Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Here comes a Gulf of Tonkin like event!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 07:56 AM
Original message
Here comes a Gulf of Tonkin like event!
LONDON, England (CNN) -- Fifteen British Royal Marines on patrol in the Persian Gulf have been "seized" by the Iranian navy, the British Ministry of Defense said.

The Marines were "engaged in routine boarding operations of merchant shipping in Iraqi territorial waters," the ministry said in a statement on Friday.

A U.S. military official who monitors the region told CNN the Marines stopped an Iranian ship suspected of smuggling automobiles, and boarded it for an inspection.

While the Marines were on board, six Navy ships from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard showed up and claimed the British had entered Iranian waters.

A dispute ensued over whether the Marines were in Iraqi, international, or Iranian territorial waters, and the 15 were then seized and taken to Iran, the U.S. military official said.

An Iraqi fisherman told Reuters the incident took place in the Shatt al-Arab waterway that marks the southern stretch of Iraq's border with Iran. His account could not be immediately confirmed.

The British ministry's statement said the Marines "completed a successful inspection of a merchant ship when they and their two boats were surrounded and escorted by Iranian vessels into Iranian territorial waters."
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/23/iran.uk/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
1. And to think all of the hundreds of clairvoyants here at DU...
predicted this months ago. We really need to start a psychic network here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. This is very unlikely
to lead to a war. It happens - in fact, it happened a few years ago with the Brits and Iran.

I predict they'll be released within a couple of days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. Really? I thought all the clairvoyants
predicted a war with Iran? That hasn't happened yet. I'll hold off on crediting any of them until it does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #7
16. Many of them predicted it would be this type of event that..
would touch off a war with Iran, I agree very premature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iwasthere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #7
17. You can bet that they are trying to figure out a way to use this event...
...as a means to start the Iran war they want soooo badly. That's a no brainer. Oh what a distraction that would be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
2. I don't think this is a Gulf of Tonkin moment
Something similar happened in 2004. No war ensued. The captured military folks were released within days.

And where's the evidence that this was a false flag operation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MUAD_DIB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #2
12. Bush wants the world to believe

that the Iranians are persian a reckless course.
As more navy ships fill up the area the gulf will only get wider between Washington and Tehran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
4. Actually it is a real live event, unlike the gulf of tonkin.
This is the second time that British operations in the area, whose exact border has been in dispute for decades, have resulted in Iran capturing their forces.

The gulf of tonkin event was largely fictional. This event appears to not be fictional. It may in fact trigger the war the bushco so sorely needs right now, in which case it might as well be fictional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. I doubt much will come of this.
The British will bitch about it. The Iranians will go "nyah nhay!" for a week and then the troops will be returned. This isn't the first time this has happened, and it won't be the last.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. You could be right.
I said 'may', by which I meant it is a possibility. I wasn't offering odds. The administration does have motivation to escalate this into a major crisis. While back in 2004 a similar incident was resolved without any problems, that was 2004, Iran was not on our immediate hit list, and the administration was riding high at home. I'm not sure we can expect the same resolution this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. They're British soldiers.
Tony Blair isn't keen on starting a war with Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Tony Blair has done Bush's bidding from day one.
I do not take a lot of comfort in 'they're British soldiers'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
5. This isn't the first time Iran has taken Brits and their boats
Same thing happened a few years ago. About the same spot.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BoneDaddy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
6. No need to be Nostradamus on this one
but if we can't goad Iran into acting irresponsibly, we will create a scenario that will escalate this situation. Let's hope cooler heads prevail, the soldiers are returned without incident. Amihdinijad (sp?) needs to be smart on this one. Unless he has been on the CIA payroll for years and this is just part of the play we are watching.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
9. I do not think so.
The US and England have been conducting operations in and around Iran. This group got caught. They will be held for a relatively brief period, released, and things will revert back to the abnormal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WiseButAngrySara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. LOL! "and things will revert back to the abnormal"
Sad, but likely true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WiseButAngrySara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
13. Gulf of Tonkin ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Resolution

Gulf of Tonkin Resolution

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was a joint resolution of the U.S. Congress passed in August 1964 in direct response to a minor naval engagement known as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. It is of historical significance because it gave U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson authorization, without a formal declaration of war by Congress, for the use of military force in Southeast Asia. The Johnson administration subsequently cited the resolution as legal authority for its rapid escalation of U.S. military involvement in the Vietnam conflict.<1>

The Gulf of Tonkin Incident began with an attack by three North Vietnamese torpedo boats on the Maddox, a U.S. destroyer, in the Gulf of Tonkin on 2 August 1964. Two days later, that vessel and another U.S. destroyer in the area both reported themselves under renewed attack, although North Vietnam subsequently insisted that it hadn't attacked — and no attack is now believed to have occurred on the 4th of August.

Within hours, Johnson ordered retaliatory air strikes on the bases of the North Vietnamese boats and announced, in a television address to the American public the same evening, that U.S. naval forces had been attacked. In a message he sent to Congress the following day, the President affirmed that "the North Vietnamese regime had conducted further deliberate attacks against U.S. naval vessels operating in international waters."

Johnson requested approval of a resolution "expressing the unity and determination of the United States in supporting freedom and in protecting peace in southeast Asia". He said that the resolution should express support "for all necessary action to protect our Armed Forces" — but repeated previous assurances that "the United States... seeks no wider war". As the nation entered the final three months of political campaigning for the 1964 elections (in which Johnson was standing for election), the president contended that the resolution would help "hostile nations... understand" that the United States was unified in its determination "to continue to protect its national interests."<2>

After fewer than nine hours of committee consideration and floor debate, Congress voted, on August 7, 1964, on a joint resolution which authorized the president "to take all necessary steps, including the use of armed force, to assist any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty requesting assistance in defense of its freedom."<5> The unanimous affirmative vote in the House of Representatives was 416-0. (However, Congressman Eugene Siler of Kentucky, who was not present but opposed the measure, was "paired" with another member who favored the resolution — i.e., his opposition was not counted, but the vote in favor was one less than it would have been.) The Senate conferred its approval by a vote of 88-2. Some members expressed misgivings about the measure, but in the end, Senators Wayne Morse of Oregon and Ernest Gruening of Alaska cast the only nay votes.<6> "I believe this resolution to be a historic mistake," warned Senator Morse.<7>



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Dose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-23-07 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
18. The signals started blasting 2 years ago. All that was left on the list was an excuse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC