According to the book "Missile Inbound", one theory of what happened is that the Iranians fed false intel to the Iraqis that a high value Iranian target was going to be in the area where the STARK was.
Posted on 07/26/2006 11:12:57 AM PDT by AmericanYankee
From Wikipedia:
Stark was deployed to the Middle East Force in 1984 and 1987. The ship was struck on May 17, 1987, by two Exocet antiship missiles fired from an Iraqi Mirage F1 fighter during the Iran-Iraq War. The fighter had taken off from Shaibah at 20:00 and had flown south into the Persian Gulf. Shortly after being routinely challenged by the frigate around 22:10, the fighter fired two Exocet missiles. The frigate did not detect the missiles, and both struck without warning. The first penetrated the port-side hull; it failed to detonate, but spewed flaming rocket fuel in its path. The second entered at almost the same point, and left a 3-by-4-meter gash—then exploded in crew quarters. Thirty-seven sailors were killed and twenty-one were injured.
This has been called the U.S. Navy's deadliest peacetime disaster before the gun turret explosion onboard the battleship Iowa.
Because the U.S. and Iraq were not at war at the time, the attack was likely not authorized. According to Iraqi officials, the pilot who attacked the Stark was not punished. Though American officials believed he had been executed, journalist Robert Fisk, in his book The Great War For Civilisation, quotes an ex-Iraqi Air Force commander who says the pilot is still alive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_(FFG-31)
I recall the Japanese attacking a U.S. gunboat before we entered World War II also...
Another reason, among many why the war against Iraq is justified. This wasnt even an "accident" either:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/fromthearchive/story/0,12269,1485811,00.html
The severe damage inflicted on the vessel by apparently only one Exocet missile, which punched a 10-15 foot hole in the hull just below the bridge superstructure, highlighted the dangers to US shipping of operating in Gulf waters without adequate air cover. The crew realised that the Iraqi fighter had locked onto the ship, but apparently did not act quickly enough to activate the Phalanx anti-aircraft device - the last line of defence against the Exocet.
The Stark's crew twice sought to warn off the Iraqis, but to no avail.
Iraq 's failure to come up with a proper explanation for the attack aroused deep anger in Washington and is certain to lead to a reassessment of the US's diplomatic relations with Baghdad.
(This was a reprint of the 1987 article)
"Worst of all during eight years of his presidency, Bill Clinton did nothing to respond to the attack on the USS Stark."
Appreciate the sentiment, but it occurred during the Reagan administration. I'm not sure if the first Bush admin responded either.
Yes, I understand that fact. However, in summer of 1987 Reagan was also being attacked about Iran-Contra and only had a year and a half remaining in his presidency. How could he attack Iraq, when he was being attacked daily by Tip O'Neil and the Dan Rather for Iran-Contra?
"I'm not sure if the first Bush admin responded either."
Was Desert Storm enough? I remember at the time how the attack on the USS Stark was believed to have been accidental. The attack apparently made us jittery, which led to the accidental downing of that Iran Air A-300 the following year.
The Germans sank the US distroyer USS Reuben James in Oct '41 while it was on convoy duty in the north Atlantic.
Reagan did nothing either. In fact, he defended Saddam Hussein's government when the attack occurred, stating, AND I QUOTE, "I've had a very fulsome apology from the President of Iraq...we've never considered them hostile at all."
To find the exact quote in order to confirm what I have said, go to your local government documents repository and get the Weekly Presidential Papers of Reagan for 1987. Or, here is an online document from the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library:
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1987/051987c.htm
full text:
Mr. Copper. Sir, do you have any other indications -- Saddam Husayn yesterday said that this was just an inadvertent incident and the Government thus far appears to have accepted that conclusion. Do you have any evidence as to exactly what prompted this attack, any further than has already been announced?
