What's up With the American Sailors ?

I honestly believe the Iranians forced them to apologize. There's no way I can see our sailors making excuses on their own.

Has not come out yet as to if one or both boats broke down when they drifted into Iranian waters.  If only one, why was not a tow rigged by the other boat?

In todays climate with Iran, I can see the hand of DC in the apology, to get them back soonest.

I dunno how they are trained, these days.

We'll know if the USA pays more money to Iran. 

This vet sees a Code of Conduct violation there, but that's just me. Technically we are not at war with Iran. But then again we have not been at peace either for over 35 years now. 

Considering they were in Iranian captivity for under 24 hours and show no obvious signs of abuse as is common for POWs who have made similar broadcast statements I am really wondering... And at the same time dismayed.

seeing how the Iranians had them captured, on their knees, facing away, hands on their heads, they were obviously not treated as sailors in distress needing assistance....

I can feel the same way Stik,I never served so  I don't know,but it seems strange.i would have thought there would be a protocol to follow,you know,name,rank,serial number.

"I'm sorry, sir, I can't answer that question."

Hopefully they stay safe.

I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in their defense.

I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.

If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available. I will make every effort to escape and to aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.

If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. I will give no information or take part in any action which might be harmful to my comrades. If I am senior, I will take command. If not, I will obey the lawful orders of those appointed over me and will back them up in every way.

When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.

I will never forget that I am an American, fighting for freedom, responsible for my actions, and dedicated to the principles which made my country free. I will trust in my God and in the United States of America.

As I said before, we are not at war with Iran. But they were obviously detained at gunpoint and taken prisoner and to a location not of their own choosing. Article III and beyond is supposed to kick in at that point. See Article V regarding statements.

Goldhammer I disagree. DC would want the opposite, fighting their way out in a hail of fire which they could have. A couple of RG's in Boston Whalers?

No there's a weirdness. Why did they have passports? Why all in camo in camo boats out in the middle of the Gulf?  Much more to it than meets the eye. Almost like the operation was planned to go the way it did. Weird.

As far as the camo boats and uniforms, that is standard for those guys- those are brown water sailors, riverine or small boat delivery unit types (sorry I don't recall their official designation- I last worked with them in '91). The passport thing is a little more unusual but not unheard of. I will say been there/done that, and leave it at that. Lets just say it points more to the SOF side of the house usually, but also could be completely separate and innocent. As far as the "how and why" they ended up in those waters, there is the $64,000 question... 

Been out of the loop for a long time, but I sort of agree with Gmorrison; river boats in the Persian Gulf, no tow line, GPS guidance available, video of capture and days away from implementation of nuclear deal. Will probably never get the truth of the matter, just glad it didn't turn out to be a Mayaguez or Pueblo incident. The Code of Conduct, or the new Warriors Code is a broad umbrella to operate under, unfortunately it shifts according to the political winds of the moment.

GMorrison

Goldhammer I disagree. DC would want the opposite, fighting their way out in a hail of fire which they could have. A couple of RG's in Boston Whalers?

No there's a weirdness. Why did they have passports? Why all in camo in camo boats out in the middle of the Gulf?  Much more to it than meets the eye. Almost like the operation was planned to go the way it did. Weird.

 

Supposedly on a training mission now, or were being temp. deployed up gulf......depending on the story you believe.......first I heard was deployed, now is training sortie.

But, IMO the climate in DC right now is appeasement, had it been back in '81 it would have been a firefight.

Most places your military ID is good enough, or used to be.  Nowadays it might be different, especially over in the mideast.  Now you virtually need a passport to go to Canada or Mexico and get back in.

Hmmm!

   Well , I don't follow the stuff on the news these days ( too busy on model commissions ) I will say this though . Articles two and three sums it up for this 24 year veteran of two services .

       The Navy back then was very adamant about this as was the Marine Corps .  T.B.

tankerbuilder

Hmmm!

   Well , I don't follow the stuff on the news these days ( too busy on model commissions ) I will say this though . Articles two and three sums it up for this 24 year veteran of two services .

       The Navy back then was very adamant about this as was the Marine Corps .  T.B.

 

There is no war between Iran and the US going on, not even in proxy. In fact they are our allies in the proxy war in western Iraq and Syria.

I can't sit here and say they should have done this or should have done that. I was a little surprised to see brown water sailors out in the middle of the Gulf, to see how heavily armed they seemed to be, and to have them so exposed to what seemed to be pretty light coast guard forces.

My guess is that they screwed up some sort of extraction mission, but it's pretty hard to tell.

No, there has been no proxy combat between US forces and Iranian forces since we withdrew from Iraq. But I would hardly call them our allies in the current mess USN that part of the world. More of two competing adversaries with a common interest against  ISIS, ISIL, or whatever you want to call them.

And again, even in ambiguous circumstances like this, the Code Of Conduct still applies. 

But yes, the how and why of this will be interesting to hear once it comes out.

GMorrison

There is no war between Iran and the US going on, not even in proxy. In fact they are our allies in the proxy war in western Iraq and Syria.

templar1099

      

 

GMorrison

There is no war between Iran and the US going on, not even in proxy. In fact they are our allies in the proxy war in western Iraq and Syria.

 

   I'm sorry gentlemen I was speaking to the war of Beliefs that is being played out globally.   The " our war " statement was a reflection on pre 9/11 military endeavors.

 

 

Iran was supporting the Shiite militias fighing and killing US service members in Iraq in every possible way until we pulled out. I would hardly consider them friendly. Not since 1979.

Allies and friends can be two different things. Ok, change the term to "fellow limited interests".

So here's where I see some light. The Iranians certainly are no stranger to Muslim tyranny.

Their orignal religion, Zoroastran, was wiped out when they were conquered by the arabs in the 7th Century. But thereare still plenty of Zoroastrans in Iran and around the world, particularly the Assyrians.

Then they were a secular state until 1979, and had to go through the upheaval and Islamization all over again. Mostly, people in Iran really hate it.

I do think there's an opportunity there. This thing could have really gone south really fast.

I doubt that a lot has changed about men and women serving today, versus days gone by, regarding conduct when captured or detained by foreign forces. Basically it was to give only the minimum of information, resist with the utmost effort, escape if possible, and give no information about activities prior to capture.

Easy enough to understand, BUT, given the ruthless nature of those that grabbed our folks and their contentious/terrible relations with the U.S.A., I can only imagine that it's entirely likely the Skipper's alledged confession of blame and apology, was anything but voluntary.

He is a young officer, serving with dedication, the lives and health of the crew were his responsibility. I don't doubt for a second that once identified as the mission Commander, he had to deal with threats to do harm to some or all.

I have to put myself in his shoes, if lives were threatened would I let my sailors be executed or imprisoned. Or do what was required at that given place and time, to do all possible to prevent that threat becoming reality. There exists no honor or gentlemanly conduct on the part of these people, that it's said we are not at war with.

In time I hope the Commander will be understood to have made a reasonable and prudent decision, given the position our youngsters were placed in.

Last, what the heck were two small boats doing so far from land, in waters that I consider far from peaceful? Where were the reserve forces that could be implemented to reinforce or recue them, or was there simply nothing of that sort? And since they were grabbed at gunpoint, given that they likely could have made floating debris out of the opposite forces, why didn't that happen? Possibly pre-ordered to not respond with force? If so, why even send them in armed? 

Maybe there is just not much we will ever know about this mission, but I'm truly thankful they have been released, and I share in the happiness their loved ones are feeling now.

If the young Commander prevented harm to his fellow sailors by his likely forced actions, I say well done, Skipper.

I agree. But I understand that the rules of engagement are much stricter than that.

I agree, and probably will not be for at least a generation barring unforseen social upheavel.

stikpusher

Iran was supporting the Shiite militias fighing and killing US service members in Iraq in every possible way until we pulled out. I would hardly consider them friendly. Not since 1979.

Generally the ROE is not to fire unless fired upon, but unless they absolutely knew they were in Iraian waters, I can't see them getting boarded, without putting up some resistance.

Iran thinks it can control the entrance to the Gulf  and therefore flexes it's muscles every once in awhile, and usually geets it hands slapped to prove they don't.  Seems like it is about time for another lesson with the ruler on the back of the hand.

there are aspects to this that have me, and many of us baffled. without the facts i am not going to fault the actions of the sailors on the boats. as mentioned we aren't "at war" with iran. OTOH there are far to many questions even this former ground pounding DAT has about the situation and chain of command orders and influence.

i could say more but my tin foil hat is in the wash.

waynec

.......

i could say more but my tin foil hat is in the wash.

 

That's what happens when ya use foil from the Thanksgiving Turkey.........

In my opinion the troops are simply a reflection of their CIC

Nice gratuitous shot there. Explain please- POTUS came down to the Navy and told the sailors to go over and surrender?

Next we'll have Trump lumping them in with McCain saying that they are big "losers!".

Easy from the cheap seats. Plenty of our service members get themselves into situations such as these and we are very fortunate they survive.

On the face of it the Lt. Cmdr. (?) turned a bad situation into a better one.