Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Would Have Fired on The Iranians
UK Independent via. Hot Air ^

Posted on 03/25/2007 5:30:55 PM PDT by Weight of Glory

The executive officer - second-in-command on USS Underwood, the frigate working in the British-controlled task force with HMS Cornwall - said: “The unique US Navy rules of engagement say we not only have a right to self-defence but also an obligation to self-defence. They [the British] had every right in my mind and every justification to defend themselves rather than allow themselves to be taken. Our reaction was, ‘Why didn’t your guys defend themselves?’”…

(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: geopolitics; iran; rulesofengagement; selfdefence; uk; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-203 next last
This is a story that is out of the UK Independent, but I was restricted from directly linking to it. Use the link to Hot Air, and scroll down to the link HA provides, to read the full article.
1 posted on 03/25/2007 5:30:56 PM PDT by Weight of Glory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

From the article :

"Yesterday, the former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, said British rules of engagement were “very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting … Rather than roaring into action and sinking everything in sight we try to step back and that, of course, is why our chaps were, in effect, able to be captured and taken away.”

Ahem. 'De-escalatory' ? Sooo... when they come to kill you in your own house will you try to 'de-escalate' by killing yourself ? What the hell in the world are these people smoking. Someone even gets close enough to try to board you *do* sink everything in sight and ask questions later.


2 posted on 03/25/2007 5:35:18 PM PDT by farlander (Try not to wear milk bone underwear - it's a dog eat dog financial world)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farlander
It just goes to show you that all this is related to knives having pointy parts on the end. Once they get the sharp points off the end of chef knives and the like, everything will be all better.
3 posted on 03/25/2007 5:37:01 PM PDT by kingu (No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

This is a direct act of war by the Iranians. They ought to be retaliated against.


4 posted on 03/25/2007 5:37:19 PM PDT by ICE-FLYER (God bless and keep the United States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

I would never say that we or our Brit pals cant fight and kick butt but Id be willing to bet if this were 15 Yanks instead of Brits the outcome would have been the same. I cant understand why everyone is so scared of these Persian m&%$^#r &^@*$#rs.


5 posted on 03/25/2007 5:37:47 PM PDT by DogBarkTree (The United States failure to act against Iran will be seen as weakness throughout the Muslim world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

I guess "Rule Britannia" is no longer in effect. Why even bother to have a Royal Navy if the SOP is to "de-escalate"?


6 posted on 03/25/2007 5:37:55 PM PDT by clintonh8r
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farlander

" Ahem. 'De-escalatory' "

Yeah! It does seem as though the Brits know of a mysterious land where they acquire all the "squishy" words they use.


7 posted on 03/25/2007 5:38:11 PM PDT by Weight of Glory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

I don't know if the US Navy would have fired, but if I were in the group and we had been furnished firearms and bullets, the weapon would have been used when the demand to surrender was issued.


8 posted on 03/25/2007 5:38:13 PM PDT by RightWhale (Treaty rules;commerce droolz; Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farlander
Yesterday, the former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, said British rules of engagement were “very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting"

Memo to the Brits: The war has already started.

9 posted on 03/25/2007 5:38:44 PM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

Yes, I noticed how the sailors on the USS Cole fired on the explosive laden dinghy bearing down on them. /s/

The sailors on the USS Cole had NO ammunition in thier weapons.


10 posted on 03/25/2007 5:39:54 PM PDT by OldFriend ( TOM DeLAY FAN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

This happened Friday. Come Saturday morning I would have made sure president Makmood would have awoken to boatless Navy. With the promise he soon would arise to an aircraftless Air force and finally with the promise he soon will have to stop worrying about waking up in the first place.


11 posted on 03/25/2007 5:40:08 PM PDT by TheRedSoxWinThePennant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

Well First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West,it's obvious the Iranians aren't playing by your rules of engagement !!!


