US warship fires warning shots at Iranian boats

[tonbridgebrit]

On 27/08/2016 at 4:03 AM, Rancid said:

Hmm, not really a great fan of Iran, however if Iranian warships were regularly sailing off the coast of US or UK what would be the reaction? Let's be honest, it has nothing to do with freedom of navigation, its all about gunship diplomacy and intimidation. Kick a dog often enough and he will either cower or bite back.

+1

And also, Saudi Arabia is a Washington puppet. Washington wants to send out a message, to remind people that they do actually protect their puppet.

 

[Ulysses G.]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Washington, what's your problem with Iran ?
 

 

State sponsored terrorism and an illegal nuclear weapons program - until Obama gave them funds to use for one and legitimized the other one.

[JayBeeee]

Sorry! Which US coast were the Iranian boats too close to?

[Publicus]

The United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea rules the waves.

 

It's a global treaty that among other vital matters identifies and legalises international waterways in the interest of global trade and other commerce and for purposes of a stable rules based common maritime legal order. 

 

With the ayatollahs continually threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz, which is regarded as the number one of seven chokepoints of the world's oceans and seas, somebody's got to deal with it. USA has dozens of allies globally to include strategic partners such as India to name one. Then there are those who are not.

 

Introduce yourself because this continues to be the U.S. Navy since 1900 and indefinitely....

 

Quote

 

Rear Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahan, a naval historian and theorist, informed America that control of the sea would result in global dominance. [In 1890] Mahan wrote The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660-1783.  In this work, Mahan argued that the historical significance of naval power had never been completely understood.  The book became one of the most important works on naval history and strategy ever written.  Mahan became one of the leading supporters of American overseas expansion and thus reversed President Washington's doctrine of no foreign engagements. 

 

https://mstartzman.pbworks.com/w/page/21898867/Alfred Thayer Mahan (The Influence of Sea Power…) (4)

 

 

RADM Mahan was an early commandant of the U.S. Naval War College. At the U.S. Naval Academy from which RADM Mahan graduated he is outranked only by Neptune himself. USN is everywhere and that is where it is going to stay.

Edited August 31, 2016 by Publicus
Typo and revision.

[Ulysses G.]

20 minutes ago, Publicus said:

USN is everywhere and that is where it is going to stay.

 

Hear, hear!

[rijb]

8 hours ago, Carib said:

 

Don't worry, the arrogance is still very much alive even if "the joke" is that old already. 

 

Yes, starting with your own.

[rijb]

7 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

How about we accept that the US military presence in the Middle East, it's actually part of the problem, and not the solution to the problem.

 

 

Don't keep us in suspense.  What is your solution?   Death to America?

[craigt3365]

11 hours ago, Naam said:

 

no it's not another topic Craig, be fair please. Iraq is in my [not so] humble view the most sensitive integral part of the Middle East. Sunni/Shia problem center and south, each of the two parties supported by opposing powers. the Kurds in the north and their ethnic brothers across the border in Turkey (huge problems for the Turkish state and the PKK) and last not least the cradle out of which the "Islamic State" monster crawled causing problems by followers and sympathetic supporters in half a dozen other states and involving opposing "western" powers in Syria. killing the monster created other monsters and monstrous situations of yet unknown dimensions. the al-Qaeda boys were and are choir boys in comparison.

Well put!!!!

[craigt3365]

9 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

How about we accept that the US military presence in the Middle East, it's actually part of the problem, and not the solution to the problem.

 

100% agreed!  As is the military presence of a number of other outside forces....and a number of other ME military forces.  It's a big mess.

[craigt3365]

9 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Washington, decide whether you want to attack Iran OR China first.

You want to pick a war with China even though Walmart is importing a mountain of Chinese goods ?  And why do you want to start a fight with Iran ? Washington, what's your problem with Iran ?


Oh, I think I know. Back in the early 1950s, you carried out a coup in Iran. The coup actually removed a democratically elected Iranian government, the CIA practically admits to doing it. It was done to control Iran's oil, and the puppet Shah was made Iran's ruler.
The puppet Shah was then ousted by a popular uprising, and the Ayatollah took over his country. This was round about 1980. Oh, and the Ayatollah had something against you, Washington. Well, that's not surprising, he weren't too pleased that your puppet controlled his country for almost three decades.

And ever since the CIA coup that was done back in the 1950s, well, Iran has not trusted Washington. Hardly surprising is it ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état

Washington has no interest in a war with any nation.  Not sure where you are getting your news from.  It's about freedom of navigation and nations breaking international conventions.  Understand???  That's what this topic is about, not the 1950's.

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, rijb said:

 

Don't keep us in suspense.  What is your solution?   Death to America?

You mean like in this report?  LOL  From my friend Ric's recent trip to Iran.  Which he loved, by the way.  The people were great, the government...not so.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/death-to-america-visiting-iran_us_57c2aa18e4b06384eb401e2c

[rijb]

I left my job, in Iran, about the same time the Shah left.  We tried to warn the western-education Iranians that Khomeini was using them.   And they would be the first to die, once that animal took power.  I’m sorry to say we were right.  

 

Good people, bad religious leaders.  Just like many other countries in the world.

Edited September 1, 2016 by rijb

[Redline]

On 8/31/2016 at 8:45 PM, Naam said:

today dear children, we get a lecture from a worldwide renowned historian, the Right Honourable R. Edline, Esq. explaining in details during which time periods Iran and China were allowed and not allowed to invade other countries.

We can't wait for your book!