Discussion in 'Iran' started by Gunny, Jan 8, 2008.
At least it didn't go without comment.
Obviously the iranian action was calculated. To what end? From what I have read, had they come an an inch closer, the Navy would have blown them away. How would that have served their purposes? Maybe the media, which would convict the Navy as trigger happy gunslingers, is something that the Iranians would find useful.
I suspect more goading Bush into stretching our resources prior to the next president coming into office.
Actually, I have to wonder why myself since it was common practice for them to run parallel to us, shaking their fists and acting all tough whenever we would go through the Strait.
They did not charge us however, and if they had engaged a cruiser, destroyer and frigate there wouldn't have been enough left to make matchsticks out of.
how about bombing those fucking boats
Unless they had actually attacked, it would have served no purpose. The Iranians wouldn't have stood a chance against 3 US Navy warships.
The Captain in charge of that group of ships was the one to make the decision, not Bush. If the Iranians had continued their course, teh Captain would have been completely by the ROEs to take them out, and those ROEs have been in place for decades.
A ship's captain doesn't care WHO you vote for.
Few Know About the Tonkin Bay Incidents
On August 4, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson spoke on national television, asking Congress for authorization to use force in Vietnam in response to a claimed "unprovoked attack" against a U.S. destroyer on "routine patrol: in the Tonkin Gulf on August 2, followed by a "deliberate attack" by North Vietnamese PT boats on a pair of U.S. ships two days later. Three days later, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed by Congress, unanimously by the House (4160), and by the Senate 882, with Senators Wayne Morse of Oregon and Ernest Gruening of Alaska casting the only dissenting votes. That resolution was the slender reed on which the subsequent vast escalation of the war was built. Here I. F. Stone offers one of the first investigative reports into the omissions and deceptions in mainstream reporting of the Tonkin Gulf incidents.
Obviously, if the Iranians had attacked, the US ships should have surrendered without firing a shot.
Seems like that's the mentality, doesn't it?
Separate names with a comma.