[america4vr]

The White House echoed Cosgriff's characterization Tuesday, calling Iran's actions "reckless." "It was not normal behavior," said White House press secretary Dana Perino. "It's just another point of reference for people in the region who are concerned about the behavior of Iran."

The is the sort of unbalanced behavior the civilized world is so emphatically concerned about that gives pause to the nightmarish scenario of having these provocative maniacs with their itchy-trigger fingers on a nuclear weapon. Now, take this sort of maniacal behavior combine it with the intense religious zealotry whereby they believe provoking an apocalyptic event serves to expedite the arrival of their religious savior, their Messiah,the Twelfth Imam, and you've got yourself a very worrisome scenario, to say the least.

[Slapshot68]

Liberals will whine that Bush is pushing for war by having the warships there in the first place.

Of course, idiot liberals will miss that we’ve had warships in that area for long before Bush was President, protecting the oil shipping lanes.

[SuziQ]

Instant replay is a b*tch, isn’t it, Iran?

[anymouse]

Those Iranian boats should have been turned into flotsam as soon as they got within range, especially after they broadcast an attack message and dropped presumed improvised mines in the water near our ships. I’m sure their was some furious communications between the captains of those ships and their command, but they took a huge risk in letting those Iranian boats get as close as they did.

[Army Air Corps]

Ping

[garyhope]

I don’t understand why we just didn’t hose all those boats.

Just turn the Phalanx canons on them and make em, puff, disappear.

[Army Air Corps]

ping

[Bon mots]

The Pentagon said five small Iranian boats repeatedly "charged" three U.S. warships —

If that is the case,
...and those five small boats are not full of holes on the bottom of the sea...

...then I would have to concur with the judgement of the NY Post:

Iran:  1
US:    0

Next time, they should put them all on the sea floor.
Keep their eyes open for an ambush. The Iranians might have had 1000 rockets ready to be launched at one juicy target simultaneously. Maybe not even one of the ships involved in this feign. Maybe an aircraft carrier located someplace else.

This may have been a diversionary feign to attract fire at four dispensible targets and give them the pretext to try sink an aircraft carrier a hundred miles away.

[HereInTheHeartland]

I’m just a casual observer of this, but it seems like a bad thing that these punks were allowed to get this close.

Of course had we fired, it would have had many repercussions.
But our people and assets must be protected.

[Brad from Tennessee]

The Iranians are playing with fire. I imagine if a shaped explosive was attached or built into a cigarette boat and it rammed a ship at the correct angle for maximum effect it could do a lot of damage. However, this would provoke a U.S. retaliatory strike on Iran probably leading to an escalating conflict. Out of this crisis the U.S. could find justification for attacking all the strategic targets needed to set back Iran’s nuclear program, decapitate the government and military, and interdict Iranian support to terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[ASA Vet]

only asked them to identify themselves

Poor Rags having an awful hard time identifying US Warships?

[river rat]

This scenario is just one of the risks faced when we deploy forces in close proximity to “non-combative belligerent forces” who at any time can decide to become combative.

We are in THEIR neighborhood...
They have considerable ability to attack the fleet from shore.
If we were to have attacked these small boats, they would have been JUSTIFIED in attacking all U.S. Naval and Ground forces within the range of their surface to surface ordnance.

If we had to balls to follow the “natural escalation” of this scenario it could lead to the devastation of Iran and possible a few American, Israeli, and allied cities...

I regret to acknowledge we probably no longer hold a meaningful threat of mutually assured destruction over our Islamist adversaries.......they claim to WELCOME martyrdom...

Sadly - we will probably WAIT until Iran/Syria/North Korea deliver a truly horrific strike before we respond — if in fact we have the ability or will to do so....

Their control of OIL, may in the long term permit them to destroy our economy without firing a shot!
Our Leftist will forever fight against anything we do to become self sufficient in energy...

Grim isn’t it?
My vote? Is to strike first and VIOLENTLY at the very next provocation — no matter how slight and Inform the WORLD at the U.N. that this is the case.....

No more free shots, no more blown up barracks, ships or clubs. No more faked attacks on our ships.
Acts of belligerence will be regarded as ACTS OF WAR.

This time - unlike the Bay of Tonkin - we will have video and audio for the freaking “mouth breathers” of the world.

Perhaps then — these Islamists will implement a whole lot more control over their freaking lunatics - once their own homes, families, property, fortunes and asses may be lost as a consequence of their outlandish behavior...

[Gum Shoe]

The problem with all this is the location of the provocation. I’m sure the IRG was hoping we would engage the Iranian boats so their onshore Silkworm Batteries could open up on our ships. They picked the narrow straights for a reason. It may have been a good idea to not engage them at that time.

[A CA Guy]

It’s why theocracies are the worst, you get a cult like Islam where they convert or kill you then civility and world peace goes right out the window.