Pentagon: 2 U.S. Navy Boats Held by Iran Military

originally posted by: UnBreakable
Last week it was Iran firing missiles within a mile of a destroyer, now this. It seems Iran is just itchin' to start something with us, or at least acting like a big dog marking it's territory. Of course with China and Russia having their back.............

what are you saying ? that we shouldn't have arrested those sailors when they violated our maritime border ? is that what you're saying ?

seriously ,i'm really curious to know whats your amazing logic here !

originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: haman10

Agreed, and just to reiterate, I was referring to Iran on this - > what in the world were they thinking,

Excellent info Ham, thanks!

My bad bro ,again ,i think my poor english skills are failing me

One senior official told NBC News the Iranians understand it was a mistake and have agreed to release the Americans in international waters within hours.

OH this is so P-E-R-F-E-C-T isn't it !!!

The State of the Ønion address tonight, the missiles last week, the concrete in the reactor today....

Bet Obama talks this one up real good tonight.

The Iran agreements with no signatures, John Kerry etc. etc.

For all you fear mongers who are already beating the drums of war.

There was a very similar situation like this back in 2007 when Iran seized a British boat and took 15 British captive.

No war.

So lets see how this plays out before we starting running for the bomb shelters.

a reply to: Sovaka

Excellent point Sov; excellent point!

Sean Penn to negotiate?

a reply to: haman10

NO worries Ham all good

I should have worded it differently , this one is on me

How deep is the water there?
One thing the Navy has is plenty of anchors.
Glad this is not turning into a big issue.

between Kuwait and Bahrain

Seems like a long drift to get to Iranian waters unless they were sailing on the boundary purposely. Seems out of the way.

originally posted by: SLAYER69
a reply to: ReadLeader

Training mission... drifted into Iranian waters.

Yup, sounds like a bad movie plot.


Who writes this stuff?

No, I'm not doubting that Iran has two US Navy boats, I'm talking about the cover story as to why they were there in the first place.

Which I imagine is exactly why the crew was taken into custody. The US would have done exactly the same.

Seems to me they should have stayed farther away from Irans territory. We would have seized their boats if they were in our waters. It's as bad as the Iranians shooting next to our ship. Everyone seems to be trying to tantalize the other side.

Lucky for the crew it were iraniers... if it were turks the boats were sunk ! tresspassing border

a reply to: SLAYER69

Don.t denigrate our guys who would go in and get them back that way

originally posted by: ressiv
Lucky for the crew it were iraniers... if it were turks the boats were sunk ! tresspassing border

Sinking any US boat, even a modified PT boat, you would be staring right in the eyeball of fate. I don't even think the Turks would risk the retaliation that would certainly ensue. Then again, who knows... this is how big things come about. I guess we can all look back in the past at the small triggers that wound up shaping all of our history.

Two boats drifted in to Iranian waters due to malfunction? Seriously? In this case, I don't blame Iran raising their eyebrows. One American boat, sure. That would be understandable. Two? Though...is CHina making our boats now too?

Thankful Iran is releasing our men, but there has to be a lot more to this drifting story.

Obama's best buddies acting as enemies? Quick, put on your liberal blinders before you have naughty thoughts.

CBS news report, It does seem though that the diplomatic way has been achieved already.

a reply to: CynConcepts

The second boat would have stayed near the first, in case they ran into trouble, such as a fire, or taking on water. So yes, two could easily have drifted into Iranian waters.

Wonder if the delay is due to scouring the US boats, for info and tech?

Pretty slim that one boat, under power, would just drift with one without power... wouldn't they just hook up and get the heck out of potential risk?

If both were without power, that makes it more headscratching...

Strange days have found us...

a reply to: JacKatMtn

Depends on what the problem was, how close to Iranian waters they were, and how fast the Iranians responded.

The fact that the US Naval assets in the region did not immediately unleash Armageddon on Iranian land and sea assets is testament to their Captains and Commanders understanding that Iran was well within their rights to do this, also US Commanders and Captains are not politically motivated and have peace-at-all-costs as a central tenet to the duty they are tasked with.

You see, in the traditional sense, the Navy (any Navy) is tasked with the defense of that Navys territorial waters and to dispel any attacks onto the mainland region. The US is 8,500 nautical miles (or 11,900nm via Cape of Good Hope) from the Strait of Hormuz, in other words, they are a very long way from home.

The US Navy is in the Strait of Hormuz to protect and escort the petroleum assets of corporate oligarchies, they are not there to protect the US Homeland from any threat whatsoever.

Iran is exercising it's sovereign right to protect itself within the guidelines set out under the UN's International Maritime Organization and the setting of baseline territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zones - all member countries that are not land-locked, have these same rights.