Americans drove us neo-conservatives out of town a couple of years ago.

Bush is simply following the demands of the American people whose mindset is pre-1993 WTC bombing.

Change will come when we are attacked again.

It was 8 1/2 years between the first attack in 1993 and the second in 2001, the second 1000 times bigger than the first; the next attack will be a really big surprise.
syn | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 8:11 am | #

The form of governance in Iran is theofascism, and all forms of fascism seek confrontation as part of the ideology's homicidal/suicidal (duocidal) death wish, and its special heightened anxiety about honor in the honor/shame sociology. Add the ideology's notorious anthropological obsession with 'purity' (read the books by both Khomeini and Hitler) and we have the recipe for constant confrontations until their death wish is achieved.

The U.S. Navy acted prudently. It is important to recognize that this is only the latest in what will be a long string of confrontations. The British Navy responded deplorably to their confrontation with the Iranians; we acted calmly, yet firmly. Very, very professional. The time will come to shoot, but that time is not now, and should never be the time of the Revolutionary Guard's choosing.

The last time we were provoked by the Iranian Navy, we sank half their fleet. They know that, and remember it (the shame!) well. Let's hold our fire for as long as we can, continue to build a case with our allies for Iranian fascist dementia, and then respond with overwhelming force when all forebearance has failed.

Don't let the Iranians goad our sense of honor into rash action; if we do, then we are playing into their duocidal death wish.
a Duoist | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 8:42 am | #

I suggest someone ask Senator Obama if he does in fact have a set of balls and when would he choose (under what circumstances as a President) to use them?
RJ | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 9:08 am | #

As a side note: Our Navy has guns on board that would have shredded those little boats. It was a smart move to wait and call the Iranian's bluff, especially when one views how the American press would have played it if we did in fact wipe out those craft: "Bush finds his excuse to go to war with the Iranians!" Further, don't you think the Iranians are loved by their fellow oil producing countries for how they have aided in accelerating the rise in oil prices?

No, this game is much more complicated than just seeing who will blink first.

I'll bet on our Navy not letting those perps get any closer than 100 yards before they visit Allah and look for some virgins.

USA all the way!
RJ | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 9:20 am | #

C'mon now, you need to give the Navy a break here. It takes time to consult with the lawyers in the Pentagon to determine the correct PC response. S/Off. I am begining to wonder just how many people have been killed, how many terrorists have escaped and how many innocent people on the battlefield have been killed because of our love affair with PC and lawyers.
The real problem here is the control exert by non combat oriented people. My suggestion is to put more lawyers on the front lines. It might change their ideas about fighting and winning wars.
Dennis | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 9:21 am | #

We were seconds from shooting when they backed down. You can't shoot a fleeing suspect. That's basic ROE.

Besides, there is nothing Iran would want more than to engage us in battle at a time primed to affect the upcoming election, and ensure who is elected would be less likely to follow through.

For all the flak Bush is taking over Annapolis, this was the whole purpose of getting Israeli concessions: Keeping the Arab-Israeli conflict (in which Iran is a heavy player through its proxies Hamas and Hezbolla)from becoming a flashpoint at some inopportune time.
R S | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 9:24 am | #

Remember when the Japanese Empire was the big bully in the Pacific?

Navy subs would sink a warship, then surface to conduct "machine gun turkey shoots" on the ill fated sailors floating in the water. Yes, even those pretending to be dead.

My kind of prudent action. Remove the PC shackles and allow the Navy to do what they do best.

a Duoist...

Duo you-o have duo faces, one of which is hidden, that you-o would like to share with us?

I'm getting a little dizzy with all your duoplicity.
Oracle of Delaware | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 9:47 am | #

Once again, Almighty Allah (swt) has allowed His people to inflict great humiliation upon His enemies.

When will you cowards accept reality and acknowledge that you are powerless to oppose the will of Allah (swt).

Time grows short. Embrace Islam now and live in peace in submission to the will of Almighty Allah (swt).

Your grandchildren will be Muslim.

Allahu akbar!
American Muslim | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 10:00 am | #

This is the same dance that dictators always dance with democracies like the US. They never understand how dangerous it is (especially when the US is the dance partner). They mistake forbearance for weakness, eventually they hit the tripwire and then they get unloaded upon.
LarryD | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 10:04 am | #

Someone raised the possibility that the intention was not one of anticipating action, but rather one of raising the price of oil. In other words, trust the US to ensure that an actual conflict would not occur as long as the Iranian forces backed down in time, but raise world-wide anxiety about the shipping of oil through the Strait of Hormuz.
If this possibility is true, it may be good news - the Iranians have a money crunch. Now...since we don't control the oil markets...how do we push that vulnerability?
suek | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 11:32 am | #

I watched the video.

The Navy is in the wrong if they fire on a boat without adequate attempts to ascertain the boat's intentions and get some kind of acknowledgment that attempts to warn off the boat have been heard. Failing that, there needs to be probable cause. Packages dumped over the side of a nonresponding boat could be mines----or they could be pirated DVDs and hashish thrown overboard by smugglers.

By the time the intent was divined as hostile, and the Navy was ready to fire, the boats were bugging out.
R S | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 11:35 am | #

Dennis has my vote. Let's start rounding them up and drop them inside Warizstan!
always right | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 12:01 pm | #

I also watched the released video. Supposedly the iranians know exactly what's happening over radio broadcast via several frequencies. (That is why they know WHEN to turn away.) I still say letting one of them get within 200 feet (now it says 200 meter) is too close without at least a couple of warning shots already. I am sure we can drench them completely. Let the iranians gloat over their "victory", we will have video to show their wetness afterwards. No matter if we fire or not, iran is going to spin any result as victory.

