Navy Ship Encounters Iranian Boat (and USN fires a flare to send it away)

Navy Ship Encounters Iranian Boat (and USN fires a flare to send it away)

www.breitbart.com

The Navy says a ship encountered a small Iranian high-speed boat in the central Persian Gulf and warned it away by firing a flare.

Two other similar Iranian boats in the area did not come as close.

The USS Typhoon tried unsuccessfully to establish radio contact with the Iranian boat after it came within an estimated 200 yards of the Typhoon on Thursday, outside Iranian territorial waters. A Navy official says the ship then fired the flare and continued on its way without incident.

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Iran shows video of navy standoff
U.S. Navy Shot At By Iran?
Gulf prankster at issue in Iran dispute

The Iranians must be getting a bit freaked out with all the warmongering happening on both sides of the table. While Ahmadinejad is certainly not helping the Iranian people's cause by restarting their nuclear program and enriching uranium, the US/Israel is also not helping by calling them part of the axis of evil.

The Iranian people are not evil. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble. Its simply not true. They are one of the more westernized Islamic countries in the world, certainly more so than Saudi Arabia which is quite backwards.

I do not want to see war with Iran. That's very basic. I do not care what they say because they only say it out of fear. They are afraid for their lives that the US military will invade. I find that completely understandable. We did invade their less powerful neighbor in a few days and hung their leader (well the Iraqis did but just go with it).

We need to come to a peaceful arrangement with this country. They are not going to give up nuclear power aspirations. I do not blame them.

And if they really are producing nuclear warheads, can you blame them? If it wasn't for constant fear of destruction by the US and Israel, they wouldn't need mutually assured destruction. That's all it is. They want to be sure that no one will attack out of fear of being bombed themselves.

In all fairness, nuking Israel would be the end of Iran. They simply will not do it. I would bet my life on it. That is, unless they were provoked first.

Right now they're playing a reactionary game.

Be honest. I can tell if you tell the truth or not. These are not bad people. Misunderstood? Sure. Mistranslated? Most definitely. But bad? No, I don't buy the war and fearmongering done by this administration and Israel.

They are god-fearing people just like Americans and Israelis. So no I will not invade.

The official says there were no signs any boat was armed.

It was at least the second encounter with an aggressive Iranian high- speed boat this year. In January, Iranian boats made what the Navy called provocative moves near a U.S. ship in the Strait of Hormuz.

An unarmed Iranian boat checking out what is on the coast of Iran. Completely understandable.

And was anyone hurt? No. No harm done.

www.breitbart.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 4/11/2008 by biggie smalls]

I was just about to say, this is such a headline when it happens, yet it happens alot with other nations, but they dont get plastered, its like they are trying to make us feel we need to, that they are just asking for it...

our ways of life are quickly about to change, no wise person can see this species continue on such a course......

Only a fool looking for an incident would approach any warship in this area of the world. The idiot should be glad he's not meeting virgins.

An apparently unarmed Iranian high-speed boat could be packed with explosives that you can't see until it is far too late.

These clowns are just looking for trouble.

reply to post by hinky


The US military has been looking for trouble the entire time we've been in the middle east. We are trying to provoke Iran to attack.

If they fire the first shot, we would be completely justified in "killing those bad guys." If we take the first shot, it'll just be another Iraq war quagmire. Well, it'll be a quagmire no matter what, but it'll look worse for the US if we shoot first. And if we go to war with Iran, that's probably how it will happen.

Only a fool looking for an incident would approach any warship in this area of the world. The idiot should be glad he's not meeting virgins.

Are you familiar with recon? Checking out what another nation is up to?

Is this illegal? Heck, the US does far worse in the name of intelligence. If we tarnish the Iranian name all the time with warmongering, why don't we tell the truth about what we actually do?

An apparently unarmed Iranian high-speed boat could be packed with explosives that you can't see until it is far too late.

I can see why you believe this to be a possibility, but the Iranians aren't that stupid. They know if they attack us, all hell will break loose. We have enough ships and planes in that region already that a naval and air assault would cripple their entire defense system. A land invasion would be the real problem. We would never win.

Look at Iraq. There's far less defensible land in Iraq, yet we're still there years later. Iran would be far worse.

These clowns are just looking for trouble.

I could say the same about Bush and Olmert.



Mind you I am not defending either sides' action. I am trying to understand why they would feel the need to do such a thing. And its quite clear, they were gathering intelligence and making a statement.

War with Iran will be the undoing of America. Our economy will crash, our military will fall apart, and the US mainland will be up for grabs. Our country is pretty much defenseless at this point. Most of our military is fighting overseas.

That's a fact. The average US citizen has no proper military training, although many of us have weapons. A battle-hardened expeditionary force could take over at least 1 big city no problem.

