January 14, 2008 9:43
Did "Filipino Monkey" Almost Cause WWIII?
Did a notorious airwave prankster known as "Filipino Monkey" nearly trigger a U.S.-Iranian war in the Gulf on Jan. 6?
Last Monday, Pentagon officials issued disturbing information to journalists in Washington about a provocative Iranian threat against U.S. ships in the Gulf. The information made big news, reported by all the major U.S. and international newspapers and television networks. The story was front-page headlines just as President Bush was departing for a eight-day tour of the Middle East, where one of his top priorities would be convincing Arab states to help the Bush administration confront Iran.
According to U.S. officials, who initially provided some of the information off-the-record and not for attribution to an identifiable spokesperson, five Iranian speedboats approached three U.S. navy vessels in the Strait of Hormuz and acted aggressively. Senior U.S. military officials as well as Bush himself variously called Iran's behavior reckless, provocative and dangerous. But the detail that spiced up the story and really grabbed the headlines was at first provided off-the-record to reporters. Officials said that as the speedboats maneuvered, a warning was issued by ship-to-ship radio that the U.S. ships would explode momentarily. "I am coming at you, and you will explode in a few minutes," is the quote the NY Times used, provided by an anonymous American official. A similar version made it into the first paragraph of the Washington Post's account. Soon afterwards, the Pentagon released a video of the incident along with the verbal threat. The Pentagon was effectively accusing Iran of planning, carrying out or at least feigning suicide attacks on U.S. ships, reminiscent of the Al Qaeda attack on the USS Cole in Yemen in 2000. The Post's Robin Wright wrote that "the Pentagon had consistently given the impression that the [radio] threat was linked to the Iranian boats."
Now, the Navy Times newspaper is casting serious doubt on the claim that it was the Iranians who issued the kamikaze warning. It seems that the threat might have been uttered by a local heckler known in Gulf shipping lanes as "Filipino Monkey," who's been famous in the region for 25 years for interrupting Gulf radio communications with insults and epithets. The Navy Times article, by Andrew Scutro and David Brown, quoted several current and former Navy seamen saying the verbal threat may well have been a prank. "It's been a joke out there for years," said a civilian seaman quoted by paper.
Along with other news media over the last few days, Navy Times quotes Navy brass effectively back peddling from the version put out by the Pentagon last week. "We don’t know for sure where they came from,” said Commander Lydia Robertson, spokeswoman for 5th Fleet in Bahrain, according to Navy Times. "It could have been a shore station." Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Gary Roughead told the paper: "Based on my experience operating in that part of the world, where there is a lot of maritime activity, trying to discern [who is speaking on the radio channel] is very hard to do."
There may be a serious problem here. Has the Bush administration's demonization of Iran so pervaded the U.S. government that the judgement of vital decision-makers is becoming dangerously clouded? So when a possible practical joker issues a threat to a warship, you have a Strangelovian military chain of command from Bahrain to Washington racing to insist that the crazy, murderous mullahs in Tehran are at it again. By the Pentagon's own account, one of the warships very nearly took out at least one of the Iranian vessels but the order to fire was prevented at the last minute when the speedboats turned away. It goes without saying that an armed clash like that between two long-time adversaries could have ignited a much larger confrontation. Bush recently warned that Iran's nuclear ambitions have raised the specter of World War III and he has not ruled out a U.S. military strike on Iran to degrade its uranium-enrichment facility.
In due course, I hope that we establish who issued the verbal threat to blow up the U.S. ships. Was it "Filipino Monkey"? An imitator? If the Pentagon had better proof that it was an Iranian, we would have seen it by now. Incidentally, the Iranians always denied making the threat, and accused the U.S. of hyping a routine ship-to-ship interaction in international waters into a fabricated confrontation. “This is an ordinary occurrence, which happens every now and then for both sides,” Iranian Foreign Minister spokesman Mohammed Ali Hosseini said immediately afterwards.
But I'm more interested in knowing if there was any monkey business involved in how the Pentagon originally spun the sensational kamikaze angle to the press and the global public. How seriously did the officers on the three ships take the suicide-attack threat? Were they certain that it had been issued by the Iranians? Did they consider or believe that it could have come from a prankster? How carefully did the Pentagon analyze the verbal threat once it was relayed back to Washington? Were officials there completely convinced that the threat came from Iran? Or did they have doubts yet went ahead anyway and indicated to reporters that Iran did it? Were officers on the scene and Pentagon officials in Washington aware that pranksters are prevalent on the Gulf radio networks? Did they factor that into their risk assessment and into their decision to point a quick finger at Iran?
If "Filipino Monkey" or somebody of that ilk turns out to be the culprit, it means that the Pentagon either can't tell the difference between a prank and a threat, or that it's too busy confronting Iran to bother trying to do so. Either way, it's another reason to worry.
--By Scott MacLeod/Cairo
| Sphere Related Blogs & Articles | | |
 |
Daily Email
Recent Posts
The Middle East Blog Archives
September 2008
Choose a day to view events.
<< Previous Months
Reader Comments
Posted by Jacob Blues
January 14, 2008
Welcome to the post 9/11, USS Cole, and Iranian capture of British sailors, world.
In the past, Iran has pushed its own position of power in the Gulf, threatening to disable shipping and neighboring states.
It is a nation that still broadcasts the ideology of Marg Bar America!
One could assume that this is mere propaganda, or, when facing potential kamikazi threats, use it as a factor when deciding if these ships are on routine patrol, or planning to attack.
Communication, indeed, mutual understanding is a two-way street. It's nice to try to push the idea that Iran has no place in this dispute, or any real responsibility in improving relations with its neighbors and the US.
Posted by p_lukasiak
January 14, 2008
Did a notorious airwave prankster known as "Filipino Monkey" nearly trigger a U.S.-Iranian war in the Gulf on Jan. 6?
No, Filipino Monkey did not nearly trigger WWIII. You and your peers, with your breathless, completely unskeptical, and utterly irresponsible repetition of the story did that.
YOU'VE HAD SEVEN YEARS TO FIGURE OUT THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS DISHONEST -- YET YOU AND YOUR PEERS STILL TREAT EVERYTHING THAT COMES OUT OF THIS ADMINISTRATION AS IF IT WAS TRUE---UNTIL ITS TURNS OUT NOT TO BE TRUE.
The captain of the ship handled the situation appropriately -- my guess is that the captain of the USS Hopper has even heard Filipino Monkey before, and recognized his voice -- almost certainly, the ship's radio operators would have, and would have communicated that to the captain.
Has the Bush administration's demonization of Iran so pervaded the U.S. government that the judgement of vital decision-makers is becoming dangerously clouded? So when a possible practical joker issues a threat to a warship, you have the entire military chain of command from Bahrain to Washington racing to insist that the crazy, murderous mullahs in Tehran are at it again.
the judgement of "vital decision-makers" has been clouded from day one. Nor is there any indication that "the entire military chain of command from Bahrain to Washington" were "racing to insist that the crazy, murderous mullahs in Tehran are at it again."
(btw, why not try putting "crazy, murderous mullah in Tehran" in quotes -- unless you think that really is an apt description. And, in case you didn't know it, the 'entire chain of command from Bahrain to DC' is maybe one person between the two, depending upon where the commander of the 5th fleet happens to be.)
You see, you have to be predisposed to alarmism to read words like “unnecessarily provocative” as alarming, rather than an expression of annoyance. And you have to have no understanding at all of naval procedures to not realize that “We were perilously close to an incident where we would have taken out at least one of the Iranian small boats" means anything other than the fact that the commander recognized a POTENTIAL threat, and was ready to deal with that threat if it appeared to be a real threat.
Doubtless there are people in Bahrain who are there solely to find anything that can be used to hype the "threat" represented by Iran. So when the captain filed an "incident" report about contact with "Iranians in speedboats", and included the fact that radio traffic during the incident included the "Filipino Monkey" threat (without saying it came from the boats -- the military started walking THAT back ASAP) some Bush/Cheney flunky immediately forwarded it to somewhere like Cheney's office, who made sure it got leaked immediately..... and just like the puppets you are, the media went on full alert, rather than trying to determine what actually happened.
So don't blame Filipino Monkey for anything -- any blame for a potential WWIII lies with the Bush Administration that is desperately seeking a causus belli, and an uncritical pack of mediawhores who will aid and abet him at every turn.
Posted by jfljoe
January 15, 2008
I completely with p_lukasiak. The alarmism perpetuated by the media cycle is alarming. The need to get "the scoop" on other news sources is quite analogous to the Bush Administration's need to control the color-coded fear level in our fair country- get the message out before your competition in order to control attention and create need. Btw, it's casus belli, commonly misspelled with an extra 'u', but I'm not one to pick.
Posted by James Fox
January 15, 2008
Accidents and mistakes often cause wars. The only real way out is to withdraw from the Gulf and spend the money on alternate energy supplies and conservation. That was true 30 years ago after the first oil embargo, and is even more true today. The only thing that has changed in the meantime is that we have wasted several trillion dollars trying to defend a resource that is going away anyway.
Posted by Michael Lloyd
January 15, 2008
I agree with previous comments about the Bush administration having no credibility. Bush has offered nothing but lies and deceit and was elected President - twice! Stories continue to be reported as if they are true. The latest case in point: a few speed boats taking on three lethal U.S. Navy ships. Right. If they had thought of it, the White House press release would have read,"water sking Iranian terrorists attempt suicide bombing of three U.S. fighting vessels."
Consider the possibility that Bush and his crew are champing at the bit for a reason to attack Iran. That would take people's minds away from the economy and better position a Neo Con Republican for the Presidential election. Meanwhile Bush is touring around the Middle East at least in part to be able to say, "look I tried to bring peace to Middle East, but gee, Iran wants no part of it."
The media, contrary much public opinion, have been alarmingly kind to this administration.
Posted by Sherif
January 15, 2008
Is that even worth talking about?Sorry Scott, not a good one.
Posted by Sharekhan
January 15, 2008
I think Scott does not also think that the "Filipino Monkey" does not even exist. Think! Just Think!
Prankster from Bahrain apparently knows exact time and date when the Iranian boats and US Boats are going to be passing over each other on the Straitz of Hormuzd. Co-incidence!Sounds ridiculous!
That the "monkey" hi-jacked the US boats radio transmission same time when they were crossing each other or exactly the same time when Pentagon shows the video of a small iranian boat coming to them stating " I am going to explode".
The monkey is watching! I agree the video is false and the whole Bush administration is monkeying the thing.
Posted by no one special
January 15, 2008
All really great comments BUT is anybody listening ....... unfortunately NO ….. Washington’s top political have their heads way too far up their own asses to listen to reasonably logic and the press is right there pushing…… O and it’s going to get worse ….. election season is coming!
Posted by dw314
January 15, 2008
The navy should have just blown their butts out of the water. I'm a very liberal guy, but, enough is enough. Of course, since this administration lies about everything it's hard to know whart REALLY happened, however, if anybody gets that close to ur ships, blow their butts up!
Posted by no one special
January 15, 2008
"Accidents and mistakes often cause wars. The only real way out is to withdraw from the Gulf and spend the money on alternate energy supplies and conservation. That was true 30 years ago after the first oil embargo, and is even more true today. The only thing that has changed in the meantime is that we have wasted several trillion dollars trying to defend a resource that is going away anyway."
I agree with the above but I think it's too late .... In that 30 years we've also made a lot ememies in that part of the world trying to defending those resources ... Now we need to keep a eye on them(ememies) which mean we need to be in their countries gathering intel ....... It's a shame ..... let just face facts there's no way out! I'm not sure it all about oil anymore I think we be even after the oil dries up trying fix our mistakes!
Posted by Bob
January 15, 2008
Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran...
What? There's a chance the Iranian ships might not have been threatening our ship at all? Sorry, I was singing, I must have heard you wrong. Bomb bomb bomb...
Posted by Drillbit1
January 15, 2008
The Bush Administration dishonest? What about the idiotic leaders of Iran? Are they honest? HELL NO!!! They do know how far to go before we would have blew them out of the water, & they stopped short, self-preservation. Some of you liberal, blind-folded, idiots can't see the truth because of your radical thoughts,WAKE-UP the majority of the Iranian people are not happy with the current regime! Ever wonder why? Stop attacking the U.S. & do some basic research on Iran & it's current leaders & you will understand unless you are a hopeless radical.
Posted by hass
January 15, 2008
Incidentally, the US ships were not in "international waters" - the Straits of Hormuz are divided between IRan and Oman. They have the right of transit - but that does not give them the right to fly helos or disregard Iranian requests for identification, nor are they entitled to demand that Iranian ships stay away. It is Iranian waters, after all.
Posted by Saltydog
January 15, 2008
I'm also one who likes to harp on the media for being sensational and alarmists, but I think this is an excellent article. It asks an extremely important question: "Has the Bush administration's demonization of Iran so pervaded the U.S. government that the judgement of vital decision-makers is becoming dangerously clouded?"
I'm not sure how you could accuse the author of being a puppet of the government when he's stating something the government would obviously prefer not to be aired in such a public and mainstream forum as Time magazine.
All too often the media has played along while this administration has wagged the dog. For once, it's nice to hear Bush being called out on his reckless desire to trade the blood of our soldiers for Haliburton dividends!
Posted by Kelly
January 15, 2008
"Fog of War". Heard of it?
It is how trajic incidents occur, such as this one. Now everyone is politicizing the whole thing! Withdraw from the Gulf, use the money for eco methodologies, sheesh... there is a reality gap between the right and left wingers that HAS TO be bridged.
Thanks to the professional US sailors who did NOT blow the speedboats out of the water.
Posted by p_lukasiak
January 15, 2008
I'm not sure how you could accuse the author of being a puppet of the government when he's stating something the government would obviously prefer not to be aired in such a public and mainstream forum as Time magazine.
well, he's a puppet who, when the hand up his butt is exposed, collapses back into the flaccid tube sock that he was created from.
Oh, and whoever mentioned the point that there are no international waters in the straits of Hormuz...BRAVO! Its a shame that none of the posters -- supposed experts on the middle east -- even knew that much, let alone that the "inbound" shipping lanes are part of Iranian waters that have international transit rights.
In other words, the three navy boats were in Iran, which they have a right to be under international law --- but they have to respect the rights of Iran while transiting through that area.
Posted by Rocco
January 15, 2008
I just wonder if this exhibition of US naval power in Iran is just another poor excuse to protect Isreal from ALL her enemies? If my histroy is correct, it was Israel that attacked the USS Liberty in international waters in 1967. The US did absolutely nothing and sadly, we instead spent our military resources in Vietnam instead of dealing with this hostle nation. My opinion; it was an Israeli that may have made the threat.
Posted by Kelly
January 15, 2008
Rocco. You are propagating falsehoods. You "wonder" nothing at all, you obviously have an agenda.
Your history is way, way, way out of kilter. You do the men and women of the Liberty a disservice with using them in this manner.
The Liberty incident was an accident of war. Israel paid 13M to the ones hurt by this incident... lets see Iraq pony up the monies for the Stark incident.
Anyways, you need to study up on the history of the incident. Please do so and use authenticated sources, not conspiracy theorist sites. Please.
Posted by Feral Ranter
January 15, 2008
I recall when the US Navy shot down a perfectly innocent Iranian airliner. Aside for the horror of nearly 300 people killed by the Navy, the frantic attempts by US apologists to justify the downing reached the level of the pathological. Bodies from the airplane were said to be cadavers from Iranian morgues loaded into the plane to make it look like a full airliner.
Posted by kim
January 15, 2008
p. luk. makes it up, and at least someone believes. Pitiful.
==============================
Posted by marty
January 15, 2008
This will further my resolve to get Dr. Ron Paul Elected RonPaul2008.com. For the Great Premier Bush Christ's right hand man on earth to go live on TV and condemn Iran, When some Filipino Monkeys are the cause
Posted by Alan MacDonald
January 15, 2008
"Filipino Monkey" is not the dangerous monkey in terms of creating a WWIII.
As Hugo Chavez accurately noted, "Bush is like a monkey with a razor."
Posted by Spencer Garrett
January 15, 2008
File this stupid article under the Stereotypical Big Media Blames America First category. The author tips his hand when he refers to the military chain of command as "Strangelovian" without even a slight hint of irony or sarcasm. If he thinks a fight between the U.S. Navy and the Iranian Navy can take on the characteristics of World War III then he should look at the outcomes of earlier fights between those two forces.
As a Junior Officer in the first Gulf War (almost 20 years ago) I vividly remember the Filipino Monkey broadcasts. To quote John McCain, "to become the Commanding Officer of a U.S. Navy vessel is a long and demanding process", and I am sure that these skippers and their senior officers have experience in the Persian (Arabian) Gulf. They would be aware of the Filipino Monkey broadcasts as well as the fact that the Iranian Navy routinely queries vessels exercising their right to transit the Strait of Hormuz.
American warships pass through the Strait of Hormuz all the time. However, something the Iranians did in this incident caused these experienced Commanding Officers to decide that something was amiss and to prepare for hostile action. The Iranians do these inquiries in such a way as to try to intimidate their foes, both American and Arab (you will notice that there never seem to be international incidents with the Omanians about vessels' Right of Transit through that strait). For instance, why swarm American warships with multiple vessels? Oil tankers and other merchant vessels are routinely swarmed by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's Boston Whalers because they want to board them and extort a payoff from the civilian masters (skippers) of those ships, but it is pretty hard to confuse an American destroyer with a Cheveron/Shell/BP/etc supertanker.
For the author, who wasn't there in the Strait, at Fifth Fleet HQ in Bahrain, or at the Pentagon, to write a commentary implying that this is all a conspiracy by the Pentagon to provide a spark for war with Iran is laughable but unfortunately it is also a demonstration of the dominant bias of today's journalists. Perhaps he should stop commenting on other journalist's articles and go to Bahrain and investigate for himself... stop being a journalist and start being a reporter!
Posted by John
January 15, 2008
Mr. McLeod,
As ever, actions speak louder than words.
Posted by Rocco
January 15, 2008
To Kelly above. Unfortunately, Mr Kelly has neglected to collate recent information on the depth of Israeli-US deception regarding the attack on the USS Liberty. The recent declassification of government documents and the recollections of former military personnel, including some quoted for the first time, which strengthen doubts about the U.S. National Security Agency's position that it never intercepted the communications of the attacking Israeli pilots -- communications, according to those who remember seeing them, that showed the Israelis knew they were attacking an American naval vessel.
The documents also suggest that the U.S. government, anxious to spare Israel's reputation and preserve its alliance with the U.S., closed the case with what even some of its participants now say was a hasty and seriously flawed investigation. Mr Kelly the new documents can be found here: http://www.nsa.gov/liberty
So is Israel our friend? The issue is: What nation or nations would benefit greatly if Iran and the US clashed? The Philippines?
Posted by Edward
January 15, 2008
Can someone please explain to me what our ships are doing in the Straight to begin with? How much money did I have to spend on this operation? Oh wait, none. All the money is being borrowed from China or is borrowed from the Federal Reserve by printing more money. And gee, all that extra money that has been created is also causing massive monetary inflation to the tune of 15% a year. (read through shadowstats.com) But hey, who cares!?! America kicks ass!
Posted by JCole
January 15, 2008
Filipino Monkey?
Yeah right.. what actually happened is the US got caught staging a Gulf of Tonkin incident.
It's George Bush calling this stupid speedboat deal a dangerous aggressive action.
Iran starts selling the 3rd largest oil supply in the world on Feb 11'th 2008 in Euros. Ohhh what will happen when the world no longer needs to buy US dollars and hold our government debt. By February.. either the US dollar will be in free fall.. or we will be at war with Iran.
Posted by Alister
January 15, 2008
["But I'm more interested in knowing if there was any monkey business involved in how the Pentagon originally spun the sensational kamikaze angle to the press and the global public."]
Is this a joke? Are there really journalists this naive working for Time?
Posted by rangoldsmith
January 15, 2008
Do you want to play a game?
How about Global Thermonuclear War.
Posted by Solo of OHIO
January 15, 2008
You must have forgotten about the more important issue here: THE SPEED BOATS THAT CAME EXTREMELY CLOSE TO THE US SHIPS. To hell with that stupid recording. The real issue here is what were those speed boats trying to accomplish?
Also, I find it very hard to believe that a prankster could somehow time his prank to perfectly coincide with such a provokative demonstration by the Revolutionary Guard. How is it that the timing of the prank and the near-attack from the boats occured at precisely the same time? Or are you claiming that the recording was from a different time-period completely?
Posted by doctorbz
January 15, 2008
Here is Iranian version of incident. Clearly shows stupidity of U.S.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_eVLfioCCM
Posted by Kenny B
January 15, 2008
File article under misleading and worthless. It was posted by Scott MacLeod, TIME's Cairo Bureau Chief since 1998, and I trying to determine why Time would employ such am idiot.
The Iranians are not stupid. They knew these were warships. They knew what they were doing.
Anyone should easily understand it was the proximity and aggressive behavior of the Iranians boats that is at issue. Yet, Scott Macleod tries to mislead us into thinking the whole event was predicated on the radio transmission.
Either Scott MacLeod is an idiot or is being disingenuous. Either one is not good and I doubt I'll ever trust anything he writes again.
Posted by darius
January 15, 2008
The Iranian video discussed here:
http://www.juancole.com/2008/01/us-video-of-iran-speedboats-flawed.html
clearly shows Iranian navy boats approaching the ships to identify them. US Navy is operating in straight of Hormuz that which puts them within a few miles from Iranian territorial waters. President Bush has consistently stated that "all options are on table". It would be prudent for the Iranian to attempt to identify the warships.
Surely US warships can shoot at the Iranian navy boats. International law is about precedences. If US reserves the right to operate in close proximity of Iranian waters AND considers attempts of Identification as harassments; then watch the Chinese or Russian navy to do the same off the coastal waters of US.
Posted by Sam W
January 15, 2008
The comments about the media are especially perceptive here. Let's see...run a "Sky Is Falling Headline"...sell lots of newspapers and/or advertising...then "investigative reporters" find that the sky is not falling...run another story like the one above and sell lots more newspapers and/or advertising. It is all a scam. Time Magazine and EVERY media outlet would LOVE a war, anywhere, any time...it is GOOD for business. Who cares if some "little people" die?
Posted by post american
January 15, 2008
Who wants "War" with Iran? The Zionist Neo Cons!
I look forward to this "War". It will be the straw that breaks the USA just like the USSR.
I'd stock up on canned goods and uh shotguns.
USA! usa! usa!
Posted by Sic Semper Tyrannis
January 15, 2008
Wow! The dark cloud of cognitive dissoance hangs heavy over the U.S. Homeland. There is a low grade civil war simmering! The U.S. Military/Government/Media have ZERO crediblity. After Nine Eleven, After the Anthrax, After Afghanistan, After Iraq, After Pakistan. regards
Posted by Burning Bush
January 15, 2008
Posted by Drillbit1
January 15, 2008
Some of you liberal, blind-folded, idiots can't see the truth because of your radical thoughts,WAKE-UP the majority of the Iranian people are not happy with the current regime! Ever wonder why? Stop attacking the U.S. & do some basic research on Iran & it's current leaders & you will understand unless you are a hopeless radical.
Uh you don't have to be a "Liberal" to believe that the U.S. Government is full of it. Since when did Americans start loving the government? THe Majority of the AMERICAN People are not happy with the current regime. The best way to stop the blowback of terrorist tactics would be to stop screwing around with other nations, like the USA assassinating the Iran PREZ back in '53!
Posted by flipino monkey
January 15, 2008
hey guys,this one was an american monkey (it was not me!!!) Bush used it to trump up the war while he was in israel and he sold $20B to idiot arab shieks in persian gulf to fight iranian atomic speed boats.
best regs
flipino monkey
Posted by Paris
January 15, 2008
It’s amazing that people are actually questioning US Navy. Our military faced an aggressive move by the Iranian revolutionary guards and they were sensible enough not to show kneejerk reaction, now we are even questioning the facts and our own eyes. It is truly sickening and it is sad to see that only a tragedy will bring us together.
Iranians have been behind killing Americans all over the world for over 28 years. What does it take to understand that the Iranian government is a government of terror?
They support and fund terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas. But no let’s believe IRI just because we hate Bush. Let’s call our military liars because we don’t like the administration. They were testing the waters and see how the white house would response. The revolutionary guard is a terrorist organization that is terrorizing the people of Iran. When I read some of you it is as if Ahmadi Nejad was writing. I am glad that the reactions were strong and in a form of a warning, you can’t be weak with mullahs.
None of this will change the fact that the Mullah’s are not to be trusted and the day they are gone is the best day for the Iranian people and the world.
Posted by Kenny B
January 15, 2008
Paris
your point about the revolutionary guards is well taken. They are more powerful than the Iranian military, and will support the gains and goals of the Islamic revolution at the expense of the Iranian people, and even the ruling mullahs.
What most people don't understand is that the real power in Iran lies with the revolutionary guards.
Posted by michael Canfield
January 15, 2008
Iran has sophisticated weapons system. Why bother with a couple of kamikaze souped up speed boats which could be easily taken out with automated gatling guns (provided they are turned on). It would be far easier and more reliable for Iran to use the equivalent of an Exocet missile to take out the US war ships. Remember Saddam and the USS Stark in 87? It seems infantile for the world's only superpower with the greatest navy in the world to feel threatend by 3-5 cigarette boats. I mean really. Can we be rational once in a while. We have to be the most irrationally frightened nation on the planet.
Mickster
Posted by American Patriot
January 15, 2008
What some of you are failing to grasp are the puppet strings involved here.
1) Our navy, armed to the teeth, is hanging out in Iran's front yard by order of our current POLITICAL regime. You simply cannot fault the Iranians (or anyone) for investigating who's in their front yard and for making it a little unpleasant for whomever that may be. Do you want someone walking through your front yard in an aggressive stance, armed to the teeth? Let me take it a step further: do you want someone in your front yard who has KILLED 300+ of your family members in the recent past...AND your democratically elected president as was mentioned above -- in the 1950s?
We'd be giving them the same hell were they hanging out in front of NY or San Francisco.
2) This is yet another attempt to wag the dog and the media ate it up with no serious reporting; all they did was echo the administration's mouthpieces, just as they did with faked stories of wmd, etc.
3) No one is calling our military liars; they are calling the Bush admin liars. This is not complicated. Don't make it that way. Our military thankfully has at least some wise leadership to have recognized this for what it was: just a typical cat and mouse game.
4) Yes, the Liberty incident was covered up. Too many powerful people stood to lose from it.
5) Yes, this most recent "incident" echoes the faked Gulf of Tonkin "incident" that got us into the Vietnam War.
Honestly, if some of you folks don't start thinking for YOURSELVES, we are all going to hell in a handbasket. Americans, Iranians, Arabians, all of us. And start finding what unites us all as humans instead of what divides us as enemies. YES. There is a way out of the Middle East. It's called alternative energy. It's good for the economy, it's good for us. And yes, there are moderates in Iran to counter their right-wing government just like there are moderates here to counter ours.
The difference is that we left their moderates to blow in the wind when they approached us seeking peace and offering help after 9/11. This was an embarrassment for Iran and the moderates there paid dearly for it. Now we have to deal with this kook Ahminejad.
Do some homework on your own. THINK FOR YOURSELF. Don't just listen to what our gov't and corporate media tell you for God's sake...for all of our sakes! Do you see this story on the cover of TIME? No, it's on a friggin' blog.
Posted by Brian, FOB Warrior, Iraq
January 15, 2008
It's amazing how many people comment about the "blood of our soldiers" and the administration's desire to start a war, yet have no real knowledge of what goes on in the region. As I sit here in my office in Iraq I can tell you with great certainty that virtually all of the US soldiers here (of which I am one) agree with why we're here, what we're doing, and what the threat of Iran really means. I've personally watched reporters from a multitude of organizations approach soldiers for an "interview" hoping to catch them saying something bad about the administration. After interviewing dozens of them, they invariably find some young private who wants to go home and decides to complain. Nevertheless, the vast majority of us realize that most Americans are incredibly naive. We watch as the Iranians bring thousands of pounds of explosives across the border each day. We watch the intel from our humint sources as the Iranian military advisors teach the insurgents how to destabilize us from within. I've personnally hosed out the inside of humvees after explosives with Irania markings kill some of my fellow soldiers. And yet, the liberals believe there's nothing wrong with Iran. I've personnally been involved in raids where we've arrested Iranian military advisors, and captured their writings---writings on how to dominate the region by manipulating the US media to undermine our citizen's resolve. Unless you're on the ground, you simply can't understand. The Iranians were playing a dangerous game--as they always do--regardless of whether the broadcast was a hoax. You don't approach a US warship at high speed unless you want to get killed, just like you don't approach a US convoy at high speed for the same reason. The Iraqis know this--they move well to the side when we pass because they understand the pressure we're under to protect ourselves in a hostile environment. The Iranians understand this too, though they're using these provocative acts to create discord among our people. And you know what? Thanks to the media, it's working.
Posted by Rick Levandowski
January 15, 2008
Anybody who's been through the Straits knows of the smuggler's cigar-speedboats that run between the UAE/Qatar and Iran exercising the free-market needs of those in Iran who want booze, porn and ciggies. They dodge for and aft of tankers and anyone else to avoid the radar so it's nothing new. It's akin to our Coast Guard patrolling International Waters in search of smugglers and Iran has just as much right to do the same in the tight quarters of the Straits.
The balance of power has several definitions and interpretations, "Filipino Monkey" can be heard off the Malacca Straits too.
Posted by Scott MacLeod
January 15, 2008
Brian,
Many thanks for your comment on the blog, much appreciated. Very good to have some thoughts from folks on the ground in Iraq.
Posted by disgusted
January 15, 2008
"Iran has sophisticated weapons system. Why bother with a couple of kamikaze souped up speed boats which could be easily taken out with automated gatling guns (provided they are turned on)."- Mickster Does anyone here remember the USS Cole? Regardless of any threats broadcast over the radio, small speed boats laden with explosives are a very real and formidable threat to US ships. For the rest of you that blame the US first for everything, you have done a terrible thing. You've wasted your minds.
Posted by Becca<333 ™
January 15, 2008
i think u guys are awsome and i love u guys !!!
i love to wake up in the morning and go read the time pamer magizine!
i love it!!
thanks u guys for making this website im a all time user!!
thanks,=]
Becca
♥
Posted by Dwight
January 15, 2008
Wait.
For 40 years we spent hundreds of billions to face down the thousands of Soviet missiles...
Which means that what we have to do in the Muslim lands is inform all Muslim nations that if a terrorist nukes a Western city, a band from Marocco to Indonesia will be turned to glass.
Then, as with the Soviests, let them govern as badly as they wish.
It works!
Just a few years back, Iranians almost through out the incompetent mullahs.
Then Bush, Cheney, Rummy and the Israeli Non-Americans got all itchy and gave them mullahs the kind of chance for bluster they need to survive. And the mullahs are again high in the saddle.
This is what we call the 'Foreign Policy Establishment'? People who can't understand that we won
a) peace through Assured Destruction and
b) great progress toward world democracy-and-capitalism through patient example?
What? Our media don't criticize this? The two parties basically agree? The public is silent?
Fellow Americans, lets face it:
We are Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Why?
We have, to date, failed rather spectacularly on the biggest, simplest, and costliest lesson of our generation.
Perhaps if we have a laugh at our stupidity, we can move on to smarter policy! :)
Posted by dwight
January 15, 2008
Morocco!
Posted by p_lukasiak
January 15, 2008
Brian, Many thanks for your comment on the blog, much appreciated. Very good to have some thoughts from folks on the ground in Iraq.
scott...
as you are no doubt aware, the US military restricts access to the internet for dissenters in the service, and there is always the "watchful eye" of a military press officer around when soldiers are being interviewed.
I'm not sure if Brian is a sock puppet who isn't in the military, or just a lying propagandist, but if you believe this statement...
We watch as the Iranians bring thousands of pounds of explosives across the border each day.
has any truth whatsoever, then either you are a bigger idiot than Brian is a liar, or we've got the most incompentently run military in the history of anti-occupation insurgencies.
(The "Iranians are bringing explosives across the border" can be true only if Brian is a pure and utterly unprincipled propagandist -- and these are legal explosives being sent to Iraq for use in things like oil exploration, or demolition of bombed out buildings that represent a threat to public safety. Its clear what Brian is trying to convey here, however -- and it isn't the authorized importation of explosives.)
I mean SERIOUSLY, do you really think that the US military sits on its hands while IRANIANS bring explosives across the border? How is it possible that the US military could be this incompetent -- to sit by and WATCH materials being brought across the border to kill Americans, and do nothing?
Of course, it could be the case that the Iraqi government and security forces are preventing the US military from acting -- but if that is the case, do you really think that the soldiers on the ground would not be screaming their (literally, in some cases) bloody heads off about it, rather than saying what Brian is claiming?
Posted by p_lukasiak
January 15, 2008
Mickster Does anyone here remember the USS Cole? Regardless of any threats broadcast over the radio, small speed boats laden with explosives are a very real and formidable threat to US ships.
puhleez. A "formidable" threat? Did the Cole sink? Not to disparage the tragic loss of 17 american sailors in that incident, but on the "formidable" scale of 'a slap on the wrist from your grandmother', and 'getting beaten to death by a tire-iron-wielding band of Hells Angels', the Cole bombing falls somewhere around the 'getting punched in the shoulder by your girlfriend.'
People keep forgetting that the Hopper was in IRANIAN waters -- and the odds are extremely high, given what we know about the mission of the Hopper, that it was acting illegally. (here's a clue -- taking pictures of Iranian defenses on its coast is an ILLEGAL ACT if done by a vessel travelling through the Straits under "international rights of passage".)
Iran has every right to patrol its territorial waters, and challenge military vessels from other nations that it has good reason to suspect is in violation of internation maritime law.
Posted by American Patriot
January 15, 2008
I'd advise my fellow citizens in Iraq that if they want the alleged Iranian roadside bombs to stop, to demand that our government engage in DIPLOMACY with Iran rather than saber-rattling which has been their standard response to most major international crises -- many of which they've created and/or escalated themselves. Because waving a gun at somebody isn't always the best approach to resolving a problem.
Yes, I am well aware that Iran is very possibly training some insurgents to do bad things in Iraq. I'm also aware there WAS NO AL-QUEDA IN IRAQ UNTIL WE INVADED it and made conditions ripe for those jackals to prosper. And the boogeyman Al-Queda is responsible for plenty of the bloodshed and carnage in Iraq.
And BTW, where is Osama? Let's see, is he under the president's sofa cushion with the WMD? How disgustingly INSULTING the president was to our military in particular with that display. And you think this guy has YOUR best interests in mind, soldier? Or America's? No, he's in it for the ego and the money for him and his Halliburton and oil buds. The word "hubris" also comes to mind.
This isn't my opinion at_all, but it seems to be his: you're expendable. Do you see, um, ANYONE in his family -- or his daughters -- serving in Iraq or Afghanistan? Nope, they're out partying with the rest of the blue bloods. Do you see him or anyone in congress or Bushco sacrificing ANYTHING personal in Iraq or Afghanistan? No, you don't. At least England puts their family where their mouth is by sending over Prince Harry or Jake or whatever his name is to serve.
But the media puts forth this brilliant "serve the nation" pablum and guys like Brian sign up with all the best intentions only to end up in the worst of situations...lacking any semblance of good political leadership to direct their mighty resources not where they can do the most good, but it seems thus far, where we as a nation have done incredibly bad things.
And the media are also complicit by not having the cajones to ask the right questions at the right time, by not holding our "leaders" to a higher standard. Lapdogs. Again, do you see them questioning ANY of what's gone on since Bush took office -- we as a nation are gonna pay through the nose for the horrid mismanagement and corruption that is simply SOP for Bushco. Do the media seriously investigate any of it? No. Because we as American citizens are expendable, too. It's all for the benefit of those at the top. The rest of us are a bunch of lemmings.
I should also mention that patriots like Brian are every day tragically reaping the fruits of our own political mismanagement of Iraqi resources, starting with the dismissal of the Iraqi army and Saddam's guard and continuing with failure to secure Iraqi weapons depots. Guys, Iraq is our Vietnam. We don't belong there and we should get out now. Oh but I know, you want to stay in and lose more Americans in a sausage grinder that's not going away, ever. Great.
Here's something else you perhaps need to think about: what would we do if the Russians or Chinese or whomever invaded Mexico on cooked-up intel, toppled their government, then came in with their troops and bombs and basically destroyed the nation, all the while pointing fingers (and rifles) and saying, "You're next, America, you're next!" What would we do? We'd sure as hell be training insurgents and setting up our own unpleasant surprises for the occupiers. Having accepted this reality, it's disingenuous to fault Iran for doing the same thing. I'm not condoning their actions, I'm saying how can we not expect them to do the same thing we would do were we in their situation?
This America-centric jingoism attitude is what gets us into trouble every time. Behavior like Bush has exhibited makes America into a bully feared by some and hated by all. That is what we've become. All in the name of what? To what end?
What part of unending aggression and unmitigated cowboy gall don't we understand? What part of BLOWBACK do we fail to grasp? Actions have consequences. And the sooner we get the political leadership in our nation to embrace that year in and year out, the better off we'll all be.
I have all the respect in the world for our soldiers and it DOESN'T make me unpatriotic to question our political motives and our attitudes. Not questioning leads to tragedies like My-Lai and Abu Ghraib that don't just hurt our soldiers and what they stand for, but erode respect for us as a nation. Blind allegiance is costing us dearly -- in the loss of thus far nearly 4000 American lives, not to mention all the shattered families here. All the vets who come home blown up -- either on the inside or outside or both -- to receive piddling medical benefits and less help with coping after life in a war zone.
To say nothing of the TENS of thousands and more likely hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives lost and families destroyed. Over what? COOKED-UP INTEL. Lies. We were lied to, Brian, and so were you. And the media has given Bush a pass on all of it. Why is this cretin still in office? Why hasn't he been thrown out on his ear, impeached, and jailed for high treason? And now you and your friends are paying for it with your lives. We and the next several generations of our children are only paying with our wallets. Oh yeah...and the hatred of the rest of the world.
Posted by Cam
January 15, 2008
Do you really think you have time to decide if a radioed threat comes from ashore or other boat while a speed boat from a declared enemy is heading to you at full speed?
Don't think so. Grave mistakes could take place in such a situation, but better the mistake is them got blown up and not us. This iranian government has a well deserved fame that goes against any move they make. And I saying iranian government. I doubt the majority of the iranian people are fundamentalist lunatics as their government.
Posted by no one special
January 15, 2008
WOW .... Talk about going out on a tangent ..... The true issues here is how the media is way too fast to publish an article before is finds the facts ...... In turn the media creates spin, tensions and falsehoods that are unfounded and viewed around the world as "what america/americans thinks"! Frankly I don't give two shits if an IRAN boat came close to an america boat. As a civilian is not really my problem and there is nothing I can do or say to help the situation. That is what the military is for, they are in bussiness to handle those situations ..... The real issues is why was this leaked "Media Spin"!
Posted by Scott MacLeod
January 15, 2008
p_lukasiak:
sorry, didnt mean to imply that i agreed with brian. dont get comments from inside iraq too often, just felt like recognizing that. i should have also thanked you (and some of our other regular commenters) for your prolific presence on the blog these days. so... thanks! Please stick around...
Posted by Jason
January 15, 2008
Bottom Line Up Front: Anyone who plays chicken with a WARSHIP **deserves** to be blown out of the water, just in the interest of Darwinism, much less for security reasons.
Posted by p_lukasiak
January 15, 2008
Do you really think you have time to decide if a radioed threat comes from ashore or other boat while a speed boat from a declared enemy is heading to you at full speed?
possibly... but since the navy knows that there are "pranksters" who listen in to ship-to-ship radio communications and who interject themselves into the "communications", what they are hearing does not, and should not, influence their decsion-making in a potential crisis situation. If you see a speedboat coming at you, you issue a verbal warning... if it keeps coming, you fire a warning shot (as the Hopper reportedly did). If it still keeps coming, you blow it out of the water only at the point where the ship would suffer some damage if allowed to procede further.
I mean, these ships aren't tin cans -- they are heavily armored and while contact with an explosive laden projectile (be it a torpedo, or a speedboat) can do considerable damage, the amount of damage from an explosion in which there is no contact is much less -- and declines rapidly with each foot away from the ship that the explosion takes place.
The Navy understands this. Why don't you?
Posted by no one special
January 15, 2008
Bottom line is that this article has nothing to do with who should blow who up. It has to do with the media's irresponsible reporting and how it has a ripple effect on the world politic, foreign agenda and foreign relationships.
Posted by Ghost
January 15, 2008
It's O.K; we are going to attack Iran anyway. For two reasons. The taking of American hostages,on sovergin American property, in Teharan, and the killing of 241 Marines in Beruit. Oh,Lukasiak, the loss of 17 US Navy personel, is like getting punched in the arm from your girl friend. To bad life is so trivial in your eyes. Hey let the bombing of Iran begin!
Posted by Hish
January 15, 2008
Actually, I think American Ships need to get the hell out of other people's waters, and out of other people's business. They've cast themselves world police and doing a real shitty job at that. They need to leave professional work to the professionals, like Interpol and the UN, not thieves and corporate cronies.
With Police like that, its no surprise the world is going straight to hell.
Posted by culbyramfan
January 15, 2008
Sorry but after reading Brians comments I just had to chime in.I served 3 tours in the middle east, before, during and after the first gulf war and still have friends to day serving now in Iraq. I dont know if they are in a different war than Brian but there opion and mine on this war are a million miles apart.Sounded like he was being spoon fed what to say to me.I feel for all of them that over there now risking there lives for something they dont really believe in.At least in the first gulf war we felt we were doing some good for someone.
Posted by disgusted
January 16, 2008
"puhleez. A "formidable" threat? Did the Cole sink? Not to disparage the tragic loss of 17 american sailors in that incident, but on the "formidable" scale of 'a slap on the wrist from your grandmother', and 'getting beaten to death by a tire-iron-wielding band of Hells Angels', the Cole bombing falls somewhere around the 'getting punched in the shoulder by your girlfriend."-p_lukasiak You obviously didn't pay attention to the fact that a whole big enough to drive a tank through was blown through the side of the ship. That was ONE boat that did that damage. The ship was at port which is a much better place to have such a thing happen as opposed to being at sea. Regardless the ship nearly sank and had to be ferried across the ocean literally on top of another ship so that it could be repaired. 17 sailors were killed and many more injured which is a tragedy in my eyes. In yours they were probably just doing their jobs. Had the ship been at sea it very well could have sunk. Would that have registered high enough on your scale to be rated as a formidable threat?
Posted by p_lukasiak
January 16, 2008
disgusted...
if the ship had been at sea, it wouldn't have been within range of explosive laden speedboats.
The point is this... speedboats laden with explosives are not a formidable threat to the national security of the United States. On the "formidable threat" level, they rank in the vicinity of the Grenadan Defense Forces.
The Cole attack was a sucess not because speedboats are such a formidable threat, but because we didn't see speedboats as a threat -- there were no standing orders for those on watch that would have permitted them to fire on the speedboat without the captain's permission. The captain followed proper Naval protocols for securing his ship -- but those protocols were inadequate, so a couple of lunatics were able to blow a hole in the Cole.
"Lunatics in speedboats blew a hole in one of our boats because we didn't anticipate that an attack of this nature could take place" doesn't make speedboats a threat. It does, however, make suicidal lunatics a threat. And the Iranian regime, whatever you might think of them, are not lunatics---and are certainly not suicidal. We should be worrying more about the lunatics -- and the fact that they find and exploit sucidal lunatics -- and less about some chimera Iranian threat.
Posted by no one special
January 16, 2008
Alright already .... Time for you guys to settle this the old fashion way .... wild west shootout .... Take 10 steps turn and shoot ... If you happen to see a speedboat darting towards you shoot it too ....
This blog has been taken so far out of context it not even funny ... well maybe a little funny!
Posted by Sherif
January 16, 2008
Shockek to see all the comments but very interesting!
Brian:"writings on how to dominate the region by manipulating the US media to undermine our citizen's resolve"
All the respect to you if you are in Iraq, but I can not beleive that statement, I beleive Iran possesses a threat to us,I don't think we should resolve it the same way we are trying to stabilise Iraq, I know the Iranians are smarter than communicating in writing.
Posted by Jen
January 17, 2008
The Hoover Institution has just published a great summary of the American/Iranian relationship, including why things have gotten so tense (like the fast book incident a few weeks ago) and why some suspect Iran of having a nuclear weapons program:
http://www.hoover.org/research/focusonissues/focus/13769442.html
Best of all, according to Hoover, we may not need to go to war with Iran after all. This will be good news to those who have tired of our involvement in Iraq:
“In a collaborative article written by the Hoover Institution’s Peter and Helen Bing Senior Fellow Michael McFaul and Hoover research fellow Abbas Milani, they argue that preemptive strikes against Iran would not only be disastrous but would undermine what little stability exists in the region. The two explain that the best way to engage Iran is through diplomatic means: ‘Although counterintuitive to some, diplomatic engagement is required to pursue the long-term goal of democratization and, in parallel, the short-term goal of arms control.’
“But is the chasm between the United States and Iran too large to cross? A number of reliable polls indicate that an overwhelming majority of Iranians hold a highly favorable opinion of America and Americans. Furthermore, according to a published report, a vast majority of Iranians and Americans alike denounce Osama bin Laden and agree that terrorism is a serious threat. This suggests to experts such as McFaul, Milani, and Hoover senior fellow Larry Diamond that enough common ground exists that diplomatic solutions can be explored.
“... Despite decades of distrust and heated rhetoric, Victor Davis Hanson, the Hoover Institution’s Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow, believes that the U.S. Iran policy is working. ‘A strike now on Iran would be a grave mistake,’ Hanson explains, ‘in every strategic and political sense—not to mention the humanitarian one of harming a populace that may well soon prove to be the most pro-Western in the region.’ “
Posted by dwadwaddw
January 31, 2008
www.mail.com