Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Wednesday, 9th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

US warning to Iran after threat to warships in Gulf



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 08 January 2008
THE White House issued a warning to Iran last night after dramatic reports that Iranian Revolutionary Guard speedboats threatened US warships in Strait of Hormuz on the eve of George Bush's tour of the Middle East.
The Iranians had radioed the American vessels warning an attack was imminent, a Pentagon official said.

"I'm coming at you and will blow you up in a couple of minutes," he quoted the radio transmission as saying.

American forces were on the o
n the verge of firing in self- defence when the five Iranian boats, which came within 200 metres of USS Port Royal, a navy cruiser, a destroyer and a frigate, turned and sped off, dropping unidentified objects in the water as they left, the officials said.

"It is the most serious provocation of this sort that we've seen yet," one said.

Reports of the 20-minute incident, which took place in international waters early on Sunday morning, emerged as President Bush prepared to leave for a six-day visit to the Middle East today.

"We urge the Iranians to refrain from such provocative actions that could lead to a dangerous situation in the future," Gordon Johndroe, the National Security Council spokesman, said.

The Pentagon described the Iranian actions as "careless, reckless and potentially hostile". Bryan Whitman, a spokesman, said: "This is clearly something that deserves an explanation."

But Tehran promptly played down the confrontation. "This is an ordinary occurrence which happens every now and then for both sides," Mohammad Ali Hosseini, the foreign ministry spokesman, said.

The incident surprised many Iran experts who said both Washington and Tehran had made recent efforts to "de- escalate" their confrontation.

One sceptical analyst said: "Have you ever heard of a suicide bomber saying 'hey, I'm going to blow myself up right now?'"

Washington will want to determine whether the action was the result of overzealous Revolutionary Guards acting on their own or whether it was an intended provocation planned in Tehran.

The second scenario would suggest Tehran was underlining its opposition to Mr Bush's visit.

His rare trip to the region is aimed at bolstering Arab support against Iran's nuclear programme as well as shoring up troubled peace moves between the Israelis and Palestinians. The narrow Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Persian Gulf is one of the world's most sensitive strategic locations, with at least a fifth of the world's crude oil supply passing through it.

Iranian commanders have repeatedly warned that if their country is attacked by the US, blocking the Strait's narrow choke-point to the Persian Gulf would be one of several means of retaliation. Oil prices rose some 30 cents to more than $98 a barrel after news of the incident before slipping back.

Iranian analysts urged caution, saying there had been public attempts by Tehran and Washington recently to ease tensions. The US military had also misread Iranian radio communications in the past, most notably in 1988 when the USS Vincennes mistakenly shot down an Iranian civilian airliner over the Strait of Hormuz, killing all 290 passengers and crew.

"I'd take this with a very large grain of salt until we get more details … who knows, this could be a turning point or it could be an isolated incident with no significance at all," Professor Gary Sick, an Iran specialist at University of Columbia, New York, said.

"This is contrary to all the positive signals we've seen in recent weeks from both sides. This strikes me really as an aberration," Prof Sick, who served on the National Security Council under Presidents Ford, Carter, and Reagan, told The Scotsman.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, last week said that relations with the US could be restored. Some believe he was sending a message to US presidential candidates.

HARDWARE LINED UP ON NEW FRONT LINE

THE largest of the American vessels involved in the confrontation with the Iranian boats was the USS Port Royal, a Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruiser.

The Port Royal is an extremely advanced ship, carrying the Aegis weapon control and radar system.

It was accompanied by the USS Hopper, a guided missile destroyer, another modern, advanced warship.

Both vessels carry a variety of missiles, including sea-to-air and surface to surface weapons. The Port Royal can also fire long-range cruise missiles.

The more lightly armed frigate USS Ingraham was the third vessel of the group. It is unclear exactly what vessels the Iranians used, but the fast attack craft of the variety that seized the 15 British sailors last year seems likely.

Iran has in the past claimed to be in possession of powerful Russian-designed Sunburn supersonic anti-ship missiles with which it could hit any vessel – military or civilian – passing through the straits.

The Sunburn missiles are extremely fast and give the defending vessel a maximum theoretical response time of only 25-30 seconds.



The full article contains 824 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 07 January 2008 10:33 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Iran
 
1

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 08/01/2008 01:23:46
Here its started, this time, I hope there is a proper response, Mushroom style
2

frank mcbride,

lusitania 08/01/2008 01:35:03
The dead man walking is determined to lay waste the ME in his "company's" pusuit of oil.