12 posted on 03/25/2007 5:40:15 PM PDT by Obie Wan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

Looks like the Lebanese (Syrian/Iranian) grabbing of Israeli soldiers was a test case. The world screamed excessive force and the Israelis backed down.


13 posted on 03/25/2007 5:41:01 PM PDT by cripplecreek (Peace without victory is a temporary illusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

"I don't know if the US Navy would have fired,"

True, always tough to say what you WOULD do. However, at least our guys SAY they would do it; and in the world of "don't-say-this-or-that" it is something!


14 posted on 03/25/2007 5:41:02 PM PDT by Weight of Glory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory; The Spirit Of Allegiance; pissant; cyborg; patriciaruth; Howlin; Jim Robinson
I agree that we would have fired on them. Let us take a moment to reflect on an old prayer, because it is as powerful now as it was then, and oh so appropriate. Merciful Father, hear our prayer, protect our brave men and women so far from home, in such grave peril. These are our best, they stand where we cannot, death stalks them, and they are precious beyond all treasure.

"Eternal Father, strong to save
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave.
Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep
Oh hear us when we cry to thee
For those in peril on the sea."

15 posted on 03/25/2007 5:41:23 PM PDT by Enterprise (I can't talk about liberals anymore because some of the words will get me sent to rehab.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DogBarkTree

You know the story of the isolated Marine on Guadalcanal who was surrounded and thought he was going down, fighting of course. Then another Marine called from a couple trees away. 'There's two of us! Let's go!' And they did.
They busted out of there yelling and shooting.


16 posted on 03/25/2007 5:41:27 PM PDT by RightWhale (Treaty rules;commerce droolz; Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DogBarkTree

Have to agree with you there. We're usually no better. Its part of our hands off policy with Iran.

Sometimes I get so tired...


17 posted on 03/25/2007 5:43:35 PM PDT by navyguy (We don't need more youth. What we need is a fountain of SMART.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

So: (1) will the ROE change for the Brits (and for the US if they aren't different)? and (2) will the Iranians try something similar again (with hopefully different results)?


18 posted on 03/25/2007 5:44:02 PM PDT by waimea.man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DogBarkTree

"Id be willing to bet if this were 15 Yanks instead of Brits the outcome would have been the same. I cant understand why everyone is so scared of these Persian m&%$^#r &^@*$#rs."




Then what does this mean?

"Asked by The Independent whether the men under his command would have fired on the Iranians, [Lt. Cdr. Erik Horner] said: “Agreed. Yes. I don’t want to second-guess the British after the fact but our rules of engagement allow a little more latitude. Our boarding team’s training is a little bit more towards self-preservation.”
The executive officer - second-in-command on USS Underwood, the frigate working in the British-controlled task force with HMS Cornwall - said: “The unique US Navy rules of engagement say we not only have a right to self-defence but also an obligation to self-defence. They [the British] had every right in my mind and every justification to defend themselves rather than allow themselves to be taken. Our reaction was, ‘Why didn’t your guys defend themselves?’”…


19 posted on 03/25/2007 5:44:47 PM PDT by ansel12 (God ate veal, Genesis 18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: farlander
Yesterday, the former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, said British rules of engagement were “very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting … Rather than roaring into action and sinking everything in sight we try to step back and that, of course, is why our chaps were, in effect, able to be captured and taken away.”

If British ROE were more appropriate, they wouldn't come looking for you chumps er... chaps.

20 posted on 03/25/2007 5:45:14 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
Yes, I noticed how the sailors on the USS Cole fired on the explosive laden dinghy bearing down on them. /s/

The sailors on the USS Cole had NO ammunition in thier weapons.

And you don't think anything has changed since then?

21 posted on 03/25/2007 5:45:19 PM PDT by xjcsa (The "average temperature" of the earth is as meaningful as the "average number" in a phone book.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

22 posted on 03/25/2007 5:46:16 PM PDT by ASA Vet (The WOT should have been over on 11/5/1979.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r

The British navy hasn't officially ruled the seas since WW2, and unofficially since WW1.


23 posted on 03/25/2007 5:46:33 PM PDT by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: farlander
""Yesterday, the former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, said British rules of engagement were “very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting …"

The Europeans have gone sissy, even the once proud Brits. "De-escalatory"? "Don't want wars starting"? Note to Admiral West, you are already in a war. Not fighting back after you're already in a war is an act of cowardice, no matter how many words like "de-escalatory" you may invent.

24 posted on 03/25/2007 5:47:27 PM PDT by Cooking101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cooking101

BUMP!


25 posted on 03/25/2007 5:50:34 PM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: farlander
former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, said British rules of engagement were “very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting … Rather than roaring into action and sinking everything in sight we try to step back and that, of course, is why our chaps were, in effect, able to be captured and taken away.”

Sounds like ROE more appropriate for when passing through trusted allied waters...

26 posted on 03/25/2007 5:52:50 PM PDT by M203M4 (The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

Maybe these guys spent a bit too much time vacationing in France.....


27 posted on 03/25/2007 5:53:30 PM PDT by eeevil conservative (Duncan Hunter and John Bolton in '08!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farlander

It was a British Admiral said that moderation in warfare is the height of folly.

I suppose that's why they didn't take U.S. sailors hostage.


28 posted on 03/25/2007 5:53:31 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (When I search out the massed wheeling circles of the stars, my feet no longer touch the earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TheRedSoxWinThePennant

The Iranian Navy

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

Such as it is..


29 posted on 03/25/2007 5:54:21 PM PDT by Armedanddangerous (Master of Sinanju, Emeritus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cooking101
Hey First High Lord mucky muck - one of our guys would have yelled: "I have not yet begun to de-escalate."
30 posted on 03/25/2007 5:54:31 PM PDT by Enterprise (I can't talk about liberals anymore because some of the words will get me sent to rehab.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory
American forces in Iraq now hold some 300 prisoners tied to Iran’s intelligence agencies, Pajamas Media learned from both diplomatic and military sources. This is believed, by both sources, to be a record number of prisoners tied to Iran. Virtually all were captured in the past two months.

One way to look at this is: the US wants to eliminate iranian backing of terrorists in Iraq. Another way to look at it is: US is starting to roll up iranian cells around the world in preparation for a strike on iran.

31 posted on 03/25/2007 5:55:27 PM PDT by gotribe ( I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution... - Grover Cleveland.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Armedanddangerous

They still shouldnt have one


32 posted on 03/25/2007 5:55:50 PM PDT by TheRedSoxWinThePennant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

lol!


33 posted on 03/25/2007 5:56:42 PM PDT by Boxsford (Mediocrity attacks excellence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

Admiral Lord Nelson:

"England expects that every man will do his duty."

"You must consider every man your enemy who speaks ill of your king..."


34 posted on 03/25/2007 5:56:49 PM PDT by Weight of Glory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

It means that Horner is 2nd guessing the Brits. I have no doubt our guys would have had to get the OK to fire. By the time they got it they would have been surrounded like the Brits. Horner should have just STFU.


35 posted on 03/25/2007 5:57:15 PM PDT by DogBarkTree (The United States failure to act against Iran will be seen as weakness throughout the Muslim world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: farlander
Rather than roaring into action and sinking everything in sight we try to step back and that, of course, is why our chaps were, in effect, able to be captured and taken away.”

Lord Nelson is rolling over in his grave.

36 posted on 03/25/2007 5:58:40 PM PDT by A message (Liberalism does not breed survivors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cooking101

British rules of engagement were “very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting …"

Yeah, that always works.

37 posted on 03/25/2007 6:00:34 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (When I search out the massed wheeling circles of the stars, my feet no longer touch the earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

I guess the same rules of engagement don't apply to our border guards.


38 posted on 03/25/2007 6:02:12 PM PDT by alicewonders (I like Duncan Hunter for President in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farlander
"Yesterday, the former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, said British rules of engagement were “very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting..."

Ronald Reagan said something to the effect of "America's been in four wars during my lifetime and none of them were started because the enemy thought we were too strong."

39 posted on 03/25/2007 6:02:51 PM PDT by Onelifetogive (Liberals are willing to sacrifice any amount of someone else's money to increase their own power...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DogBarkTree

Our Brit pals know that if they got into it, we would have backed them 100% per-cent.

You cannot say the same about any other country, if we got into it.


40 posted on 03/25/2007 6:03:08 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (When I search out the massed wheeling circles of the stars, my feet no longer touch the earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TheRedSoxWinThePennant

I suspect that royal navy submarine fired tomahawks could sink the majority of it in 24 hours or so.

I don't know if the RAF has the air assets near enough to conduct strikes on Iranian targets. Remember, they no longer have big strategic bombers, and the few carriers they do have right now only have Harriers on them.

Unless they are moving planes to forward Iraqi bases, its going to be hard to do bombing runs.

I suspect it will fall mostly on the royal navy to do missile strikes with assistance from the U.S. Navy.


41 posted on 03/25/2007 6:03:24 PM PDT by Armedanddangerous (Master of Sinanju, Emeritus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

I think the Brits would act the same towards us.


42 posted on 03/25/2007 6:04:05 PM PDT by waimea.man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: DogBarkTree

He stated our ROE and said that it means we would have fought.


43 posted on 03/25/2007 6:04:59 PM PDT by ansel12 (God ate veal, Genesis 18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: waimea.man

British sailors would be chomping at the bit to back us up, their government, sans Maggy, would go wobbly.


44 posted on 03/25/2007 6:05:40 PM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (When I search out the massed wheeling circles of the stars, my feet no longer touch the earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
because we don’t want wars starting"

Having your people held hostage will start trouble a whole lot faster. The Brits will have to bow and scrape to get their people back.

45 posted on 03/25/2007 6:07:55 PM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Weight of Glory

This isn't your great-great-great-great grandfather's Royal Navy....

46 posted on 03/25/2007 6:08:04 PM PDT by mikrofon (The sun has long set)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DogBarkTree
I agree. At this point it is counter productive.

I will say that if I had been (and in charge)there a helo would of been in the air and the Iranians would have had to think seriously about their plans. After the Cole ANY vessel on the Gulf is suspect and should approach with caution - at least in my world.

47 posted on 03/25/2007 6:09:44 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (We stand on the bridge and no one may pass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

That small bomb- bearing craft, and any other small craft not identified and cleared should not have been allowed to approach within a specified perimeter, say, no nearer than 500 yards from the USS Cole, considering the threat inherent in the location in which she was moored. Failure to thus secure the ship constitutes dereliction of duty, probably at multiple levels in the chain of command, not excluding the Dept. of State and the Oval Office.


48 posted on 03/25/2007 6:10:21 PM PDT by Elsiejay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cooking101
"Don't want wars starting"? Note to Admiral West, you are already in a war.

This is like something out of Alice in Wonderland... Admirals who refuse to acknowledge they're in a war, even while their men (and a woman) are under direct attack from the enemy...

49 posted on 03/25/2007 6:11:06 PM PDT by LikeLight (tagline expired - do you wish to renew?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All

I have said it on another thread but.....

It is my understanding that there were up to six Iranian boats that had surrounded the Brits. If the Cornwall had openned fire on them, there would have been many Iranian casualties plus 15 dead Brits. The Cornwall would not have been able to extinguish all six boats. The Iranians were heavily armed and would have taken out the Brits after the first shots were fired by HMS Cornwall.

Just my two cents worth.


50 posted on 03/25/2007 6:16:53 PM PDT by casino66 ("We'll succeed," Bush added, "unless we quit.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-203 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson