Why are you concentrating on the source of this news? the source is irrelevant here. My main source in this news is not presstv. Presstv is quoting Israeli public security minister Avi Dichter, do you have any dubt that a Zionist official would encorage USA to attack Iran? I can not think of anyone believing otherwise.
In the olden days maybe Motori jaan, but nowadays with Global Positionaing Systems, you don't really need a landmark to know how close you are to shore. You know better on these technical issues, but I'm sure they can pin point their exact location to a few feet/meters in this manner and would be no where near Iranian territorial waters - unless they wanted to provoke a confrontation - or if the Iranians had no idea how far off shore they were - which would make hand held GPS units a higher priority than stealth aircraft at this point! 
If you remember B-H jAn, during the british sailors conflict both side provided GPS coordinates, UK proved sailors never penetrated in Iranian waters and IRI proved other wise. GPS coordinates can be altered by the people sitting behind control panels, those satellites are still considered as US DoD properties.
Also if both sides happen to be in the international waters then each one will be considered as fair game.
The most likely scenario is that bush want to tell the arabs he is goin to visit soon......
- Look Iranian threaten the Straits of Hormuz sound, and they (Iranian) dare to threaten the US "the-big-No-1-pigs"-navy!
And if Iranian dare to threaten the US "the-big-No-1-pigs"-navy, than you arab-countries are just a very easy target for them!
There are still none reliable sources which can possibly verify the information about the conflict and what really happened out there!
video #1 CNN
Videeo #2 BBC
Video #3 CNN
- Look Iranian threaten the Straits of Hormuz sound, and they (Iranian) dare to threaten the US "the-big-No-1-pigs"-navy!
And if Iranian dare to threaten the US "the-big-No-1-pigs"-navy, than you arab-countries are just a very easy target for them!
There are still none reliable sources which can possibly verify the information about the conflict and what really happened out there!
video #1 CNN
Videeo #2 BBC
Video #3 CNN
Last edited:
Here is the footage of incident that the U.S. released today.
Recordings show Iran-US clash in Gulf
Small Iranian fast boats swarmed around massive U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf, and a man speaking heavily accented English threatened, "I am coming to you. ... You will explode," according to a video released Tuesday by the Pentagon.
The Iranian boats appeared to ignore repeated warnings from the U.S. ships, including horn blasts and radio transmissions, as the ships moved through the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf.
In a four-minute, 20-second video, shot from the bridge of the destroyer USS Hopper, the small boats — including a bright blue one — can be seen racing near the wake the U.S. ships and crossing close to each other.
From the Hopper's bridge, after spotting the approaching Iranian boats, a Navy crew member says over the radio: "This is coalition warship. I am engaged in transit passage in accordance with international law. I intend no harm. Over."
Often uneven and shaky, the video condenses what Navy officials have said was a 20-minute or so clash early Sunday between three Navy warships and five Iranian fast boats. It ends with a blank screen, as only the audio of the Navy's final warning can be heard, just after the voice warns that they are coming.
"Inbound small craft: You are approaching a coalition warship operating in international waters. Your identity is not known; your intentions are unclear," the unidentified Navy crew member says. He then cautions the Iranians that if they do not steer clear they will be "subject to defensive measures."
"Request that you alter course immediately to remain clear," the crew member says.
After a pause, the man with the accent issues a final threat: "You will explode after (indecipherable) minutes."
A Navy crew member then repeated the threat as he heard it: "He says, 'You will explode after a few minutes.'" At that point the tape ends.
President Bush on Tuesday denounced the incident as a "provocative act."
"It is a dangerous situation," Bush said during a White House news conference. "They should not have done it, pure and simple. ... I don't know what their thinking was, but I'm telling you what my thinking was. I think it was a provocative act."
The audio and video recordings were made separately but were pulled together by the Navy. Internal U.S. Navy transmissions can also be heard on the tape. The Hopper was in the lead, followed by the cruiser USS Port Royal and the frigate USS Ingraham.
The top Navy commander in the Gulf said the Iranian fleet of high-speed boats charged at and threatened to blow up the Navy convoy as it passed near but outside Iranian waters on Sunday. The Iranian fleet "maneuvered aggressively" and then fled as the American ship commanders were preparing to open fire, Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff said. No shots were fired.
In Tehran, Iran's Foreign Ministry suggested that the Iranian boats had not recognized the U.S. vessels. Spokesman Mohammed Ali Hosseini played down the incident. "That is something normal that takes place every now and then for each party," he told the state news agency IRNA.
Cosgriff disputed Iranian claims that the incident was a routine encounter, saying Iran's "provocative" actions were "deadly serious" to the U.S. military.
The confrontation was an unusual flare-up of U.S.-Iranian tensions in the Persian Gulf as Bush prepared for an eight-day Mideast trip designed in part to counter Iran's influence in the region. He is expected to discuss the U.S. posture toward Tehran with Arab allies also worried about Tehran's desire for greater regional power.
Many Arab countries fear the Iranian-American rivalry could erupt into a military confrontation that would put them in the crossfire and hurt vital oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran's Revolutionary Guards said that its high-speed boats never threatened the U.S. vessels during the encounter, insisting it only asked them to identify themselves, then let them continue into the Gulf. A Guards commander defended his force's right to identify ships in the sensitive waterway.
Cosgriff, the commander of U.S. 5th Fleet, which patrols the Gulf and is based in nearby Bahrain, said the American vessels had been identified by Iranian authorities earlier in the day.
"The group had been successfully queried by an Iranian ship, possibly a Revolutionary Guards ship, and two or three Iranian (shore) stations and an Omani station," Cosgriff told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Tuesday.
The U.S. commander also said that the American ships were clearly marked and the incident took place during the day when they could be seen. "I can't help but conclude that it was provocative," Cosgriff said.
The Pentagon has said the U.S. ships were on the verge of opening fire on the Iranian boats when they fled.
Cosgriff said the five Iranian boats were outfitted with outboard motors and carrying three to four people each.
Two of the Iranian boats went to the ship's left side, three to the right, he said. The two on the left "were more energetic and made a number of runs toward the lead ship, the USS Hopper." The two boats dumped boxes into the water.
U.S. military officials, including Cosgriff, cautioned, however, that they have not been able to connect definitively the radio call with one of the Revolutionary Guards boats.
"The ships were close enough to shore that the call could have come from a shore station, it could have come from another boat," said Cdr. Lydia Robertson, the 5th Fleet spokeswoman. "But the call did happen while the small boats were there."
Senior Revolutionary Guards commander Ali Reza Tangsiri said Iran had the right to ask any ships to identify themselves upon entering or leaving the Persian Gulf.
"It is a basic responsibility of patrolling units of the Revolutionary Guards to take necessary interception measures toward any vessels entering into the waters of the Persian Gulf," Tangsiri said, according to the Mehr news agency.
Cosgriff objected to Iranian attempts to downplay the incident.
"I hope from this lesson they realize that we are concerned by small, high-speed vessels," said Cosgriff. "I hope they understand we will take those actions we deem appropriate to defend our ships and our sailors."
Riad Kahwaji, a Dubai-based analyst with the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis, said Iran may have been seeking to send a "political message" to Arab Gulf states to highlight the dangers of military confrontation.
"When somebody gets so close to a big ship then he's very likely asking for trouble or trying to provoke something," he said. "Opening fire means sparking a war. ... Does anyone really want to take that risk?"
Recordings show Iran-US clash in Gulf
Small Iranian fast boats swarmed around massive U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf, and a man speaking heavily accented English threatened, "I am coming to you. ... You will explode," according to a video released Tuesday by the Pentagon.
The Iranian boats appeared to ignore repeated warnings from the U.S. ships, including horn blasts and radio transmissions, as the ships moved through the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf.
In a four-minute, 20-second video, shot from the bridge of the destroyer USS Hopper, the small boats — including a bright blue one — can be seen racing near the wake the U.S. ships and crossing close to each other.
From the Hopper's bridge, after spotting the approaching Iranian boats, a Navy crew member says over the radio: "This is coalition warship. I am engaged in transit passage in accordance with international law. I intend no harm. Over."
Often uneven and shaky, the video condenses what Navy officials have said was a 20-minute or so clash early Sunday between three Navy warships and five Iranian fast boats. It ends with a blank screen, as only the audio of the Navy's final warning can be heard, just after the voice warns that they are coming.
"Inbound small craft: You are approaching a coalition warship operating in international waters. Your identity is not known; your intentions are unclear," the unidentified Navy crew member says. He then cautions the Iranians that if they do not steer clear they will be "subject to defensive measures."
"Request that you alter course immediately to remain clear," the crew member says.
After a pause, the man with the accent issues a final threat: "You will explode after (indecipherable) minutes."
A Navy crew member then repeated the threat as he heard it: "He says, 'You will explode after a few minutes.'" At that point the tape ends.
President Bush on Tuesday denounced the incident as a "provocative act."
"It is a dangerous situation," Bush said during a White House news conference. "They should not have done it, pure and simple. ... I don't know what their thinking was, but I'm telling you what my thinking was. I think it was a provocative act."
The audio and video recordings were made separately but were pulled together by the Navy. Internal U.S. Navy transmissions can also be heard on the tape. The Hopper was in the lead, followed by the cruiser USS Port Royal and the frigate USS Ingraham.
The top Navy commander in the Gulf said the Iranian fleet of high-speed boats charged at and threatened to blow up the Navy convoy as it passed near but outside Iranian waters on Sunday. The Iranian fleet "maneuvered aggressively" and then fled as the American ship commanders were preparing to open fire, Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff said. No shots were fired.
In Tehran, Iran's Foreign Ministry suggested that the Iranian boats had not recognized the U.S. vessels. Spokesman Mohammed Ali Hosseini played down the incident. "That is something normal that takes place every now and then for each party," he told the state news agency IRNA.
Cosgriff disputed Iranian claims that the incident was a routine encounter, saying Iran's "provocative" actions were "deadly serious" to the U.S. military.
The confrontation was an unusual flare-up of U.S.-Iranian tensions in the Persian Gulf as Bush prepared for an eight-day Mideast trip designed in part to counter Iran's influence in the region. He is expected to discuss the U.S. posture toward Tehran with Arab allies also worried about Tehran's desire for greater regional power.
Many Arab countries fear the Iranian-American rivalry could erupt into a military confrontation that would put them in the crossfire and hurt vital oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran's Revolutionary Guards said that its high-speed boats never threatened the U.S. vessels during the encounter, insisting it only asked them to identify themselves, then let them continue into the Gulf. A Guards commander defended his force's right to identify ships in the sensitive waterway.
Cosgriff, the commander of U.S. 5th Fleet, which patrols the Gulf and is based in nearby Bahrain, said the American vessels had been identified by Iranian authorities earlier in the day.
"The group had been successfully queried by an Iranian ship, possibly a Revolutionary Guards ship, and two or three Iranian (shore) stations and an Omani station," Cosgriff told The Associated Press in a telephone interview Tuesday.
The U.S. commander also said that the American ships were clearly marked and the incident took place during the day when they could be seen. "I can't help but conclude that it was provocative," Cosgriff said.
The Pentagon has said the U.S. ships were on the verge of opening fire on the Iranian boats when they fled.
Cosgriff said the five Iranian boats were outfitted with outboard motors and carrying three to four people each.
Two of the Iranian boats went to the ship's left side, three to the right, he said. The two on the left "were more energetic and made a number of runs toward the lead ship, the USS Hopper." The two boats dumped boxes into the water.
U.S. military officials, including Cosgriff, cautioned, however, that they have not been able to connect definitively the radio call with one of the Revolutionary Guards boats.
"The ships were close enough to shore that the call could have come from a shore station, it could have come from another boat," said Cdr. Lydia Robertson, the 5th Fleet spokeswoman. "But the call did happen while the small boats were there."
Senior Revolutionary Guards commander Ali Reza Tangsiri said Iran had the right to ask any ships to identify themselves upon entering or leaving the Persian Gulf.
"It is a basic responsibility of patrolling units of the Revolutionary Guards to take necessary interception measures toward any vessels entering into the waters of the Persian Gulf," Tangsiri said, according to the Mehr news agency.
Cosgriff objected to Iranian attempts to downplay the incident.
"I hope from this lesson they realize that we are concerned by small, high-speed vessels," said Cosgriff. "I hope they understand we will take those actions we deem appropriate to defend our ships and our sailors."
Riad Kahwaji, a Dubai-based analyst with the Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis, said Iran may have been seeking to send a "political message" to Arab Gulf states to highlight the dangers of military confrontation.
"When somebody gets so close to a big ship then he's very likely asking for trouble or trying to provoke something," he said. "Opening fire means sparking a war. ... Does anyone really want to take that risk?"
I am sure military is covering up again. They must have been so close or inside Iranian waters as they were in the incident in 1990, when they shutdown an Iranian airliner and looted and hooted in joy in Rambo like attitude, not realizing how grave their act was!
I think Americans, if they are genuinely seeking a non-confrontational approach and are not after games, should respect that fact that they are so close to land and water territories of Iran. Navy should take every step in making sure that Iranians know that they do not wish to enter Iranian waters or even approach her waters and should somehow coordinate with Iranian forces.
It is them who are close to another country's border. Iranians are simply in international waters next to their own. The very presence of American Navy is somewhat threatening and provocative. So that has to be canceled out by goodwill and taking every step possible if they are not after playing games.
By the way, did you read this part of the news:
U.S. military officials, including Cosgriff, cautioned, however, that they have not been able to connect definitively the radio call with one of the Revolutionary Guards boats.
"The ships were close enough to shore that the call could have come from a shore station, it could have come from another boat," said Cdr. Lydia Robertson, the 5th Fleet spokeswoman. "But the call did happen while the small boats were there."
From: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080108/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iran_us_navy
I think Americans, if they are genuinely seeking a non-confrontational approach and are not after games, should respect that fact that they are so close to land and water territories of Iran. Navy should take every step in making sure that Iranians know that they do not wish to enter Iranian waters or even approach her waters and should somehow coordinate with Iranian forces.
It is them who are close to another country's border. Iranians are simply in international waters next to their own. The very presence of American Navy is somewhat threatening and provocative. So that has to be canceled out by goodwill and taking every step possible if they are not after playing games.
By the way, did you read this part of the news:
U.S. military officials, including Cosgriff, cautioned, however, that they have not been able to connect definitively the radio call with one of the Revolutionary Guards boats.
"The ships were close enough to shore that the call could have come from a shore station, it could have come from another boat," said Cdr. Lydia Robertson, the 5th Fleet spokeswoman. "But the call did happen while the small boats were there."
From: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080108/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iran_us_navy
Are you worried more about American Navy than what their mistakes can do to your country?
You can do a favor to NAVY. Vote out republican party. I am not saying dems are angles but with them Navy will be one step safer as well as your fellow human beings who live/fly/travel in the Persian gulf region. That is the least you could do.
You can do a favor to NAVY. Vote out republican party. I am not saying dems are angles but with them Navy will be one step safer as well as your fellow human beings who live/fly/travel in the Persian gulf region. That is the least you could do.
Ok, thank you for responding.
From my perspective the only reason that I was alarmed a bit is the behavior of the US stock market in recent times. 9/11 clearly showed that the "market" knew of the event before it happened.
We are getting similar price action recently. Of course this is not a 100% predictor as there are many other reasons for a sell off. However it is sufficient to be alarmed. For example, today, the moment Bush opened his mouth on the Iran incident then the market in the US had a huge sell off.
I am certain that if there are strike plans against Iran then the market will telegraph it beforehand. Somehow friends and family will know about it. Of course I am sure that others believe as I do therefore it could simply be unnecessary alarm.
From my perspective the only reason that I was alarmed a bit is the behavior of the US stock market in recent times. 9/11 clearly showed that the "market" knew of the event before it happened.
We are getting similar price action recently. Of course this is not a 100% predictor as there are many other reasons for a sell off. However it is sufficient to be alarmed. For example, today, the moment Bush opened his mouth on the Iran incident then the market in the US had a huge sell off.
I am certain that if there are strike plans against Iran then the market will telegraph it beforehand. Somehow friends and family will know about it. Of course I am sure that others believe as I do therefore it could simply be unnecessary alarm.
I bought this really cool think from woot (www.woot.com) and when u press the button and talk into it changes your voice to sound robotic... It sounds a lot like that. it cost me .99 LOL. These little boats did not even have mounted guns.
Given that an incident did occur, it isn't all that difficult to manufacture evidence supporting your own version. It's been done before. Just google "Gulf of Tonkin"!
Iran and US have both been operating in the Persian Gulf waters side by side. Both militaries communicate with eachother on a regular basis on a cordial basis. I dont see why the IRGC would all of a sudden decide to go blow up a US ship. It makes no sense. They would, however, make threats if they felt the Iranian waters were being violated. That seems to be the most plausible explanation. Of course, Bush's visit to the Midle East, and how this incident may help his cause with the Persian gulf Arab states may also have something to do with this.
Iran and US have both been operating in the Persian Gulf waters side by side. Both militaries communicate with eachother on a regular basis on a cordial basis. I dont see why the IRGC would all of a sudden decide to go blow up a US ship. It makes no sense. They would, however, make threats if they felt the Iranian waters were being violated. That seems to be the most plausible explanation. Of course, Bush's visit to the Midle East, and how this incident may help his cause with the Persian gulf Arab states may also have something to do with this.
Let's say those ships did enter Iranian waters. Is this anyway for a great nation to react? What are you doing circling three guided missile cruisers, in little boats that you see at Sears, and acting like nutcases. There are long standing protocols for handling situations like this in a professional dignified manner. Sorry to see the country in the hands of a bunch deranged idiots.
what a joke by us-navy..... he he he
فيلم پنتاگون از تهديد ناوهاي آمريكا توسط قايق*هاي تندرو ساختگي است
That is very obvious! :slowz:
به گزارش خبرنگار امور دفاعي خبرگزاري فارس پس از آنكه شب گذشته رسانه*هاي آمريكايي و غربي همچون سي.ان.ان، فاكس نيوز، رويترز، بي بي سي و صدها شبكه تلويزيوني و خبرگزاري*هاي مطرح* بين*المللي اقدام به پخش تصاويري از تهديد ناوهاي آمريكايي توسط قايق هاي تندرو ايراني پرداختند يك فرمانده ارشد نيروي دريايي سپاه در گفتگو با خبرنگار فارس اعلام كرد: تصاويري كه وزارت دفاع امريكا درباره موضوع كشتي*هاي جنگي آمريكا پخش كرده، آرشيوي و صداها نيز ساختگي است.
وي در ادامه تاكيد كرد: در آستانه سفر از پيش شكست خورده بوش به منطقه و اجراي پروژه ايران هراسي كه در دستور كار رسانه هاي غربي قرار گرفته، فيلم و تصاوير منتشر شده پنتاگون در مورد وقايع اخير تنگه هرمز به صورت ناشيانه اي جعل و ساخته شده به گونه اي كه هيچگونه تطابقي بين تصوير و صدا در اين فيلم وجود ندارد و ساختگي بودن آن كاملا مشخص است.
به گفته مقامات نظامي كشورمان شناورهاي نيروي دريايي سپاه كنترل ورود و خروج شناورهاي بيگانه را برعهده داشته و روز يكشنبه نيز طبق روال روزانه در تنگه هرمز مشغول گشت زني عادي و كنترل شناورهاي ورودي و خروجي به خليج فارس بودند كه سه فروند ناو آمريكا در حال ورود به آبهاي منطقه از سوي اين شناورها مشاهده شدند كه مطابق معمول مورد شناسايي و سئوال قرار گرفتند اما فيلم ارائه شده توسط پنتاگون هيچ ارتباطي با اين واقعه ندارد.
عصر روزدوشنبه خبرگزاري فارس اقدام به گفتگو با يك فرمانده ارشد نيروي دريايي سپاه نمود كه وي در تشريح جنجال اخير مقامات و رسانه هاي غربي به ويژه آمريكايي گفت: ساعت 7 و40 دقيقه صبح ديروز طبق روال گذشته شناورهاي نيروي دريايي سپاه در تنگه هرمز مشغول گشت زني عادي و كنترل شناورهاي ورودي و خروجي به خليج فارس بودند كه سه فروند ناو آمريكا در حال ورود به آبهاي منطقه از سوي اين شناورها مشاهده شدند كه مطابق معمول مورد شناسايي و سئوال قرار گرفتند.
وي گفت: ناوهاي آمريكايي نيز طبق روال گذشته ضمن معرفي خود شماره بدنه ناوها را اعلام كردند و بدون هيچ گونه روال غيرعادي به مسير خود ادامه دادند.
طبق كنوانسيون بين المللي قانون درياها شرايطي براي عبور از تنگه ها مانند تنگه هرمز تعيين شده است كه اين شرايط توسط كشورهاي ساحلي تنگه ها مورد اجرا و دقت قرار مي گيرد. يكي از مواد اين كنوانسيون عبور بي ضرر از تنگه ها است.
انتهاي پيام/
CNN article
Iran: U.S. faked conflict video
............In the audio recording, a man speaking in heavily accented English threatened, "I am coming to you. ...You will explode after ... minutes." :--biggrinwned:
فيلم پنتاگون از تهديد ناوهاي آمريكا توسط قايق*هاي تندرو ساختگي است
That is very obvious! :slowz:
به گزارش خبرنگار امور دفاعي خبرگزاري فارس پس از آنكه شب گذشته رسانه*هاي آمريكايي و غربي همچون سي.ان.ان، فاكس نيوز، رويترز، بي بي سي و صدها شبكه تلويزيوني و خبرگزاري*هاي مطرح* بين*المللي اقدام به پخش تصاويري از تهديد ناوهاي آمريكايي توسط قايق هاي تندرو ايراني پرداختند يك فرمانده ارشد نيروي دريايي سپاه در گفتگو با خبرنگار فارس اعلام كرد: تصاويري كه وزارت دفاع امريكا درباره موضوع كشتي*هاي جنگي آمريكا پخش كرده، آرشيوي و صداها نيز ساختگي است.
وي در ادامه تاكيد كرد: در آستانه سفر از پيش شكست خورده بوش به منطقه و اجراي پروژه ايران هراسي كه در دستور كار رسانه هاي غربي قرار گرفته، فيلم و تصاوير منتشر شده پنتاگون در مورد وقايع اخير تنگه هرمز به صورت ناشيانه اي جعل و ساخته شده به گونه اي كه هيچگونه تطابقي بين تصوير و صدا در اين فيلم وجود ندارد و ساختگي بودن آن كاملا مشخص است.
به گفته مقامات نظامي كشورمان شناورهاي نيروي دريايي سپاه كنترل ورود و خروج شناورهاي بيگانه را برعهده داشته و روز يكشنبه نيز طبق روال روزانه در تنگه هرمز مشغول گشت زني عادي و كنترل شناورهاي ورودي و خروجي به خليج فارس بودند كه سه فروند ناو آمريكا در حال ورود به آبهاي منطقه از سوي اين شناورها مشاهده شدند كه مطابق معمول مورد شناسايي و سئوال قرار گرفتند اما فيلم ارائه شده توسط پنتاگون هيچ ارتباطي با اين واقعه ندارد.
عصر روزدوشنبه خبرگزاري فارس اقدام به گفتگو با يك فرمانده ارشد نيروي دريايي سپاه نمود كه وي در تشريح جنجال اخير مقامات و رسانه هاي غربي به ويژه آمريكايي گفت: ساعت 7 و40 دقيقه صبح ديروز طبق روال گذشته شناورهاي نيروي دريايي سپاه در تنگه هرمز مشغول گشت زني عادي و كنترل شناورهاي ورودي و خروجي به خليج فارس بودند كه سه فروند ناو آمريكا در حال ورود به آبهاي منطقه از سوي اين شناورها مشاهده شدند كه مطابق معمول مورد شناسايي و سئوال قرار گرفتند.
وي گفت: ناوهاي آمريكايي نيز طبق روال گذشته ضمن معرفي خود شماره بدنه ناوها را اعلام كردند و بدون هيچ گونه روال غيرعادي به مسير خود ادامه دادند.
طبق كنوانسيون بين المللي قانون درياها شرايطي براي عبور از تنگه ها مانند تنگه هرمز تعيين شده است كه اين شرايط توسط كشورهاي ساحلي تنگه ها مورد اجرا و دقت قرار مي گيرد. يكي از مواد اين كنوانسيون عبور بي ضرر از تنگه ها است.
انتهاي پيام/
CNN article
Iran: U.S. faked conflict video
............In the audio recording, a man speaking in heavily accented English threatened, "I am coming to you. ...You will explode after ... minutes." :--biggrin
wned:
Last edited:
AghA Flint, what makes you think the protocol -the same one that has been followed for all these years- was not followed? And ask yourself what the great nation of America would do if Iranian battleships were right now cruising up and down US coast just outside US territorial waters -let alone enter its waters.
Just saw the video. I don't know man, but it really doesn't make any sense. I live in a military town, and have known a few American military guys who served in the Persian Gulf. They said that the relationship between the US and Iranian military was actually very cordial, and in fact, cooperative many times.
What you see in this video is some guy all of a sudden decides to say "I'm coming at you" and "You will explode in a few minutes"!!! Why, after so many years of apparent cooperation, would some guy on a speed boat decide in a whim to change this long-standing policy? And if these guys actually intended to go explode anything, why in the world would they announce that intention a few minutes in advance? And how is it that the Iranian boats turned away "just as the order to shoot was being issued"? How would they knoow they were about to receive fire? I don't claim the IRGC to be angels, but to me, this story has a few logical holes in it.
What you see in this video is some guy all of a sudden decides to say "I'm coming at you" and "You will explode in a few minutes"!!! Why, after so many years of apparent cooperation, would some guy on a speed boat decide in a whim to change this long-standing policy? And if these guys actually intended to go explode anything, why in the world would they announce that intention a few minutes in advance? And how is it that the Iranian boats turned away "just as the order to shoot was being issued"? How would they knoow they were about to receive fire? I don't claim the IRGC to be angels, but to me, this story has a few logical holes in it.
Looks like you hadn't seen the video before posting. Do those rafts look like to you they were conducting themselves in a professional manner? Do they look like they are conducting naval protocols while weaving, bobbing and turning like college kids on spring break? Does it even look like they have communication equipment on board? At least send a decent ship worthy of the country if you want to question the Americans. Size matters. Here is the real reason for this. They are probing to see how far they can push US Navy and in the process find out the rules of engagement. They have some idea now. It has noting to do with territorial waters. Sad thing is we do not need to be picking a fight at every turn and for no reason.
You are not happy about PressTV? ok below is another source. Unless you only belive in CNN/BBC/FOX? read this carefully it gives a good lesson on American policy of warmongering.
An Ominous Non-Event
The Gulf of Tonkin and the Strait of Hormuz
By ROBERT FANTINA
As the U.S. government continues to demonstrate its inability to learn from history, an alarming report from the Strait of Hormuz was broadcast to the world on January 7. The Associated Press reported the following: "In what U.S. officials called a serious provocation, Iranian boats harassed and provoked three U.S. Navy ships in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, threatening to explode the American vessels." These Iranian ships are believed to part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's navy, the organization that the U.S. Congress officially decreed a 'terrorist' organization.
Those either old enough to remember, or cognizant enough to understand history, will immediately be reminded of the infamous 'Gulf of Tonkin' incident, reported on August 2, 1964. On that day, the U.S. destroyer Maddox, on an espionage mission in the Gulf of Tonkin off the Vietnam coast, reported being fired on by North Vietnamese torpedo patrol boats. In response the Maddox fired back, sinking one boat. Tensions in the area were already growing, and now the world watched and waited.
On August 4 of that same year, the Maddox and the C. Turner Joy, another destroyer, were again patrolling the Gulf of Tonkin. Instruments on the Maddox indicated that it was either attacked or was under attack, and both the Maddox and the C. Turner Joy began firing back, with assistance from U.S. air power.
It was less than 24 hours later when the captain concluded that there might not have been an attack; why the instruments indicated otherwise was not clearly explained. The pilot of a Crusader jet, James B. Stockdale, undertook a reconnaissance flight over the gulf that evening. He was asked if he saw any North Vietnamese attack vessels. Mr. Stockdale did not equivocate in his response. Said he: "Not a one. No boats, no wakes, no ricochets off boats, no boat impacts, no torpedo wakes--nothing but black sea and American firepower."
Yet this non-event, either misinterpreted or fabricated altogether, was seen by an hysterical U.S. Congress, ever willing to protect America from its enemies, real or imagined, as aggression against the U.S. It also provided members of that august body with some additional 'I'm-strong- on-Communism' credentials, which were ever in demand from the end of World War II until the dawn of the world's newest bugaboo, 'terrorism.' Congress quickly passed the so-called 'Gulf of Tonkin Resolution,' which empowered President Lyndon Johnson to take all measures he deemed necessary to repel aggression. While this was not the start of the Vietnam War, it represented the first major escalation that did not end for over a decade, and cost the lives of over 50,000 U.S. soldiers, and between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 Vietnamese citizens. It caused havoc with the U.S. economy, brought near-revolution to American streets and campuses and drew hostility towards the U.S. from most of the world.
Today, an unidentified Pentagon official called this 'incident' in the Strait of Hormuz "a serious provocation." Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman referred to it as a "serious incident." Mr. Gordon Johndore, National Security Council spokesman said the United States urges the Iranians "to refrain from such provocative actions that could lead to a dangerous incident in the future."
It must be remembered that it was just a month ago that the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) determined that Iran ceased its nuclear weapons program four years ago. As President Bush was busy rattling his saber, and apparently itching to start yet another war, the NIE took the wind out of his bloody sails. He huffed and puffed and said, inexplicably, that the NIE report proved that Iran was still a great threat to the U.S., but it seemed that no one took him too seriously. Now, however, we have an 'incident.' Obviously, we are told, like in the Gulf of Tonkin 44 years ago, the U.S. has been the victim of 'aggression.'
It is, of course, unimportant to consider that Iran might understandably be a little trigger-happy when it sees U.S. naval vessels approaching. Just because Iran's next-door neighbor was invaded by the U.S. without provocation, and now is in the midst of a deadly occupation, should not in any way justify Iran's wariness. The fact that it was only a year ago that Mr. Bush sent a second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf for no other reason than to intimidate Iran, and to participate in 'war games' (an oxymoron if ever there was one) in clear sight of one of the members of Mr. Bush's 'axis of evil,' should simply be ignored by Iran. The fact that the U.S. has a long and violent history of invading countries that displease it in some way (perhaps they have a democratically elected government that does not bow and scrape to the occupant of the White House throne) should not alarm Iran. Mr. Bush and his spokesman have not said that they plan to invade Iran; they simply said no options are off the table.
One waits in anxious impatience to see how Congress will react. Surely the slowly-dwindling multitudes seeking the Republican and Democratic presidential nominations will race each other to the microphone to denounce Iranian aggression, thus shining their patriotic credentials. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), who last fall voted to name Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, can gloat and glow with jingoistic satisfaction that that organization has now proven her right and her critics wrong, at least in her own mind. Perhaps former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, stumbling along on the path if not towards the Republican nomination, at least in its general direction, will endorse whatever Mr. Bush proclaims; after all, Mr. Romney has stated that it is Mr. Bush who has kept America safe (save for one or two unfortunate incidents in September of 2001). Will former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who never tires of reminding the voters that he and he alone was mayor of New York on September 11 2001 (whatever that may be worth), now raise the specter of Iranian terrorism in the U.S?
One could sit back and laugh at the nonsense proclaimed by the men and women who seek to lead the United States if their actions were not so dangerous. In 1964 an incident not unlike the one that allegedly took place in the Strait of Hormuz on January 8 of this year caused Congress to officially embark on America's most deadly imperial disaster. 'Flawed intelligence,' at best, and outright lies at worst paved the way for the current imperial mess which has the potential to dwarf America's Vietnam catastrophe. And now, with a lame duck president seeking to salvage his disgraced reputation, one wonders if this reported incident from Iran will have the same effect as the non-incident in the Gulf of Tonkin 44 years ago.
Mr. Bush & Co. have never been particularly interested in facts. They have not had any desire to listen to opposing opinions. They have happily ignored the wishes of the U.S. citizens. They apparently have been very interested in enriching themselves and their cronies, and have focused their desire for riches on oil, at the expense of the blood of their own, and Iraq's, citizens. They have used fear to get Congress to support their crimes. There is nothing to cause one to think things will be different now. Congress has proved its spinelessness over and over, and we all know that there is no reason for statesmanship when interesting, pander-to-the-fear-of-the-moment sound bytes are so much easier.
Whether or not this current situation leads Congress to justify an invasion of Iran, or other actions that will lead to an invasion, remains to be seen. But the U.S. has not learned from its own history, and another repeat of an unneeded and catastrophic war is not, unfortunately, unthinkable. That the president will not stop it is not surprising; that Congress will be complicit once again is unspeakable.
Robert Fantina is author of 'Desertion and the American Soldier: 1776--2006.'
http://www.counterpunch.org/fantina01082008.html
An Ominous Non-Event
The Gulf of Tonkin and the Strait of Hormuz
By ROBERT FANTINA
As the U.S. government continues to demonstrate its inability to learn from history, an alarming report from the Strait of Hormuz was broadcast to the world on January 7. The Associated Press reported the following: "In what U.S. officials called a serious provocation, Iranian boats harassed and provoked three U.S. Navy ships in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, threatening to explode the American vessels." These Iranian ships are believed to part of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's navy, the organization that the U.S. Congress officially decreed a 'terrorist' organization.
Those either old enough to remember, or cognizant enough to understand history, will immediately be reminded of the infamous 'Gulf of Tonkin' incident, reported on August 2, 1964. On that day, the U.S. destroyer Maddox, on an espionage mission in the Gulf of Tonkin off the Vietnam coast, reported being fired on by North Vietnamese torpedo patrol boats. In response the Maddox fired back, sinking one boat. Tensions in the area were already growing, and now the world watched and waited.
On August 4 of that same year, the Maddox and the C. Turner Joy, another destroyer, were again patrolling the Gulf of Tonkin. Instruments on the Maddox indicated that it was either attacked or was under attack, and both the Maddox and the C. Turner Joy began firing back, with assistance from U.S. air power.
It was less than 24 hours later when the captain concluded that there might not have been an attack; why the instruments indicated otherwise was not clearly explained. The pilot of a Crusader jet, James B. Stockdale, undertook a reconnaissance flight over the gulf that evening. He was asked if he saw any North Vietnamese attack vessels. Mr. Stockdale did not equivocate in his response. Said he: "Not a one. No boats, no wakes, no ricochets off boats, no boat impacts, no torpedo wakes--nothing but black sea and American firepower."