The President. No, and I've had a very fulsome apology from the President of Iraq. The whole thing -- the course of the plane coming down that coast was the course that's taken by Iraqi planes all the time, and we've never considered them hostile at all. They've never been in any way hostile. And this was at night, of course, so never had any visual sight of the target. They fired by radar, that missile. And this is why we're waiting for further investigation and to find out what the attitude was on the vessel. We can understand -- first of all, an AWACS plane of ours over Saudi Arabia had reported it as an Iraqi plane. And we didn't have any reason to ever suspect hostility from them, and we won't know until investigation is concluded whether this was an error of identification on the part of the pilot -- that, I'm sure, we'll hopefully find out from the Iraqis.
According to the book "Missile Inbound", one theory of what happened is that the Iranians fed false intel to the Iraqis that a high value Iranian target was going to be in the area where the STARK was.
Who was it that attacked the U S S Liberty and killed 22 American sailors in international waters ????????
"accidental" heh, heh, heh.
Desert Storm was a response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. It was not directly attributable to the Stark.
You might not want to go there.
a 1998 Freeper got whacked just last week for over doing his rant about the Liberty.
>>> I recall the Japanese attacking a U.S. gunboat <<<
The USS Panay. The USS Liberty of it's day.
PR-5 USS Panay
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/PR/PR-5_Panay.html
The Sinking of Panay, 12 December 1937
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/dafs/PR/pr5-sinking.html
The FReeper Foxhole Remembers Attack on the USS LIBERTY - Part I (6/8/1967)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-vetscor/977970/posts
The Sinking of Panay, 12 December 1937
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/dafs/PR/pr5-sinking.html
"Two Japans": Japanese Expressions of Sympathy and Regret in the Wake of the Panay Incident
http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/summer_2001_two_japans_1.html
PR-5 USS Panay
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/PR/PR-5_Panay.html
New Link:
"Two Japans": Japanese Expressions of Sympathy and Regret in the Wake of the Panay Incident
http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2001/summer/two-japans-1.html
Reagan did not defend Iraq after the U.S.S. Stark incident because of Iran/Contra. This is a giant stretch and a denying of simple reality.
The mass graves of Saddam Hussein date to the Iran/Iraq war. Though he committed crimes after 1988 (e.g. the invasion of Kuwait and the brutal suppression of the Kurdish uprising after Desert Storm), the overwhelming majority of Saddam's crimes came during the Reagan-early Bush years.
FOR INSTANCE:
Halajba: March 1988
Iran-Iraq War and use of chemical weapons: 1983-1988
Anfal Campaign: 1987-1988
Invasion of Kuwait: August 2, 1990
Suppression of Kurdish/Shiite uprising: 1991
Killing of political opponents: 1979-onward
Ethnic cleansing of non-Arabs and Marsh Arabs: earlier 1980s onward.
It is a positive denial of recent history to claim that "Saddam by 1987 had NOT began to pile-up the bodies for his mass graves as he did all through the 1990's while who know who was president." This is so far from the truth it would be laughable if it was not for the seriousness of these grave crimes. In fact, the CURRENT trial of Saddam Hussein relates DIRECTLY to his crimes of the 1980s. There are tweleve pending charges: 1. Dujail 2. Anfal Campaign 3. Halabja 4. Kuwait Invasion 5. Shiite uprising 6. Kurdish Uprising 7. Faylee Kurds ethnic cleansing 8. Najaf Uprising 9. Draining of marshes/ethnic cleansing of Marsh People. 10. Disappearance of 3,000 of the Barzani Tribe 11. Killing of Shiite religious leaders 12. Political executions.
Of the 12, only three occurred when "you know who" was president: political executions, the draining of the marshes, and Najaf uprising.
The simple, undeniable fact is that Saddam Hussein received U.S. support from his rise to power in 1979 until his invasion of Kuwait in 1990. And during this period, he committed many crimes against humanity.
http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/2000/09/iraq-000918.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3320293.stm
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2005/saddam.trial/
What should you do when two of your enemies are fighting?
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.