US Navy fires at Iranian boats in Persian Gulf — again
posted at 1:10 pm on April 25, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
In at least the second provocation by Iranian vessels in international waters, the US Navy fired warning shots at boats that acted aggressively towards our ships. After attempting several times to signal the craft, the Navy let loose with a barrage of M-16s and .50-caliber guns. The Iranians got the message:
The incident took place in the Gulf, in international waters dozens of miles from the Iranian coast, the US said.
The vessel – the Westward Venture – was working for the US Military Sealift Command under a 65-day charter, an official told the BBC.
The Iranaian boats withdrew soon after the warning shots were fired.
US officials say the Westward Venture used the correct measures prior to firing the shots: it sounded its horn, and gave the Iranian boats a verbal warning, before firing flares, 50-caliber machine guns and M-16s in the direction of the boats.
Shortly after the incident, a routine inquiry was made of the Westward Venture by Iranian authorities, according to US officials.
Tehran wants to probe American naval defense protocols just short of initiating hostilities. The Navy, mindful of an incident in which Iranian boats captured 15 British sailors and later paraded them for propaganda purposes, have thus far shown no particular friendliness. After the USS Cole bombing in 2000, the US Navy doesn’t let anyone get close without clear intent and communication being known first.
The ultimate goal could be to intimidate the US out of the Gulf, which the Iranians consider their private lake. If so, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad will be sorely disappointed, at least in this President. If he keeps provoking the Navy, one day he may be a few boats short.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Call in Jimmy and Roz.
JonRoss on April 25, 2008 at 1:12 PM
It wasn’t the US Navy. It was a contracted ship.
Gregor on April 25, 2008 at 1:13 PM
I have a feeling this stuff with Iran is going to come to a head in the near future.
I wonder, were they flying an American flag?
Geronimo on April 25, 2008 at 1:15 PM
Glad the Westward Venture fought them off. I wonder how close Iran’s navy got?
Vanceone on April 25, 2008 at 1:15 PM
Geronimo,
I am in agreement. I think the issue has been timing, and trying to keep what’s about to happen from adversely affecting the upcoming election.
Sekhmet on April 25, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Iran’s game is to provoke an altercation that will sway the American electorate andultimately lead to the nomination of a peacenik as POTUS. Any guesses on who Iran would like to see win the nomination?
swami on April 25, 2008 at 1:22 PM
Time to bring the Iowa Class battleships back out of retirement, awaken the Four Sleeping Dragons!
Tony737 on April 25, 2008 at 1:29 PM
Our subs should TORPEDO the Iranian boats.
omnipotent on April 25, 2008 at 1:30 PM
So,the Iranians are playing water polo again!
The Iranians need to understand that the United States
will fire upon any Iranian,or unidentified vessel that
comes near a US Warship,or any American vessel for that matter!
Call it the USS Cole doctrine,a nice spray of the 20mm
Phalanx gatling gun would shred any foolish intentions!
And any US Warship should have CAP if they need it,the
United States should be having air assests available,
even if it has a couple of Jihadys in a canoe packed
with explosives on a one way suicide mission!
canopfor on April 25, 2008 at 1:30 PM
This needs to be repeated:
Tony737 on April 25, 2008 at 1:32 PM
I doubt it’s the only reason for the provocation but I think one of the goals was to raise the price of oil.
FloatingRock on April 25, 2008 at 1:38 PM
Demanding a two mile separation from US Navy ships in a Traffic Separation Scheme (like the one in the Strait of Hormuz, for example) is impossible, but I agree with the need for ROE that allows US ships to be more proactive in their own defense.
PBoilermaker on April 25, 2008 at 1:43 PM
Warning shots plural? I’m with Lim–nice = dead all too often.
One warning shot. The rest ought to be hits.
TexasDan on April 25, 2008 at 1:45 PM
Time to bring the Iowa Class battleships back out of
retirement,awaken the Four Sleeping Dragons!
Tony 737 on April 25,2008 at 1:29PM.
Tony737: Tony,I have two baseball caps,one is the USS
New Jersey,and the USS Missouri,and thank God
Ronald Regean re-activated them back when!
And taking out my trusty Battleship book,I’ve
got a nice picture of Bob Hope and Anne Margert
cutting a cake on the USS New Jersey as part of
the Christmas 1968 USO!
All 4 Battlewagons with thier 16 inch guns are
beautiful,and when Cher was onbroard strutting
and singing,that was something else,especially
the Navy cooperating,outstanding video!
canopfor on April 25, 2008 at 1:45 PM
LOL…point taken. It is the opinion of an old ground pounder.
Limerick on April 25, 2008 at 1:47 PM
If its rough going thru the straights of Hormuz,
then Combat Air Patrol should take the burden a
bit on ID’ing these clowns!
canopfor on April 25, 2008 at 1:49 PM
US Navy-contracted ship=US Navy as far as acts of war/terror against it. I’m betting that the security force who did the firing were sailors and marines.
Here’s a sample of the type of cargo that the SS Westward Venture carries.
baldilocks on April 25, 2008 at 1:49 PM
After spending Desert Storm doing Embargo Boarding Ops at the mouth of the Gulf…
No can do. Those waters are both very restricted and extremely busy. This was a merchant ship that was transporting US supplies… they did the correct thing.
Real problem is that we are trying to do Coastal shallow water Ops with a Deep Blue Water Navy. Politics in the Pentagon killed the Hydrofoils (which would have been perfect here and were VERY cool) and are slowing the development of the Littoral Ships… Both would be MUCH better than anything else we have for Gulf Ops…
Romeo13 on April 25, 2008 at 1:50 PM
We don’t need the BB’s to defeat a swarm. People, I guess, think that a CG or DDG can’t defend itself because there aren’t news reports about the US Navy scwhacking vessels out of the water every day. Trust me, modern surface combatants are plenty capable against surface, air and subsurface contacts. The 5″, Mk32, CIWS Block 1B, Bushmaster, Mk44, .50 and M249 are all quite capable as far as sending Iranian targets to the bottom, including those pesky KILO’s.
PBoilermaker on April 25, 2008 at 1:51 PM
Here are some nice photos of the Westward Venture.
BohicaTwentyTwo on April 25, 2008 at 1:51 PM
Go Navy. don’t take their crap.
RMC1618 on April 25, 2008 at 1:51 PM
Enough with the warning shots. Blow them out of the water and there won’t be any more “aggressive” actions by Iranian boats.
kcluva on April 25, 2008 at 1:53 PM
If Ahmedinejad wants to create an excuse, a la the Gulf of Tonkin, for us to destroy his entire military infrastructure, his ability to import anything whatsoever, and his nuclear program to boot, just keep it up.
Won’t take much, I reckon. George W. Bush is waiting.
MrLynn on April 25, 2008 at 1:54 PM
Even if its a supply,or god forbid fuel or ammunition ship,
The US needs to make it clear to the Iranians,get close
we open fire,get closer and your ship will be sunk!
Its got to be clear enough that the New york Times
b!tches about it,and CNN broadcasts it!
canopfor on April 25, 2008 at 1:57 PM
This is only a test. There will be more “provocations” – using small boats – to see our reaction and response. This will all lead up to the more serious act – the firing of anti-ship missiles. Right now, the Iranians are getting us used to the pin-pricks, so that we will be off-guard when they fire their anti-ship missiles.
We better be on-guard. And we better start getting serious.
OhEssYouCowboys on April 25, 2008 at 2:00 PM
If anyone thinks Iran small water craft boats can defeat our Naval forces in that area need to do some more research. The US Navy have something called Air Power (helo/plane)which the British didn’t used when the Iranian did it to them.
jdun on April 25, 2008 at 2:03 PM
Short memories in Iran.
Operation Praying Mantis = Iranian Navy vanishes in 48 hours.
Kristopher on April 25, 2008 at 2:07 PM
Reality check here.
These were most probably UNMARKED and UNFLAGGED speed boats… like the Qud’s force have been using for years.
If we blow them out of the water without them firing first? We’re the bad guys, because Iran will disavow owning them, and we will have killed CIVILIAN boats in the Gulf. Now, Iran says they OWN the Gulf… and this will give the political cover to try to exert control over it. They will claim control in order to “make the seas safe” from the Evil US Navy.
They won’t win, but its a long term political strategy to gain control of the Straights… cause if they control those waters they can then charge for transit.
Romeo13 on April 25, 2008 at 2:13 PM
Here the reality check, we’re not British. Our sailors lives worth more then some perceives political gains.
jdun on April 25, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Now that we fired warning shots once, that counts forever, right? Next time we get to simply lock-on and let loose?
Time to fit some chain guns and launchers on those contracted ships (just a suggestion)
Hening on April 25, 2008 at 2:22 PM
Never understood you swabbies. On the ground I had rocks and holes to hide me, and miles and miles of hard ground to run across if I chickened out. You guys have your battle station. That’s it. Big tip of the hat to all you blue water warriors. Every warship is just one big machine and you guys are hardwired right into the bulkheads. Beer and brauts await you anytime you are in the neighborhood.
