There is no 'international waters' area

In the Strait of Hormuz...

So what exactly were we claiming as we sailed our warships through them?:

Tension spiked markedly last week when Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) speedboats were involved in an "incident" with three US Navy vessels, which claimed they were international waters.

Yet there is no "international water" in the Strait of Hormuz, straddled between the territorial waters of Iran and Oman. The US government claimed, through a Pentagon spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the three US ships "transiting through the Strait of Hormuz" were provocatively harassed by the speedboats.

The article goes on to discuss the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, (UNCLOS) and makes this point:

However, irrespective of how Congress acts on the pending legislation on UNCLOS, the fact is that the US cannot have its cake and eat it. That is, rely on it to defend its navigational rights in the Strait of Hormuz and, simultaneously, disregard the various limitations on those rights imposed by the UNCLOS - and favoring Iran.

Thus:

In other words, US warships transiting through Hormuz must, in effect, act as non-war ships, "temporarily depriving themselves of their armed might". And any "warning shots" fired by US ships at Iranian boats, inspecting the US ships under customary international laws, must be considered an infringement on Iran's rights. This technically warrants a legal backlash in the form of the Iranians temporary suspending the US warships' right of passage. Again, the US could be technically prosecuted by Iran in international forums for conducting questionable activities while in Iranian territorial waters.

Now take a look at the Strait:





And tell me which one is doing the harassing?

Will Cheney get his war with Iran in time?

Before they break down the door to his secret undisclosed location lair and pry his zombie hands away from the red button?

WASHINGTON — Iranian boats harassed and provoked three American Navy ships in the strategic Strait of Hormuz, threatening to explode the vessels, U.S. officials said Monday, calling it the most serious such incident in years.

U.S. forces were taking steps toward firing on the Iranians to defend themselves, said the U.S. naval commander in the region. But the boats _ believed to be from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's navy _ turned and moved away, officials said.

[snip]

An Iranian Revolutionary Guard official also described the incident as nothing unusual.

"No unusual confrontation has taken place between the Guard's patrol vessels and U.S. ships," state-run television quoted the official as saying. The official was speaking on customary condition of anonymity. The Guard official said the Guard's vessels were conducting normal patrols in the Strait of Hormuz when they saw three U.S. ships enter the waters of the region.

"The Guard's navy vessels, as usual, asked the ships to identify themselves and they did so and continued their path," the TV quoted the official as saying.

Whitman said the U.S. vessels were in international waters, making a normal transit into the Gulf. He said the Iranian boats were operating at "distances and speeds that showed reckless and dangerous intent _ reckless, dangerous and potentially hostile intent."

Historical tensions between the two nations have increased in recent years over Washington's charge that Tehran has been developing nuclear weapons and supplying and training Iraqi insurgents using roadside bombs _ the No. 1 killer of U.S. troops in Iraq.

At about this time last year, Bush announced he was sending a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf region in a show of force against Iran. The U.S. Navy quietly scaled back to one carrier group several months later. But while the two were there, they staged two major exercises off Iran's coast.

Gee, we've been mooning Iran for effing MONTHS and this is all we get? Dick is going to be very displeased....

Update 1/9: Bryan of Why Now? has a very good description of what may have happened with the ships: Bump and Run.

Update: The New York Times reports about the odd audio made of the Iranian threat.. with no ambient noises from the ships:

The episode was initially described Monday by American officials who said it took place Sunday in the Strait of Hormuz.

They said five armed Iranian speedboats approached three United States Navy warships in international waters, then maneuvered aggressively as a radio threat was issued that the American ships would be blown up. No shots were fired. The video runs slightly more than four minutes and, Pentagon officials said, was shot from the bridge of the guided-missile destroyer Hopper.

The audio includes a heavily accented voice warning in English that the Navy warships would explode. However, the recording carries no ambient noise — the sounds of a motor, the sea or wind — that would be expected if the broadcast had been made from one of the five small boats that sped around the three-ship American convoy.

Pentagon officials said they could not rule out that the broadcast might have come from shore, or from another ship nearby, although it might have come from one of the five fast boats with a high-quality radio system.

Update 1/10: Um... never mind. heh...

Update 1/11: Ah, of course. It may have been the mysterious voice of the Filipino Monkey. Now all things become clear. We were about to start WWIII because of a prankster....

