Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

USA fires on boat in the Persian Gulf
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
yodanole



Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: La Florida

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 12:09 pm    Post subject: USA fires on boat in the Persian Gulf Reply with quote

One dead...

http://news.yahoo.com/us-navy-fires-ship-persian-gulf-one-dead-161552208--abc-news-topstories.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dave Chance



Joined: 30 May 2011

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well yeah if Russia had two carriers off the coast of California something might go down...'tho if Russia then fired on and killed someone they wouldn't be let off the hook...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yodanole



Joined: 02 Mar 2003
Location: La Florida

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Two carriers, did you say?

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagon-sends-carrier-middle-east-early-220927601--abc-news-politics.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ttompatz



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just goes to show that the largest and most dangerous TERRORIST organization on the planet is the US government backed by the US military machine.

Opening fire on civilian vessels in an ALLIES territorial waters (not even in international waters) with outright impunity.

Perhaps it is time for countries in the Caribbean or perhaps the Canadians to start shooting at US pleasure craft in US waters. Maybe the Americans might get upset?

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
TheUrbanMyth



Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

PostPosted: Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

.
ttompatz wrote:
Just goes to show that the largest and most dangerous TERRORIST organization on the planet is the US government backed by the US military machine.

Opening fire on civilian vessels in an ALLIES territorial waters (not even in international waters) with outright impunity.

Perhaps it is time for countries in the Caribbean or perhaps the Canadians to start shooting at US pleasure craft in US waters. Maybe the Americans might get upset?

.


It goes to show nothing of the sort.

Quote:
Lt. Greg Raelson, a spokesperson for the Navy's 5th Fleet, which is based in nearby Bahrain, said that a security team aboard the oil supply ship U.S.N.S. Rappahannock fired a .50 caliber machine gun at a "small motor vessel after it disregarded warnings and rapidly approached the U.S. ship" off the coast of Jebel Ali, a city approximately 30 miles from Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.


If you approach a military craft at a high rate of speed ( not unlike a suicide bomber would), receive warnings and STILL continue then there is no surprise if you get shot. The U.S Navy was NOT the aggressor here. The boat acted in an aggressive manner. And it was warned which terrorists don't do.

It is the height of stupidity to approach an area that has been attacked before and has armed men patrolling it. And then to top it all off they were warned and disregarded it...what did they THINK would happen?

Quote:
Another Navy official said it was "on a course that would have caused it to impact the Rappahanock... It wasn't just close, it was on a course that would have ultimately taken it to impact."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ttompatz



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

let's see... a UAE pleasure/fishing boat in UAE territorial waters approaches a CARGO ship (not like it was a combat vessel).

Said ship issues warnings (probably in English) over the radio and they are not acknowledged (since the people on the boat may not have radio or may not speak English) so they just open fire on a vessel in the territorial waters of an ally.

What do you think would happen if a US flagged pleasure craft approached a UK ship in the Bahamas, Bermuda or the BVI and was blown of out the water?

The US armed forces.... Shoot first and have an inquiry later.

TERRORISTS at large.

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
sml7285



Joined: 26 Apr 2012

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 2:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ttompatz wrote:
let's see... a UAE pleasure/fishing boat in UAE territorial waters approaches a CARGO ship (not like it was a combat vessel).

Said ship issues warnings (probably in English) over the radio and they are not acknowledged (since the people on the boat may not have radio or may not speak English) so they just open fire on a vessel in the territorial waters of an ally.

What do you think would happen if a US flagged pleasure craft approached a UK ship in the Bahamas, Bermuda or the BVI and was blown of out the water?

The US armed forces.... Shoot first and have an inquiry later.

TERRORISTS at large.

.


One subject in which I have more expertise than anyone in these forums!

1/3 of the world's ships are registered as Panamanian or Liberian. Ship owners don't register their ships in their home countries due to insane regulations and costs - ie. to have a ship registered under a US flag, a vessel must be 1) built in the US (difficult as there are almost no dockyards in the US), 2) have a crew consisting of 100% US citizens as officers and 75% US citizens overall, 3) available for military use during times of war.

Other countries have similar regulations. Therefore the only three countries that any savvy shipping business registers its ships under are Panama, Liberia and the Marshall Islands.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheUrbanMyth



Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ttompatz wrote:
let's see... a UAE pleasure/fishing boat in UAE territorial waters approaches a CARGO ship (not like it was a combat vessel).

Said ship issues warnings (probably in English) over the radio and they are not acknowledged (since the people on the boat may not have radio or may not speak English) so they just open fire on a vessel in the territorial waters of an ally.

What do you think would happen if a US flagged pleasure craft approached a UK ship in the Bahamas, Bermuda or the BVI and was blown of out the water?

The US armed forces.... Shoot first and have an inquiry later.

TERRORISTS at large.


First of all it wasn't just approaching...it was on a collision course.

Secondly it was a security team aboard the vessel that opened fire...it makes no mention of their nationality...for all you know this security team were not even soldiers but private mercs a la Blackwater or even local operatives. Nor were they trying to kill them all...out of the six only one man was killed.

"security team" not "U.S Forces"
How about waiting to find out what happened and who shot BEFORE jumping to conclusions?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
comm



Joined: 22 Jun 2010

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheUrbanMyth wrote:
How about waiting to find out what happened and who shot BEFORE jumping to conclusions?

Approaching a military vessel on a collision course at high speed and ignoring warnings to turn away are perfectly sufficient grounds to be fired upon.

On the other hand, I don't think we can be sure that's what happened. Maybe the crew of the U.S. ship just shouted "Look out, it's coming right for us!" and figured they were in the clear...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TERRORING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TRAWLING TROLLING TROLLING TROLLING TROLLING TROLLING TROLLING TROLLING TROLLING TROLLING
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
ttompatz



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

First of all it wasn't just approaching...it was on a collision course.

Secondly it was a security team aboard the vessel that opened fire...it makes no mention of their nationality...for all you know this security team were not even soldiers but private mercs a la Blackwater or even local operatives. Nor were they trying to kill them all...out of the six only one man was killed.

"security team" not "U.S Forces"
How about waiting to find out what happened and who shot BEFORE jumping to conclusions?


Only the Americans would even attempt to justify outright, extra judicial murder in the soverign territory of a DECLARED ALLY.

But why would that be a surprise. It isn't like it was the first time they have broken international law and violated the sovereign territorial rights of an ally (Panama, Pakistan, Canada, Mexico, the Philippines to name but a few) to commit grievous crimes and just say tough when called on it.

How is that any different than al-Qaeda, the Taliban or the Iranians.
A matched pair of cheeks from the same ass. America should be added to the list of countries that support, condone and commit acts of terrorism.

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Dave Chance



Joined: 30 May 2011

PostPosted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The US has a history of trouble making in other countries' sovereign waters-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident

A highly classified program of covert actions against North Vietnam known as Operation Plan 34-Alpha, in conjunction with the DESOTO operations, had begun under the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in 1961. In 1964 the program was transferred to the US Defense Department and conducted by the Military Assistance Command, Vietnam Studies and Observations Group (SOG)[10]

For the maritime portion of the covert operation, Tjeld-class fast patrol boats had been purchased quietly from Norway and sent to South Vietnam. Although the crews of the boats were South Vietnamese naval personnel, approval for each mission conducted under the plan came directly from Admiral U.S. Grant Sharp, Jr., CINCPAC in Honolulu, who received his orders from the White House.[11] After the coastal attacks began, Hanoi lodged a complaint with the International Control Commission (ICC), which had been established in 1954 to oversee the terms of the Geneva Accords, but the US denied any involvement.


Four years later, US Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara admitted to Congress that the US ships had in fact been cooperating in the South Vietnamese attacks against North Vietnam.


President Johnson's speech to the American people

Shortly before midnight on August 4, President Johnson made a speech by radio in which he described an attack by North Vietnamese vessels on two U.S. Navy warships, USS Maddox and USS Turner Joy and requested authority to undertake a military response.[22][23] Johnson's speech repeated the theme that "dramatized Hanoi/Ho Chi Minh as the aggressor and which put the U.S. into a more acceptable defensive posture."[22] Johnson also referred to the attacks as having taken place "on the high seas," suggesting that they had occurred in international waters.[24]


Distortion of the event

Evidence was still being sought on the night of August 4 when Johnson gave his address to the American public on the incident. Messages recorded that day indicate that neither President Johnson nor McNamara was certain of an attack.[28]

Consequences

US Defense Secretary Robert McNamara failed to inform US President Lyndon B. Johnson that the U.S. naval task group commander in the Tonkin Gulf, Captain John J. Herrick, had changed his mind about the alleged North Vietnamese torpedo attack on U.S. warships he had reported earlier that day.

By early afternoon of 4 August, Washington time, Herrick had reported to the Commander in Chief Pacific in Honolulu that "freak weather effects" on the ship�s radar had made such an attack questionable. In fact, Herrick was now saying, in a message sent at 1:27 pm Washington time, that no North Vietnamese patrol boats had actually been sighted. Herrick now proposed a "complete evaluation before any further action taken."

President Johnson, who was up for election that year, ordered retaliatory air strikes and went on national television on August 4. Although Maddox had been involved in providing intelligence support for South Vietnamese attacks at H�n M� and H�n Ngư, Johnson denied, in his testimony before Congress, that the U.S. Navy had supported South Vietnamese military operations in the Gulf. He thus characterized the attack as "unprovoked" since the ship had been in international waters.

As a result of his testimony, on August 7, Congress passed a joint resolution (H.J. RES 1145), titled the Southeast Asia Resolution, which granted President Johnson the authority to conduct military operations in Southeast Asia without the benefit of a declaration of war. The Resolution gave President Johnson approval "to take all necessary steps, including the use of armed force, to assist any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty requesting assistance in defense of its freedom."

[edit] Later statements about the incidentIn 1965, President Johnson commented privately: "For all I know, our Navy was shooting at whales out there." [33]


And that, folks, is the classic example of how America and its allies are "attacked by terrorists/raging out-of-control commies" etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bucheon bum



Joined: 16 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sml7285 wrote:
ttompatz wrote:
let's see... a UAE pleasure/fishing boat in UAE territorial waters approaches a CARGO ship (not like it was a combat vessel).

Said ship issues warnings (probably in English) over the radio and they are not acknowledged (since the people on the boat may not have radio or may not speak English) so they just open fire on a vessel in the territorial waters of an ally.

What do you think would happen if a US flagged pleasure craft approached a UK ship in the Bahamas, Bermuda or the BVI and was blown of out the water?

The US armed forces.... Shoot first and have an inquiry later.

TERRORISTS at large.

.


One subject in which I have more expertise than anyone in these forums!

1/3 of the world's ships are registered as Panamanian or Liberian. Ship owners don't register their ships in their home countries due to insane regulations and costs - ie. to have a ship registered under a US flag, a vessel must be 1) built in the US (difficult as there are almost no dockyards in the US), 2) have a crew consisting of 100% US citizens as officers and 75% US citizens overall, 3) available for military use during times of war.

Other countries have similar regulations. Therefore the only three countries that any savvy shipping business registers its ships under are Panama, Liberia and the Marshall Islands.


Funny how Liberia is one of the three. Wonder how that came about. Thanks for the info though, I always wondered what tye of regulations and requirements there were to register a ship under a US flag.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheUrbanMyth



Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ttompatz wrote:
TheUrbanMyth wrote:

First of all it wasn't just approaching...it was on a collision course.

Secondly it was a security team aboard the vessel that opened fire...it makes no mention of their nationality...for all you know this security team were not even soldiers but private mercs a la Blackwater or even local operatives. Nor were they trying to kill them all...out of the six only one man was killed.

"security team" not "U.S Forces"
How about waiting to find out what happened and who shot BEFORE jumping to conclusions?


Only the Americans would even attempt to justify outright, extra judicial murder in the soverign territory of a DECLARED ALLY.



.



Not American. But I don't habitually view the world through a prism of anti-Americanism either.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ttompatz



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea

PostPosted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheUrbanMyth wrote:
Not American. But I don't habitually view the world through a prism of anti-Americanism either.


Most of the others don't commit heinous crimes in the sovereign territory of their allies (or even shoot at their allies for that matter) but if they do then they don't bother trying to justify it through spin doctoring the circumstances either.

It's not Americans that I hate, it is the American government and their outright hypocrisy (terrorists denouncing terrorism) and the US forces abroad (from the DEA to the military) with their shoot first and ask later attitude - OUTSIDE of combat zones (but I guess if you are American the whole planet outside of the US is a combat zone).

It truly is unfortunate that they have gone from the world's hero in 1946 to the top 10 world's worst enemies in 2012. My how the mighty have fallen.

Oh, and slightly back on topic... seems that the witnesses statements don't exactly match the US statements of facts either (but since they are not American they must be lying).

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International