Iran detains US sailors

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
http://www.ibtimes.com/iran-us-navy-dispute-live-updates-iranian-military-holds-10-american-sailors-irans-2262162

And it sounds like they were, in fact, in Iranian waters.

Has that been established as a fact yet? Your own link does not confirm that as the case.
"Iranian forces are holding 10 American sailors in custody Tuesday after two U.S. Navy boats moving between Kuwait and Bahrain reportedly drifted into Iranian-claimed waters."

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Another amazing coincidence: some of the sanctions against Iran are due to end this week or next week.

Good luck to anybody trying to get fresh sanctions against Iran through the United Nations.

Iran's sense of timing is impeccable.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Another amazing coincidence: some of the sanctions against Iran are due to end this week or next week.

Good luck to anybody trying to get fresh sanctions against Iran through the United Nations.

Iran's sense of timing is impeccable.

It's also a reminder from the Revolutionary Guard to the Iranian moderates to tread carefully.

**jhe90**

UK sends any Russians a escort and watches any foreign aircraft coming into our claimed airspace, sea space or protection zones.

It may be dwarfed by russsains but as a matter of international games you always send a watcher.

RAF been playing it for decades.
And no, i doubt uk would detain them, maybe secure weapons until there fixed and off but i doubt arrest them as such. Its Russia. There still dangerous

**jasper76**

The Post is reporting that US officials have been given assurances by Iran regarding the situation:

“We have received assurances the sailors will promptly be allowed to continue their journey,” the official said.

(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/01/12/iran-captures-two-u-s-navy-boats-but-will-return-crew-soon/)

Not sure what assurances from the Iranian government are worth...

**jhe90**

jasper76 wrote:
The Post is reporting that US officials have been given assurances by Iran regarding the situation:

“We have received assurances the sailors will promptly be allowed to continue their journey,” the official said.

(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/01/12/iran-captures-two-u-s-navy-boats-but-will-return-crew-soon/)

Not sure what assurances from the Iranian government are worth...

Maybe a Zimbabwean dollar....

**d-usa**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
d-usa wrote:
http://www.ibtimes.com/iran-us-navy-dispute-live-updates-iranian-military-holds-10-american-sailors-irans-2262162

And it sounds like they were, in fact, in Iranian waters.

Has that been established as a fact yet? Your own link does not confirm that as the case.
"Iranian forces are holding 10 American sailors in custody Tuesday after two U.S. Navy boats moving between Kuwait and Bahrain reportedly drifted into Iranian-claimed waters."

From the link:

UPDATE: 5:50 p.m. EST — Two small U.S. Navy boats that were stopped by Iran Tuesday may have run out of gas or had mechanical problems when they drifted into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf
UPDATE: 4:45 p.m. EST — Secretary of State John Kerry called Iranian officials in Tehran Tuesday to explain that two U.S. Navy vessels had mistakenly strayed into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf.

Doesn't sound like anybody on the US side is trying to deny that so far.

I'm surprised that the GOP haven't declared that they are going to have an empty chair for these sailors at the SOTU speech tonight...

**flamingkillamajig**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Easy E wrote:
So they detained them, and it seems like they let them go? Did i miss read the story?

You're missing the point. That sailors from the world's most powerful military were detained in the first place, speaks volumes at how low American might has sunk in the eyes of Iran. That they even had the nerve to do this tells its own message.

Nobody did this to Britain in the 19th century without a gak storm heading their way in retaliation.

I dunno I'd still say play it careful for now. If they keep acting like idiots maybe use embargos or some such (you said we were already doing that right?). There has to be some way to hit em hard without being too violent. A lot of America's enemies want to paint us the bad guy or make us look violent. Best to show us as merciful unless tested and them as the extremists they really are.

If you see yourself as the good guy you should act like it. Basically be the more merciful one.

**Tannhauser42**

Given the possible options, I certainly prefer Iran's response to this over Turkey's...

**Relapse**

I 'd hate to be in the crew that signed off on the maintanence of that thing right now.

**CptJake**

Relapse wrote:
How is a malfunctioning boat going anywhere, though? I 'd hate to be in the crew that signed off on the maintanence of that thing right now.

My question is; If there were two of the same type, why didn't they tow the broke one?

**Relapse**

CptJake wrote:
Relapse wrote:
How is a malfunctioning boat going anywhere, though? I 'd hate to be in the crew that signed off on the maintanence of that thing right now.

My question is; If there were two of the same type, why didn't they tow the broke one?

It'll be interesting to find out the details when the crews are released.

**CptJake**

Relapse wrote:
CptJake wrote:
Relapse wrote:
How is a malfunctioning boat going anywhere, though? I 'd hate to be in the crew that signed off on the maintanence of that thing right now.

My question is; If there were two of the same type, why didn't they tow the broke one?

It'll be interesting to find out the details when the crews are released.

Yep.

I've heard the Iranians took comms gear off at least one boat. If true I sure hope the crew was squared away enough to have at least zeroed everything out.

**whembly**

This is a cluster...

But, Obama has his Nuke agreement with Iran, so everything's kosher.

*shrug*

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
From the link:

UPDATE: 5:50 p.m. EST — Two small U.S. Navy boats that were stopped by Iran Tuesday may have run out of gas or had mechanical problems when they drifted into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf
UPDATE: 4:45 p.m. EST — Secretary of State John Kerry called Iranian officials in Tehran Tuesday to explain that two U.S. Navy vessels had mistakenly strayed into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf

Your quotes are incomplete. They should read;
UPDATE: 5:50 p.m. EST — Two small U.S. Navy boats that were stopped by Iran Tuesday may have run out of gas or had mechanical problems when they drifted into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, the Washington Post reported.
UPDATE: 4:45 p.m. EST — Secretary of State John Kerry called Iranian officials in Tehran Tuesday to explain that two U.S. Navy vessels had mistakenly strayed into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, NBC News reported.

You wouldn't be seeking to omit vital context would you?
From NBC News (one of the reports you omitted);
"The officials said it's unclear whether the sailors — nine men and one woman — had strayed into Iranian territorial waters before they were captured."
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pentagon-2-u-s-navy-boats-held-iran-military-n495031

So, I'll ask again - Has that been established as a fact yet whether the boats were in Iranian waters?

d-usa wrote:
I'm surprised that the GOP haven't declared that they are going to have an empty chair for these sailors at the SOTU speech tonight...

It's right beside the empty chair for the children killed by drone strikes.

**whembly**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
d-usa wrote:
From the link:

UPDATE: 5:50 p.m. EST — Two small U.S. Navy boats that were stopped by Iran Tuesday may have run out of gas or had mechanical problems when they drifted into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf
UPDATE: 4:45 p.m. EST — Secretary of State John Kerry called Iranian officials in Tehran Tuesday to explain that two U.S. Navy vessels had mistakenly strayed into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf

Your quotes are incomplete. They should read;
UPDATE: 5:50 p.m. EST — Two small U.S. Navy boats that were stopped by Iran Tuesday may have run out of gas or had mechanical problems when they drifted into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, the Washington Post reported.
UPDATE: 4:45 p.m. EST — Secretary of State John Kerry called Iranian officials in Tehran Tuesday to explain that two U.S. Navy vessels had mistakenly strayed into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, NBC News reported.

You wouldn't be seeking to omit vital context would you?
From NBC News (one of the reports you omitted);
"The officials said it's unclear whether the sailors — nine men and one woman — had strayed into Iranian territorial waters before they were captured."
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/pentagon-2-u-s-navy-boats-held-iran-military-n495031

So, I'll ask again - Has that been established as a fact yet whether the boats were in Iranian waters?

Even some congressional critters are saying this is a big deal
Top Dem: Iran's naval seizure 'endangers' nuclear deal

The top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee said Iran needs to free 10 U.S. sailors it captured Tuesday, or else the implementation of the nuclear agreement will be threatened.

"I think it endangers everything, I really do," Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., the panel's ranking member, told the Washington Examiner.

"I'm outraged, and Iran needs to release these people as soon as possible or else it would be unthinkable or impossible to make further progress with them on anything as far as I am concerned," he said.

The Associated Press reported the Iranian military has seized two U.S. Navy boats with 10 American sailors on board. The sailors are being held on an island in Iranian waters. The Iranian foreign minister has told Secretary of State John Kerry the sailors will be released soon.

The Iran nuclear agreement would lift U.S. sanctions on the Islamic State in exchange for a reduction in its nuclear program. But Iran has already violated a United Nations ban on testing ballistic missiles and remains a major sponsor of terrorism.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., said the seizing of the U.S. boats, which Iran said were captured in Iranian waters, will increase pressure on President Obama to abandon the terms of the nuclear deal. King said Democrats as well as Republicans are increasingly wary of the deal.

"This is going to add to it," King said.

King said Iran's taking of the sailors is "open defiance of the U.S." and a "direct shot at the president," taken purposely on the day he is to deliver his final State of the Union address. But Congress has no power to break the deal.

Still, King called on Obama to walk away from it.

"I think we should suspend the agreement," King said. "Don't turn over the funds at all."

The House is scheduled to vote Wednesday on legislation that would preserve economic sanctions against Iran that are to be lifted as part of the nuclear agreement.

The bill is poised to pass with mostly Republican support, but is not on the schedule in the Senate and is guaranteed to earn a presidential veto.

Engel said he won't back the GOP sanctions bill because it changes the terms of the nuclear agreement, which Congress failed to block last year.

"I'm not interested in poking the president in the eye," said Engel, who opposed the nuclear deal.

Engel said he is working on a bill that would sanction Iran if it violates the terms of the nuclear deal. The bill would also include resources to bolster Israel's defense system, he said.

d-usa wrote:
I'm surprised that the GOP haven't declared that they are going to have an empty chair for these sailors at the SOTU speech tonight...

It's right beside the empty chair for the children killed by drone strikes.

Obama would need to put some cream on that burn!

**Ahtman**

It feels like some here want to make mountains out of mole hills based on personal proclivities.

**d-usa**

I'm sorry I didn't include "x reported" when posting and quoting the article reporting it.

The source said that Kerry admitted they were in Iranian waters, so unless there is a correction to the source or a statement by the DoD or DoS I will be just fine when I type "they were in Iranian waters", especially since there hasn't been a single peep from anybody saying they were taken in international waters.

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
The source said that Kerry admitted they were in Iranian waters, so unless there is a correction to the source or a statement by the DoD or DoS I will be just fine when I type "they were in Iranian waters", especially since there hasn't been a single peep from anybody saying they were taken in international waters.

Kerry admitted they were in Iranian waters? The Washington Post said;
"Kerry “made the case very strongly” to Zarif that the incident had stemmed from a mechanical problem aboard one of the boats, and that they appeared to have drifted into Iranian territorial waters"
Saying they :appeared to" isn't an admission. I'll wait until something more substantial is released.

**d-usa**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
d-usa wrote:
The source said that Kerry admitted they were in Iranian waters, so unless there is a correction to the source or a statement by the DoD or DoS I will be just fine when I type "they were in Iranian waters", especially since there hasn't been a single peep from anybody saying they were taken in international waters.

Kerry admitted they were in Iranian waters? The Washington Post said;
"Kerry “made the case very strongly” to Zarif that the incident had stemmed from a mechanical problem aboard one of the boats, and that they appeared to have drifted into Iranian territorial waters"
Saying they :appeared to" isn't an admission. I'll wait until something more substantial is released.

d-usa previously reported that the International Business Times previously reported that John Kerry reportedly called Iran to report how the boats ended up in Iranian waters and that the International Business TImes also reported that the Washington Post reported that the boats may have ran out of gas when they drifted into Iranian waters. The report that John Kerry reported to Iran how the boats ended up in Iranian waters were an update to the initial report that the boats reportedly were in Iranian waters and after the reported admission by John Kerry there have not been any reported updates that contradict the report that John Kerry reportedly explained how the boats ended up in Iranian waters.

Source: Abrams, A. (2015, January 12). Iran-US navy dispute live updates: Iranian military holds 10 American sailors on Iran’s farsi island. International Business Times. Retrieved January 12, 2015.

Can we be done with the pedantic stuff now? If you have a source denying they were in Iranian waters, feel free to post it.

**BobtheInquisitor**

Overreacting to the slightest perceived offense is the thing confident world powers are supposed to do now? I thought that's what insecure teenagers did.

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
d-usa previously reported that the International Business Times previously reported that John Kerry reportedly called Iran to report how the boats ended up in Iranian waters and that the International Business TImes also reported that the Washington Post reported that the boats may have ran out of gas when they drifted into Iranian waters. The report that John Kerry reported to Iran how the boats ended up in Iranian waters were an update to the initial report that the boats reportedly were in Iranian waters and after the reported admission by John Kerry there have not been any reported updates that contradict the report that John Kerry reportedly explained how the boats ended up in Iranian waters.

Source: Abrams, A. (2015, January 12). Iran-US navy dispute live updates: Iranian military holds 10 American sailors on Iran’s farsi island. International Business Times. Retrieved January 12, 2015.

Can we be done with the pedantic stuff now? If you have a source denying they were in Iranian waters, feel free to post it.

Talking in 3rd person now?

I apologize for you misreading my seeking an accurate account of events as pedantry. But given that they were either in international waters or not establishing that fact is somewhat important.

