Quote :

"Because had he fired on the boats, bitches like you would've been screaming TONKIN TONKIN OMG AMERICAN IMPRERIALSTS BUSH IS THE DEVIL The guy warned them that they would be fired on if they didn't turn This is clearly provocative and Iran is asking for it. "

its amazing to me that the ships were not fired upon. the commanders showed incredible and borderline recklass restraint. if I were their superior officer, I would honestly be questioning their judgement (even though it turned out to be the right move).

1/9/2008 10:07:01 AM

^ absolutely. I may not have shown the same restraint. You don't wait to be a victim.

1/9/2008 10:07:56 AM

Ok, if you want to be an idiot and start WW3, then I am glad you aren't in the military. Firing on those boats would have shot oil prices up to over $110/barrel and sparked another conflict in an already unstable region of the world. I sincerely hope you are not that fucking retarded and have the ability to think of the consequences of your actions.

1/9/2008 10:13:41 AM

haha, but never mind them. Never mind the consequences of their actions.


We would have been justified firing on them and you would have blamed the trigger man, not the agressive speed boat saying "YOU'RE GOING TO BLOW UP IN MINUTES"


Nice.

1/9/2008 10:14:33 AM

But that's precisely what didn't happen. They clearly were not opening fire and technically they weren't doing anything wrong. I already said they were obviously the provocatives in this situation, but you cannot be so gung ho when dealing with a situation such as this. The people in charge made the correct decision because now we don't have to fight another war... yet.

1/9/2008 10:18:44 AM

So If I'm walking towards you with a knife drawn saying I WILL STAB YOU

you're not going to do anything?

1/9/2008 10:21:30 AM

Quote :

"So If I'm walking towards you with a knife drawn saying I WILL STAB YOU you're not going to do anything?"

That's a terrible analogy if you actually think about it, which you probably didn't.

1/9/2008 10:22:54 AM

A speed boat cruising towards you in an area ridden with suidicide bombers, radioing: "YOU WILL BLOW UP IN MINUTES"



Why is my analogy bad?

1/9/2008 10:24:54 AM

It's one thing to say "it's a terrible analogy" and walk away. It's another thing to say it's a terrible analogy and actually explain why.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 10:25 AM. Reason : -]

1/9/2008 10:25:09 AM

^It's a terrible analogy because he knows that he would have counteracted in any way he could've.

1/9/2008 10:30:07 AM

Ok... first of all, your analogy fails to take into account the repercussions of firing on the boats. If I shoot you in the face before you stab me, I go to the police station and file a report on how some dumbass with a knife tried to stab me. If they shoot at the boats, they touch off another war in the Middle East. Your analogy fails to take into account the scope of the situation.

Second, coming at me with a knife on the street is a far cry from a warship vs. a speedboat. It's a much more even fight. There's absolutely no good possible outcome from a huge boat firing on some speedboats like that.

A more proper analogy (but still one that fails to deal with the scope of the situation) would be like if a 3rd grader came up and said they were gonna beat your ass. What would you do? Take their words at face value and preemptively attack them? That would make you look like the hugest jerkoff in the world.

1/9/2008 10:31:58 AM

Quote :

"That's a terrible analogy if you actually think about it, which you probably didn't."

are you stoned now? thats a perfect analogy.

how else is a person to interpret a communicated threat? especially considering the situation. it is well known that suicide attacks are a primary weapon used against us. in open water, the Iranian navy would stand no chance against the US navy. therefore, it stands to reason that if they were to attack us, it would be in a manner like this...many small, fast, explosive-ridden boats with the intent to ram the hull of ship (like a torpedo).

1/9/2008 10:32:45 AM

There's no drawn knife in this case.

1/9/2008 10:33:16 AM

^^ Please read my first post which is the last post on page 2. I basically admitted everything you just said. kthxbye

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 10:34 AM. Reason : ]

1/9/2008 10:33:54 AM

Quote :

"Ok... first of all, your analogy fails to take into account the repercussions of firing on the boats. If I shoot you in the face before you stab me, I go to the police station and file a report on how some dumbass with a knife tried to stab me. If they shoot at the boats, they touch off another war in the Middle East. Your analogy fails to take into account the scope of the situation. Second, coming at me with a knife on the street is a far cry from a warship vs. a speedboat. It's a much more even fight. There's absolutely no good possible outcome from a huge boat firing on some speedboats like that. A more proper analogy (but still one that fails to deal with the scope of the situation) would be like if a 3rd grader came up and said they were gonna beat your ass. What would you do? Take their words at face value and preemptively attack them? That would make you look like the hugest jerkoff in the world. "

dude

1 - if a person threatens you with violence, it is perfectly legal to respond and defend yourself with with the same vigor. police officers have this same mandate. ie...someone threatens you with fists, you can defend yourself with a fist. if someone threatens your life, you can defend yourself by taking their life. nature 101.

2 - the outcome would be the complete destruction of the enemy's boat. a fair outcome if that enemy was threatening to destroy yours.

3 - if that third grader was carrying a potentially lethal weapon, what choice would you have to defend yourself? if the Iranian boat was a tugboat moving at 5 knots singing camp fire songs, your analogy would make sense...not speed boat with unknown weapons verbally threatening your 'explosion'

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 10:40 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2008 10:38:57 AM

I agree with Stoned, it was a terrible analogy. Shit like this just isn't simplified or dumbed down so easily.

1/9/2008 10:41:20 AM

it's our fault, bird.

^ sometimes things ARE that easy... a speed boat, in the middle of the middle east, where suicide bombs take place all the time... and the people are radioing in "WE'RE GOING TO DESTROY YOU."


Seriously, it doesn't take nuance to understand this situation, it's actually pretty cut and dry.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 10:42 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2008 10:41:44 AM

Dude

If the only way they can damage you is to run into you and they never get closer than 200 yards, where is the real threat?

1/9/2008 10:42:17 AM

see: USS Cole.


They destroyed that ship and killed 17 along with it.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 10:43 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2008 10:43:08 AM

^^ Lets play with this analogy. You're standing on the edge of some guys lawn . . . perhaps you're technically legal, but you're essentially taunting him and you've threatened him before with ahnilliation. He comes out to the street where you're standing and makes idle threats. He's 150lbs, you're 250lbs. You punch him in the face.

You're going to jail for assault.

Please though, do continue.

1/9/2008 10:44:43 AM

From IMStoned420:

Quote :

"But any ship, no matter how large could potentially be a threat to US warships. The USS Cole is relevant because it shows the damage that a small vessel can cause. It doesn't matter if the boat was in port or if it was in international waters, it's still a potential danger to our ships."

Quote :

"see: USS Cole. They destroyed that ship and killed 17 along with it."

please... do tell me more of this event which i have never before realized occurred.

^ I have no idea where you're going with that. It might be a snide remark towards me, or it might not. I really can't tell.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 10:48 AM. Reason : ]

1/9/2008 10:45:43 AM

Quote :

"perhaps you're technically legal, but you're essentially taunting him and you've threatened him before with ahnilliation"

LOL, we've threatened him with annihilation? Quite the opposite my friend, looks like you need to look at some quotes from ahmadinijad.

1/9/2008 10:50:14 AM

We've realistically threatened them. There isn't a whole lot they could realistically do to us to annihilate us.

BTW, I'm all for keeping Iran in check, but until they actually do something we have no legitimate reason for going after them. Americans these days are far too hawkish.

1/9/2008 10:53:45 AM

Oeuvre has the logical reasoning skills have a 10 yr old.

Quote :

"The Iranian boats made "threatening" moves toward the U.S. ships and in one case came within 200 yards of one of them, the U.S. officials said."

This skiff sure looks like a MAJOR threat to a fucking navy destroyer. If the Iranians wanted to damage a US warship I am sure they would have performed the operation a little more covertly then performing donuts in the middle of the ocean while yelling praise Allah and death to the American infidels.

