Breaking: Iran detains U.S navy soldiers entering Iranian territorial waters

[Serpentine]

Mate, let me share my opinion on that matter.

You know Syria downed our jet 2012 for briefly violating Syrian airspace. You know, you normally warn the tresspasser, send your jets to intercept and escort the violator out of your airspace. So, when these guys downed our Jet, we changed our RoE regarding Syrian border only. After that we shot 1 Syrian Helicopter and Jet for trespassing into our territory.

Things got complicated when Russians joined the war...You know some Russian Jets removed their country flag from their Jets.

So, you have a Fighter jet closing into your airspace, your rules of engagement is to bring down Syrian jets that trespasses into your airspace... you can't identify the incoming jets nationality....It can be Syrian or Russian...what to do ?

To remind you, months ago a Russian reconnaissance aircraft breached our space in the Black Sea cost....we didn't shoot it down, just send two F-16s to intercept and escorted it out of our airspace.

And i don't understand you did we escalated things or Russians escalated by violating our airspace for 3 times despite protests and warnings ?

What would you suggest, to let Russians violate our airspace once a week, and fill complaint about it, every time ?

There are still better ways. You could simply fire warning shots, lock on targets continuously to make them notice you. How many times do you see a country shooting down a jet for violating their airspace for 10 seconds? You see, if Turkey was not actively sending armed men and weapons to Syria, it would still be justifiable, but this, well at least I can't personally accept that.

To make it clear, it's not because of nationality of downed jet. Even if it was an American jet, I would still say it was not appropriate. Even if my own country did this, I mean shooting down a plane violating our airspace for 10 seconds (a plane that we all know doesn't have hostile intentions and is conducting air raids near border just on the other side), I would still say this same thing.

During invasion of Iraq, U.S jets did violate our airspace few times. During 90s, Turkish jets violated our airspace dozens of times.

Now Syrian airspace seems to be a no-go for Turkish jets, as Russia is desperately waiting to find a proper excuse to shoot down your jets and this directly affects Erdogan's ambitions regarding Syria (which is good imo), but still, this act also harmed Turkey's interest directly. It didn't benefit anyone, perhaps except for Russia so it can have an excuse to close Syrian airspace to Turkish jets.

 

[Cyrus the Great]

Iranians are playing with fire. They tend to forget about Operation Praying Mantis.

While territorial violation is not justifiable, one can address the matter more amicably. You don't mess with big powers and give them the impetus to build a case against you in the long run.

That is differences between you and Iran. That makes Iran long stand for 3000 years.

 

[LeGenD]

That is the differences between you and Iran.

You think that my country compromises on the matters of its national security? It doesn't.

However, my country calculates its options carefully. Nothing wrong with this.

When US forces attacked our military positions in Salala, Pakistan demanded US to vacate Shamsi airbase within 24 hours and closed the southern supply route for 6 months. This route was opened after a formal apology.

However, Pakistan is not eager to give US a pretext to build a case against it and use it at some point in the future. Sorry, we are not eager to experience an Operation Praying Mantis when we have India to keep in check.

We don't feel the need to make a big issue of an incident that can be easily resolved.

You guys think short-term, not long-term. And this is the reason why you have experienced sanctions for such a long duration. Be glad that your country have huge oil reserves that sustained your economy for so long.

Some of the countries around Iran followed your advise then got messy even without US invasion. Look around and stop lecturing others.

Which countries? Examples?

 

[Metanoia]

Such is Iran's greatness.

Ahem...humbleness perhaps?

 

[like_a_boss]

must watch @gambit @anon45

 

[Falcon29]

That is why as soon as they saw Iranian military they raised their hands in surrender and cried: "Take us, take us, take us, please, we submit to you, oh great warriors of the sea".
.

lolwut

 

[anon45]

If you go by that definition than all the armies are professionals because "relating to a job that requires special education, training, or skill"

Agreed, which is why i'm asking for your definition of a 'professional' military. There is in fact no agreed upon definition, so calling them unprofessional, is meaningless rhetoric.


