View Full Version : Iran... uh-oh...
jonovision_man
01-07-08, 10:36 AM
cnn.com says:
Breaking News
U.S. military reports "significant confrontation" between 5 Iranian vessels and 3 U.S. warships in Strait of Hormuz. Details soon.
jono
TrueBrit
01-07-08, 10:40 AM
Hmmm....anyone getting Vietnam flashbacks on this one?
jonovision_man
01-07-08, 10:51 AM
Playing games:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/01/07/iran.us.navy/index.html
How long before the U.S. blows one of these guys out of the water... pretty stupid if you ask me.
jono
How long before the U.S. blows one of these guys out of the water... pretty stupid if you ask me.
jono
Probably not very long. I'm surprised they didn't the other night.
In one radio transmission, the Iranians told the U.S. Navy: "I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes," the U.S. military officials told CNN.
When the U.S. ships heard that radio transmission, they manned their gun positions and officers were "in the process" of giving the order to fire when the Iranians abruptly turned away, the U.S. officials said.
Hmmm....anyone getting Vietnam flashbacks on this one?
Been doing that for the last five odd years TB.
great. all we need is for some ship to step over the line and actually provoke retaliation from a US warship.
then the media can report how we are hatemongers for attacking them and the world can side with Iran. :shakehead
opinionated ow
01-07-08, 11:47 AM
why are US warships there anyway? I thought it was a peace keeping force for Iraq, not an all out war mongering team out to get Iran as well.
Methanolandbrats
01-07-08, 12:00 PM
Hmmm....anyone getting Vietnam flashbacks on this one?
First thing I thought too. Something don't smell right.
Hope they're all video taping. I wonder how close they'll let a boat get before they blow it out of the water.
Andrew Longman
01-07-08, 12:11 PM
why are US warships there anyway? I thought it was a peace keeping force for Iraq, not an all out war mongering team out to get Iran as well.
The strait of Hormuz is of great strategical importance, as it is the only sea route through which oil from Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, as well as most of United Arab Emirates, can be transported.
Get the picture? The US Navy is always there protecting US interests, i.e., oil. :)
The strait of Hormuz is of great strategical importance, as it is the only sea route through which oil from Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, as well as most of United Arab Emirates, can be transported.
Get the picture? The US Navy is always there protecting US interests, i.e., oil. :)
well there's that :shakehead , plus that war thing going on in Iraq and as you said, its the only sea route to get there.
not like this was the first time, won't be the last
Andrew Longman
01-07-08, 12:21 PM
How long before the U.S. blows one of these guys out of the water... pretty stupid if you ask me.
Only a little different from playing cat and mouse with Russian subs during the cold war.
The Navy is there to keep some looney in a rubber raft full of C4 from blowing up a tanker. Or to keep local looney Navys from highjacking shipping. Keep in mind the Iranians held captive a British crew for two weeks.
But if the British Navy allowed themselves to be captured and the US Navy didn't shoot in this incident you can be pretty sure they are under orders to stay off the trigger.
Granted, just being there poses a big risk, but it is calculated to be less than not being there.
Still our issues in the region scream for political and diplomatic solutions. And for the US to get off the oil habit.
Insomniac
01-07-08, 01:02 PM
Hopefully there are orders to fire only if fired on first. I'd hate to see a war started because Iran was antagonizing the U.S. This is nothing new, they have been doing it knowing full well that the U.S. would have a lot of trouble adding a third war.
Hopefully there are orders to fire only if fired on first. I'd hate to see a war started because Iran was antagonizing the U.S. This is nothing new, they have been doing it knowing full well that the U.S. would have a lot of trouble adding a third war.
40 yo, ex-navy, i-banker these days. Says patrolling Hormuz, having the sirens go off middle of the night, everyone rushing to their stations, the most terrifying thing he's ever experienced. And that was 20 years ago.
stroker
01-07-08, 01:55 PM
feh. They're just probing for responses. Sorta like taunting the tiger in the zoo cage to see what you can get away with before he leaps over the "20 foot" fence and chews your ass.
Hopefully there are orders to fire only if fired on first.
After the USS Cole attack, no way are they going to wait until fired upon. I imagine there is a defined distance for each ship that nobody is allowed to cross.
Insomniac
01-07-08, 02:35 PM
After the USS Cole attack, no way are they going to wait until fired upon. I imagine there is a defined distance for each ship that nobody is allowed to cross.
There's a slight difference between a dingy and Iran's Navy.
There's a slight difference between a dingy and Iran's Navy.
Yeah. One of them doesn't pose too big of a threat.
Sean Malone
01-07-08, 03:11 PM
Reportedly they were 200 yards away. that's close, especially if you're in a ship over 100'.
Just guessing, but I think these little 'taunts' are not an uncommon occurrence (Iran, NK, Russia, China etc). Just depends on whether the media gets wind of it or not and whether it's a slow news day.
Dirk Diggler
01-07-08, 03:35 PM
why are US warships there anyway?
The image of a strung out junkie wandering around a bad neighborhood comes to mind.
oddlycalm
01-07-08, 03:54 PM
You can bet the same is happening in the air every day as well. All this chest thumping is exactly what led to one of our ships shooting down that Iranian airliner some time back. I'm certain that wasn't the response anyone was looking for, but it happened.
oc
TrueBrit
01-07-08, 04:04 PM
There's a slight difference between a dingy and Iran's Navy.
Wouldn't know for sure...no pictures of the "harassing" Iranian boats....
'twould appear that they've been able to figure out that 200 yards is about the limit though....
Just more games of chicken being played....like the Ruskies sending up Bears and the RAF scrambling Lightnings to go and escort them back to int'l airspace when I was a kid growing up in Blighty...Or the Russian "trawlers" near the Scottish RN Submarine bases...
Insomniac
01-07-08, 04:59 PM
Wouldn't know for sure...no pictures of the "harassing" Iranian boats....
'twould appear that they've been able to figure out that 200 yards is about the limit though....
Just more games of chicken being played....like the Ruskies sending up Bears and the RAF scrambling Lightnings to go and escort them back to int'l airspace when I was a kid growing up in Blighty...Or the Russian "trawlers" near the Scottish RN Submarine bases...
I tend to picture the Iranian Navy having a little more capability than this:
http://culebraboats.com/puerto-rico/culebra/dinghy-dakity.png
:)
Sean Malone
01-07-08, 05:05 PM
I thought I read recently that Iran was using a few WW2 era US Navy ships. I may be thinking of DPRK though. I do know there are quite a few old US navy boats in service in third world countries. I believe Venezuela has at least one. My subscription to Janes expired. Man do I miss the scratch and sniff AAA ads. :)
Current Iranian Navy vessels from wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Iranian_Navy_Vessels
Just more games of chicken being played....like the Ruskies sending up Bears and the RAF scrambling Lightnings to go and escort them back to int'l airspace when I was a kid growing up in Blighty...
Hell, that just happened four months ago. :shakehead
The warships were there for exactly this type of incident. In order to maintain sea lanes, you have to keep them clear by using them.
TrueBrit
01-07-08, 05:56 PM
Hell, that just happened four months ago. :shakehead
Yup...Pootey-Poot decided to rattle the sabres some more...
stroker
01-07-08, 06:25 PM
I tend to picture the Iranian Navy having a little more capability than this:
http://culebraboats.com/puerto-rico/culebra/dinghy-dakity.png
:)
that chick better cover up fast or the Iranian Morals Police are going to beat the snot out of the both of them.
They also better be related and/or married, facing Mecca, not drinking, and she definately better not be steering. :p
for those of you saying its not a big deal and this happens all the time:
The confrontation between the five gunboats and the US Navy ships that took place on Sunday was described by the Pentagon as “the most serious provocation of this sort that we’ve seen yet”. The incident, which lasted about 20 minutes, was “careless, reckless and potentially hostile”, Bry-an Whitman, the Pentagon spokesman, said. He demanded an explanation from the Iranians.
The Pentagon said that the Iranian boats had turned away “at the very moment that US forces were preparing to open fire in self-defence”.
for those of you saying its not a big deal and this happens all the time:
b.s. like this is still nothing new. actually a bit of a shame they weren't blown out of the water, blowing up an aggressive navy ship isn't quite the same as an airilner in the PR debacle dept. and they deserve after what they pulled on the brits last year.
cameraman
01-07-08, 07:29 PM
for those of you saying its not a big deal and this happens all the time:
Do you realize how many times US and Soviet submarines actually collided?
This was a bunch of brain dead testosterone driven Iranian Revolutionary Guards who were trying to goad the Navy into responding. They want an international incident. We sure do not need to be giving them one. The Navy handled it correctly.
Do you realize how many times US and Soviet submarines actually collided?
This was a bunch of brain dead testosterone driven Iranian Revolutionary Guards who were trying to goad the Navy into responding. They want an international incident. We sure do not need to be giving them one. The Navy handled it correctly.
What does the quote I posted have to do with the soviets? It was the closest theyve been with Iran.
Of course the Navy handled it correctly, but per the quote they were also on the verge of firing until the Iranians stood down at the last second. A minute later and we'd all be talking about a different story.
b.s. like this is still nothing new. actually a bit of a shame they weren't blown out of the water, blowing up an aggressive navy ship isn't quite the same as an airilner in the PR debacle dept. and they deserve after what they pulled on the brits last year.
agreed, but unfortunately the rest of the world wouldn't see it that way.
The US Navy is always there protecting US interests,
Isn't that why we have them?
Sean Malone
01-07-08, 07:56 PM
What does the quote I posted have to do with the soviets? It was the closest theyve been with Iran.
Of course the Navy handled it correctly, but per the quote they were also on the verge of firing until the Iranians stood down at the last second. A minute later and we'd all be talking about a different story.
The news just said it's the third time this has happened in the past year.
Wake me up when shots fired.;)
Insomniac
01-07-08, 09:04 PM
Someone please explain to the U.S. Navy what self-defense is. There are 160,000 troops and 180,000 private contractors (21,000 American, 43,000 Other Nationalities and the rest Iraqi) in Iraq. They don't need Iran (officially) involved.
eiregosod
01-07-08, 10:57 PM
while all that was going on, two F-18s crashed in the persian Gulf. and it comes to light that US govt officials sold nucular data to furriners :tony:
One official mentioned that the other possible reason for this behavior (besides trying to stir up a confrontation) is watching our response to different attack postures to find weaknesses. Of course if there were hostilities underway they wouldn't have been allowed that close but torpedoes or missiles could have been launched from a quite a bit further out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-802
Sean Malone
01-07-08, 11:27 PM
One official mentioned that the other possible reason for this behavior (besides trying to stir up a confrontation) is watching our response to different attack postures to find weaknesses. Of course if there were hostilities underway they wouldn't have been allowed that close but torpedoes or missiles could have been launched from a quite a bit further out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-802
I think our response to actual hostilities would be utter devastation. I wouldn't want to be an Iranian if that day ever comes. It's bad enough I'm an 1/16 Swedish. :)
I think our response to actual hostilities would be utter devastation. I wouldn't want to be an Iranian if that day ever comes. It's bad enough I'm an 1/16 Swedish. :)
Which 16th? :gomer:
Sean Malone
01-07-08, 11:49 PM
Which 16th? :gomer:
I'm trying to think of a funny response but can't. Must be the 1/16 German in me. Sweden is the #1 consumer of coffee however, and I can't start the day without it! Ahh, roots. :)
Dirk Diggler
01-08-08, 12:47 AM
Which 16th? :gomer:
?
http://babesinpoland.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/swedish_chef.jpg
?
http://www.rollingout.com/images/b2blog/wk04_05_07/absolut_vodka.jpg
?
http://www.abba-world.net/images/pictures/abba76.jpg
from aformentioned alum
This stuff happens all the time.
We will be minding our own business and a boat with two dudes and a fifty cal will come out and start shooting at us.
We had to cluster bomb one in 94 I personally saw the bullets coming for me. They were BIG.
If you dont think Iran does this all the freaking time you are a moron.
I'll tell you what the raction is - we come up to full power, start shooting at them with everything we have, whcih on an Aegis Cruiser is 2 5 inche guns that are not designed to hit that small a target (and never do) 4 50 calibers (but only 2 at a timefor obvious reasons), 1 25 mm depending on if they are attacking the port side and a bunch of small arfms.
As an FYI we never hit the speedboat as it bounces around on the waves shooting at us and we call in the ready CAP to drop bombs on them.
not disagreeing that this wasnt the first time, just pointing out that the pentagon has said its the most serious incident yet.
obviously if the pentagon says, this incident is the most serious of its kind, that implies there have been others in the past. :shakehead
why are US warships there anyway? I thought it was a peace keeping force for Iraq, not an all out war mongering team out to get Iran as well.
There are RAN ships there as well, numbnuts. :rolleyes:
opinionated ow
01-08-08, 11:20 AM
There are RAN ships there as well, numbnuts. :rolleyes:
not threatening to blow others out of the water....
not threatening to blow others out of the water....
See what happens if an armed speedboat tries to approach them while in international waters.
There are RAN ships there as well, numbnuts. :rolleyes:
Stay civil, "numbnuts."
not threatening to blow others out of the water....
No, they're just using harsh language...
Australian navy sailors used "colourful language" and aggressive tactics to repel five Iranian gunboats in an incident prior to the capture of 15 British sailors in March, Australian defence officials said on Friday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSSYD149272
I'm sure it was all meant in good fun and there was no pointing of weapons or threats involved.
not threatening to blow others out of the water....
If they have to, they will. Don't have any doubts about it.
Stay civil, "numbnuts."
Numbnuts? That's like a term of affection in Australia. ;)
But yes, I will.
"colourful language" and aggressive tactics
That describes the Australian navy in a nutshell. :D
Ballsy bastards, I'll give them that
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/26424.html <-video
Only way they can one up that is to pull some water skiers the next time. :gomer:
Maybe we should place a sign on the side of the ships that says: "Keep OUT!! Maintain 500 Yards Distance!!!!!"
But that would require a HUGE lettering on US ships...
And would ruin the beautiful grey color...
TrueBrit
01-09-08, 11:35 AM
Maybe we should place a sign on the side of the ships that says: "Keep OUT!! Maintain 500 Yards Distance!!!!!"
But that would require a HUGE lettering on US ships...
And would ruin the beautiful grey color...
Those bloody great big guns would seem to say the same thing though...unless, apparently, you are in the Iranian "navy"...
Dirk Diggler
01-09-08, 11:40 AM
"I fart in your general direction!"
TrueBrit
01-10-08, 05:30 PM
Ballsy bastards, I'll give them that
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/26424.html <-video
Only way they can one up that is to pull some water skiers the next time. :gomer:
That was, um, interesting....
Here's another version.. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2008/01/10/VI2008011001805.html?sid=ST2008011001831
No doubt these fellas were up to no good...being a major nuisance at the very least...
TrueBrit
01-10-08, 05:32 PM
There's a slight difference between a dingy and Iran's Navy.
Take a look at the vids...these guys weren't piloting much more than speedboats...
During the invasion, there were stories of Iraqis repeatedly charging armored columns in pick'um-up trucks. Some folks like to learn the hard way.
TrueBrit
01-10-08, 06:08 PM
During the invasion, there were stories of Iraqis repeatedly charging armored columns in pick'um-up trucks. Some folks like to learn the hard way.
Sort of like the Poles using horse-back lancers against German tanks in WW II
Andrew Longman
01-10-08, 06:13 PM
That was, um, interesting....
Here's another version.. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2008/01/10/VI2008011001805.html?sid=ST2008011001831
No doubt these fellas were up to no good...being a major nuisance at the very least...
What were the Iranians asking? I can make out what he says after, "Coalitian warships. Request garble permission garble garble..."
I can believe the US ships were in international water because they have good navigation devices. Unless the Iraqis had GPS, a map and knew how to use them, the Iraqis might just have been bobbing around and got caught up to their zeal to threaten the coalition ships.
Or not.
Or not.
:rofl:
Yeah, probably.
Insomniac
01-10-08, 11:38 PM
Take a look at the vids...these guys weren't piloting much more than speedboats...
I saw that. Looked like a bunch of kids out there. Now they are saying they don't know if it was those guys making the threat, other ships or from land. In any case, the U.S. Navy seems to know who it was, so in my opinion, they did the right thing by not firing. These seem to be games the Iranisns play often. I still say with them, do not fire unless they fire first.
Sean Malone
01-10-08, 11:57 PM
I saw that. Looked like a bunch of kids out there. Now they are saying they don't know if it was those guys making the threat, other ships or from land. In any case, the U.S. Navy seems to know who it was, so in my opinion, they did the right thing by not firing. These seem to be games the Iranisns play often. I still say with them, do not fire unless they fire first.
A few warning shots across their bow if they look like they are coming up quick and not answering a hail. It all depends on the situation.
A few warning shots across their bow if they look like they are coming up quick and not answering a hail. It all depends on the situation.
agreed. not firing unless they fire first is a good way of getting soldiers killed.
The problem is their first shot could be a suicide bomb. At that point it is too late. I sure there are standing orders not to let anything within a certain distance.
eiregosod
01-11-08, 11:33 AM
the tape released by the pentagon had dubbed audio from elsewhere.
get back to playing WW3 on your playstations, nothing to see here.
eiregosod
01-11-08, 11:34 AM
During the invasion, there were stories of Iraqis repeatedly charging armored columns in pick'um-up trucks. Some folks like to learn the hard way.
they were the good ole days
the tape released by the pentagon had dubbed audio from elsewhere.
Says who?
get back to playing WW3 on your playstations, nothing to see here.
I went with the X Box it's the better buy.
Andrew Longman
01-11-08, 12:31 PM
Says who?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/10/MNDUUC1G3.DTL&feed=rss.news
http://www.jwharrison.com/blog/2008/01/10/us-now-doubts-its-own-iranian-speedboat-video/
FWIW the Navy admitted the video was edited from a 20 minute master
Methanolandbrats
01-11-08, 12:35 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/10/MNDUUC1G3.DTL&feed=rss.news
http://www.jwharrison.com/blog/2008/01/10/us-now-doubts-its-own-iranian-speedboat-video/
FWIW the Navy admitted the video was edited from a 20 minute master The Pentagon has excellent script writers, editors and producers.....always remember that when a reporter quotes "adminstration soures" or a "Pentagon spokesman" :irked:
eiregosod
01-11-08, 02:33 PM
I went with the X Box it's the better buy.
I got to shoot up many of the Al Qaedas that came with the Xbox my nephew got for Christmas!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/10/MNDUUC1G3.DTL&feed=rss.news
http://www.jwharrison.com/blog/2008/01/10/us-now-doubts-its-own-iranian-speedboat-video/
FWIW the Navy admitted the video was edited from a 20 minute master
The video and audio were recorded separately and then matched, naval and Pentagon officials said Tuesday.
It doesn't say the audio was recorded elsewhere as was suggested. If they audio and video were recorded during the same incident, I don't see the problem.
Dr. Corkski
01-11-08, 07:16 PM
I got to shoot up many of the Al Qaedas that came with the Xbox my nephew got for Christmas!Al-Asad is just a puppet. :tony:
coolhand
01-13-08, 02:49 AM
Look what a 4-man Zodiac did the USS Cole and then say that was not a threat.
http://www.lockport-ny.com/images/USS_Cole_Hole.jpg
Anyway, the Navy did a good job they passed through the straights and got to where they wanted. Those IRGC went home with their designer eye-wear.
One thing I am surprised about is that no one is talking about active denial tools. The Navy supposedly has LRAD. This would have been a good situation to use it.
Andrew Longman
01-13-08, 11:38 PM
It doesn't say the audio was recorded elsewhere as was suggested. If they audio and video were recorded during the same incident, I don't see the problem.
My recollection is the audio is off the bridge and contains radio traffic. The video was shot outside the bridge.
coolhand
01-14-08, 03:30 AM
If they were using a regular VHF frequency it would be hard to tell where it came from. That is like someone dropping in on a CB freq.
Spicoli
01-14-08, 11:49 AM
http://i12.tinypic.com/85q0dg8.jpg
:cool:
Insomniac
01-14-08, 03:23 PM
Look what a 4-man Zodiac did the USS Cole and then say that was not a threat.
http://www.lockport-ny.com/images/USS_Cole_Hole.jpg
Anyway, the Navy did a good job they passed through the straights and got to where they wanted. Those IRGC went home with their designer eye-wear.
One thing I am surprised about is that no one is talking about active denial tools. The Navy supposedly has LRAD. This would have been a good situation to use it.
I certainly wasn't saying they posed no threat. Engaging them should be the last option, and I'm glad that is what it appears to be.
The small, boxlike objects dropped in the water by Iranian boats as they approached U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf on Sunday posed no threat to the American vessels, U.S. officials said yesterday, even as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff charged that the incident reflects Iran's new tactics of asymmetric warfare.
After passing the white objects, commanders on the USS Port Royal and its accompanying destroyer and frigate decided there was so little danger from the objects that they did not bother to radio other ships to warn them, the officials said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/11/AR2008011103730.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080114/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_us_navy
If this were a Ah-nold movie it'd be Kindergarden Cop. Those little bastards are merciless, but if you drop kick one, then you're the bad guy. :p
http://www.solosubtitulos.com/uploads/imagenes/3862_kindergartencop.jpg
Also, were is teh "All your base are belong to us." paraody? :gomer:
The Tokyo Rose of the Persian Gulf? :saywhat:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080115/ap_on_re_mi_ea/gulf_us_war_of_words
-Kevin
Insomniac
02-12-08, 10:16 AM
Iran has nothing on Russia.
U.S. fighter planes intercepted two Russian bombers, including one that buzzed an American aircraft carrier in the western Pacific during the weekend, The Associated Press has learned.
A U.S. military official says that one Russian Tupolev 95 flew directly over the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz twice, at a low altitude of about 2,000 feet, while another bomber circled about 58 miles out. The official was speaking on condition of anonymity because the reports on the flights were classified as secret.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UODA4G0&show_article=1
Methanolandbrats
02-12-08, 10:19 AM
Iran has nothing on Russia.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UODA4G0&show_article=1 Well ****, that's it, let's invade Russia, kick their asses and pipe their oil directly to Alaska :thumbup:
The captain of the Nimitz is probably in deep doodoo. That bomber should never have been allowed that close to the ship. :shakehead
Rogue Leader
02-12-08, 10:37 AM
The captain of the Nimitz is probably in deep doodoo. That bomber should never have been allowed that close to the ship. :shakehead
It's not American airspace, so what was he to do? Shoot them down?
Insomniac
02-12-08, 11:11 AM
It's not American airspace, so what was he to do? Shoot them down?
You'd think a bomber flying directly over a ship is more of a danger than speed boats in the water. But somehow, it seems like there was much less panic. :D
Iran has nothing on Russia.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UODA4G0&show_article=1
Just Pootie Poot showin' of again. He must have watched Top Gun recently. :gomer:
-Kevin
eiregosod
02-12-08, 12:17 PM
its just Russia saying "hands off" :tony:
http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=33887
negative ghostrider, the pattern is full.
You'd think a bomber flying directly over a ship is more of a danger than speed boats in the water. But somehow, it seems like there was much less panic. :D
were the Russians saying, "we will kill you"
Insomniac
02-12-08, 04:11 PM
were the Russians saying, "we will kill you"
Didn't they report the Iranians didn't either. ;)
Taken from the deck of the Nimitz: (that guy had blue eyes) :damn:
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/4899/421nimitzbearkb7.jpg
The US Navy's position is that the fly over wasn't provocative because the bomber's wings were clean, i.e. no ordinace was mounted under the wings. I guess the Navy felt they could shoot down the bombers before the bombay doors opened and the internal weapons were deployed. (maybe) Also, the second bomber keeping its distance to "cover" his comrade may have lowered the threat below the "provocative" level according to some PR flak's handbook. One bomber, OK. Two bomber, bad. :silly:
But from the flight path videos, the Nimitz was their destination, and they flew around Japan to get there. So they weren't just sightseeing.
As for the captain's responsibility in the incident, I think his career is safe. The Nimitz is the flagship of a strike group that includes 5 other ships all commanded by a Rear Admiral, who probably had orders not to engage.
Every article has made a point to mention that there was no verbal communication with the bombers. My guess is they let the radar, infrared, and laser guided missile locks do the talking. 'Course there are other methods of keeping up foreign relations... :)
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/6291/mirrords3.jpg
BTW, we launched 4 planes. The Japanese scrambled 22. That's alot of hostile aircraft sharing the friendly skies.
Talking with the Russians is such a pain in the ass. They'll never just say what's bothering them. No, instead it's always some dumbass stunt, and we have to guess what's wrong. Marine Gen. James E. Cartwright was spot on when he told the Senate Budget Committee this afternoon that the real question was, "What message was intended by this overflight?”
The Russians don't take a dump, son, without a plan...
where's Fred Thompson when you need him? ;)
chop456
02-13-08, 04:11 AM
Talking with the Russians is such a pain in the ass. They'll never just say what's bothering them. No, instead it's always some dumbass stunt, and we have to guess what's wrong.
They must have a Female Studies minor at the Russian War College.
coolhand
02-13-08, 04:29 AM
This was routine during the Cold War, Putin is probably playing tough for his domestic audience.
Also how do they know it was not a Tu-142/Tu-142M Maritime ELINT/SIGINT platform?
The Tu-142 has a radar dome slung underneath, and the stinger on top of the tail points backwards, instead of forward as on the Tu-95.
http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1600/tu142mzgt6.jpg
Didn't they report the Iranians didn't either. ;)
per the Iranians.
ferrarigod
02-13-08, 09:16 AM
Iran has nothing on Russia.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UODA4G0&show_article=1
russia has been doing such things since Putin came to power. Just a couple weeks ago they test fired missiles in the Bay of Biscay. Not rare or unusual over the last few years for the federation to be playing war games. UK has intercepted many times just north of Briton.
Insomniac
02-13-08, 09:41 AM
per the Iranians.
Sorry. They denied it, but other have also said (even the Pentagon) that they don't know if it was them.
In accented English a voice is heard to say "I am coming to you ... You will explode in a few minutes." Pentagon officials had previously stated that the voice came from one of the boats, but they are now distancing themselves from that claim, saying instead that they do not know the source of the transmission.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/13/wiran113.xml
Maybe this is what the Russian Bear is cranky about.
The Carrier Cold War
The U.S. tries to shut Russia out of India's defense market.
The Indian Navy will reportedly be offered the soon-to-be decommissioned USS Kitty Hawk (CV 63) aircraft carrier for free--provided the Indian Navy will agree to purchase 65 of the newest model Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets to be operated off of it.
link (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/772agroh.asp)
Thank you. Come again. :p
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.