[edit on 4/11/2008 by biggie smalls]

Yes, Iran knows that. But all they need is one nut job to mess up the equilibrium

As was said . . . it should be common sense not to approach a war boat . . . especially when you won't answer the radio . . . especially in that area . . .

Let's bottom line this and put anyone's love or hatred of the USA and it's current administration aside.

Iran's boats are approaching other warships. This is an act of war. These are international waters. These are not home ports for the Iranian Regatta Club. Only America's tolerance to fools is the only reason no Iranian has been killed.

This is only news because the the international news organizations love of the peace loving Iranians. NO, they have an agenda also. Anything to put the big bad American in a bad light is instantly published for all American haters to cheer about.

Forget the recon aspect of this. That is just an excuse for explaining an idiotic act. If you want to know anything about any capability of any NATO or Soviet warship, goggle it. You will find all the details you need.

As for the Iranian people, I love them as much an many other Mid-Eastern people. I do not like their choice of administration or their religion, but they do not have the luxury of voting them out or going to a different temple.

On a positive note, you're a fairly decent troll with the implied Iranian invasion of the USA. They would have to stand in line with Mexico.

Originally posted by hinky
Let's bottom line this and put anyone's love or hatred of the USA and it's current administration aside.

Hatred? That's such a strong word. I hate no one and no country. Highly dislike the government? Sure. Who can't if they pay attention? I surely do not dislike the US though, how can someone hate land?

Iran's boats are approaching other warships. This is an act of war. These are international waters. These are not home ports for the Iranian Regatta Club. Only America's tolerance to fools is the only reason no Iranian has been killed.

When the US has their warships sitting right outside the Iranian's front porch, what can you expect? You can argue till you're blue in the face that the US navy has all the right to be there, but if you want a quick geography lesson rest assured we shouldn't be in the middle east.

That is, unless you're of the party who believes we're defending "our" oil? That would be a completely different story.







Why are we even in this area in the first place? Each country's territorial waters go 200 nautical miles from the coast, so based on the above diagram the Iranians have every right to be anywhere in the straight of hormuz. Thanks though. Nice try.

EDIT: Ok I just reread the article and the event happened in the "central persian gulf." That's still within 200nm.

This is only news because the the international news organizations love of the peace loving Iranians. NO, they have an agenda also. Anything to put the big bad American in a bad light is instantly published for all American haters to cheer about.

I'm pretty sure the news organizations don't want another bull# excuse for an invasion. Iraq turned out real great. Would you like to sign up and fight "over there"?

Forget the recon aspect of this. That is just an excuse for explaining an idiotic act. If you want to know anything about any capability of any NATO or Soviet warship, goggle it. You will find all the details you need.

Maybe so. I never said it was a smart move.

As for the Iranian people, I love them as much an many other Mid-Eastern people. I do not like their choice of administration or their religion, but they do not have the luxury of voting them out or going to a different temple.

And the American people have the luxury of voting the government out of office? Please.

On a positive note, you're a fairly decent troll with the implied Iranian invasion of the USA. They would have to stand in line with Mexico.

I don't think I've ever been called a troll. Thanks for the compliment. Someone's feathers are a little ruffled, aren't they?

Thanks for misinterpreting my words though. It really does you justice.

Iran doesn't have the capability to invade the US. End of story. Why don't you go back and read my statement. Did I mention anything about Iran invading? Nope, nunca, nadie.

I stand by my statements.

P.S. If I haven't made myself abundantly clear, I do not wish war upon anyone, especially not Iraq Part 2.

[edit on 4/11/2008 by biggie smalls]

Originally posted by hinky
Iran's boats are approaching other warships. This is an act of war.

Act of war?

Can we nuke Japan again please, I was tailgated by a Toyota yesterday..

I love how it's an "Act of War" for the Iranians to be out boating in the waters surrounding their country.....

yet, Americans sending WAR SHIPS to sit outside their country is "no big deal."

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

The USS Typhoon is a in shore costal patrol boat and as such it not really equipped with any significant offensive firepower, although she has several means at her disposal to defend herself. Her CO acted properly he warned off the Iranian boats and proceeded in a non hostile manner on his course. If thinks had gotten hostile she would have defended herself and awaited for the "cavalry" to come, basically the more powerful US warships and aircraft in the area.

In January two US destroyers were faced with a similar incident with Iranian gun boats sailing full speed toward the US ships not responding to communication efforts and changing course to maintain intercept. The CO's were given clearance to fire and those boats would have been sunk within moments but they stopped and turned away at the last second before they breeched the line of no return. Basically within 200M of the ship.

Iran only claims a 24 mile contiguous zone. Not 200 miles, although there are very few countries who do claim this for fishing rights protection.

Enjoyed the pictures.

Central Persian Gulf is international waters.

reply to post by WestPoint23

In January two US destroyers were faced with a similar incident with Iranian gun boats sailing full speed toward the US ships not responding to communication efforts and changing course to maintain intercept. The CO's were given clearance to fire and those boats would have been sunk within moments but they stopped and turned away at the last second before they breeched the line of no return. Basically within 200M of the ship

and which of the 2 video`s did you watch? since both had totally different radio dialogue

`boats been sunk` - by what? do they have guided missiles now? since CIWS is useless and the deck gun is nearly as effective - a video was posted in the weaponary section about the ability of naval weaponary to deal with small craft , the short answer - its not.

Originally posted by Harlequin
'boats been sunk' - by what? do they have guided missiles now? since CIWS is useless and the deck gun is nearly as effective

Umm... both the ESSM and SM-2 are capable of engaging surface targets, even fast moving boats, tests have proven this capability. There are also the Helos which can fire a host of A2G munitions, including anti-ship missiles. And no the deck gun is not "useless" in such a case.

hinky, it looks like you were right about the 24nm. Judging from the map its around that number.










So why again is the US navy in the Persian gulf? Oh yeah, I forgot, oil and the occupation of Iraq. My bad, carry on.

[edit on 4/12/2008 by biggie smalls]

from a different source

And yet an even different one........


We can't and shouldn't always trust what MSM are telling us, and I know fellow ATSers know this.

So I wanted to give you a few more news pieces to look at.

I agree US military are beating the war drum. Trying to take the focus off of all the mistakes it has made.


My .02

[edit on 12-4-2008 by freedomataprice]

reply to post by hinky


So wait, you telling me it is okay if US decides to block the shipments of Iranian tankers which ship oil in the international waterst that are close to Iranian waters and would say " Oh, they must have explosives on these tankers, plus they we in the international waters, and we can do whatever we want".
T

[edit on 12-4-2008 by Odessit]

An exclusive economic zone extends for 200 nautical miles (370 km) beyond the baselines of the territorial sea, thus it includes the territorial sea and its contiguous zone.[3] A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources. However, it cannot regulate or prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea, whether innocent or belligerent, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its territorial sea. Before 1982, coastal nations arbitrarily extended their territorial waters in an effort to control activities which are now regulated by the exclusive economic zone, such as offshore oil exploration or fishing rights (see Cod War). Indeed, the exclusive economic zone is still popularly, though erroneously, called a coastal nation's territorial waters.

Some background info on coastal waters.

Biggie smalls, your posts are very true towhat i was going to say, Iran is certainly trapped between the itchy fingered Israeli's and the Gung-ho American Government attitude, although the people in the speed boat shouldn't really try and antagonise the US Navy either.

You're quite right about Iran, the news in America might demonise Iran, forcing the gullible and stupid into a narrow minded belief Iran is a bad place).

Sadly, these are the same people who also share my home country and believe that Iraq tried to invade America on 9/11....

In other words, people have finally become succombed to the bull crap that has been forced into their brains.

Sadly, my predictions:

Either,
A false flag attack on either American soil which would then prevent the elections and possibl enforce martial law upon the US citizens....

OR a false flag attack on an allied (US or possibly UK) warship, which would trigger repsonses from the US, UK, Iran, Israel, and then quite possibly China, in other words the end of the world....

But I positively hoe for peace. For everyone.

reply to post by WestPoint23


i would suggest of the video posted in the weaponary forum ; especially in the case of the deck gun and its lack of ability to engage a fast moving boat , the only `success` came when the shelss were airburst over the target.

ESSM and SM-2 - i know they can engage everything in the `test` environment - but in GW1 the RIM-66E didn`t shoot down anything when needed - and the SM-1MR block IV is better than the also deployed SM2MR block II at the time , since the SM-2 block II is a new motor and new warhead , but same as the block 1 - which the SM-1 out shot.


so theory is all well and good , but don`t just say its the best when it didn`t work when needed.


as for helo`s - they haven`t launched them in any of the recent incidents * which btw has been happening for the last 10 years so why IS this news anyway?* , but anyway:

The primary missions of the B-model (or Bravo) are surface warfare and antisubmarine warfare, which it accomplishes through a complex system of sensors carried aboard the helicopter including a towed Magnetic Anomaly Detector (MAD) and air-launched sonobuoys. Other sensors include the APS-124 search radar, ALQ-142 ESM system and optional nose-mounted forward looking infrared (FLIR) turret. It carries the Mk-46, Mk-50, or Mk-54 torpedo, AGM-114 Hellfire missile, and a single cabin-door-mounted M60D or GAU-16 machine gun.

LAMPS III SH-60B role and weapon fit - lightweight torpedo`s and hellfire missiles....and they didn`t launch them anyway...