Dry run on the U.S. Navy in Strait of Hormuz

Specialized Iranian Republican Guard were in the five patrol boats that attempted a "dry run" on the United States Navy on January 6, 2008.  According to one individual in the know, (via email):  “U.S. naval forces protection procedures” were “tested, with the objective of softening them for a forthcoming terrorist attack.”   A U.S. admiral says, "I would not be surprised if something is up.  ...  The Fleet is on high alert. Standing orders."

Here's some background:

IRANIAN MILITARY PROVOCATION AGAINST U.S. NAVY SHIPS IN THE GULF , from Insights Into Today's Middle East

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Navy almost provoked a military confrontation with the U.S. Navy as five Iranian patrol boats came within 200 yards of the three warships from the U.S. 5ft fleet on their way to the Gulf and passing through the Strait of Hormuz. [1]

The five Iranian speed boats approached the three US warships and dropped suspicious looking packages into the water and then issued a transmitted threat. The threat warned the American ships that an Iranian attack was to commence, “I am coming at you. You will explode in a couple of minutes.’’

The three warships, USS Hopper, USS Port Royal and USS Ingraham were preparing to open fire on the Iranian speed boats but they pulled back from the international waters before anything happened. [2]

The Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad-Ali Hosseini played down the incident by saying on Monday the act taken in connection with an American navy ship is something normal. [3] The response by U.S. Secretary of Sate Condoleeza Rice was of more concern as she told BBC Arabic Service. “It was provocative, and that kind of provocation is dangerous. I would sincerely hope that the Iranians would refrain from such activity.” She went on to say, “The United States under this President has sent a very strong signal that America has strong interests in the Gulf, and the United States will continue to defend it interests in the Gulf and this goes back decades.” [4]

The last serious international incident occurred on March 23, 2007, when fifteen British sailors were captured by Iranian Forces in the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab waterway that separates Iran and Iraq. This happened at a time of heightened tensions over Tehran´s nuclear ambitions. A week after the British personnel was detained; the European Union deplored Iran´s seizure and called for their immediate release. On April 4, 2007, Iranian President Ahmadinejad declared that that he freed the sailors as a „gift“. [5] He announced his decision to release the Britons at a news conference In Tehran. He spoke at length, attacking the West over its policy in the Middle East, and it was more than an hour before he even mentioned the captured sailors. It was all part of the build up to his extraordinary theatrical gesture, says the BBC's diplomatic correspondent James Robbins. [6]

Simon Barrett Director of I-M-I-A International Media Intelligence Analysis said, “What we are witnessing is new found confidence and boldness by the Iranian Regime to confront the U.S. navy and send a clear message to the Gulf States about Iran’s new sense of dominance in the region. Since the U.S. administration issued the NIE National Intelligence Estimate Report that claimed that Iran halted their nuclear weapons programme in 2003 this has taken the international focus and pressure off Iran. The Iranian regime is testing America’s military resolve and defences just as they did last year against the British Navy by capturing British Naval personnel. If Iran acquires continues its nuclear weapons programme we will see incidents of this nature in the near future and in the future such incidents could provoke deadly confrontation as Iran seeks to dominate the region.”

References

[1] “US tells Iran to back down after Gulf Skirmish”, Daily Telegraph, January 8, 2008

[2] “Reckless Iranians threaten to blow up American warships in the Gulf,” The Times, January 8, 2008

[3] “FM spokesman says act taken in connection with US ship is normal,” Islamic Republic News Agency, January 7th 2008

[4] “US says Iran incident 'dangerous'”, Iran Focus & BBC,January 8, 2008

[5] “Chronology: Crisis over British sailors in Iran,” Reuters, April 4, 2007

[6] “Iranians release British sailors,” BBC News, April 4, 2007

Comments

[PALADIN]

WITHIN 200 YARDS OF AN AMERICAN SHIP??? THE ADMIRAL OF THAT BATTLE GROUP NEEDS TO BE RELEIVED OF DUTY IMMEDIATELY!!!!! AND COURT MARTIALED. OR WAS IT THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT FROM THE PENTAGON??? BOY THINGS ARE LOOKIN SORRY THIS WEEK. NEXT TIME THE IRAINIAN DOUCHEBAGS WILL SUCCEED AS THIS WILL SURELY EMBOLDEN THEM AND DO WONDERS FOR THEIR MORALE. THEY CAME OUT ON TOP OF THIS INCIDENT WITH A WIN FOR SURE. IT,S A PSYCHOLOGICAL WIN , BUT A VICTORY NONE THE LESS.

[ablur]

We lost. This is a win for Iran and a confirmation that we are still paper tigers.
They even dropped boxes into the water, as if setting mines in the path of the ships.
Still we do nothing. This was a sad day for America. This can only escalate and our young American soldiers will pay the ultimate price.

[Mushy]

We should have sent our own message and updated the procedure and blasted the little boats out of the water!

I agree...they won the first round and I just hope this does not come back to haunt us.

[Skunkfeathers]

Well, reasoned, rational thought tells me we don't need another shooting war just now; then again, if another puny fleet of Iranian speed boats approaches US warships, and issues another such threat, they should be sent speeding back to Iran....in a million match- stick pieces.

[Angel]

when are we going to stand up to our enemies Deb!

[Scary]

The minute I heard about this Hormuz incident, the first thing I thought of was Gulf of Tonkin. Very scary stuff indeed. Could Bush be willing to start a war with Iran and leave it up to his successor to sort out? I think it’s a grave possibility. The partisanship Bush has espoused would lead us to believe that he could sabotage a democratic presidency by making the current war even more unwinnable… Very good article by the way. I learned more about Tonkin than I knew before.

[Stormwarning]

Oil...think oil.

[Ruger Heat]

Well, a very close, personal friend of mine is a Navy man. I swear the way he looks in his "Whites" is sin for me!! Way too fine!! But that's neither here nor there.

He is fuming mad about this...and I am extremely nervous for him. I can't contemplate not having him around....He is supposed to check in with me BY Thursday night. May God above keep him and our boys safe out there.

If he had his way, he would have unleashed and open fired. That's all I can say. He's always locked, cocked, and ready to rock!!!!!!!!

[Aurora]

Paladin, hear, hear. The natural response of your typical American is to blast them into next week, especially military guys like these. I wonder who or what was tying their hands? On the ground they're fighting fierce and winning. This whole thing seems really weird to me.

[Rastaman]

Let's have a little reality here. That wasn't a "battle group". A battle group would have at least one aircraft carrier, 2 or 3 guided missile cruisers, etcetera. That was just 3 navy ships escorting each other for mutual protection, and the highest ranking officer would have been a captain, on the cruiser. Destroyers normally have a commander as skipper and the frigate would have had a lt. commander or lieutenant.

Harassment of our ships in the straits by Iran is pretty common. This was an escalation of normal harassment and is why battle stations were manned and the ships were preparing to fire.

It is common for naval vessels of different hostile nations to behave threateningly toward us in peacetime. We know we can beat the tar out of them anytime we want and so do they, so it's all swagger and bluster. This time they went too far and if they hadn't turned tail and run at the sight of precessing guns, they would be shaking hands with Davy Jones.

Don't sell our Navy short, or their courage and resolve.

Rasta
www.islamanazi.com

[ortho]

Let's descend from the clouds of jingoistic rhetoric.

Surely U.S. warships were hoping to provoke an action of some kind from Iranian ships. Surely Iranian ships were hoping to provoke an action of some kind from U.S. ships. Surely no nation, the U.S. or Iran, is innocent in this situation. Both nations are intent on playing a game of chicken. Both nations are intent to wage war to protect their citizens.

Neither nation will win the impending war. One nation will just lose more slowly than the other.

[Rastaman]

Oh good, Ortho. Is your last name Pedic? You need a prosthetic for your brain if you believe what you just wrote.

Our Navy does not go around provoking fights. Period. OK? Our ships regularly traverse the Straits TO ESCORT AND PROTECT CIVILIAN SHIPPING FROM ATTACK. That's why they're there. No other reason.

We don't need to provoke the Iranians, in fact we want them to stay as calm as possible and not disturb the flow of oil.

Come on. Jingoistic. Good grief.

Rasta
www.islamanazi.com

[ortho]

"Rastaman," your lack of civility and poor attempt at condescending humor are unfortunate. I would never dream of attempting to insult you because of your name. Nor would I ever imply that long bong sessions fuel your vitriolic rhetoric.

Your statement that U.S. naval ships patrol the Strait of Hormuz to only "protect" economic interests and not to also facilitate an attack on another sovereign nation is grounded in naive nationalism, not an actual engagement with U.S.-Iran foreign relations. Furthermore, as I have politely suggested, your statement does not account for the totality of the U.S. Fifth Fleet's mission. For instance, according to public documents, available on the Internet, the U.S. Fifth Fleet "Maritime forces maintain the capability to project power ashore to conduct sustained combat operations in support of coalition land commanders, provide air support to multinational forces on the ground as well as conduct long range strikes with aircraft and Tomahawk Land Attack cruise Missiles against enemy targets."

Come on..."TO ESCORT AND PROTECT"...that's only part of the story...good grief.

[PALADIN]

ORHTO MY DEAR "BOY" YOU NEED TO WAKE UP AND SMELL THE STARBUCKS!!!!!! THATS WHAT THEY DRINK IN THE VILLAGE IS,NT IT? OH AND THIS IS JUST FOR YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!""""""""""""""""""""";;;;;,,,,,,,,,,"""""""""????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TIME TO LIVE IN REALITY SON. I THINK YOUR THE ONE THATS BEEN HITTING THE BONG A BIT TOO MUCH LATELY.

[Ruger Heat]

Paladin:

You always make me laugh! Remember that time is Aussie land? Looks like you and I could stir up some stuff again.

Hey, while you're at the Starbucks, Ortho...pick me up a Grande Hot Chocolate.

Allow me to inform you that the US Navy was NOT out there to provoke the Iranians. I have that information on very good authority. Since when do Iranians and any other fanatical sand pit divers need provoking?

Oh wait....let me guess....the Iranians were provoked when they discovered the size of the Navy "boats", right? I can understand...after all, size does matter.

[Grouch at Right Truth]

"Surely U.S. warships were hoping to provoke an action of some kind from Iranian ships."

The Blame America First crowd is alive and well.

"Surely no nation, the U.S. or Iran, is innocent in this situation."

Tell that to the 3000 folks that perished here on 9-11-01.

"Neither nation will win the impending war."

Says who? If people like Ortho will get the hell out of the way, I'm am quite confident we would kick their raghead asses way back well beyond the stone age.

Well, now yall know exactly how I feel.

[Rastaman]

Dear Dumb Ass, oh excuse me, I mean Orthopedic. The reason I know what I'm talking about is because I was in the Navy, even though yes, it was a long time ago, and we patrolled the Straits then just as we do now and for the exact same reason.

At no time did we ever attempt the slightest provocation of another nation or their naval vessels. Get a grip, ok?

And you can make any inane remark about the name Rastaman that you like. I have a lot of fun with it myself. It's a PEN NAME, fool. It's not my name. Why should I be sensitive? Good lord. Some people.

Masta Rasta the Moron Blasta
www.islamanazi.com

[Ruger Heat]

Rasta:

You are a feisty one, aren't you? I love that!!!

So you were a Navy man, huh? Oh those "Whites" are something else!! You guys look way too FINE in that uniform. OOOHHH.

I agree...The US Navy was NOT looking to provoke anyone. If one believes that, well...how unfortunate.

[Debbie]

Hubby was a navy man too. They sure look sharp in the dress uniform. Of course hubby would look sharp no matter what he was wearing.

[TRS]

If the liberal "peace movement" warriors would have one iota of sincerity, they'd voice some gratitude for Bush's enormous restraint in face of Islamic Iran's unprovoked aggression.

But these loons are not really about "peace" and "war", but about dirty politics, whatever the cost of it is.

[Ruger Heat]

Debbie:

Amen to that!!! Sharp is not the word for how a Navy man looks in uniform.....I'm thinking the sounds "OOOOO, AAAAHHH" are good adjectives. LOL!! Also, the words, "OH MY GOSH" are fitting....right before the heart flutters begin.

Never seen your husband...and of course he would be sharp in anything. As for the Navy man I know....definitely the finest man I have seen in a long time.

He did call, he is okay. He is still upset about having to be passive. He wanted to take things to a whole new level. But the important thing is he is safe and he will live to dress in uniform again. OH MY!!

[Debbie]

Thanks for the comments and discussion everyone. Much appreciated.