Location of Farsi Island (red pointer). Iranian territory out in the middle of the gulf.
Posted on 01/19/2016 11:14:51 AM PST by Retain Mike
The following preliminary timeline of the events surrounding the Iranian detainment of 10 U.S. Navy Sailors from January 12-13, 2016, is based upon multiple operational reports received by U.S. Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT) in the first 24-48 hours after the incident. A Navy command investigation initiated on Jan. 14, will provide a more complete accounting of events.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.usni.org ...
My post did not come off right. As a comment I ment to say I did not see a problem yet with the letter below I sent.
Thinking of my own time leading small boat detachments, why were they there initially? Was no one paying attention? They now even have GPS. There were two boats, so one could have towed the other. Back in my Old Navy even if I was leading LCM-8 landing craft without radar, I would have had a chart and noted danger bearings. Maybe they should have apologized, but I doubt it?
Could it be the Iranians have a different definition of territorial waters to which they want this Administration and our Navy to subscribe? That seems more likely.
Finally how could the Navy lose track of these boats? Why were the crews not initiating contact? During an amphibious exercise my wave of assault boats were swallowed by a fog. When I saw that fog coming I made sure the flag ship could vector us back to our LPD.
This event with directs my memory back to the Cold War involving China as well as the Soviet Union. Navy ships stationed in Yokosuka Japan â€patrolled†through the Taiwan Straits as they transited to Vietnam. Our captain told us that if any Chinese ship tried to intercept us we would fight. The prospect was not that exciting because our heaviest armament were three dual 3in50cal anti-aircraft mounts. But the Pueblo incident was on everyone’s mind and that was going to be our response.
As far as I am concerned everything we have been told by this Administration and their Navy acolytes is a lie.
Since obama and all of his administration can’t possibly take responsibility for anything, unless it benefits them, I wonder how long it will take the obama administration to go after that Lt. who was made to apologize to the Iranians for supposedly straying into Iranian waters.
Thoughts on this?
Perhaps the sailor who apologized knew this capture was going to happen even before departure? Perhaps he was the only one who knew.
Mission approved by 0dunga:
1) Embarrass and humiliate the United States military
2) Show Iran as 'compassionate' for quickly releasing our sailors, THUS MAKING THE $150 BILLION PAYMENT NOT SUCH A BAD THING BECAUSE IRAN IS 'NICE TO US'
3) Portray U.S. SUBMISSION TO IRAN BECAUSE THEY ARE NOW DOMINANT OVER OUR U.S. MILITARY
Do we not track our boats while they are underway? 0923 - 1410 hrs - what was base ops doing?
This administration can NEVER tell the truth, the lie is their nature and their essence.
All that force - within minutes of last know position. And they couldn't find them?
NAVCENT’s initial operational reports showed that while in transit from Kuwait to Bahrain the RCBs deviated from their planned course on their way to the refueling. The command investigation will determine what caused the change in course and why the RCBs entered into Iranian territorial waters in the vicinity of Farsi Island.
No GPS? No compass? All failed on TWO boats? How about just head WEST as FAST as possible?
At some point one RCB had indications of a mechanical issue in a diesel engine which caused the crews to stop the RCBs and begin troubleshooting. As the RCBs travel together, the second RCB also stopped. This stop occurred in Iranian territorial waters, although it’s not clear the crew was aware of their exact location. While the RCBs were stopped and the crew was attempting to evaluate the mechanical issue, Iranian boats approached the vessels.
TWO BOATS. One will tow the other.
Based upon initial operational reports, the first boats on scene were two small craft with armed personnel on board. Soon after, two more Iranian military vessels arrived on scene also with armed personnel on board.
We have guns too. They mean "stay the f*ck away"
Initial operational reports indicate there was a verbal exchange between the Sailors and the Iranians but no exchange of gun fire. Armed Iranian military personnel then boarded the RCBs, while other Iranian personnel aboard the Iranian vessels conducted armed over-watch of the boats with mounted machine guns.
Out guys just surrendered without a fight? Against the US Military Code of Conduct? They all surrendered? No one relieved the officer the charge for being a coward? Are these folks now going to a court-martial?
Each RCB-90 has two diesel with water jet propulsion...so reduced speed but not dead in the water.
A steaming pile of horse hockey.
We have guns too.
You are right, and based on the photos that have been released and the many videos available on Youtube of what may be the very same boats, the US boats had overwhelming fire superiority. Does anybody really think a couple of guys in a plastic boat with AK-47s and one mounted 7.62mm machine gun would have engaged a US boat with multiple 50 caliber machine guns, M-240 machine guns, and a Dillon 7.62mm gatling gun? In the video below the boat has a remotely controlled 50 caliber machine gun with its associated targeting system. I'd rather not speculate about its performance, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is more accurate than a manually aimed gun. (Not all of the RCP boats are equipped with that gun system.)
Take a look at the live fire drill here
Interestingly, in the DOD released videos of these boats training near Bahrain, the crew also carry rifles, so even in a close quarters battle they have an extra weapon.
Someday we'll learn the real story.
And where exactly were they going to refuel? No one has said so far. Location will give the course they should have been traveling - assuming that they were not fully fueled to begin with and it is all the lie it seems.
Good point - supposedly the Harry Truman was about 45 miles away. That means one of the RCP boats could have arrived alongside the Harry Truman in about an hour. As could any equally fast boat. Does it really make sense that the crews on board the Harry Truman and the rest of the carrier battle group aren't tracking every boat within close range?
I'll bet they can scramble planes and mount a defense pretty quickly, but I would think they would want to know what boats were around them. And I suspect their airborne radar surveillance could cover the area.
Good point. That identifies a specific Navy ship which should have been tracking them.
Ping
The US is being played.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.