From ABC News:
The U.S. Navy is offering a huge show of military might near the location where Iran seized 15 British sailors and marines five days ago, in what is seen as a clear effort to send a message to Iran, a senior military official told ABC News’ Martha Raddatz in Bahrain.
Twelve ships, 100 aircraft and 12,000 sailors are taking part in the war games designed to get the attention of Iran.
The naval exercise went on all day today and will continue Wednesday, with F-18 fighter jets roaring from the deck of both aircraft carriers in the first appearance of two U.S. carriers in the Gulf simultaneously since 2003.
U.S. naval officials in Bahrain told ABC News that the operation was hastily planned after the 15 Britons were seized Friday, yet the Bush administration would not say publicly that this is the case.
[…]
Friday, when the sailors were first captured, there was every expectation that the men would be released within a few days, which is what happened during a similar incident in 2004.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair said today that unless the sailors and marines were returned safely, the crisis could escalate.
“I hope we manage to get them to realize they have to release them,” Blair said. “If not, then this will move into a different phase.”
The U.S. military exercise today goes well beyond the seizure of the Britons to address the overall tensions with Iran to include the transfer of Iranian weapons into Iraq and the standoff over Iran’s nuclear program.
More U.S. bullying. Can’t we all just get along? WHY MUST EVERYTHING BE ABOUT WHOSE WANG IS MORE STEELY AND DANGEROUS?
—Alternately, though, were the UN in charge of making a statement, I suppose we’d be treated to the sight of sunscreen-slathered, pedicured diplomats sailing along the Gulf in 60’ yachts, sipping Mojitas and dropping reams of paper, ink, manila folders, and rubber stamps into the water. In order to send Iran a message.
So maybe HYPERMASCULINITY ain’t always a bad thing—particularly when it is flashed at a superpatriarchal culture that believes in stoning gays and women…
How wonderful and flowery the world would be if we “could all just get along” however in face of evil one must fight with all of the bravery at their disposal. The United States Military is that brave, noble group of men and women who will fight that evil when 90% of Americans will not.
It’s always interesting how a couple of Carrier Groups standing off your shores can tend to “focus the mind” so to speak.
Since the Iranians are “parading” the captured sailors on TV, I expect thundering denounciations by every GC worshipper on the Left…. hello? Ok, I guess not.
Like Joe Wilson as Thurston Howell III on the SS Minnow.
Culturalist!
. . . although a threat to send 300 Spartans to guard the Hot Gates could solve this problem pretty quickly.
Thurston Howell III had more class.
So maybe HYPERMASCULINITY ain’t always a bad thingâ€â€particularly when it is flashed at a superpatriarchal culture that believes in stoning gays and women…
OH RIGHT. As if things are any better in the US. Men who love men are STILL unable go have the church wedding of their dreams, and women are continually having to fight to keep their right to kill their unborn offspring.
I’m sure BushBlairCo planned this whole charade for an excuse to initiate another illegal WAR FOR OIL.
Now, I gotta go take a shat on a flag or something.
Maybe if we dress up 300 Navy Seals as Spartans and have them parade through the streets of Tehran the Persians will just give up and turn over the Brits. Hey, it’s worth a try.
Of course it might backfire and they send their mutants, half-naked concubines, masked super-soldiers, elephants, rhinos and 7-foot tall leader against us.
Anybody here good with a slingshot?
Oops, wrong ancient story.
Just so they don’t send a fat executioner with crab arms . . . that guy gives me the willies!
Isn’t it odd that “disputed waters” always seem to work only one way? It sure would be fun, the next time any of the Revolutionary Guard “Navy” go boating, to scarf them up, burn their boats, announce that they had intruded into Iraqi waters, print the lat/long on their foreheads in Magic Marker, and set them ashore on some deserted stretch of beach a looong walk away from home.
Nah. Best to let diplomacy handle this.
(The whirring sounds you hear are Stephen Decatur, Horatio Nelson, Bill Halsey, and Jackie Fisher spinning in their graves)
Of course disputed waters only work one way, slack. Just like capturing UK sailors is an invitation to open negotiations, but preventing the said scarfing by use of force is ‘provocative’.
There is only one source, one canker, of unmitigated evil in the world and that is the USA and its assorted poodles and jackles.
WWHD?
This better not turn into a “Pueblo Incident”!
The “Pueblo Incident”… google it, Rosie, and note this was the same administration that was involved with the “Gulf of Tonkin Incident”.
Interestingly, the Danger Room blog describes the wargames as “long planned” and that putting the carriers in the Gulf makes them more vulnerable and less likely to start shooting.
Each of them planes cost $5000-$10,000 an hour to fly.
Combat readiness is such a waste of money, eh? Too bad national defense is one of the few legitimate provinces of the federal government. How about we slash one social program or farm subsidy every hour?
Good point.
We could be spending the money on something like Tours of the Capitol or the Democratic and Republican conventions.
alphie,
They cost $5K-$10K to fly only b/c the military hasn’t listened to you yet.
Weren’t you claiming that spending $4K-$5K a soldier in Iraq, with one of the world’s lowest costs-of-living, was unreasonable? That you ought to be able to support a typical US soldier on something like $1K or so?
Since you’re throwing around costs per hour of flying time like you know what you’re talking about, one can only conclude that either you think flying hours are padded, or else you were a lying sack of fecal matter when you claimed that soldier support costs were too high.
Which is it, alphie?
LO,
Take it easy on the aphid. He probably
thinksemotes both are true.More and more instances are starting to pop up which indicate that alphie really isn’t that stupid, he is just a lying propagandist for the other side.
Well, there’s the indecent level of excitement he gets from the latest jihadi atrocity and his one-note refrain about US troops. Hasn’t he essentially called them cowards for not going one-on-one with the jihadis?
Then there’s his posing as a “conservative” while spouting talking points from MoveOn and ANSWER. What he claims are his “conservative” positions are usually Hollywood exaggerations—see his constant attempts to reduce everything to its cost. He’s taken the left’s positions on social issues and environmental issues.
And, of course, there’s his inability/refusal to actually take a position, rather depending on half-statements, intentional mis-interpretation, and out-and-out lies.
He’s a moby at the least. But given the recent StrategyPage article on jihadis being tasked to pose as disillusioned war supporters in pro-war forums…
Robert,
Mobys (mobies?) are supposed to first establish their conservative credentials, not engage in nonsensical debate that leaves their reputation in utter tatters.
I’m just amused at how alphie runs off when confronted with his own mendacity and meretriciousness. Perhaps he has an iota of shame within him? (Naaaahhh.)
But I do wonder—what is in these threads that he so desperately wants to avoid debating? Is it possible that unconvinced readers might actually conclude, frex, that the war isn’t going quite so badly, and therefore he must derail the threads?
Or is it that, as you suggest, he’s perhaps actually an agent for the other side?
alphie’s getting exactly what he wants: when he comments, the topic changes from whatever it was about to him. He can be guaranteed plenty of attention, because whatever he says, no matter how ludicrous or unsourced, is always addressed. It’s a great game for him, because he’s always got players. He endlessly elicits the same feelings from the same people: anger, scorn, ridicule. He’d normally be a gigantic waste of time anywhere else in the world, but here, he has some measure of control over other people’s behavior. After the first few comments, I trained myself to skip past his words. I’m sure others can, too.
Responding to alphie isn’t pushback against leftist spin or drivel: it’s just playing his game…and ultimately, I think, puts more noise in the signal-to-noise ratio. Don’t you think it’s about time to stop trying to engage him? It doesn’t work. Isn’t a definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result? It’s enough already.
What Dave D. said.
I’ve wondered about this as well.
Many of the regulars always lobbied to ignore Actus when he showed up, said something idiotic and got creamed with logic. Why treat Alphie any differently? Has Jeff ever confirmed that they are in fact not one and the same? I mean this clown talks from Kos and Huffington 3×5 cards. It’s not like he’s ever gonna say anything profound, other than profoundly stupid. Heck he’/s not even funny. I could forgive some of his Leftist crap if he was at least amusing.
So say it with me, whenever Alphie says well…anything, just “Ignore the Troll”
The sad part is, quite frankly, that the US Navy could plant all of their aircraft carriers off the coast of Iran and Iran won’t break a sweat ?
Why ?
Because Iran’s allies in the US House and Senate will do everything in their power to keep the president from using force until his term is out. The Iranians get CNN, they’re not stupid.
I maintain most of this is an attempt by Iran to see how far we can be pushed – and it looks like we (and the british) can be pushed around at Iran’s leisure.
Its pretty pathetic. Britain’s reaction has been pathetic. US reaction has been pathetic.
How bout- we don’t negotiate with terrorists or crazy people – return our sailors or we start the bombing?
Anyone else miss this guy?
“I have today sent the attached letter to the Congress concerning defensive actions by our armed forces taken on September 21-22, 1987, against the Iranian naval vessel Iran Ajr. We regard this incident as closed and are currently taking steps to repatriate the 26 Iranians survivors and return the bodies of the three Iranians killed in the incident.”
How can you sip Mojitas? Aren’t they the fresh-fried steak strips in a soft taco shell?
Oops. What a difference spelling makes. Nevermind.
T&T
How can you sip Mojitas? Aren’t they the fresh-fried steak strips in a soft taco shell?
Oops. What a difference spelling makes. Nevermind.
T&T
I can’t say what will actually happen, but it does appear that we are in position to blockade Iran now.
Just a thought.