Limerick on April 25, 2008 at 2:24 PM
Time to fit some chain guns and Launchers on those
contracted ships (just a suggestion).
Hening on April 25,2008 at 2:22PM.
Hening: Outstanding idea,whats old is new again,
Armed Merchant Ships a la WW2!
Love to see the Iranian smirk disappear
quickly when the crew on the merchant ship
pull the tarp off a 20mm Phalanx!
canopfor on April 25, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Go Navy. Beat Ahm-y.
CP on April 25, 2008 at 2:33 PM
How about a warning tomahawk into their state building, one shot should get their attention.
right2bright on April 25, 2008 at 2:40 PM
Oh I can’t wait to hear Tehran go howling to the UN on this one.
pilamaye on April 25, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Yet another Reality Check:
1. We only have two (2) New Jersey Class BBs left. The Missouri is now in Pearl Harbor and the Iowa is a museum.
2. Contrary to popular opinion, with the exception of carriers, the US Navy’s ships are all thin skinned. It doesn’t really take much to make a noticeable dent, let alone a big hole (a’la USS Cole).
3. The better solution would be to arm Surface Effect Ships (aka Air Cushion boats) with surface to surface missiles, .50 cal machine guns and Gatling Guns. No speed boat can out run them and, with Kevlar skirts, they are very tough to knock out.
SeniorD on April 25, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Big expensive targets to pull out of the mothballs. (I briefly help restore Mighty MO in in HI)
I’m no expert but I think smaller craft would be better.
shick on April 25, 2008 at 2:44 PM
He’s already a few boats short… you know… up there.
AlexB on April 25, 2008 at 2:46 PM
I see we were thinking the same general thought. However, I should have said ships rather than craft. (I think my AF wings are showing) :)
shick on April 25, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Warning Shots = Appeasement of a nation at war with the United States.
“Iranians are killing Americans in Iraq,” SecDef Gates.
Kalapana on April 25, 2008 at 3:05 PM
Kalapana on April 25, 2008 at 3:05 PM
yep and i cant for the life of me figure out why we dont do something.
they said today on the news that they have found more new Iranian weapons lately, i think enough warnings about this have been made, we need to make a statement.
trailortrash on April 25, 2008 at 3:17 PM
I think these provocations have gone on long enough. It’s all well and good to demonstrate our sincerity in defending our troops, but it’s long past time to put one of these dry run suicide bombers underwater.
As the British sailor crisis revealed, the Iranians managing these missions are crack teams who know their lives are in the hands of the Americans. Maybe if a few of them didn’t come home, others would be less enthusiastic about volunteering.
HitNRun on April 25, 2008 at 3:18 PM
They are testing the ROE. How else to know how sharp to make the tiger-poking stick?
shaken on April 25, 2008 at 3:23 PM
Not so. There’s most likely no military crew aboard this ship, and no military command structure. In fact, given previous weak-kneed (lack of) responses in similar situations, it wouldn’t surprise me to see our candidates blasting the ship’s actions as dangerous.
Very doubtful, and if that were the case … we most likely would NOT have seen any warning shots fired. Our military crews are NOT ALLOWED to do their job.
Gregor on April 25, 2008 at 3:23 PM
I suspect that we’re waiting for the right provocation, one that unambiguously requires a forceful response. You better hope it occurs before some pusillanimous Democrat takes the White House.
MrLynn on April 25, 2008 at 3:26 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegasus_class_hydrofoil
We used to have 6 of em… but the big blue water Admirals retired them…
Sad, they REALLY rocked, and would be perfect in the Gulf for escorting Freghters.
Romeo13 on April 25, 2008 at 3:29 PM
Not sure about this particular ship but my son’s outfit has personnel along for the ride when their equipment is on the water. Just caretakers, basically, but armed ones.
Limerick on April 25, 2008 at 3:30 PM
+9000
Didn’t we sink most of their navy in retaliation for something in the 90’s?
liquidflorian on April 25, 2008 at 3:31 PM
Exactly.
baldilocks on April 25, 2008 at 3:35 PM
If there’s a 50 caliber on board, they must have military support. What’s with the warning shots? It’s time the give the Iranians what they’re begging for…blow them out of the water if they threaten a U.S. ship.
orlandocajun on April 25, 2008 at 3:38 PM
They must think that crude oil prices are close to a drop point. This is what they do when they want to drive prices up. That really is all I see here.
TBinSTL on April 25, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Memory Lane:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis
I think Iran is begging for a sequel.
Kai on April 25, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Romeo13 on April 25, 2008 at 3:29 PM
These are what we currently have in the Gulf as far as patrol ships. Nothing to be trifled with.
BohicaTwentyTwo on April 25, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Technically, the U.S. Navy didn’t fire on the Iranians, a DoD Defense Contractor fired on the Iranians. Which if they actually got into a deadly confrontation with the Iranians, the situation would set a dangerous precedent (being that they are different then Blackwater and other Private Military Contractors or PMCs, and on the high seas).
Furthermore, most DoD Defense Contractors in War Zones are allowed to provide for their own security, so it is not unlikely that the boat had armaments on-board, regardless of the Navy personnel presence on-board. And, via an ammendment to the UCMJ, contractors who go to War in support of or with the Military are subject to laws of the UCMJ and official Military Tribunal.
PresidenToor on April 25, 2008 at 4:14 PM
Heh! Got a kick out of your post. We felt the same about you ground pounders. Just knew you had to be nuts rolling around in the mud jumping into holes. All a matter of perspective.
Oldnuke on April 25, 2008 at 4:33 PM
This is what I consider a “warning shot” – if there are two boats coming at you, sink one of them as a warning to the other boat.
Squiggy on April 25, 2008 at 4:43 PM
They did’nt fire at Iranian boats, if so they would have been sunk.
Johan Klaus on April 25, 2008 at 4:54 PM
The best kind of warning shot.
Johan Klaus on April 25, 2008 at 4:55 PM
The tiger needs to bite back; hard.
Johan Klaus on April 25, 2008 at 5:00 PM
What’s with the warning shots?
It’s called Law of the Sea. Besides, tooling around in a speed boat isn’t exactly an act of war.
Sinking a speed boat that isn’t flying your flag is.
I R A Darth Aggie on April 25, 2008 at 5:54 PM
I have an oil painting in my office of a Liberty ship with a gun mounted on the bow. Just think of what we have these days that could take that space.
Hening on April 25, 2008 at 6:14 PM
That’s it! Skiers!
Try that argument with the Cole crew.
Limerick on April 25, 2008 at 6:19 PM
My Father was a gunner’s mate on a contract ship during WW2. It was a passenger liner, leased to the Army, with a Navy crew, except engine room and fireroom crew which were merchant marine. The ship carried cargo and troops.
Oldnuke on April 25, 2008 at 6:28 PM
The have Navy security dets aboard who are still repsonsible to the MSC Master (who is a US Navy resevist)
Squid Shark on April 25, 2008 at 9:12 PM
These MSC Bubbas have got plenty of firepower. They have security dets and most of the mates and masters are USN reseve officers.
Squid Shark on April 25, 2008 at 9:14 PM
If it was MSC or contract, it’s most likely got a naval detachment on board. In most cases gunnersmates and radiomen with a comm officer in charge.
dingbat on April 25, 2008 at 9:49 PM
I concur wholeheartedly.
My first ship was USS Wainwright (CG-28), which was heavily involved in Operation Praying Mantis… sorry to say, I didn’t check onboard ’til a few months afterwards.
The Wisconsin is a museum in Norfolk, VA.
Texas Nick USN on April 25, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Speaking as a MilDet OIC on a USNS, I can say that Squid Shark has it exactly right.
It was a USN Security Det onboard the Global Venture that shot up a boat in the Suez a few weeks back.
Texas Nick USN on April 25, 2008 at 10:41 PM
That’s a warning if I ever heard one. I think they might get the point. :)
MannyT-vA on April 26, 2008 at 5:55 AM
Iran is going to push this too far and lose a few boats.
Dinnerjacket used children to carve out paths through minefields during the Iran-Iraq war. He has no issue with losing a couple of dinghy’s worth of Iranian sailors.
Ares on April 26, 2008 at 8:11 AM
Ares on April 26, 2008 at 8:12 AM
Wishful thinking, I would not want to be the CO that starts another war in the Middle East
Squid Shark on April 26, 2008 at 8:43 AM
RMC1618 on April 26, 2008 at 11:16 PM
My problem is the term shots.
One over the bow, if no reaction is observed sink the vessel and save/incarcerate the sailors and turn them over at the next port.
The same goes for the pirates in Indonesia, and Caribbean.
MSGTAS on April 27, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Comment pages: