The latest antics by the Iranian Pasdaran in the Strait of Hormuz doing their damnedest to get the USN to fire on them has me a tad baffled. In this era of near omnipresent video footage, the chance of this being a questionable ‘Tonkin Gulf’ incident is greatly reduced (so please, if you have Bush Derangement Syndrome, resist the urge to comment), therefore it does seem like this was a real action by the Iranians… so presumably they are doing this for a reason rather than some desire to get themselves shot full of holes just for the hell of it. But what reason is that exactly? Or even approximately?
So what is the upside for Iran in this in military or political terms? This is not a question I have an answer for. If they actually want to start a war, all that will take is a single Silkworm missile launch, so what is this idiocy setting out to achieve? Also whilst the USN clearly showed commendable restraint, I am astonished that they did not fire on the Pasdaran boats given the descriptions of what they did and given recent memories of what happened to the USS Cole.
Hmm, I think it’s one of two things, or possibly both. The first is taunting the enemy, a form of showing off. They know that the western forces are trapped in a gordian knot of decency, rules of engagement etc. They therefore know they can wave their arses at a mighty naval force and not get them kicked. It shows to the Faithful how weak the western armed forces are, bound by effete liberal western rules.
The other thing is the possibility of a money shot. If the mighty US navy had sunk a few of these pissy little boats, the western liberal left would have immediately turned on their own military, demanding enquiries, courts martial and rolling heads. They wouldn’t have got them, probably. But it would have strengthened the already strong support on the left for Islamic regimes. It would be proof that the US (and allies) are bullies beating up little defenceless people in their own lands. Waters. Whatever.
So it was a win-win, really. It’s all about PR and recruiting support, domestically and among supporters in the enemy’s own camp.
That’s MHO, anyway.
What are they playing at? Having fun, I’d imagine. If you know you can piss off the big American warship by zipping around it in a speedboat saying “Hey! Yankee! You smell like a baboon and none of you weapon systems are designed to target speedboats! See you later!” over the radio – I mean why *wouldn’t* you do it?
Because you’ll get a load of shit from your CO as soon as you get back? Well, yeah, but think of the cred you get from the lads back at port.
Two hostile powers in a face off – what’s in any way odd about sabres being rattled? I assume US pilots regularly amuse themselves buzzing Iranian warships, only the Iranian news chooses not to report it. Perhaps US signals folks amuse themselves playing country and western over Iranian radio frequencies. Who knows?
“We’re here! We’re queer! Get used to it!”
Hey, the same Iranian group recently humbled Nelson’s finest. The once mighty British government that fought a war over Jenkins’ Ear allowed itself to be publicly humiliated. If something works once, try again!
After all, there is bound to be a report out of the CIA shortly saying that the Iranians have no hostile intent.
“After all, there is bound to be a report out of the CIA shortly saying that the Iranians have no hostile intent.”
Faintly unlikely when the Pentagon immediately issue a statement saying that it was ‘the most serious provocation of this sort that [they’ve] seen yet.’
The latest rumours say Ahmadinejad is not as popular with Khamenei as he once was. The news that Iran caved into international pressure in 2003 over its nuclear ambitions has sharply decreased the threat of a military strike against Iran by the US. No US threat means no more Ahmadinejadian fiery rhetoric which allows the Iranian people see the contradictions hidden behind the smoke. The economy is knackered. Yet another reason for Khamenei’s disapointment in Ahmadinejad. People are not as supportive to the Ayatollahs as they once were. What better to attempt to stir up the masses with an “incident” involving the Big Satan?
Actually most western navies, particularly the USN and the Royal Navy are now equipping themselves with systems expressly designed to hit these kinds of threats.
Everything from simple .50 cal MGs to super gatling guns to modifications of the Phalanx anti missile gun system are now available.
Reason? How about making a mint on crude oil futures. Go long, make like war is imminent, pocket profit. Take profit, go short, back down, and pocket profit. Repeat procedure until someone wises up…
It was going to be a propoganda victory for Iran whatever, so why not? The United States Navy was unlikely to fire, and there would be an uproar, from at home and the Islamic world, if they did. The culture we are dealing with, and those people who cherish it, have nothing but contempt for the constraining rules and laws governing confrontation. The laws of man, and especially the Kaffir, are blasphemous nonsense, for only the law of Allah is respected by them.
War is deceit, so said Mohammed.
Sean O’Callaghan wins the prize. The correct answer is: Keep the price of oil high by adding to fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Also to test US defenses.
“It was going to be a propoganda victory for Iran whatever, so why not?”
I don’t think that Iran’s actions will gain them any respect or sympathy outside of Zimbabwe, North Korea and Cuba. We shouldn’t be afraid of ignoring Iran’s attempts at intimidation, we should be more concerned with the human rights record of its dictatorial theocracy.
After all, there is bound to be a report out of the CIA shortly saying that the Iranians have no hostile intent.”
Faintly unlikely when the Pentagon immediately issue a statement saying that it was ‘the most serious provocation of this sort that [they’ve] seen yet.’
Quot — When we are all having fun, it can be difficult to tell where the sarcasm ends. My apologies if you were piling on with appropriate flippness — but just in case you were serious, think again.
Do you honestly believe that the CIA gives a tinker’s damn about the Pentagon? Like most giant bureaucracies, the US government has entered the phase where much of the overhead staff (CIA, State Department) are focused on scoring points off who they see as the real enemy — those bastards in the Pentagon.
The sad fact is that today’s CIA has more allegiance to the New York Times than to the people who pay their bills.
Alice has it right:
Not only humiliated but suffered the grievous loss of an I-Pod.
There was a time when the RN or USN would have blown these stupid bastards out of the water.
……and, should you have missed it, check this out…and weep:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=506219&in_page_id=1770
…I mean why *wouldn’t* you do it?
Google ‘ma deuce’.
Don’t look for reason or sanity from Muslims. BDS is light hearted stuff compared with Islamic Derangement. They are collectively insane. End of story. Or perhaps beginning of a story if the west would stop trying to reason with these people and put the golden rule into reverse – do to Islamics as they do to the kaffirs and infidels.
“I assume US pilots regularly amuse themselves buzzing Iranian warships, only the Iranian news chooses not to report it. Perhaps US signals folks amuse themselves playing country and western over Iranian radio frequencies. Who knows?”
An intentionally disingenuous, and downright stupid, comment. As you say, you don’t know.
I think the better view is that there are certain groups within the Iranian Republic (eg. the Republican Guard) that are more bellicose than mainstream Iran. In this sense, I don’t think a bunch of small gunboats buzzing US warships represents the collective insanity of the Iranians … or even of their political leadership, who probably did not condone this operation. If I’m right, this should come as a relief as the average man-in-the-street Iranian is opposed to this sort of dangerous posturing, as is the average man-in-the-street American, Brit, etc.. For the sake of peace and stability, it should be a priority to engage with the moderate elements within Iran before the extreme elements become even more prevalent.
The fact that an emerging extremist group in Iran appears to be a part of the formal military forces of the Iranian state is, however, deeply troubling. Rogue groups within the formal structures of a state can be extremely dangerous (c.f. the 1st Régiment Étranger Parachutiste) in that they can potentially drag an entire state into a cause important only to that rogue group. While I have no doubt that there are elements within Iran that would prefer to engage the U.S. militarily, I hope the Americans are smart enough not to take the bait, as it is doubtful that outright war is (even now) a general consensus held by Iran at large. Now, more than ever, is engagement between moderate groups on both sides increasingly essential.
If there is to be another war in the middle east, let’s hope that it is precipitated by rational thought and clear planning. We don’t need another war started the way WW1 was (and/or the second Gulf War).
IMHO.
“do to Islamics as they do to the kaffirs and infidels.”
Shall we hope that you’re being disingenuous?
That’s 1.6 billion people that you’ve collectively marked ‘deranged’.
“Do you honestly believe that the CIA gives a tinker’s damn about the Pentagon?”
There is surely a difference between military disagreement and outright contrariness. Besides, after NYT writer James Risen published a book that asked ‘did the CIA give the Iranians blueprints to build a bomb?’, it’s probably not a subject that they will want to discuss with that particular paper.
Sean O’Callaghan is correct (I wonder if he runs a hedge fund……)
Completely and totally off topic, but how cool is this – both Hazel Stone AND Simon Jester post on Samizdata.
There is hope yet.
1. Doing the defiance dance.
2. Ensure continuing high, and preferably higher. oil prices.
3. Hoping to provoke an incident for domestic political reasons (IIRC there are some elections coming up in Iran).
4. Hoping to provoke an incident for international reasons:
Can stand up in UN and proclaim “us Muslims are so persecuted…”
Incident leads other countries &/0r leftish opinionators to proclaim “oh these howwibly gung-ho Americans! Capitalismimperialismracismcolonialism! No war-for-oil!”
Incident leads other counties (esp. W Europe, china, Japan) to push for appeasement in order to protect oil supplies.
“Sean O’Callaghan is correct (I wonder if he runs a hedge fund……)”
Oh is he now? Gods save us from the “oracles.”
Daily Dramatics, disingenuous no, realistic yes. One doesn’t just call a spade a spade but to do a thorough job proceeds to dig dirt with it.
When one does with Islamics one comes up with recently the 1989 burning of Salman Rushdie’s book kickoff in Leeds/Bradford as a signal to world wide rioting, murder and mayhem. The Mohammed cartoons in 2006, the World Trade centre etc. in 2001 and historically the centuries of white slavery in the UK and black slavery continuing to this day in Africa. The destruction of the Buddhist sculptures in Afghanistan, the slaughter of Buddhists in Thailand, etc. etc.
The only continent which has yet to be touched with murder, pillage and destruction by the ROP is South America.
The events that you speak of were all the result of Islamism, a set of political ideologies holding that Islam is not only a religion but also a political system. It represents the principles of fanatics and theocracies, and I am, as anyone of a remotely democratic nature should be, vehemently opposed to any hint of it.
However, there are many moderate muslims who share my views, and however much I disagree with their religion I cannot demonise them. Progress will be made through integration, not so that society can meekly tolerate radical views but so that they will begin to recognise liberal values such as tolerance and equality.
We can strongly oppose Islamic beliefs, but we must not oppose them as people.
It wouldn’t be the first time that US pilots have buzzed potential antagonists:
“The Kremlin had been incensed by these U-2 overflights for four years — a situation exacerbated by the U.S. pilots who routinely broadcast a mocking hyena laugh at the Soviets when they failed to shoot down the jets.”
Come now, Simon…his statement was bunk, pure speculation. COULD it have happened? Of course. But that does not make his statement any less bunk-tastic.
Nor does citation of a Cold War incident (over 40 years ago, as well) add any particular heft, m’dear…
Simon Jester,
You are showing the same lack of knowledge as “J”.
“Buzzing” means flying low over an object. The U2 overflights were at 60,000+ feet.
The Iranians, who have accused the US of everything short of raping the Prophet’s wives, would publicize any buzzing incidents in a heartbeat.
And any USAF/USN pilot who performed an unauthorized buzzing of a potentially-hostile target under such tensions would be grounded and officially reprimanded as soon as he landed. Career over.
Simon,
Hell ya over the enemy and they’re trying to kill you and you wouldn’t be a bit wired? Remember they only got Gary Powers after firing a veritable fusillade of SA-2s (claiming a MiG-19 in the process). Bet ya also didn’t know that at 50,000ft a B-36 could out-fly a MiG-15?
Quotidian Dramatics,
The problem is that the muslims don’t see it that way. Islam is a total way of life and intrinsically a political movement. Don’t ask me, ask a C7th Arabian kiddy fiddler.
What is being forgotten is the long slog underway in America to select presidential candidates.One camdidate Barack Hussein Obama has stated that there will be no American bases in Iraq.Whilst Iran has been waiting out the Bush Administration,Iran has never given up on its desire to be the regional superpower.This was a test to see if the Bush Doctrine was really over.
Hazel: my only point was that comparable incidents have happened in the past.
DF: “The Iranians, who have accused the US of everything short of raping the Prophet’s wives, would publicize any buzzing incidents in a heartbeat.”
And admit that the US could fly rings around them at will?
Daily Dramatics, you are quite right to insist that the majority of the world’s Islamics are not bloodthirsty Jihadis. However, the same holds true for our societies. The majority of our citizens are not paedophiles who abduct and murder young children or gang up to murder innocents like Steve Lawrence. The difference is that we treat our criminal minority as criminals and deal with them as such. We do not organize sweet eating dancing parties to celebrate events like 9/11. We do not take to the streets and scream for the beheading of a naive Christian teacher who allowed her students to name a teddy bear Mohammed. Until the silent majority of so-called moderates stand up to be counted and speak out against the dystopian minority they are complicit in the outrages of their murderous religion.
“Daily Dramatics, you are quite right to insist that the majority of the world’s Islamics are not bloodthirsty Jihadis.”
I was not making a point as simple as that, I was stating that the majority of muslims do not support the idea that that Islam is a political doctrine as well as a religious belief. Millions of them are subjected to the horrors of this idea in theocracies such as Iran and Saudi Arabia and it is one of the greatest tragedies in the modern world; they deserve our support, not our contempt.
I agree with you, however, that moderate muslims should, if they truly believe that their faith is not intolerant and cruel, speak out against those of their religion that practice such brutality and inequality. We need to integrate muslims in order to promote liberal values, not drive them away and into the beliefs of fundamentalists.
Simon, I concede that point. J’s couching of pure speculation in terms of probability simply irritated my mathematician’s soul.
QD,
Well, if they don’t support that they clearly haven’t read the Qu’ran or the Hadith.
Q.D.
No one is this thread was suggesting that all billion plus Muslims were Islamists.
As for the C.I.A.
I suggest you read Rowen Scarborough’s “Sabotage: America’s Enemies Within the C.I.A.”, Regency Publishing, Washington D.C., 2007.
– Well, if they don’t support that they clearly haven’t read the Qu’ran or the Hadith.
A fair point, but if some Muslims take an interpretation of the Qu’ran and Hadith that is informed by liberal values then I for one won’t start calling them heretics. Indeed, it’s an encouraging sign that some beliefs are evolving. We can trace the liberalisation of christian values up to increasing secularisation.
– No one is this thread was suggesting that all billion plus Muslims were Islamists.
I quote from Millie Woods:
“They are collectively insane. End of story. Or perhaps beginning of a story if the west would stop trying to reason with these people and put the golden rule into reverse – do to Islamics as they do to the kaffirs and infidels.
– I suggest you read Rowen Scarborough’s “Sabotage: America’s Enemies Within the C.I.A.”, Regency Publishing, Washington D.C., 2007.
Thanks for the recommendation. However, I will maintain my scepticism towards Alice’s prediction until the CIA does indeed release this report.