Bush Castigates Iran, Calling Naval Confrontation ‘Provocative Act’

[mattskramer]

Well we can agree that those distances (60'/40'/20') are ridiculous.

Okay. Okay. I was way off. I guess this all comes down to a subjective judgment call. One simply hopes that the one responsible for making the judgment does not have too much of an itchy trigger finger and let it all loose at the first sign of discomfort. At the same time, one hopes that the one responsible for making the judgment isn’t too apathetic and lethargic. Is there a set rule about when to warn and when to shoot? If not, then I suppose that each knowledgeable captain may have his own opinion.

 

[Annie]

Okay. Okay. I was way off. I guess this all comes down to a subjective judgment call. One simply hopes that the one responsible for making the judgment does not have too much of an itchy trigger finger and let it all loose at the first sign of discomfort. At the same time, one hopes that the one responsible for making the judgment isn’t too apathetic and lethargic. Is there a set rule about when to warn and when to shoot? If not, then I suppose that each knowledgeable captain may have his own opinion.

Yeah, there's been lots of examples of the bolded. Face it Matts, your heart is not with those serving.

 

[maineman]

Is there a set rule about when to warn and when to shoot? If not, then I suppose that each knowledgeable captain may have his own opinion.

The ROEs are pretty comprehensive.

 

[Gunny]

Okay. Okay. I was way off. I guess this all comes down to a subjective judgment call. One simply hopes that the one responsible for making the judgment does not have too much of an itchy trigger finger and let it all loose at the first sign of discomfort. At the same time, one hopes that the one responsible for making the judgment isn’t too apathetic and lethargic. Is there a set rule about when to warn and when to shoot? If not, then I suppose that each knowledgeable captain may have his own opinion.

There are rules for the rules, but it ALWAYS comes down to the person in command making the decision. Contrary to how you would like for it to be, not everything is cut and dried and there are not supposedly error-free computers making decisions.

 

[mattskramer]

Okay. Okay. I was way off. I guess this all comes down to a subjective judgment call. One simply hopes that the one responsible for making the judgment does not have too much of an itchy trigger finger and let it all loose at the first sign of discomfort. At the same time, one hopes that the one responsible for making the judgment isn’t too apathetic and lethargic. Is there a set rule about when to warn and when to shoot? If not, then I suppose that each knowledgeable captain may have his own opinion.

My heart is with those who serve. It is also with those who were carelessly and needlessly murdered by loose cannons with itchy trigger fingers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai

 

[Gunny]

My heart is with those who serve. It is also with those who were carelessly and needlessly murdered by loose cannons with itchy trigger fingers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai

While it DOES happen, it doesn't happen all that often. There will always be people who make a bad judgement call, and there will always be criminals, and both always will slip through the cracks.

I condone neither, but the fact is, it happens. We're ALL trained to make the right decisions as determined by circumstance, and it is literally DRILLED into our heads. You really can't ask for much more and consider it a realistic request.

 

[mattskramer]

While it DOES happen, it doesn't happen all that often. There will always be people who make a bad judgement call, and there will always be criminals, and both always will slip through the cracks.

I condone neither, but the fact is, it happens. We're ALL trained to make the right decisions as determined by circumstance, and it is literally DRILLED into our heads. You really can't ask for much more and consider it a realistic request.

People can err on either side of reasonable caution - agreed?

 

[Gunny]

People can err on either side of reasonable caution - agreed?

Sure they can. Erring on one side of caution gets your ship blown up. Erring on the other side of caution might get Iranian gunboats blown up for no reason.

In this case, the right decision was made and neither happened, as it should be.

 

[maineman]

Sure they can. Erring on one side of caution gets your ship blown up. Erring on the other side of caution might get Iranian gunboats blown up for no reason.

In this case, the right decision was made and neither happened, as it should be.

exactly

 

[Alpha1]

My Bro received this...
----------------------------------------

Received this from a WO 2 that I was stationed with in VC-6 Norfolk, VA.



----- Original Message -----
From: Hank Porter
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:39 PM
Subject: Strait of Hormuz

I see the Iranian ragheads appear to be intensifying their 'chicken games' with go fast boats in the Strait of Homuz.

I know we did this with the Soviet Navy and Soviet block ships for many years in the Med. I was there for some of the near hits and they scared the hell out of me a couple of times. I give credit to the US Navy captains. None of them yielded their right of way, but man, some of them were close calls.

Now I really don't believe any of us, including the Soviets, were trying to kill each other or start an international incedent. But these ragheads, in my opinion, are another story. I am convinced they want us to shoot first and I think we may have to do so.

I don't know what our rules of engagement are but they say the fast boats are getting within 200 yards of our ships. That's too damn close. If the ragheads decide to run in on our ships with either torpedo or suicide attacks I don't think we can take them out with any weapon other than Phalanx and then they must be up and armed at the time.

I ran drone target boats at many of our ships and none of them hit my boats with three or five inch stuff. I only lost three Firefish; one to an air attack with a Bullpup missile, one to either 50 cal or 20 mm shore fire at Dam Neck and one as a result of me ramming the destroyer I was operating from. It was an out of control runaway but it did ram the ship. They could not hit it with five inch coming in from the port beam at 30 knots. Had that been a loaded suicide run we would probably have lost the ship. In close, the boats run too fast for the 'heavy' guns to train. In addition, I got so close to the Randolph she could not depress her guns low enough to even shoot hit my boat. Of course, there was no Phalanx at the time.

I would like to think our experience with the Firefish had something to do with the development and deployment of the Phalanx system. I just don't know if that is the case. I hope Phalanx is on all our combat ships. I don't know that either.

Having Phalanx is only half the resolution. We have to use the damn thing at the right time. Case in point .... USS Cole. We must establish realistic rules of engagement and shoot first if necessary. Screw world political opinion and the Democrats.

And if /when we do, we must use air power to take out the 'mother ships' and shore bases from which the ragheads' fast boats operate.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Hank

 

[Zoomie1980]

People can err on either side of reasonable caution - agreed?

Well, again, as has been stated here numerous times, the decisions to shoot or not to shoot are based on Rules of Engagement. If those boats had move inside the radius called for to shoot, they would have been blown to bits. Commanders do have final discretion concerning the safety of their crews but if they violate those rules one way to the other, they will have a lot of explaining to do. Which is why they almost NEVER do that.

 

[Gunny]

Well, again, as has been stated here numerous times, the decisions to shoot or not to shoot are based on Rules of Engagement. If those boats had move inside the radius called for to shoot, they would have been blown to bits. Commanders do have final discretion concerning the safety of their crews but if they violate those rules one way to the other, they will have a lot of explaining to do. Which is why they almost NEVER do that.

Same deal with pilots, right?

 

[Zoomie1980]

Same deal with pilots, right?

Yea, got a lot of those. The only problem we used to have was some the ROE's were contradictory at times.

 

[PpleLOSINGpower]

Obviously, with growing support from China and Russia, the Iranians are feeling more backed and possibly being pressured by C & R to sort of stir the hornets nest. With Russia, China, and Iran forming the Shanghai Cooperation Oraganization to equal the power the U.S. holds with their allies, Iran may simply feel more secure in their actions of puffing up their chests. We're surely coming into some tense times, and our actions are under strict scruteny from these countries.