1) IBT is compiling information from other news sources and omitting a lot of details, this is the reason for asking has it been established as fact
2) The Washington Post said "appeared to" not, that the boat had in fact been outside international waters
3) NBC said " it's unclear whether the sailors — nine men and one woman — had strayed into Iranian territorial waters before they were captured."

Other news is reporting that there was no distress call by the boats (which complicates claims there were mechanical difficulties).

I have neither admitted or denied that the boats were in Iranian waters. I have asked if it was a fact that they were because the reporting is unclear as to whether they were or were not.If you have a source confirming that the boats were in Iranian waters feel free to post it.

**d-usa**

I have posted an article that reported that Kerry called Iran to explain why the boats were in Iranian waters.

If that's not good enough for you feel free to ignore it.

**Dreadclaw69**

d-usa wrote:
I have posted an article that reported that Kerry called Iran to explain why the boats were in Iranian waters.

If that's not good enough for you feel free to ignore it.

I didn't ignore it, in fact I read it and the article it came from. The article itself stated;
"The officials said it's unclear whether the sailors — nine men and one woman — had strayed into Iranian territorial waters before they were captured."

So at this point the location of the boat when it was intercepted is still unclear.

**d-usa**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
d-usa wrote:
I have posted an article that reported that Kerry called Iran to explain why the boats were in Iranian waters.

If that's not good enough for you feel free to ignore it.

I didn't igniore it, in fact I read it and the article it came from. The article itself stated;
"The officials said it's unclear whether the sailors — nine men and one woman — had strayed into Iranian territorial waters before they were captured."

So at this point the location of the boat when it was intercepted is still unclear.

Original Story: 4:43 p.m. EST — Officials said it was unclear whether the 10 American sailors on one of the boats had gone into Iranian waters before being captured
UPDATE: 4:45 p.m. EST — Secretary of State John Kerry called Iranian officials in Tehran Tuesday to explain that two U.S. Navy vessels had mistakenly strayed into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf
UPDATE: 5:50 p.m. EST — Two small U.S. Navy boats that were stopped by Iran Tuesday may have run out of gas or had mechanical problems when they drifted into Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf

Yes, the article said it was unclear if they were, and after that there have been two updates reporting that it was clear that they were.

Meanwhile from CNN:

Washington (CNN)—Ten American sailors were being held in Iranian custody after two small U.S. naval craft entered Iranian territorial waters, defense officials said Tuesday.

Also via NBC:

The 10 American sailors aboard the small riverine vessels were on a training mission around noon ET when one of the boats may have experienced mechanical failure and drifted into Iranian-claimed waters, officials said..

**Ouze**

I can't realistically imagine patrol boats loaded with military personnel from any country drifting into a non-ally's coastal waters and not being briefly detained.

Briefly being the key word here, of course.

**d-usa**

Ouze wrote:
I can't realistically imagine patrol boats loaded with military personnel from any country drifting into a non-ally's coastal waters and not being briefly detained.

Briefly being the key word here, of course.

The latest reported news are that they will be reunited with the US Navy in international waters at dawn.

I'm not holding my breath that the boats will be returned, but if they are that will give Iran plenty of time to check things out on them.

**Ouze**

Well, did you interview the principals yourself? I really can't trust you when you say "the news" without an APA citation.

Also, it's about 7am localtime Iran, so we should hear something in 2 hours or so.

**whembly**

I wonder how it went down... but Farsi Island?

I always thought the Gulf States contested this island...

Hopefully more details follows...

**LordofHats**

Iran has stated the crew and boats will be returned.

There's actually nothing to suggest this is a real (edit: real as in significant) incident beyond how Republicans are jumping on it for political points. All of this 'arrested' stuff comes from a single Iranian news source that was translated as 'arrested' and everyone else is just rolling the ball downhill on that alone. The Iranian government doesn't actually seem to consider this incident anything more than "some boats broke down and we went to pick them up." EDIT: The original report seems to be from either Fars News or Tasnim News but their English pages don't have any reports on this up yet that I can find.

**d-usa**

I'm not a military person, so maybe some of our military members can educate me on this:

Is it normal for the US Navy to take two small unit CB90s that were designed for river and shallow water use and equipped with enhanced communication equipment and optical gear that make it particularly useful for night operations, and send them on a 200 mile journey that takes them far enough away from the coastal waters that it was designed for and close enough to an Iranian military base located in the middle of the gulf that it ended up drifting less than 12 miles from the coast when the mechanical malfunction happened?