God preserve us from Bush/Cheney/Haliburton (Abrusco - formerly the Bush family company).
3

bikewoman,

08/01/2008 01:42:13
Iran is out of control and should be spanked.
4

thatscottishwoman,

The Kirkyard 08/01/2008 02:08:53
3 bikewoman

Agreed!
5

Michaela,

Canada 08/01/2008 02:44:27
Maybe Ahmadinejad likes being spanked ....
6

anti--Hun,

Fortress Ibrox...ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha 08/01/2008 03:00:32
They behave like medieval savages, so we should bomb them back into medieval times.
7

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 08/01/2008 03:27:15
# 6 exactly,

in fact there should be a clear warning the next attack on Christians will be repaid by a "daisycutter" over 21 29 N 39 45 E
8

williamx,

canada 08/01/2008 05:24:56
Nobody knows the truth in this propaganda incident. But one thing for sure, the Iranians have all the cards. All they have to do is hold military games in the international waters of the Straight of Hormuz and oil shipment insurance costs will ensure nothing sails through. This could be the final nail in the US and world economy. There is also the Russian designed torpedo that travels at 150 knots. You guys still there?
9

Guga II,

Rockall 08/01/2008 07:07:33
Serious stuff this "I'm coming at you and will blow you up in a couple of minutes,". It's just about as believable as Reagan spouting about the bombing Russia having started.

Does anyone actually believe anything the Americans say these days?
10

malkster,

Scotland 08/01/2008 07:59:44
This would be very difficult to make up. The calls would be on VHF monitored on every bridge in the task group. The Ships would be at action station and at 200 metres the iranians clearly visible to all bridge teams and upper deck weapons crews.
11

Taz,

The Land of the Free. 08/01/2008 08:00:19
The Iranians must figure they are messing with British Marines. Do they have a surprise in store.
12

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 08/01/2008 08:24:03
Americans not in American waters, not even international waters and they get upety when the Iranains give them a taste of thier own medicine?

3 years ago, over the Uists, an American warship threatend to blow a civilian passanger plane out the sky (a BA subsidury plane flying it's usual route from Stornoway to Benbecula)as it believed it to be a threat. Now tell me, that ok? The plane subsequently diverted course for the safety of the passangers.
13

Selgovae,

Scottish Borders 08/01/2008 08:38:48
#6 "They behave like medieval savages, so we should bomb them back into medieval times."

Be fair. The Iranians aren't exactly angels either.
14

ddmc,

08/01/2008 08:55:54
#10 remember when the US bombed the libyans in the 80's, the evidence was shown to be 'fake' radio comms from libya which turned out was planted by the Israeli's.

google USS Liberty & The gulf of tonkin, 2 examples of false flag operations, now that the nukular myth has been let out the bag with the NIE report, a flase flag is the last hope the neocons have to start a war before Bush goes.

Seriously tho, why spend $billions on warships if a speedboat (rubber dinghy) with an AS missile can take you out !

#13 LOL
15

malkster,

Scotland 08/01/2008 09:02:47
#14 Where was this proven and published? I don't need to google either USS Liberty or Gulf of Tonkin as I am up to speed with my history. Having operated in the Gulf I have seen the agressive actions of the Iranians first hand.
16

ddmc,

08/01/2008 09:36:38
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident
17

SMG,,

Israel 08/01/2008 09:55:34
Glass carpark, anyone?
18

ebbi,

spain 08/01/2008 10:17:13
here we go again.if its not this its something else.the americans have been playing this game for decades and everytimee we fall for it.do you really believe what the americans feed you?how many times are you gonna fall for it?when are you gonna see that the nuclear bomb and war is not the answer?to the americans its only a game.
i think the world has a serious problem on its hands while americans maintain this bigdaddy attitude.
for god's sake grow up and see the root of the problems before its too late.why is it that the americans love killing ,war and destruction?oh i know its the best way to create billions of dollars for the big guys and plunder the pour american's taxes.well done george bush your masters are proud of you.
19

Findlay Thompson,

08/01/2008 10:28:55
American warships have no reason to be anywhere near Iran.
20

Findlay Thompson,

08/01/2008 10:31:36
#15

By the way Malkster I would refrain from 'Googling' all sites visited by yourself are recorded against your IP address! Try Scroogle.
21

malkster,

Scotland 08/01/2008 10:37:40
#20

I never mentioned Googling. Try looking at a chart or even a map then tell me how you get into the Arabian Gulf without going through the straits of Hormuz and therefore close to Iran.
22

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 08/01/2008 10:48:43
American warships regularly make these kind of threats to Scottish fishermen on the Clyde. Nasty American warmakers that they are...
23

,

08/01/2008 11:11:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

Peter,

Looking over the heads of Unionist dwarfs 08/01/2008 12:09:20
23 - Watch out Bill in case the trolls send a suicide bomber / mafiosa hit man to get you!

