U.S. officials say rumour of Iran strike not true

Scotsman ^ | 1/18/2007

[Rutles4Ever]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. defence officials on Thursday said a rumoured Iranian missile strike on a U.S. naval vessel in the Gulf was not true.

"No such event took place," said one of the officials on condition of anonymity.

The bond market briefly pared losses on talk of possible military engagement between the United States and Iran, but turned back down after the U.S. Defence Department said the incident did not occur.

Tensions are high between Washington and Tehran. The United States accuses Iran of supporting insurgents in Iraq and charges that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons under the cover of a civilian energy program.

The Pentagon has increased the U.S. military presence in the Gulf in recent weeks, a move widely seen as a warning against provocative actions by Iran.

[Rutles4Ever]

Where there's smoke... Next few days should be interesting.

[edcoil]

rumors start here first, I have heard nothing.

[EagleUSA]

I think alot of "rumors" will fly to keep that madman in Iran awake at night. No matter how you slice the cake, the non-Islamofascist world cannot let that nut case get the bomb.

[1234]

WHERE were there rumors??!!

[T.Smith]

Doesn't Revelations say something about "wars and rumors of war"?

[Thermalseeker]

I think alot of "rumors" will fly to keep that madman in Iran awake at night.

We have a lot of ways to start "rumors" electronically and keep their air defense on high alert, ultimately wearing them down for the main event.....

[romanesq]

Yeah it does make mention. But as I've learned, the most dangerous time is when they start talking about peace.

Yup the US is most definitely not acting today. Next.

[maquiladora]

The only rumor like this that I heard was about 2 or 3 days ago, a rumor was going around in Iran that there had been a clash at sea but then a local Iranian commander came out and denied it.

[MeanWestTexan]

Hey, the Stennis Carrier group is steaming toward Iran with the same peaceful intentions of Iran's nuclear program.

[Psalm 73]

"U.S. defence officials on Thursday said a rumoured Iranian missile strike on a U.S. naval vessel...."

and we know the rumor is false - 'cause Iran still exists.....

[Rutles4Ever]

Don't know where the rumors were circulating, but it's quite unusual for the Pentagon (especially under condition of anonymity) to publicly address rumors of war. Now, obviously nothing happened, per se, but this is a pretty good indicator that tensions have been ratcheted up considerably in the Gulf. The Pentagon would not disavow such a statement unless there were plausible conditions to be concerned about enflaming.

[Grampa Dave]

If Tehran Knew!:

"In America, they lie for tactical reasons, stating over and over that military action against Iran is unlikely. However in Iran, out of ignorance, they reiterate that American military action against their country is impossible because the US is "unable" to do so!

We say and hope our analysis is wrong. A possible military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities is in the final stages. Unless a political miracle occurs that revives the halted dialog between Iran and the international community, Iran and its neighboring countries should not be surprised by a scenario that includes American military action. "

Just maybe, President Bush is purposely allowing the media and the left to spout their garbage in order to create the illusion that we are completely incapable of taking any action against Iran. It would come as a complete surprise if we did take action.

Iranian Map: Before our upcoming Victory:

Iranian Map: After our upcoming Victory:

Over the past week, the U.S. Navy has given orders to the U.S.S. John Stennis carrier battle group, based in Bremerton, WA, to steam toward the Persian Gulf, where it will join the U.S.S. Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Navy sources say the Pentagon is getting ready to announce the dispatch of a third carrier battle group – the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan – from San Diego. That will make three carrier battle groups in the region starting at around the end of January.

Oh, and along with them is the amphibious assault group led by the U.S.S. Boxer, which can land several thousand U.S. Marines to seize and destroy strategic sites near the coast at a moment’s notice. (Busheir? Bandar Abbas? Jask? The three Persian Gulf islands Iran seized from the UAE in the 1990s and has since fortified to harass Gulf shipping? Your pick).

A Quote from: The Dogs of War - Lessons of the 20th Century. By Victor Davis Hanson, (author most recently of Carnage and Culture: Landmark Battles in the Rise of Western Power):

“"I would not wish to fight the United States - either militarily, politically, or culturally. For every threat, our history teaches us that Americans offer not just a rejoinder, but the specter of a devastating answer of a magnitude almost inconceivable to those now chanting and threatening in the streets of the Middle East.

Do they have any idea of what sort of dangerous people we really are? Do they understand the history of the names of those ships now off their coasts, like the USS Peleliu or Enterprise, or the pedigree of the 82nd or 101st Airborne?"

Click The Pic To Donate

To others reading this: "If you are reading this and don't donate to Free Republic, you are probably a liberal or CINO Freeploader! Real conservatives don't mooch off of others. They pay their share! "