Next time, we will have more than just a USS Cole. What was the cost again? And if I remember right, the people responsible were "released" by the yemenese.
always right | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 12:09 pm | #

Monday morning quarterbacking is all this is.

I think the Navy did well on this one, talk about balls, this took balls.

Nobody went off prematurely in panic on our side, today we don't have to deal with the nutrootz screaming. Even without a real incident of battle, the nutrootz started right in hollering about this being "Bush's Strait of Hormuz" -- only problem with that scream is that it didn't happen.

I think that the world saw true bravery and they can't talk around that no matter the spin.


!
The Machine | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 12:31 pm | #

When I heard about this - I thought 'desensitization'. Push the limits time and again, make the norm the 200 yards, and get us to relax our guard.

Then - put a nuke in one of the boats. At 210 yards, press the button.

And it'll be Operation Crossroads in the Straits. How many ships would be destroyed outright, how many would be sunk and 'salvageable', how many damaged and left afloat? It would depend on the force of the explosion, of course - but it's a good bet that anything within a mile would be toast. The Operation Crossroads tests were done with 21 kiloton weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Ope...tion_Crossroads

Of course, the Iranians would deny it. Obviously, it was a US nuclear mistake... because everyone knows how warlike the US is and how innocent the Iranian nuclear program is.

I think it's just a matter of time, unfortunately.

J.
JLawson | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 2:16 pm | #

Completely OT,

Dr. Sanity,
Are you going to write a psychological analysis about Hillary crying and Bill's following day "tearing up, too"?

Apparently NH "highly educated" (in NPR-Juan Williams' words) voters eat it all up.
always right | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 2:41 pm | #

What strikes me is how willing we are to fight this proxy war in such a reactive fashion.

I only hope we've got some creative navy commanders that can get at least one boat full of Iranians to shit in their pants this week.
SteveH | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 2:55 pm | #

You are in a war zone. The enemy is approaching aggressively. You politely request that he not do it. After tossing mysterious boxes into the water, they retreat. You do nothing but point at them.

What's wrong with this picture?

Why did they get so close to be seen and not turned into fish food?

The time for politeness is long passed. Yet we have the insanity of not being able to offend our enemy let alone injure or kill him.
A. Rational Human | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 4:28 pm | #

all i want is one good warning shot!!
xqqme | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 5:22 pm | #

I agree that the US Navy responded "correctly," and with restraint.

I also agree that the Iranian "leadership" will be emboldened. This was both propaganda and a trial baloon for them.

If we engage the Iranians and put their mad-dog leadership down, we will be condemned as warmongers. If we don't, we will be condemned for not stopping them when they do finally get their nuke off.

But that's okay, we're Americans. We're used to being to blame for everything.

There's a saying - the wisdom of age is that we accept.

I hope it's that and not cynicism that allows me to be less worked up when the nattering nabobs get their gums in an uproar.
Merovign | Email | Homepage | 01.09.08 - 6:05 pm | #

The Iranians were probably trying to provoke an incident just prior to GWB's trip to the Middle East, and a few sunken Iranian gunboats might have fired up Hezbollah to do something stupid in Lebanon.

You have to think like a screwball to understand these raghead geopoliticians like Ahmadodojihad. It was his Pasdaran Boy Scout paramilitaries that tried to pull this off. He'll be toast when Rafsanjani beats this terrorist/kidnapper who held two of my friends hostage for 444 days. It was letting a terrorist speak to the UN that was a crime last year, and letting the dwarf speak at Columbia.

But it probably was the smartest thing to do in the big picture with the GWB visit to withhold sinking the terrorist gunboats.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 01.10.08 - 2:52 am | #

They couldn't have fired if the Iranians were praying or reciting from the quran - it would have been a clear Constitutional violation of rights and a henious violation of Human Rights and International Law. Only after they fired on our ships could we have asked them to not do that, then warned them, then fired a warning shot, then fired on them which would have made us liable because our ships could run away from them. It is our fault for putting ourselves in a dangerous position and being armed in the process.
goesh | Email | Homepage | 01.10.08 - 10:50 am | #

See how Al'lah prepares the Infidel for the Slaughter?

(The Islamic Republic of Iran has built a triumphal highway from the Well where the Twelfth Imam (Shia Islam's End Time Conquering Messiah figure) is prophesied to arise and lead Islam to triumph at the End of the World. They have also dropped signed statements of loyalty into the well.)

UN?
Do you mean the League of Nations?
Headless Unicorn Guy | Email | Homepage | 01.10.08 - 4:05 pm | #

goesh takes a stab at satire and fails miserably.
Jack Ryan | Email | Homepage | 01.10.08 - 5:55 pm | #

goesh should take a stab at thinking clearly. The ships had every right to sail in international waters. The gunboats had NO right to challenge them.
daveinboca | Email | Homepage | 01.10.08 - 9:29 pm | #

shortness of stature is you are right, it is a sign of a bully. shortness of stature, shortness of breath, shortness of buildings. someone wants to be long and they envy the ones with long. they have only short. you are right doctor sanaty. but the best way for a patient like that is to seek a doctor for help, but the best way is therapy that also has fun, like utilizing techniques such as word games for example that help the patient and doctor in team to figure out what is wrong with your fear. all the luck and work hard.
Dr. Zakariyya Guindi | Email | Homepage | 01.12.08 - 1:34 pm | #