From the US to UK to Russia to China to India to Pakistan to Iran, all the militaries are professional. To say otherwise is laughable. Words mean things.

That is not to say all soldiers act professionally. Which is an issue in any military.

The exception are conscript soldiers, who would not be considered professional by definition. In that respect part of Russia's military is in fact unprofessional.


The US military is one of the most experienced, and relatively well trained militaries
though.

 

[Daneshmand]

So how do you define a professional military?

Here is exposition on what makes a military professional according to / from the USMC

What Is a Military Professional? | Marine Corps Association

To issue an official apology would ultimately be up to the commander in Chief and/or the department of state. Its a real stretch to go from the president and/or diplomats not issuing an apology to the military being unprofessional.

Also were those medals awarded for that incident? If not then I would say its unrelated.

You are a joker trying to be funny here. Being professional in context of a military is not a difficult concept to understand. According to international law the first and foremost requirement of such a military is to be fighting for either ideological reasons or for patriotic reasons of its own country.

US military is none of these. US military fights for other nations eg. Saudi Arabia or Israel, making it officially a mercenary. I do not see for example US has ideological or patriotic bonds with Saudi Arabia, but US did go to war on their behalf and still does. For example in this latest incident your sailors were there to protect the Bahrain dictatorship. What patriotic or ideological bonds exist between US military and Bahrain which would satisfy international law defining the professional military from mercenaries?

US military kills innocents whether when it is conducting regime changes in South America or when it is doing self reported "humanitarian" missions. Given the choice between civilians and a legitimate target, the US military always chooses the civilian. The horrendous massacres from Vietnam to Iraq and systematic promotion of torture of detainees have been the hallmark of US military. Since we are on a Pakistanis forum, do you think this is how a professional military acts by shooting at its own ally in "war on terror"? 2011 NATO attack in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You are really hilarious. You should really read up on the history of US military. It is not really a patriotic organization. It is just a gigantic killing machine for rent by the highest bidder whether they be Saudis, or MIC or whoever else. There is only one exception here, in which US military has acted with professionalism and has tried its extra best to avoid "accidents". But as they say, exceptions prove the rule. That exception was US military "engagement" with ISIS. As you know in other places US military given the choice between bombing civilians / hospitals / women shelters and a legitimate target, always chooses the former.

But in case of ISIS, US military was so soft hearted that they never bombed ISIS without first informing ISIS, that they should vacate that patch of desert. In fact when ISIS got angry because of so much love, support and protection it was receiving from US as Syrian military had started to called them American puppets, so they refused to listen to American military radio channels warning them where bombs will fall at exactly what time of what strength. So US military to avoid any kind of accident, the ISIS boys might get themselves into, started to drop pamphlets warning of the desert bombing schedule of the next month. A whole jungle had to be cut down in order to print so much paper for US military to drop on ISIS, warning them to stay safe.

Professional army? My azzz!

 

[anon45]

You are a joker trying to be funny here. Being professional in context of a military is not a difficult concept to understand. According to international law the first and foremost requirement of such a military is to be fighting for either ideological reasons or for patriotic reasons of its own country.

Ok, your definition of a professional army is one that is " fighting for either ideological reasons or for patriotic reasons of its own country."

According to that definition the US military is professional as it is subordinate to a commander and chief who lays out objectives he/she views as within the national interest of the US. It is the job of the US military to achieve them.

There can be no more patriotic reason than working to achieve what is in the national interest, so under that definition the US military is in fact professional.

US military is none of these. US military fights for other nations eg. Saudi Arabia or Israel, making it officially a mercenary. I do not see for example US has ideological or patriotic bonds with Saudi Arabia, but US did go to war on their behalf and still does. For example in this latest incident your sailors were there to protect the Bahrain dictatorship. What patriotic or ideological bonds exist between US military and Bahrain which would satisfy international law defining the professional military from mercenaries?

Short answer is national interest. The globe and the US Government operate on more these days than ideology, it isn't the Cold War anymore, and even then realpolitik played a role.