Malkster - do you not reckon if Iran gets too uppity that the US will reduce Bandar Abbass and its naval base to rubble? That rather screws up their naval ops as then everything else has to come down the gulf from Shat al Arat. What do you reckon - Sea wolf would kill the Soviet missile at two miles out? If the Iraq and Pakistan borders are closed where does Iran get its arms and supplies from? Would Putin play a high risk game and supply Iran or allow China to supply them?

No, the reality is that Iran has few friends and a whole load of local enemies who would just love to see the Persians squigged. Watch the CIA pouring money into the Kurds if they take on the Iranians and the US buying off Turkish fears. If the US go into Iran it will be by air and by proxy.
25

Let's have the truth,

08/01/2008 12:41:36
# 13

I believe your comment has blown over everyone's heads.

....Well done!
26

malkster,

Scotland 08/01/2008 12:41:54
#24
From a purely tactical military view point it would be relatively straightforward to destroy the Iranians ability to project power via conventional forces. A combination of cruise missiles and air strikes would neutralise naval and air bases. Any ships at sea would be dealt with by naval units and organic rotary wing assets. History has proven that an FPB Navy is extremely vulnerable to helicopter attack. The danger would come from suicide attacks and SSKs operating in the shalllow water of the Gulf.
27

Let's have the truth,

08/01/2008 12:43:24
# 13

except ddmc's.
28

Sandi,

San Diego 08/01/2008 16:43:32
Cheney is desperate to "find" some excuse to invade Iran. Now that the election is in full swing, the Republicans have to remind us all that we need to live in fear and that only they, Republicans, can protect us.

You can expect more of the same until November.
29

thatscottishwoman,

The Kirkyard 08/01/2008 18:33:54
23 bill2

Why are you posting this same comment on all the threads? That's against the rules! Stop being a troll.
30

mike - across the pond,

findlay thompson..... 08/01/2008 19:12:45
"American warships have no reason to be anywhere near Iran."

really?

americans have no reason to secure YOUR oil supply...

sure you say that now... wait until they sink an oil frieghter in the straights of hormuz.... closing off oil shipments from Kuwait, Iraq, and yes even Iran... the americans have kept these shipping lanes open for the last half century...

and all you bring to the table is some ignorant whining about how those who are willing to make sacrifices to protect your way of life have no business being there?

maybe I should vote for Ron Paul... but then my grand kids would have to lay down THEIR lives to straighten out the mess you dont have the intestinal fortitude to face..... sorry ron... no vote from me....
31

Biker,

Ayr 08/01/2008 19:30:47
Sounds like the Iranians realy meant business eh? here we go again. Missinformation by the US so invasion can be justified in the future.
32

Lynne,

USA 08/01/2008 19:47:23
You people who so conveniently find reasons to hate the US and can't believe what my gov't says..should read the explanation from Iran who admitted doing this.
We weren't going to sit on our hands while they decided whether or not to blow up the ships, and had our guns aimed to shoot. They are lucky they got out of there. But you can be sure we wouldn't have been sitting in their gun boats while denying we were in their territory and been taken hostage for 2 weeks.
33

Selgovae,

Scottish Borders 08/01/2008 20:26:52
#30 Mike

" the americans have kept these shipping lanes open for the last half century"

I think until about 1970, the UK did the lion's share of keeping the Gulf secure. But by that time, we'd somehow lured you into destabalising Iran, and you picked up the increased tab for keeping the peace. Sorry about that!

