Speedboats, Iran and the importance of ratcheting down tensions
Posted 52 weeks 1 hour ago byThis is why restraint is a good thing:
The list of those who are less than fully confident in the Pentagon’s video/audio mashup of aggressive maneuvers by Iranian boats near American warships in the Strait of Hormuz now includes the Pentagon itself.
Unnamed Pentagon officials said on Wednesday that the threatening voice heard in the audio clip, which was released on Monday night with a disclaimer that it was recorded separately from the video images and merged with them later, is not directly traceable to the Iranian military.
That undercuts one of the most menacing elements from the Pentagon’s assertion that Iranian forces threatened the Navy ships: The voice on the radio saying, “I am coming to you. … You will explode after … minutes.”
As my father-in-law likes to say (in a different context): More will be revealed. I suppose it's possible that Iran was trying to provoke a Major Incident with a superpower seemingly itching to be provoked -- and maybe additional facts in coming days will prove that. But it seems unlikely, doesn't it?
UPDATE On the other hand, let's be entirely clear. Iran is still an incredibly nasty place to live:
Earlier this week, human rights groups in Iran expressed shock after judicial authorities disclosed they had amputated the left feet and right hands of five criminals convicted of armed robbery in the southern province of Sistan-Baluchistan.
While amputation punishments are not new in Iran — they were revived after the 1979 Islamic revolution and enforcement of the Islamic penal code — the government has rarely publicized such sentences. Moreover, amputation sentences have been for either hands or feet — not both. And in the newly disclosed instances, the amputators cut off the right hand and left foot, making it difficult, if not impossible, for the condemned people to walk even with a cane or crutches.
Thoughts
Re: No, perhaps not the Gulf of Tonkin...
Submitted on January 10th, 2008 by Jim LakelyIt's a bit of a stretch, Joel, to think that the Bush administration would make the war-mongering Cheney's day by firing up the B-2s if we are forced by Iran's provocation to blow a few skiffs out of the water. In fact, the history of our conduct in the Iraq war is one of incredible, and perhaps foolish, restraint (such as when we took Fallujah in 2004, but crept away to uphold the since-discredited "light footprint" strategy). Besides, it's quite obvious already -- despite the fact that the NIE report hardly says that Iran's nuke ambition is dead -- that Bush is going to kick Iran down the road for the next president to deal with barring a MAJOR provocation.
And I think it is wise to take information that a blogger admits "I hear is put together by some pretty knowledgeable DC insiders" with a sizable lump of salt between the cheek and gum -- especially considering the overly politicized intelligence community's well-documented history of undermining the administration.
As for the happy face stuff -- this has been bugging me for a long time, and strikes me as a weak complaint. It presumes that the public was fooled into thinking that Iraq was going better than it was. Please. The big news outlets of the United States were relentlessly negative in their Iraq War reporting -- often to the exclusion of any positive developments.
Did the administration go to the extreme in trying to put a positive spin on the war? Perhaps. But you can hardly blame them. They're trying to win a war, in which public perception is just as important as bullets and bombs, in the face of relentless negativity on the home front. And it's not like war critics would have given the Bush administration any slack if it said, "Yeah, you're right. Iraq is a freakin' disaster." (Just imagine the headlines -- which our enemies watch closely -- "Bush Admits U.S. Is Losing in Iraq; Pledges to Continue Quaqmire.")
The truth is, things are getting better in Iraq -- which in the longer view of history will make the administration's flawed "happy face" rhetoric look a lot better than the lefty media's equally flawed "it's completely hopeless" defeatism.
No, perhaps not the Gulf of Tonkin...
Submitted on January 10th, 2008 by Joel... but unfortunately, the administration has lost the benefit of the doubt where such things are concerned. Not just because of the WMD fiasco -- lots of people got that wrong -- but because officials kept putting a happy face on the insurgency long after it had become obvious the situation was spiraling out of control, and also because of things like this.
If the Iranians start shooting or bombing, then shoot or bomb back. But I don't trust this administration not to -- at minimum -- overinterpret such situations.
This isn't the Gulf of Tonkin
Submitted on January 10th, 2008 by BenAnd if the U.S. Navy decides to sink a few Iranian gunboats that stray too close to American warships, it wouldn't be the first time.
Should we keep our powder dry? Maybe. But the Iranians can't say they weren't warned.
Just saying.