Yet this non-event, either misinterpreted or fabricated altogether, was seen by an hysterical U.S. Congress, ever willing to protect America from its enemies, real or imagined, as aggression against the U.S. It also provided members of that august body with some additional 'I'm-strong- on-Communism' credentials, which were ever in demand from the end of World War II until the dawn of the world's newest bugaboo, 'terrorism.' Congress quickly passed the so-called 'Gulf of Tonkin Resolution,' which empowered President Lyndon Johnson to take all measures he deemed necessary to repel aggression. While this was not the start of the Vietnam War, it represented the first major escalation that did not end for over a decade, and cost the lives of over 50,000 U.S. soldiers, and between 1,000,000 and 2,000,000 Vietnamese citizens. It caused havoc with the U.S. economy, brought near-revolution to American streets and campuses and drew hostility towards the U.S. from most of the world.
Today, an unidentified Pentagon official called this 'incident' in the Strait of Hormuz "a serious provocation." Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman referred to it as a "serious incident." Mr. Gordon Johndore, National Security Council spokesman said the United States urges the Iranians "to refrain from such provocative actions that could lead to a dangerous incident in the future."
It must be remembered that it was just a month ago that the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) determined that Iran ceased its nuclear weapons program four years ago. As President Bush was busy rattling his saber, and apparently itching to start yet another war, the NIE took the wind out of his bloody sails. He huffed and puffed and said, inexplicably, that the NIE report proved that Iran was still a great threat to the U.S., but it seemed that no one took him too seriously. Now, however, we have an 'incident.' Obviously, we are told, like in the Gulf of Tonkin 44 years ago, the U.S. has been the victim of 'aggression.'
It is, of course, unimportant to consider that Iran might understandably be a little trigger-happy when it sees U.S. naval vessels approaching. Just because Iran's next-door neighbor was invaded by the U.S. without provocation, and now is in the midst of a deadly occupation, should not in any way justify Iran's wariness. The fact that it was only a year ago that Mr. Bush sent a second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf for no other reason than to intimidate Iran, and to participate in 'war games' (an oxymoron if ever there was one) in clear sight of one of the members of Mr. Bush's 'axis of evil,' should simply be ignored by Iran. The fact that the U.S. has a long and violent history of invading countries that displease it in some way (perhaps they have a democratically elected government that does not bow and scrape to the occupant of the White House throne) should not alarm Iran. Mr. Bush and his spokesman have not said that they plan to invade Iran; they simply said no options are off the table.
One waits in anxious impatience to see how Congress will react. Surely the slowly-dwindling multitudes seeking the Republican and Democratic presidential nominations will race each other to the microphone to denounce Iranian aggression, thus shining their patriotic credentials. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), who last fall voted to name Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, can gloat and glow with jingoistic satisfaction that that organization has now proven her right and her critics wrong, at least in her own mind. Perhaps former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, stumbling along on the path if not towards the Republican nomination, at least in its general direction, will endorse whatever Mr. Bush proclaims; after all, Mr. Romney has stated that it is Mr. Bush who has kept America safe (save for one or two unfortunate incidents in September of 2001). Will former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who never tires of reminding the voters that he and he alone was mayor of New York on September 11 2001 (whatever that may be worth), now raise the specter of Iranian terrorism in the U.S?
One could sit back and laugh at the nonsense proclaimed by the men and women who seek to lead the United States if their actions were not so dangerous. In 1964 an incident not unlike the one that allegedly took place in the Strait of Hormuz on January 8 of this year caused Congress to officially embark on America's most deadly imperial disaster. 'Flawed intelligence,' at best, and outright lies at worst paved the way for the current imperial mess which has the potential to dwarf America's Vietnam catastrophe. And now, with a lame duck president seeking to salvage his disgraced reputation, one wonders if this reported incident from Iran will have the same effect as the non-incident in the Gulf of Tonkin 44 years ago.
Mr. Bush & Co. have never been particularly interested in facts. They have not had any desire to listen to opposing opinions. They have happily ignored the wishes of the U.S. citizens. They apparently have been very interested in enriching themselves and their cronies, and have focused their desire for riches on oil, at the expense of the blood of their own, and Iraq's, citizens. They have used fear to get Congress to support their crimes. There is nothing to cause one to think things will be different now. Congress has proved its spinelessness over and over, and we all know that there is no reason for statesmanship when interesting, pander-to-the-fear-of-the-moment sound bytes are so much easier.
Whether or not this current situation leads Congress to justify an invasion of Iran, or other actions that will lead to an invasion, remains to be seen. But the U.S. has not learned from its own history, and another repeat of an unneeded and catastrophic war is not, unfortunately, unthinkable. That the president will not stop it is not surprising; that Congress will be complicit once again is unspeakable.
Robert Fantina is author of 'Desertion and the American Soldier: 1776--2006.'
http://www.counterpunch.org/fantina01082008.html