"US Navy Ship Fires Warning Shots At Four Iranian..." Topic

…Boats In The Strait Of Hormuz.

"A U.S. Navy destroyer fired three warning shots towards four of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps vessels on Sunday after they closed in at a high rate of speed in the Strait of Hormuz, two U.S. defence officials told Reuters on Monday.

The officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the USS Mahan established radio communication with the boats but they did not respond to requests to slow down and instead continued asking the Mahan questions. The Navy destroyer fired warning flares and a U.S. Navy helicopter also dropped a smoke float before the warning shots were fired.

The Iranian vessels came within 900 yards (800 meters) of the Mahan, which was escorting two other U.S. military ships, they said…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

at 900 yards, that's about 3 seconds flight time for a Harpoon or equivalent missile.

You approach a warship in an attack profile, you can expect some "attention". You may not like the attention you get.

It sometimes seems that the Iranian Navy is desperate to start a war with the USA… not so?

"Nathan Scott" account has been Locked, suspicious IP activity.

35 incidents last year, up from 25 the previous year, IIRC.

That's about one every ten days, and seems to be increasing in frequency.

I suspect the silliness will continue, until a few of their forces get swatted for stepping over the line.

Hope the rules of engagement change radically, to provide a bit more protection for our troops and vessels, a week from Friday.

The way the US handled it is the right way to do things. At this point. If at all possible let the IRGCN actually fire directly on the USN. Then the USN blow them out of the water.

Of course, if they try to close the range too rapidly and attrempt to ram any USN vessel. Then the USN should engage and blow them out of the water.

This won't lead to war. Just more Iranian rhetoric, bluster, saber-rattling, etc. And the IRGC want to be martyred to go to Paradise, anyway.

And if the IRGC tries an all out attack on the USN. The USN and USAF will sink all their boats and ships.
Splash any Iranian aircraft that attempts to attack the USN/USAF. Plus the USN/USAF will destroy any coast batteries that attempt to fire on any USN/USAF assets.

The Iranian Theocratic leaders know all this. And they should be ready to see the "Sweetheart" Nuc Deal they got changed greatly or dumped entirely by the USA. In the days to come … very shortly.

They can not win a war with the USA. And all the USA has to do is use the USN and USAF. No US troops need to be landed. And the Iranians know it.

Yes Yes! But about the the cost of gas once the shooting starts.

Just mean that we will go Electric sooner.

We should have sank all three of the Iranian vessels.

". And they should be ready to see the "Sweetheart" Nuc Deal they got changed greatly or dumped entirely by the USA. In the days to come … very shortly."

Unfortunately, they already have their money so the only carrot left is sanctions for those interested in, or not afraid of, honoring them.

I'm reasonably certain that the Chinese would be rather upset at the dramatic increase in the cost of petroleum if the Iranians started something in the Straits of Hormuz.

The US will simply restart production of Shale Oil and not care too much.

It'll probably increase oil prices in the short term, which is a good thing for the USA, Canada, Russia, and others. Not so good for the EU and Japan. China might be impacted a bit as well too.

Seems like a good jobs program, and we get to shut down Iranian oil imports/exports, if things get worse.

Win-Win!

Yes Yes! But about the the cost of gas once the shooting starts.

Of course, that is why Saudi Arabia and others like them literally get away with murder.

We should have sank all three of the Iranian vessels.

Soon than later that will happen if the Iranians continue with their provocations.

Unfortunately, they already have their money so the only carrot left is sanctions for those interested in, or not afraid of, honoring them.

That may be the case. This "deal" with Iran will almost surely come back to bite the USA in the butt. But those that made this deal with be gone and not have to clean up the mess they made, IMO.

The US will simply restart production of Shale Oil and not care too much.

I agree … it appears anyone buying Mid East oil, in one way or another supports islamic terrorism in the long run. And that includes the USA.

Did the Iranians at any time leave their territorial waters? So long as they don't open fire, they can do whatever the hell they like inside them, and destroying them would be against international law given it's an act of aggression.

Seems to me simply a good bit of training for both sides.

The Iranians like to remind the USN they're there, that's all.

No different to the various games all forces play with each other – certainly no reason to get as annoyed as some here.

The Iranians like to remind the USN they're there, that's all.

The US knows that quite well. And if the IRGC pushes too close to any USN ship. They won't be "there" …

No different to the various games all forces play with each other – certainly no reason to get as annoyed as some here.

Iran is not Russia or China. They are not in the UN P-5 +1. And with their leadership, etc., being primarily islamists, that makes them somewhat more of a threat than others. In some aspects. And if they get nucs, that will become even more clear.

Stu, the thing is that there is an international shipping channel that the US ships were in. A rather wide shipping channel, IIRC, roughly 10km wide in each direction. The shipping channels through the Straits of Juan de Fuca (between US and Canada, the approaches to Seattle) are about the same width.

The US likes to stay in the dead center of said shipping channel, and I'd bet that if we got the GPS position of where the various ships were, the Iranians would be approaching warships in peaceful transit of international waters in an attack profile. Within seconds of weapons impact.

That's an act of aggression.

When you play with fire, sometimes you get burned.

The Iranian Republican Guard might want to remember that.

Lion – the USN may well be in an international shipping channel…but I wouldn't count on it.

The USS Vincennes illegally entered Omani waters whilst fooling about just prior to killing several hundred Iranian civilians – those are narrow bits of ocean after all and not everyone agrees with where the boundaries are.

But even if they were, the aforementioned narrow channels mean the Iranians can close and satill be on home turf in a lot of places.

That they're not on the security Council doesn't mean they haven't got the same rights as the USA to play games with other nations' armed forces.

As I said, it's just trianing, nothing to get your knickers in a twist over.

"The USS Vincennes illegally entered Omani waters whilst fooling about"

I thought they were chasing Iranian speed/gun boats back into Iranian waters. The Iranian boats were attempting to interdict in the recovery operations of a US warship (Samuels? Roberts?) damaged when it struck an Iranian sea mine in international waters.

Edit:
Had to do a refresher to check my memory. So I turned to the esteemed reference (?), wiki to get at least an overall picture.

Wiki states that the Vincennes was on station to protect the recovery operations of the damaged Samuel Roberts. This ship was not attacked again by the Iranians but rather it was their attack on a Pakistani cargo ship that initiated the incident.

That they're not on the security Council doesn't mean they haven't got the same rights as the USA to play games with other nations' armed forces.

The point being, regardless, they don't carry the clout or weight that the P5 + 1 does. Another reason they want to get nucs. But that may prove to be their undoing, if they try to play games with the "big dawgs".

And you're going to dig up the Vincennes again ? Your continuing anti-US and pro-Iran comments don't seem to contain the actual facts of the incident, AFAIK. Your comments fit your narrative … and much of it is not accurate, not just IMO … but many others here.

aforementioned narrow channels mean the Iranians can close and satill be on home turf in a lot of places.

If they attack a USN vessel regardless of their actual location. The IRGC boats, etc., won't go home to talk about it … And I'm pretty sure they know that.

zoneofcontrol – it did at one point get a warning from the Omani Navy telling it to clear off….

Legion – my point about the Vincennes was actually just to point out there's no a lot of room to manoeuvre around there without ending up in someone's sandbox.

I'm still awaiting any indication the speed boats were hostile, apart from anti-Iranian paranoia.

This doesn't seem to me to be any different to Russians probing UK air defences or US submarines shadowing Russian ships.

Just indignation that Americans are the target, that's all.

I'm still awaiting any indication the speed boats were hostile, apart from anti-Iranian paranoia.

You mean aside from continuing to approach at a high rate of speed and not responding to radio or any other signals, including aircraft flares?

Legion – my point about the Vincennes was actually just to point out there's no a lot of room to manoeuvre around there without ending up in someone's sandbox.

That is part of the paradigm of naval operation at times.

I'm still awaiting any indication the speed boats were hostile, apart from anti-Iranian paranoia.

I've said before. Many in the US Military believe the US has been at a de facto war with Iran, since '83. I will go with that over your opinion.

This doesn't seem to me to be any different to Russians probing UK air defences or US submarines shadowing Russian ships.

Again, Iran is not Russia.

Just indignation that Americans are the target, that's all.

You may call it what you like … however Iran is pushing it's luck trying to provoke the US. And at one point they will got too far and suffer accordingly …

Lion – in other words they made a training attack run?

Now remind me again how often US subs do the same thing to other nations' shipping?

The US may regard itself as being at war with Iran, but the fact remains that Iran hasn't attacked the USA in that time.

Whereas the USA has a considerable amount of blood on its hands.

Why should it matter who is doing the probing? the Americans have no God given right to be exempt from being the training target occasionally.

Iran is not poking the USA any more than the USA in poking Iran. If you think your nation hasn't had enough young men and women killed recently then by all means start another avoidable war.

But don't expect us to join in.

By that thinking we could fire a few ICBMs at some foreign power's capital but have them abort right before entering their air space. After all there is no difference between "targeting" and "attack run".

It sometimes seems that the Iranian Navy is desperate to start a war with the USA… not so?

Not so. So why would outclassed Iranian naval units seemingly try to provoke a stronger US navy, in International waters?

I'm not sure some of our esteemed readership here appreciates military command in countries other than the US. The Iranian fast attack boats are actually controlled by hardline Iranian clerics. Their agenda may well be very different from the mainstream government. So what do they want? Fairly obviously, they seek to gain some internal political clout from provoking the "Great Satan".

So if you want to play into the hands of your opponent, what would you do?

a few of their forces get swatted

or, worse;

Many in the US Military believe the US has been at a de facto war with Iran, since '83

In other words, encourage "factions" within the US military to set their own agenda? Operate outside the strict chain of command? I think this nonsense & certainly hope it isn't true.
As flawed as the US can be, it isn't Iran.

It's all very well being an armchair strategist, safe away from the consequences of any direct & violent action you preach, but I have faith that the US high command will, whilst protecting its forces, act in a restrained manner if possible. The real world is not a video game where high score wins nor a pulp novel were you can label the opposition "murderers" & deal with them on that simplistic a plane.

Iran is not poking the USA any more than the USA in poking Iran. If you think your nation hasn't had enough young men and women killed recently then by all means start another avoidable war.

I'm not saying the USA wants to go to war with Iran. But we have discussed this before. They know they'd lose. And only the USN & USAF would be engaged. No boots on the ground.

What you seem to not understand is if the IRGCN tried to ram a USN vessel. They would be destroyed. And I highly doubt Iran will start a war over that. Even they are not that dumb.

E.g. The Turks shot down a Russian aircraft over Syria or Turkey(?)recently. Nothing but harsh words exchanged.

The USN destroyed radar & missile sites in Yemen most likely manned by IRGC. Nothing happened. No war declared.

And if the Iran declared war on the US … what could they really do ? Save for provide targets for the USN & USAF to practice on.

You're once again over reacting and seem not to understand the Geo-political situation.

Again, even Iran knows they would lose many air, naval, ground assets with the USA. They can't afford to.

But don't expect us to join in.

We would not need the UK. And I didn't know you could actually influence your elected government.

In other words, encourage "factions" within the US military to set their own agenda? Operate outside the strict chain of command? I think this nonsense & certainly hope it isn't true.

Not at all. The US military again under the command of the US civilian leadership. Does not set an agenda. But the US military still has to be prepared to do what may have to be done. If the US leadership says go. How many time to I have to tell you, the US Military does not do anything without the POTUS, etc., legal orders ?

As flawed as the US can be, it isn't Iran.

So in other words you don't know how the US military and the US government actually works. And yes it's pretty clear the US is not Iran. On many, many levels.

It's all very well being an armchair strategist, safe away from the consequences of any direct & violent action you preach,

IS THAT NOT WHAT WE ALL ARE DOING HERE ? We are discussing geo-political and military subjects.

but I have faith that the US high command will, whilst protecting its forces, act in a restrained manner if possible.

That is the only thing you have said that is true, IMO.

The real world is not a video game where high score wins nor a pulp novel were you can label the opposition "murderers" & deal with them on that simplistic a plane.

I don't play video games, never had. And have not read pulp novels in decades. And I'm able to tell the difference between reality and a videogame or a book.

However far as I am concerned, and I'm not only one, Iran has a lot of US blood on their hands starting in '83. They supported Shia militias in Iraq that the US troops had to combat. And in some cases died. That is enough for me to ID them as the "enemy".

As far as a simplistic plane. It appears to me, that if you're being attacked. And you return fire, etc. That seems to me to be a very basic survival instinct. No politics, geopolitics, etc., involved just … Us or Them … And again I'm not the only one that thinks that way. Some may not be able to see that thru rose colored glasses …

And again I'm not the only one that thinks that way. Some may not be able to see that thru rose colored glasses

2-3 like minded here & a few cronies at home a consensus do not make. I asked a taxi driver yesterday and he agreed with me….you see the argumentative fallacy?

IS THAT NOT WHAT WE ALL ARE DOING HERE ?

NO IT'S NOT
I just felt like shouting too. If you speak nonsense you should be expected to be called on it.

I don't play video games,

I'll try another analogy. Super-hero movies. Any Hollywood movie with a Good Guy vs Bad Guys. The world isn't that simplistic. The US is *not* the Good Guy. Certainly, often the Better Guy but that doesn't give her carte blanche. This is the complexity you don't seem to be able to fathom.

Ralph, I was telling a pal of mine about you. He's a colonel in the Australian army (albeit the Reserve. However he was a lowly captain in the Regulars in Afghanistan).
He said I should be politer to combat veterans. So I will be.

you have said that is true

Thank you.

Lion – in other words they made a training attack run?

Now remind me again how often US subs do the same thing to other nations' shipping?

Just about constantly.

But we break off when called on it, and the Iranians didn't.

Except the Iranains did when fired upon… they've still done nothing overtly hostile.

that's playing into the hands of the Iranians.

Who still, decades after the Revolution, have never directly attacked the USA despite a large degree of provocation.

Even the Israelis can't say that…

However far as I am concerned, and I'm not only one, Iran has a lot of US blood on their hands starting in '83. They supported Shia militias in Iraq that the US troops had to combat. And in some cases died. That is enough for me to ID them as the "enemy".

And who supplied the enemies of Iran with weapons and supplies and intelligence that helped kill over 500,000 Iranians ? . Add that to the continued attacks(direct and indirect) by US allies not to mention Iran Air flt 655. and maybe that is why the US is id'ed as the "enemy

So I can see why you get upset about a speedboat or 2 – those dastardly Iranians

2-3 like minded here & a few cronies at home a consensus do not make. I asked a taxi driver yesterday and he agreed with me….you see the argumentative fallacy?

I really was not talking about here. But all the interviews, in media both on TV, the net and in Journals, like Military History, the now defunct Airchair General etc. … that I see and read. So I will take those military and intel professionals comments over many here.

This is the complexity you don't seem to be able to fathom.

Yes, as you continually allude to you are much smarter and much more moral than I. So be it. I'm just an old broken down former Grunt Commander. Not as intellectual and academic as many here. So take that for what it is worth. Which it appear here is not worth much. And I get that … And I rarely watch Super Hero movies and have not read comic books in decades. But thanks for trying to make things more understandable to a stupid uneducated old fool the likes of me …

That is what I have to say … no need to go any further … we all know where that will lead …

Yes, stu and grtbrt, I know all that …

So I can see why you get upset about a speedboat or 2 – those dastardly Iranians

Hyperbole, condescending, patronizing, etc. … it sound like that to me. And obviously I'm Not as "enlighten" as some here. I guess I'm just a stupid old former Grunt, what do I know … or should care ?

I've stated my opinion and other's theirs. They don't have to always agree … And it seems here they don't …

Yes, as you continually allude to you are much smarter and much more moral than I. So be it. I'm just an old broken down former Grunt Commander. Not as intellectual and academic as many here. So take that for what it is worth. Which it appear here is not worth much. And I get that … And I rarely watch Super Hero movies and have not read comic books in decades. But thanks for trying to make things more understandable to a stupid uneducated old fool the likes of me … old fart

I did not say any of this. And Ralph, if you'll take my advice, it's not a good idea to put yourself down like this.

I think you're usually wrong, root & branch, but I don't insult you personally.

Except the Iranains did when fired upon… they've still done nothing overtly hostile.

Aside from being on an attack profile within seconds of missile IMPACT?

Aside from not responding to radio, LRAD hails, and multiple different flares? And not responding to the international "Interrogative Whiskey Tango Foxtrot are you doing" of 5 blasts of the ship's whistle?

If your radio is down, you can send light signals. If your entire electrical system is down, you can fly a signal flag (and are probably dead in the water or should be).

Failure to respond to comms is considered an overtly hostile action, Stu. By international law. Get some of the merchant sailors in here (I know we have a few, I just can't remember their forum handles), they will agree with me.

US subs break off the shenanigans when called on the radio or given a light signal (we may or may not be able to hear a ship's whistle while we are submerged).

US subs will also drop whatever we were doing (including screwing with a carrier group as part of said carrier group's training) if we hear a distress call. We were plotting course when the USCG announced that they were 10 minutes out (and we were more than 30min out). We still called the Coasties on the radio to confirm that they had the situation in hand before we went back to the exercise with the carrier.

You were a Submariner weren't you Lion ? So you have a pretty good working knowledge about navel ops. But around here, having training and experience holds no weight. But those that never served and read about it … know so much more than you. Don't you know ?

Experience certainly counts for something, Ralph. But a sterling education & intelligence do too. Perhaps more.
Here's some readings on the issue:

link

link

You'll see these show opposing viewpoints. One of the things you gain from a good education is the ability to consider both sides of an argument. I find the "school of hard knocks" types, whilst sterling human beings, tend to be entrenched in their own little world. I have a bunch of "techies" who work for me. They sure know the minutae but tend to have no global perspective or ability to function beyond what they know.

I know the topic of education Versus experience is one you find fascinating, Ralph, but I suspect few others here share our peccadillos.
What a pity you no longer see fit to be a member so we could finish the conversation via PM like we did so many times before.
Still as Ned Kelly said before his final attempt at Riverdance, "C'est la Vie". Doubtless said with an Irish accent.

First of all, I believe this is being done by the Iranians for the purposes of internal politics. By playing up the 'foreign devils' you can divert attention from failing domestic policies. I fully expect that these attack runs were filmed to be shown in the movies back home. This is a constant theme in autocratic regimes.
Second, we were attacked in the Persian Gulf by Iranian gunboats During Desert Storm. We were a US Navy warship and the idiots were revolutionary guards in Boghammer gunboats. They were out pirating and made the stupid mistake of going up under the overhang of the ship and shooting a flare gun at the side. That's when they figured out the "Great White Ghost of the Arabian Coast" was a warship and tried to escape. As soon as they cleared the ship the Ma Deuces on the bow opened up and cut them to ribbons. Having machine gun fire in the background sure makes general quarters more efficient.

I believe this is being done by the Iranians for the purposes of internal politics. By playing up the 'foreign devils' you can divert attention from failing domestic policies.

Agree completely … My point being that if they push it, get too close … then as you put it so well –

the Ma Deuces on the bow opened up and cut them to ribbons.

"Not so. So why would outclassed Iranian naval units seemingly try to provoke a stronger US navy, in International waters?".

To cause a global conflict, in order to bring back their mythical "great mahdi".