All due respect and stuff, but I don't think your country's prime motive in policing the Gulf is so I can run my car.
34

Selgovae,

Scottish Borders 08/01/2008 20:41:19
On the other hand, I'm surprised by how many posters assume this is the US playing games. It seems more likely to me that this is some element within Iran trying to stir things up and make it difficult for Ahmadinejad to conciliate with the US. The question for the US is how to respond.
35

mike - across the pond,

selgovae 08/01/2008 20:46:10
think what you will

60+% of the oil coming through there does not land in the US... most of it goes to france... germany... other european countries... the orient...

so yes, we in america DO live the "altruistic" motive... we DO make sacrifices.... and yes are sometimes "lured" into making the sacrifices to "keep the peace"
36

mike - across the pond,

ayr...biker 08/01/2008 20:57:08
iranians mean business...

well not quite... should the iranians have actually done anything within those 200 yards, there would have been a loud BRRRAAAAAPPPP and their speedy little boats would have been reduced to kindling (or bicycle tire repair kits)...

there would have been much wailing and moaning about the mean americans "overreacting" followed by some hollering at the UN... and they'd stay the heck away from those big boats....

if they were stupid enough to launch one of those chinese sunburn missiles... well lets just say there would have been some fireworks and they would have come up short a few piers at their "navy" base come morning roll call....
37

Farzad,

Iran 08/01/2008 21:01:50
quote : The Pentagon described the Iranian actions as "careless, reckless and potentially hostile". Bryan Whitman, a spokesman, said: "This is clearly something that deserves an explanation."
how about American actions in the Middle east and Persian Gulf ? are they friendly,legally and peace making ?
Please look at the world map and imagine the distance between USA and IRAN . who has invited Yankees to Persian gulf ?
38

Farzad,

Iran 08/01/2008 21:14:32
Please follow this link related to the story :
http://62.193.18.228/index_View.asp?code=160903
39

Jim P,

08/01/2008 21:15:07
"I'm coming at you and will blow you up in a couple of minutes," he quoted the radio transmission as saying.

American forces were on the on the verge of firing in self- defence when the five Iranian boats, which came within 200 metres of USS Port Royal, a navy cruiser, a destroyer and a frigate, turned and sped off"

No defensive action from the US at 200 metres??? Something smell about this report. Remember the Vincennes?
40

ImSparticus,

Fife 08/01/2008 21:45:44
Remember the Gulf of Tonkin Incident.
41

ImSparticus,

08/01/2008 21:58:26
and remember what happened after the Gulf of Tonkin Incident.

The Yankee suffered defeat at the hands of the wee bike riding Vietmaneese... just as they are defeated in Iraq.
42

Freedom for Scotland,

08/01/2008 22:03:53
If the US had not invaded Iraq illegally then its troops would not be in the area. End of.

43

ImSparticus,

08/01/2008 22:23:04
The truth is... That the US can do very little about Iran other than rattle their much diminished Saber.... Iran has faced them down .... The Politics of Bush is as bankrupt as its Economy US Army tied down and constantly losing ground to the Taliban in Afghanistan and stuck like tar baby in Iraq.

Iran will have its Nuclear Power and take its rightful place as thee major power in the Middle east.
44

57Nomad,

california 08/01/2008 22:33:00
#19 Findlay Thompson

FT said:

"American warships have no reason to be anywhere near Iran."

Well, thank you Admiral Nelson for your insightful analysis. What you meant to say is "I can't think of any reason......" The reason that the US navy plies the open seas is no concern of yours. And you have no clue as to why the ships are deployed where an when they are.


45

,

08/01/2008 22:46:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
46

Lynne,

USA 08/01/2008 23:07:45
For people with short memories..think back to the USS Cole. That was a conducted with a small boat also. Why would the US wait for it to happen again? There should be no next time..for the Iranians, because the next time this happens the US will probably fire, and ask questions later.
47

thewitness,

09/01/2008 00:08:48
#1
Mushroom style? By the way, once the Zionists have genocided everyone in the mid-east guess what, your next! If you think these criminals care about you or your family, you really need to read some history, not the lies that were spoon fed to you by them, Zionists.

Ross Fyffe's Required Reading (link at bottom)...

The Nameless War - by Captain Archibald Maule Ramsay was educated at Eton and the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, and served with the 2nd Battalion Coldstream Guards in the First World War until he was severely wounded in 1916 - thereafter at Regimental H.Q. and the War Office and the British War Mission in Paris until the end of the war.

From 1920 he became a Member of H.M. Scottish Bodyguard. In 1931 he was elected a Member of Parliament for Midlothian and Peeblesshire.

Arrested under Regulation 18b on the 23rd May, 1940, he was detained, without charge or trial, in a cell in Brixton Prison until the 26th September, 1944. On the following morning he resumed his seat in the House of Commons and remained there until the end of that Parliament in 1945.

