.

Honestly, I'm surprised the Pentagram didn't use this opportunity to fabricate a story about the girl overpowering the Republican guard while the men hid in the corner (ala Pvt. Jessica Lynch)



I got nothing on Kirby, guy had mad skillz. I also think it very unlikely that both GPS units failed. The only rhing I could think of would be a bad load from the same source that would generate a simultaneous and identical fault, but don't think it too likely.

Heck, even without GPS ... based on time of day just drive to or away from the giant burning ball of gas in the sky.

MikeKerriii
01-14-2016, 01:38 AM
Mostly right. Despite the vessels drifting into Iranian waters, Iran is / was obligated under international maritime law to return the vessels since the vessels were not derelict (abandoned). Had they kept them that would be considered piracy.

The law used to say something quite different for armed combatants, I remember that from the Pueblo incident, When did that change?

If they were spying they got off pretty light compared to other US spy ship crews, The North Koreans kept a crew for months and the Isreali's murdered a good chunk of the Liberty's crew.

I think that this was just Murphy's laws in action

MikeKerriii
01-14-2016, 01:43 AM
I would love to have read these guys figured a way out of the situation, they did not. Many people think these guy should have made a stand a la Butch Cassidy & Sundance ... But to what end? Especially considering that they were in IR TTW, making an armed stand would provide Iranian propaganda mills more than they already have.

F. Some are always willing to have other people die for a meaningless gesture

Rainmaker
01-14-2016, 02:18 AM
and the Isreali's murdered a good chunk of the Liberty's crew.

Rainmaker's been wondering for years if this subject was EVER going to come up here on the forum.

Sadly, due to the complete MSM blackout on the subject, most Americans today have never even heard of it.....

Excerpt from Liberty survivor Phil Tourney's Book titled "What I Saw That Day"

“..“If the truth ever came out,” Tourney began, “it would change history and how people felt about the Israeli state. If the mainstream media devoted an entire week of stories to the USS Liberty and exactly what happened, the American people would be up in arms, begging for blood. Even though I’ve been accused of being an anti-Semite for trying to tell the truth, everyone should remember one important point—USS Liberty crewmembers didn’t murder anyone. The state of Israel did. The truth will change history.” When asked to elaborate, Tourney said: “Things would change drastically in regard to Zionism. There would no longer be any money, aid or weaponry being sent to Israel. If people were interested enough to study this subject, they’d find out further that Adm. [Thomas] Moorer and Capt. Ward Boston wrote scathing articles to the Navy Board of Inquiry saying its report [on the Liberty] was a complete lie and sham.”

Tourney added that “Israel ruined many lives that day—not only survivors, but families that lost loved ones, too. Many of the wounded have long since died, taken their own lives, been thrown in prison or are messed up in the head.”....“It’s like parents hiring a hit man to kill you,” he added. “Then they go to the prison and spring your killer. That’s exactly what the U.S. government did to us. When they put a gun to our heads, they put a gun to everyone’s head.”

....“Defense Secretary Robert McNamara contacted the Saratoga and recalled the fighters, telling them not to aid our ship,” he said. “But, showing true courage, Tully re-launched the jets, without authorization . . . After the second set of fighter jets were dispatched, the president of the United States—Lyndon Johnson—personally recalled them,” said Tourney. Tourney says Johnson told Tully: “I don’t give a [expletive] if that ship goes to the bottom and every sailor is lost. We will not embarrass our ally, Israel.”.......“The only message we’d sent from the makeshift wire that had been strung was: ‘Attacked by unmarked aircraft’,” he added. “We never initially identified the attackers. So how did LBJ know Israel was behind the assault?”

......“McCain has been part of the cover-up and knew exactly what happened to us,” Tourney said. “This fact has been documented since at least 1981. But his reaction leaves a lot to be desired. He claims: ‘It was a tragic mistake. Forget it. Get over it. Israel paid reparations.’ . . . McCain won’t tell people that most of the crewmen only received $200 or $250 in compensation.”



RIP Admiral Thomas Moore. Today's self-serving Kiss Ass, political lapdogs that are posing as General Officers could learn a lesson from you...

"Forceful to the end, Admiral Moore’s final statement on Jan. 9, 2004 (see March 2004 Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, p. 9) attacked the American double standard where Israel is concerned. The final part of his statement focused on the “treatment of the USS Liberty and its survivors.”


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/Z?r108:E11OC4-0056:%20findings%20of%20Moorer%20Commission

http://www.wrmea.org/2004-april/in-memoriam-admiral-thomas-hinman-moorer-1912-2004.html

http://www.ussliberty.org/moorer3.htm

Mjölnir
01-14-2016, 09:07 AM
The law used to say something quite different for armed combatants, I remember that from the Pueblo incident, When did that change?

If they were spying they got off pretty light compared to other US spy ship crews, The North Koreans kept a crew for months and the Isreali's murdered a good chunk of the Liberty's crew.

I think that this was just Murphy's laws in action

It really hasn't. There was a more formal international understanding of sovereign immunity from UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea). It resulted from the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) ... granted the US is not a signatory to the agreement, but has recognized it in the Admiralty courts before.

UNCLOS defines that warships retain sovereign immunity even when within the internal waters of a foreign nation. However, these patrol craft are not classified as warships per the Law of Naval Operations they do not carry the USS designation), the whole thing is a bunch of overlapping legal issues.

IRT the PUEBLO, The PUEBLO was attacked in international waters and subsequently directed to North Korean waters. North Korea violated international maritime law in the detainment and technically continues to do so since the PUEBLO was never struck from the Naval register (is still a commissioned ship.) We never pushed the issue on it and have for the most part forgotten about it.

Rainmaker
01-14-2016, 03:09 PM
Remember The USS LIBERTY!!!

MikeKerriii
01-14-2016, 03:47 PM
It really hasn't. There was a more formal international understanding of sovereign immunity from UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea). It resulted from the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) ... granted the US is not a signatory to the agreement, but has recognized it in the Admiralty courts before.

UNCLOS defines that warships retain sovereign immunity even when within the internal waters of a foreign nation. However, these patrol craft are not classified as warships per the Law of Naval Operations they do not carry the USS designation), the whole thing is a bunch of overlapping legal issues.

IRT the PUEBLO, The PUEBLO was attacked in international waters and subsequently directed to North Korean waters. North Korea violated international maritime law in the detainment and technically continues to do so since the PUEBLO was never struck from the Naval register (is still a commissioned ship.) We never pushed the issue on it and have for the most part forgotten about it.

Thanks for the info about Maritime law. BTW the Liberty was attacked in International waters also, far more murderously.

The incident is looking even stranger since the apparently drifted to within three miles of Iranian territory without noticing.