The US military is beholden to the government of the United States of America, so they are by definition not mercenaries. They have employed Mercenaries from PMC's but they themselves are not.

US military kills innocents whether when it is conducting regime changes in South America or when it is doing self reported "humanitarian" missions. Given the choice between civilians and a legitimate target, the US military always chooses the civilian. The horrendous massacres from Vietnam to Iraq and systematic promotion of torture of detainees have been the hallmark of US military. Since we are on a Pakistanis forum, do you think this is how a professional military acts by shooting at its own ally in "war on terror"? 2011 NATO attack in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All combat operations operating in the vicinity of civilians will inevitably have civilian casualties, it is inevitable, you give no basis for accusing the US military of prioritizing civilian targets over 'military' targets. Vietnam was still during the time of mass conscription so the military was not totally a professional military then as it had a large amount of conscripts,
and given it has no relation to the professionalism of the US military today I have no desire to take a look at the incidents further. As for Iraq you give no example of deliberate massacres of Iraqi civilians that did not receive consequences.

Regarding the 2011 incident, of course any military, professional or not, will fire back when fired upon.

You are really hilarious. You should really read up on the history of US military. It is not really a patriotic organization. It is just a gigantic killing machine for rent by the highest bidder whether they be Saudis, or MIC or whoever else. There is only one exception here, in which US military has acted with professionalism and has tried its extra best to avoid "accidents". But as they say, exceptions prove the rule. That exception was US military "engagement" with ISIS. As you know in other places US military given the choice between bombing civilians / hospitals / women shelters and a legitimate target, always chooses the former.

Just a rehash of the same failed or unproven statements. Other post about ISIS is irrelevant to the topic.

Professional army? My azzz!

According to YOUR definition of Professionalsm, the USN, USAF, US Army, and USMC are in fact professional.

So far disappointed in the quality of post coming from an 'analyst'

 

[jhungary]

Well, you guys are hard to please eh?

When US got into this kind of jam, if the US government play hardball, then you lot will say US is a bully, and when US play normal, and you lot will say US is being humiliated.

American maybe bad, it's definitely not stupid, if they were to intentionally violate Iranian border just to make a scene, would you think they will use two RCB or RIBs? I mean, what 10 men can do?

Border excursion is quite often, I don't understand why people here will treat it like it's something never seen before. Mistake of all kind could happened, more than once I have to go to Pakistan and pick up Special Force team that stray into Pakistan and they were all disarmed and searched and sometime bounded, but then they were hand over and no harm no foul, it's not like they go into Pakistan to kill innocent Pakistani.

Same thing happened here, if the US were to enter Iranian Border illegally to carry out some assassination mission, Iranian can execute those people, the fact is, it doesn't, and no one will bring woman to those kind of mission anyway, hence we can all see Iran satisfied with whatever reason US gave them for the incursion, and when they were Ok with it, why are we still talking about it?

 

[jack 86000]

انتشار بخش دوم تصاویر دستگیری تفنگداران دریایی امریکایی

 

[Arminkh]

Has anyone seen the full video?

The soldiers were being served khoreshteh morgh with noon lavash and doogh where's the cheloh kabab

Yeah I just saw it last night. I think it was khoreshte bademjan ya kadoo.

Wasn't navigation system, engine broke down on one of the boats and it drifted/ the currents swept it to the location it was found at. They were probably attempting to fix it and didn't leave it because they didn't want to explain to their superiors that they simply left an expensive piece of equipment.

Probably. I didn't know they were Swedish made. But they ended up in the worst place possible. Farsi Island is simply a piece of rock which is used as a major naval base.

 

[Daneshmand]

So much so for all this talk of professionalism: Former Navy commander: Iran capture 'a severe failure' - CNNPolitics.com

The capture of two navy ships in Iranian territorial waters represented "a severe failure by somebody," according to a former Navy commander once stationed in Bahrain. The retired officer, Chris Harmer, slammed the Navy's actions leading up to the ships' capture, saying, "Either the naval leadership put these sailors in an impossible situation or the sailors are professionally incompetent."

