Iranian speed boats play paddy-cake with the U.S. Navy
(The vaunted Iranian Navy in action!)
Sounds like a good way to get some virgins…
WASHINGTON (AP) - An Iranian fleet of high-speed boats charged at and threatened to blow up a three-ship U.S. Navy convoy passing near Iranian waters, then vanished as the American ship commanders were preparing to open fire, the top U.S. Navy commander in the area said Monday.
No shots were fired and an Iranian official in Tehran said the incident amounted to “something normal.”
Well, at least the Iranians aren’t denying it.
The three U.S. warships - cruiser USS Port Royal, destroyer USS Hopper and frigate USS Ingraham - were headed into the Persian Gulf through the Straits of Hormuz on what the U.S. Navy called a routine passage inside international waters when they were approached by five small high-speed vessels believed to be from Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy.The Iranians “maneuvered aggressively” in the direction of the U.S. ships, said Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, the commander of U.S. 5th Fleet, which patrols the Gulf and is based at nearby Bahrain. The U.S. ship commanders took a series of steps toward firing on the boats, which approached to within 500 yards, but the Iranians suddenly fled back toward their shore, Cosgriff said.
Really, any attempt by these speed boats to shoot at U.S. Navy vessels would have resulted in some ass-whupin’. Yeah, they might have been able to cause some damage, but the hell that would been unleashed on their heads would have been their suicide. Of course, that may be what they want.
Another possibility is that this was an intentional provocation to help Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Via Kamangir, Iranian blogger Haji Washington thinks that’s the case. I don’t know if I agree, as it seems like a bit of a stretch.
If the US is telling the truth and if IRGC vessels have gotten close to the American ships, without any legitimate reason, I would argue that the IRGC likes to see Hillary Clinton as the next president of the united states of America. But why do I say so?
When Clinton voted in the senate for the recognition of the IRGC as a terrorist organization, Obama criticized her for helping those who like to start the war. The same criticism was made by Edwards and had a great impact on increasing the popularity of Obama against Clinton,. Now that Obama has won Iowa and is leading with his 39% popularity, as opposed to Clinton’s 29%, and is going to win in New Hampshire on Thursday, this report can be the winning card for Clinton.
Of course, the moonbats at Democratic Underground are trying to call this an American provocation and a parallel to the Gulf of Tonkin. It’s always blame America first with those guys.
Category :
Iran 
Tags :
Gulf of Tonkin, Hillary Clinton, Iran, Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Kamangir, U.S. Navy, United States 
Similar Posts:
- What happened to the vaunted British navy?
- 60% of Democrats say campaigning should continue
- Iranians show off their new anti-aircraft missile - based on 1960’s technology
- Traitor!
- U.S. soldiers acknowledge killing Iranian in firefight
- Michael Moore favors John Edwards for president
- You stay classy, Randi!
- Missing Slick Willie
- U.S. planning long committment to Iraq - left fumes
- Female sailor the weak link?
My friend,
What I said about the boats and Hillary wasn’t serious. It seems the sarcasm was lost in translation.
By the way, I loved it when I read your feeling about how you felt about this is a ”good way to catch a few virgins”.
keep up with the good work.
Yeah, I thought it was a bit much. Thanks for the comment.
“the moonbats at Democratic Underground“…
Well suprise! Suprise! Hardly the first time these seditious parasites have been wrong…
This first is a bit of a read but worth the time: Rumsfeld’s victory: a retrospective look at our de facto flytrap strategy in Iraq
Why did the Iraqis turn against al Qaeda and Iran? Because al Qaeda and Iran were murdering them en masse. And why were al Qaeda and Iran murdering Iraqis en masse? Because Defense Secretary Rumfeld’s small-footprint force-protection strategy meant that they couldn’t attack American troops without getting immediately annihilated.
In order to get the “continuing violence” that their allies in the Western media could use to create American defeat on the home front, the Saudi and Iranian proxy warriors in Iraq had no choice but to wage war on the Iraqi people. (there is more)
Then there is this to consider also: Iraqi MP Iyad Jamal Al-Din Criticizes the Concept of an Islamic State and Says Iraqis Should Be Grateful to the US for Liberating Iraq