[Rhodes22-list] The following post is Political, Religious, Educational, point of discussions, Big Al delete!

Brad Haslett flybrad at gmail.com
Fri Jan 11 17:56:48 EST 2008


Herb,

We're probably wasting our time here, people tend to believe what they want
to believe.  You may recall we had a heated discussion here several months
ago on the strategic importance of the Straight of Hormuz and some folks
took issue with me on the percentage of the world's oil supply that passed
through there.  Just so we don't get in another pissing contest on numbers,
I'll state it in very general terms.  A "whole shitpotfull" of oil passes
through Hormuz which is only 21 miles wide at its narrowest point.  Here is
a fact that cannot be disputed!  It is international water and ships of all
nationalities, including war ships, have right of passage by international
maritime law.

What the Pentagon has released today is that they can't verify that the
threatening radio transmissions came from the speedboats.  Apparently, there
is an individual (individuals) that sailors dub the "Filipino Monkey" who
makes obnoxious and vulgar comments to passing ships, especially female
crewmembers.  You'd think we have the technology to find this little varmint
and silence him. One sure way would be to obliterate the little boats and
see if the transmissions continue.  We got lucky on this one!  The next time
might not be so happy an ending.

Speculation is that Imadumbass is ratcheting-up the rhetoric for the
upcoming elections in Iran (March). Since we've all but gone silent on the
sabre-rattling over their nuclear program, he needs to stir up the locals
with some kind of Great Satan incident. He may get more than he bargained
for if he tries this stunt again.

Whatever happened, we (or should I say they) dodged a bullet.

Brad

On Jan 11, 2008 4:22 PM, Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com> wrote:

> They don't? Are you sure? Sure seems like I saw 3 speed boats with 50
> caliber automatic guns mounted on them when I passed the US Naval
> shipyard in Port Aransas.
>
> Regardless, the point remains the same. We have not "reacted the same"
> when the "shoe was on the other foot". What we were doing was normal.
> It's what we've done for years, having a ship pass through international
> waters. What they were doing was not. We would not react the same. I
> again challenge you to show differently.
>
> john Belanger wrote:
> > we don't use speedboats for coastal patrol. our navy doesn't patrol our
> shores with swift boats either. the other foot (implies) (infers) (;-)) to
> the roles being reversed and what we would do if we were in their shoes. ;-)
> >
> > Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com> wrote:  Yes, we would react.
> However, you're now contridicting yourself.
> >
> > Previously, you said "when you put the shoe on the other foot, we would
> > do the same thing". Now you say "we would react quickly. and NOT with
> > speedboats" - so which is it, we'd do the same thing, or we'd do
> > something different?
> >
> > As far as "near our shore" we were there because it's the only way in.
> > We were in recognized international shipping lanes. We were doing
> > nothing out of the ordianary.
> >
> > john Belanger wrote:
> >
> >> herb
> >> i seem to recall a little skirmish with n korean boats off their coast,
> there's gulf of tonkin, shooting down 707 off kimchatka, reaction by soiets
> to u2's, and that recon plane the chinese forced down. what i'm getting at
> is if a russian plane or ship showed up near our shores, we would react
> quickly. and not with speedboats. if the iranians had sent out a warship or
> any unknown vessel at night, we would not be debating it now. very
> dangerous.
> >>
> >> Herb Parsons wrote:
> >> Absolute BULL. We would not "do the same thing." I challenge you to
> back
> >> it up. Show me one instance where we have ever rushed a Chinese,
> Korean,
> >> Russian, etc. ship with high speed boats and ignored radio hailing.
> >>
> >> No, we don't know where the radio transmissions came from. However,
> were
> >> it me on one of those high-speed boats, and the ship was hailing me,
> you
> >> can be there'd be transmission from ME.
> >>
> >> Unless of course, I WASN'T just "checking things out".
> >>
> >> And I agree, we'd be better off as allies. They don't want us as
> allies.
> >>
> >> john Belanger wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> herb,
> >>> when you put the shoe on the other foot, we would do the same thing,
> as have the chinese, koreans, russians, etc. when our ships or planes show
> up near their shores. complicated by narrowness of the straits of hormuz.
> its very dangerous in those waters but i have to emphasize one thing. we
> don't know where the transmission came from, as far as i have heard so far.
> i'm not excusing their actions. i think we were very restrained. i still say
> they and we would be better off as allies. if you think about it the whole
> situations results could have been very different if those boats had showed
> up at night. close call.
> >>>
> >>> Herb Parsons wrote:
> >>> What a bunch of bunk. We weren't in their waters. They didn't "send
> >>> someone out", they sent five high speed powerboats with full crews,
> and
> >>> there were radio transmissions that the naval ship was going to be
> >>> "blown up".
> >>>
> >>> But then, I forget; there are some people that are bound and
> determined
> >>> that no matter what this country does to defend itself, it's the wrong
> >>> thing.
> >>>
> >>> john Belanger wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> the solution we seem to be going for seems to be control. i will ask
> the obvious question: if ships of a foriegn nation were passing close to our
> shores, would we not send someone out to see whats going on? would we have
> any shortage of volunteers? think about this: make iran an ally. its much
> cheaper. if iran is on our side, many problems go away. no, really, think
> about it. even israel would be happy. better yet, who would be unhappy?
> bolton?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Herb Parsons
> S/V O'Jure - O'Day 25
> S/V Reve de Pappa - Coronado 35
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>


More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list