 

[Arminkh]

Actually...You are wrong.

Of course, there are international laws, but BEFORE you exercise the laws, it is expected that you exercise courtesies, especially professional courtesies and even more so since this is on the seas where navigation and travel are much more difficult than on land.

If it is clear that the trespassers have no ill intentions and that they proved that the violation was accidental, professional courtesies between seamen, especially military seamen, asks that you render assistance, as best you can, and allow or even that you escort the trespassers out of your territorial waters.

Yes...Iran have the right to investigate their vessel but what Iran did was outright humiliation for the US in general and to the sailors in particular.

Depends on the location where it happens. If it was near a non significant village, I'm sure Iran navy wouldn't waste the fuel to even get to them and would probably suffice with with a radio warning. But they were close to Farsi Island which is a major naval base. In that case, every sound military authority would interrogate the intruders to make sure it was not a kind of covert mission under an equipment failure cover.

I'm sure US would also do the same if you found two boats with 10 Iranian special forces in it near US naval base in Pearl Harbor.

 

[scythian500]

Is an American talking about courtesies? A country that bombs without abandon, sanctions, arrests and tortures foreigners, and is constantly involved with Regime changes is talking about courtesies?? We have arrested sailors, investigated, and released promptly.



You guys shot down a plane, we just arrested and released.

No one was critisizing Turkey for caring about its borders. It was the shooting down act that seemed unnecessary provocative.



USA shot down an Iranian passenger flight. Is that professional? No other major army has ever had such an "accident". Whether it was an accident or not, it definitely shows that the army isn't professional, correct? That want CIA, it was Pentagon, correct?

Also, the reaction after it wasn't professional. Is it a sign of professional NOT to apologize for such incident? Is it professional to give a medal to the person in responsible for that " accident"?

Those who talk about courtesies as a good choice despite of the absolute right of Iran to exercise its right to defend its territories be it in sea or sky or ground... Don't know that right after the seizure and detention of American soldiers Yesterday, another American aircraft carrier along side another US Navy ship and a French aircraft carrier started so "Unprofessionally" as stated by commander Fadavi by shooting alarm shots by their heavy canon in order to intimidate Iranians!! They either don't know what is the culture of Iranians or don't know the culture of Iranians and specially her military soldiers... Then Iran told those carriers to stop acting unprofessional and let the things pass its usual procedure... Then after US insist on "unprofessional" threathening, Iran locked a few tens of missiles on them, forcing outsider intruders to back off...

I hope soon we all witness how Americans act when they face a whole navy a few miles off the Manhatan Island (while still in international waters!!), and how they will act if Iranian battle ships gain into their territorial waters... I can predict a very childish yet "truly Unprofessional" action by American side...

Those who list into American troops must be given a booklet explaining in it how Iranians are not Arabs or other Middle Easterns who prefer a safe master to a risky independence...

Iranians are playing with fire. They tend to forget about Operation Praying Mantis.

While territorial violation is not justifiable, one can address the matter more amicably. You don't mess with big powers and give them the impetus to build a case against you in the long run.

A typical self-eating Muslim!! Islam does not need enemies when has your type which is the majority unfortunately...

btw, those days are long gone baby... Iran back then could not even produce screws... Back then Iran was a barely survived nation out of a devastating (militarily) revolution and at the end of a even more devastating 8 year full scale war...

Sometime I ask myself... Do some of people here really don't know the difference or they prefer to be seen like one!

When US forces attacked our military positions in Salala, Pakistan demanded US to vacate Shamsi airbase within 24 hours and closed the southern supply route for 6 months. This route was opened after a formal apology.

Yes, exactly like when American were playing with their drones killing hundreds of Pakistani citizens on a daily base and then after a long time of denial and silence, Pakistan started to convict these illegal bombardments of Pakistani soil and citizens and then what happened to those flights after the conviction? Guess what it continued as long as US felt it is necessary not counting the whole nuke-capable Pakistani army and its government