Oeuvre Plz explain the net benefit of the US engaging in war with Iran?? Maybe a bloody conflict we can install a new puppet gov't like the Shah in the 1950's??? Hopefully this time though our installed leader will not oppress the iranian population to the point where a new Islamic Revolution breaks out.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 10:56 AM. Reason : a]

1/9/2008 10:54:18 AM

Quote :

"Oeuvre has the logical reasoning skills have a 10 yr old. "

meanwhile, you have the english speaking skills of said 10 year old.



Dude, the Cole was destroyed with a dingy and a motor.

1/9/2008 10:55:48 AM

Quote :

"Dude If the only way they can damage you is to run into you and they never get closer than 200 yards, where is the real threat? "

two questions...

1. how fast would a speed boat cover 200 yards? 8-10 seconds..at the most?
2. how close to the ship would would the boat have to get to cause damage? 20-40 yards...depending on what kind of explosives?

1/9/2008 10:56:25 AM

Quote :

"^^ Lets play with this analogy. You're standing on the edge of some guys lawn . . . perhaps you're technically legal, but you're essentially taunting him and you've threatened him before with ahnilliation. He comes out to the street where you're standing and makes idle threats. He's 150lbs, you're 250lbs. You punch him in the face. You're going to jail for assault. Please though, do continue. "

you're analogy, like stonedman's, doesnt work either because you are comparing a non-lethal situation (yours) to a lethal situation like this.

1/9/2008 10:57:57 AM

Quote :

"LOL, we've threatened him with annihilation? Quite the opposite my friend, looks like you need to look at some quotes from ahmadinijad."

no, not really. AJ has threatened Israel with destruction, not the United States. We've threatened them with the statement that "every option is on the table." The Iranians goal is to provoke us into striking first, so we look like the agressor.

Now, I'm not saying we should play all kissy face with the Iranians, but its easy to wave your dick around when its not your dick getting shot at.

I noticed you haven't posted in this thread: /message_topic.aspx?topic=508679 Its worth the read.

1/9/2008 10:57:59 AM

Quote :

"Oeuvre Plz explain the net benefit of the US engaging in war with Iran?? Maybe a bloody conflict we can install a new puppet gov't like the Shah in the 1950's??? Hopefully this time though our installed leader will not oppress the iranian population to the point where a new Islamic Revolution breaks out."

I in turn ask you what the benefit to Iran that engaging with a war with us. I don't think we're looking to fight Iran. I don't want a war with Iran. However, if it comes knocking on your door, you don't back down like a pussy either.

Had they gone through with what they said on the radio and they actually did bomb our ship? What should our response be?

This looks like a trial run to me...

1/9/2008 10:58:41 AM

Quote :

"Dude, the Cole was destroyed with a dingy and a motor."

Quote :

"This skiff sure looks like a MAJOR threat to a fucking navy destroyer. If the Iranians wanted to damage a US warship I am sure they would have performed the operation a little more covertly then performing donuts in the middle of the ocean while yelling praise Allah and death to the American infidels. "

and Sadaam helped out with 9/11 right?

If Iran is SUCH a threat to world peace and economic stability surely a bunch of our allies will be ready to invade also! I mean we saved the world by conquering the evil Iraq empire. I think its about time for Europe, Saudi Arabia, and Japan to start pulling their weight in removing the worlds demonic leaders.

1/9/2008 11:00:17 AM

Quote :

"This skiff sure looks like a MAJOR threat to a fucking navy destroyer. If the Iranians wanted to damage a US warship I am sure they would have performed the operation a little more covertly then performing donuts in the middle of the ocean while yelling praise Allah and death to the American infidels. Oeuvre Plz explain the net benefit of the US engaging in war with Iran?? Maybe a bloody conflict we can install a new puppet gov't like the Shah in the 1950's??? Hopefully this time though our installed leader will not oppress the iranian population to the point where a new Islamic Revolution breaks out."

that boat with 100 lbs of explosives in the nose could cause a ton of damage. who cares what preceeds it? donuts, etc... if your life was on the line and you were on one of those ships, I am positive your viewpoint would change.

do not misunderstand being defensive against a provoking aggressor with wishing for open war.

1/9/2008 11:00:29 AM

So you're denying the Cole was destroyed?

Quote :

"do not misunderstand being defensive against a provoking aggressor with wishing for open war."

bingo

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 11:01 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2008 11:01:02 AM

Quote :

"I don't want a war with Iran. However, if it comes knocking on your door, you don't back down like a pussy either."

You'll be volunteering then?

1/9/2008 11:01:37 AM

Quote :

"If you want to have good relations with the Iranian people in the future, you should acknowledge the right and the might of the Iranian people, and you should bow and surrender to the might of the Iranian people. If you do not accept this, the Iranian people will force you to bow and surrender. -Ahmadinejhad"

1/9/2008 11:03:04 AM

Quote :

"and Sadaam helped out with 9/11 right?"

what does Saddam and 9/11 have to do with this?

should US military policy be that we are always to absorb the first blow before defending ourselves? how many US soldiers or sailors must die or be injured before we should respond with force? thankfully, it did not come to that here and nothing happened...but can you at least concede that the Iranians were acting like idiots and ASKING to have their bodies ripped apart by .50 calibre anti-aircraft rounds?

it was only by the grace of God, Allah or whoever you believe in that people did not gruesome deaths on Sunday.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 11:06 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2008 11:05:14 AM

^^ You'll be volunteering then?

1/9/2008 11:05:20 AM

Quote :

"You'll be volunteering then?"

As in join the military? No. If I'm drafted? Of course I'll go.

1/9/2008 11:06:08 AM

Ok, so you'll support the draft then?

1/9/2008 11:06:32 AM

If the country needs bodies to defend itself, then yes. I think a draft should be the final straw because it disrupts a lot of families. The all-volunteer military is certainly the easier and better way to achieve the goals.

And I'm not sure why you're asking these questions as if to invalidate my points by making me a hypocrite?

Not working. If you're arguments aren't working, I suppose you would fall back to this.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 11:09 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2008 11:08:28 AM

It does, and yes you are a hypocrite. I'm sick of all these goddamned armchair warriors talking about, "we need to invade this" or "you don't show weakness here" when they have no intetions themselves of bearing any of the burden of "protecting the nation."

The fact of the fucking matter is that we could not possibly open up another front without the draft. Period. So every cocksucker who says we need to invade Iran next, needs to go down to his nearest Marine or Army recrutier (no fucking around with the Air Force or the Navy, god bless 'em but we need boots, not boats) and sign up or shut his goddamned mouth.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 11:23 AM. Reason : Unless you've served before, like hooksaw]

1/9/2008 11:08:52 AM

how?

and for the record, even if I said I would dodge the draft, it wouldn't INVALIDATE my point, it would invalidate ME. I can smoke a cigarette and say "you shouldn't smoke, it's bad for your health." The statement, in a vacuum is true. It invalidates the person, not the points... which is usually what people do when they can't come back in a substantive and intelligent way... they try to invalidate the person.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 11:11 AM. Reason : .]

1/9/2008 11:09:26 AM

Quote :

"^^ You'll be volunteering then? "

so is that the new response if someone believes in a course of military action? I am personally not in the military but I have three cousins that are. my brother was. they are/were volunteers. 2 of my cousins all recently 're-upped' and are on their way back to Iraq now. am I now allowed to have a militaristic opinion because I have blood in the theatre?

how about I agree that if the US were pulled into a major conflict and men were needed I would be the first to sign up. if that call was made by my President I would sign up. I do not advocate war against Iran. I do, however, believe their instability is a threat to the world. as is Pakistan's. there will always be a threat from somewhere. we will always be counted on to meet it (fairly or unfairly).

1/9/2008 11:12:05 AM

^ He can't win the argument... so he's trying to push you down to make himself look better. Don't even engage.

1/9/2008 11:13:10 AM

Quote :

"should US military policy be that we are always to absorb the first blow before defending ourselves? how many US soldiers or sailors must die or be injured before we should respond with force? thankfully, it did not come to that here and nothing happened...but can you at least concede that the Iranians were acting like idiots and ASKING to have their bodies ripped apart by .50 calibre anti-aircraft rounds?"

That's the challenge of performing the role we have placed ourselves in. When we go all over the world with our military and do basically whatever we please it gets people pissed off at you. If you attack first, even if it's a preemptive attack, it pisses even more people off. There's a huge difference in the perception of a war if you're attacked first than if you get attacked first. With where our standing is in the world at the moment, we have no room for error and if that means letting someone else be the aggressor then so be it. We put ourselves in a position to be attacked. But whoever does the attacking is gonna get pounded in the ass after they do it.

That said, they probably were asking for it. Luckily for everyone, nothing happened. But to say we showed reckless restraint is an oxymoron and hardly makes sense.

1/9/2008 11:13:59 AM

Quote :

"So you're denying the Cole was destroyed?"

every german must also being a jew hating nazi.

Oeuvre would probably drive to Canada and pussy out if a draft were instated to fight Iran.

If Iran made a genuine threat to the security of the US then I would have no problem with using appropriate force. However, what we are doing now is just poking a hornets nest. Watch Out you might get stung. If the Call of Duty came I would have no problem serving this country against a legitimate threat to my family, my personal interests, and American society. I do not see though an Iranian amphibious assault on the East Coast as a real concern. Any conflict we have with Iran will most likely be due to our provocation.

Quote :

"believe their instability is a threat to the world"

I would describe Iran's regime' using many Negative adjectives, however, unstable is not one of them.
Somalia, Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza Strip, Afghanistan, and the Congo are regions i would describe as unstable.

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 11:20 AM. Reason : a]

1/9/2008 11:17:40 AM

Quote :

" every german must also being a jew hating nazi. Oeuvre would probably drive to Canada and pussy out if a draft were instated to fight Iran. "

LOL is that all you have?

1/9/2008 11:19:35 AM

Quote :

"even if I said I would dodge the draft, it wouldn't INVALIDATE my point, it would invalidate ME."

Correct, but when (granted from anecdotal evidence, not an emperical study) it appears that the majority of people making decisions about engaging in armed combat with another nation have absolutely zero military experience (this has been covered ad naseum in relation to this administration) the impact of war is lost on the decision makers. It is telling that many of the retired senior general officers opposed the Iraq war while an administration almost completely devoid of military experience advocted it. As a matter of fact, the lone voice against the Iraq invasion (at first) was the former Chariman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff himself.

Quote :

"2 of my cousins all recently 're-upped' and are on their way back to Iraq now. am I now allowed to have a militaristic opinion because I have blood in the theatre? how about I agree that if the US were pulled into a major conflict and men were needed I would be the first to sign up. if that call was made by my President I would sign up."

Um, men are needed guy. So go ahead and sign up.

I'm not saying military service should be a litmus test for office, nor should it preclude someone from holding an opinion, but I can assure you that the ground forces of the United States military are stretched rather thin.

1/9/2008 11:20:05 AM

^^ well you have proven that logical debate is not possible with you.

everything with you is "USA #1 if we don't like you we will blow you up!!!!"

1/9/2008 11:21:18 AM

Quote :

"every german must also being a jew hating nazi. Oeuvre would probably drive to Canada and pussy out if a draft were instated to fight Iran. "

LOL, and I'M THE ONE who is engaging in illogical debate... delusional...

1/9/2008 11:23:11 AM

you have still yet to answer my question

Quote :

"If Iran is SUCH a threat to world peace and economic stability surely a bunch of our allies will be ready to invade also! I mean we saved the world by conquering the evil Iraq empire. I think its about time for Europe, Saudi Arabia, and Japan to start pulling their weight in removing the worlds demonic leaders."

Who gives a shit about the economy. Iran called us a poo poo head lets attack!

[Edited on January 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM. Reason : a]

1/9/2008 11:29:24 AM