THE TRUTH (By a Scottish Hero) IN 1 SHORT BOOK - HERE
http://www.iamthewitness.com/books/Archibald.Maule.
Ramsay/The.Nameless.War/00.Introduction.htm
48

thewitness,

09/01/2008 00:15:52
#46
Chill out Lynne, dont worry, you will be on the launch pad waiting to be teleported up to heaven with your Zionist chums. Must say, i'm glad i wont be joining you.
49

thewitness,

09/01/2008 00:19:43
#44
Lynne's booked you a window seat next to her for the big flight.
50

thewitness,

09/01/2008 00:38:01
#7
You said..."in fact there should be a clear warning the next attack on Christians will be repaid by a "daisycutter" over 21 29 N 39 45 E"

Please explain what you mean by "next" attack on Christians. To my knowledge there has not been a 1st attack, in fact, Iran has not waged war of their making for 800 years or more. Is it ok for Israel to bomb Palestinian christians or Scottish christians in Lockerbie?
51

thewitness,

09/01/2008 00:44:55
#7
You said..."in fact there should be a clear warning the next attack on Christians will be repaid by a "daisycutter" over 21 29 N 39 45 E"

Please explain what you mean by "next" attack on Christians. To my knowledge there has not been a 1st attack. Iran has not waged a war of their making for 300? 800? 1000? years. Is it ok for Israel to bomb and terrorize Palestinian christians?
52

,

09/01/2008 01:47:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
53

Lynne,

USA 09/01/2008 02:48:49
the witness...or better yet, the witless..You are just a parrot of lies and myths..anything you say should be taken with a grain of salt of others. YOU, witless, are the perfect example of an anti-Israeli, and Jew Hater. All your posts are the same..
54

,

09/01/2008 03:28:24
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
55

thewitness,

09/01/2008 13:34:14
#53
Lynne, i am not a "jew hater" and i am not anti-Israel.
I have never mentioned "jews", i comment on the political leadership of Israel who follow an ideology called Zionism. It could be argued that jews are victims of Zionism as many do not support the goals or the methods. If a country's "leadership" can behave in a respectable manner i have no problems. Does the political leadership of Israel, Zionist leadership, behave in a respectable manner?
56

Lynne,

USA 10/01/2008 01:35:45
#55 I don't know what your "many" consists of, but I would say it is rather small. People emigrate to Israel because they want to live there, because it is their homeland, and because it is their right. Zionism in modern terms refers to Jews.. before you make statements that "confuse" people, understand that Zionism and Jews are two interchangeable words, maybe not to someone who is not Jewish...but when that term is used (zionism) in a denigrating manner than it also is denigrating to Jews.
So take a note..most of the time you say those words, with an implied denigration to both.
Zionism is just believing in the state of Israel and supporting her. The way you have been using that word is Anti-Israel, and Anti-Jew. I hope this explanation helps you with your future posts.
57

thewitness,

10/01/2008 03:19:25
#56 Lynne
"Zionism and Jews are two interchangeable words, maybe not to someone who is not Jewish...but when that term is used (zionism) in a denigrating manner than it also is denigrating to Jews."

Lynne, maybe you want to share your thoughts with these (pictures below)jewish folks, they must have been mistaken, for century's?
http://www.nkusa.org/activities/Demonstrations/20070609/nk4.jpg
http://www.eramuslim.com/fckfiles/image/NKUSA1.jpg

Lynne, judaism is a faith. Zionism is a political movement, ideas, that many jews reject. No political movement has a "right to exist" if it cannot behave in a respectable manner.
Israel can exist without Zionism but i doubt it can
exist (in any positive way) with an extreme supremacist
ideology. Zionism is Un-American!
58

Let's have the truth,

10/01/2008 03:42:04
Surprise, surprise: Iran accuses the US of faking the "confrontation" in the straits of Hormuz.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/world/middleeast/10iran.html?hp

....Given the US has faked most reasons for going to war in the past 50 years, Iran's claim has credibility.
59

thewitness,

10/01/2008 05:18:19
#58
I'm not sure of his size or if he likes
stripes or the orange?
http://www.pxdirect.com/inmate_u.htm
#56
Lynne, sorry to bother you but do you
know what size he takes, maybe the denim?
http://www.pxdirect.com/inmate_u.htm
60

Scott_B,

11/01/2008 15:44:22
Scotsman - it's time for an update and correction to this story. As your international newsdesk will be aware, having properly researched this "story", the propaganda is falling apart.

http://www.juancole.com/2008/01/us-video-of-iran-speedboats-flawed.html
61

Let's have the truth,

12/01/2008 00:24:39
I see the warmongers, who are generally quite voluble, are particularly quiet now.

I wonder why?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.