Update 1/12: Sailor of SteveAudio has the list of facts and fictions. We could have been hijacked into another insane war over NOTHING. We can't get these bozos out of office soon enough.

Just how deep is that bunker you've been digging?

Because you might want it a little deeper...

Sorghum Crow of Sorghum Crow's General Store picked up this article:

U.S. Navy steps up fuel deliveries to Gulf forces

LONDON, Nov 23 (Reuters) - The U.S. military has stepped up chartering of tankers and requests for extra fuel in the U.S. Central Command area, which includes the Gulf, shipping and oil industry sources say.

A Gulf oil industry source said the charters suggested there would be high naval activity, possibly including a demonstration to Iran that the U.S. Navy will protect the Strait of Hormuz oil shipping route during tensions over Tehran's nuclear programme.

The U.S. Navy's Military Sealift Command (MSC) has tendered for four tankers in November to move at least one million barrels of jet and ship fuel between Gulf ports, from Asia to the Gulf and to the Diego Garcia base, tenders seen by Reuters show.

It usually tenders for one or two tankers a month to supply Gulf operations, which include missions in Iraq.

The MSC, asked for comment, confirmed the tenders and said there was nothing abnormal about current requirements in the Gulf, where it has a large military presence and which is home to the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet.

A fifth hire request was recently cancelled, it said.

Fuels specified to be moved between Gulf ports include JP5, high flashpoint jet fuel, used to power F18 fighters aboard aircraft carriers.

"They have been very active," said a ship industry source, familiar with the MSC tender process, who asked not to be named.

"Out of the multiple charter requirements they issue, they usually do maybe one or two (tankers) a month in the Gulf. They were quiet over the summer months," he said.

Is this Cheney and his drive to attack Iran before his term is out? What is going on?

6 Navy Commanders sacked in 6 weeks

Why?

Are they refusing to attack Iran? What is going on? Who is replacing these commanders?

For the sixth time in as many weeks, the lead officer of a Navy ship has been suddenly relieved of command, DANGER ROOM pal Andy Scutro reports for Navy Times.

Here is a list of all of them, one was Coast Guard.

Why does this make me freak out just a bit?

What? Can't a country do war exercises?

So what if it's right on off the coast of Iran? The Persian Gulf is a small place! With all the warships and subs we have here, there might just be an acci... OMG!! Did you see that? One of our ships had a collision!! Bomb Iran! Bomb it now!! Bom... oh. Just us. Jeez, tell the admiral to stop making the ship do wheelies.

Carry on:

THE US today threatened new UN sanctions to punish Iran's nuclear drive as it ratcheted up tensions with the biggest display of naval power in the Gulf in years.

A bristling US armada led by two aircraft carriers steamed into waters near Iran for exercises, hours before UN watchdogs said Iran was expanding its uranium enrichment program in defiance of international sanctions.

[snip]

The US Navy said the Gulf exercises were not directed at Iran but Mustafa Alani, senior analyst with the UAE-based Gulf Research Centre, said it was no coincidence the powerful flotilla arrived on the day of the IAEA report.

"The aim of this step, which coincides entirely with the end of the UN deadline (to suspend enrichment), is to send a clear message to Iran that a military option is available to Washington," Mr Alani said.

The carriers USS John Stennis and USS Nimitz sailed through the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf along with a helicopter carrier and amphibious assault ships carrying an estimated 2200 marines.

And here:

WASHINGTON - As the United States and Iran prepare to hold talks on stabilizing Iraq, tensions between Tehran and Washington are ratcheting up again.

The U.S. Navy on Wednesday began its largest war games off the Iranian coast since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, with two nuclear-powered aircraft carriers leading a flotilla of nine ships, dozens of combat aircraft and more than 2,100 Marines.

As the air and sea exercises commenced, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency reported that Iran is expanding its nuclear program - which U.S. officials charge is aimed at developing nuclear weapons - in defiance of U.N. Security Council demands that it suspend uranium enrichment.

Iran also has stepped up arms shipments to insurgents battling American troops and the U.S.-backed governments in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. officials said. For the first time, Iran has begun supplying the Taliban in Afghanistan with explosively formed projectile bombs, which have been used to destroy U.S. armored vehicles in Iraq, the officials said.

These developments are part of a wider pattern of tit-for-tat actions and reactions that some members of Congress, U.S. officials and Arab governments worry could escalate into an armed confrontation.

Another example of the back-and-forth: As U.S. forces in Iraq continue to hold five Iranians it seized from a diplomatic facility in Irbil in the Kurdish zone, Iran has detained three Iranian-Americans, among them Haleh Esfandiari, a leading Middle East expert at the at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C.

Let me just repost what I put up February 12 of this year:

In the Strait of Hormuz:

U.S. Navy nuclear submarines maintaining vigil off the coast of Iran indicate that the Pentagon’s military plans include not only control over navigation in the Persian Gulf but also strikes against Iranian targets, a former commander of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, Admiral Eduard Baltin has told the Interfax news agency.

“The presence of U.S. nuclear submarines in the Persian Gulf region means that the Pentagon has not abandoned plans for surprise strikes against nuclear targets in Iran. With this aim a group of multi-purpose submarines ready to accomplish the task is located in the area,” Admiral Baltin said.

He made the comments after reports that a U.S. submarine collided with a Japanese tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

“American patience is not unlimited,” he said. “The submarine commanders go up to the periscope depth and forget about navigation rules and safety measures,” the admiral said.

Currently there is a group of up to four submarines in the Persian Gulf area, he said. So far they only control navigation in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and in the Arabian Sea, he said. They might receive different orders in future: to block off the Gulf of Oman, that is the Iranian coast, and, if need be, launch missile strikes against ground targets in Iran, he said.

We've packed so many warships and subs into the area, 'accidents' are bound to happen:

The Straits of Hormuz carry a vast quntity of the worlds oil in a huge number of ships. Traffic is very heavy there. There is a “Traffic Separation Scheme” in place that separates opposing shipping traffic to reduce the possibility of collision in this vital, and narrow, passage.

The USS Newport News and the Mogamigawa were travelling in the same direction so the “Traffic Separation Scheme” did not offer any protection to them. Since the USS Newport News was fully submerged the Mogamigawa was not even aware of her presence and could not take action to avoid the collision.

As LondonYank observes:

Somehow I always thought it would be other guys who would sink a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz to block the Persian Gulf. I reckoned without the peculiar incompetence of this administration and the bad luck our military has had in the region.

Update: And Francis Townsend (a White House 'Counter Terror' Official) sounds just a little bit too excited to tell us that Bush is keeping all options on the table (starts at 1:13):

And here it goes...

Iran nabs Brits inside Iranian waters:

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Iranian naval vessels on Friday seized 15 British sailors and marines who had boarded a merchant ship in Iraqi waters of the Persian Gulf, British and U.S. officials said. Britain immediately protested the detentions, which come at a time of high tension between the West and Iran.

In London, the British government summoned the Iranian ambassador to the Foreign Office: "He was left in no doubt that we want them back," Britain's Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said after the meeting.

A spokesman for the U.S. Navy, which operates off the Iraqi coast along with British forces, said Iran's Revolutionary Guard naval forces were responsible.

Cmdr. Kevin Aandahl of the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet said the Iranian Revolutionary Guards had radioed a British warship explaining that no harm had come to the 15 Britons and that they were seized because they were in Iranian waters. The British Defense Ministry said the Iranians took custody of the sailors and marines in Iraqi waters.

I told you and I told you this would happen! You pack the Persian Gulf and the Straits of Hormuz with huge warships and this is what you get!

Cheney in Oman

Promising what to whom?

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) -- Vice President Dick Cheney landed in the U.S.-allied Arab monarchy of Oman on Sunday and went directly to talks with its foreign minister, Omani government officials said.

A U.S. embassy spokesman in Oman declined to detail Cheney's plans or the focus of his visit to the sparsely populated oil-producing state, which allows the United States use of four air bases. But an Omani government official said Cheney was to discuss regional security issues, including the U.S. standoff with Iran over its nuclear program. The official, in the capital Muscat, spoke on condition of anonymity because he was unauthorized to speak to the press.

Oman sits across the strategically important Strait of Hormuz from Iran, through which two-fifths of the world's oil passes.

The sultanate allows the United States to use the air bases - including one just 50 miles from Iran - for refueling, logistics and storage of pre-positioned military supplies. Little has been revealed publicly about U.S. military ties with the reclusive country, a deeply sensitive topic inside Oman, an isolated country on the southeastern corner of the Arabian peninsula that has been a quiet U.S. military ally for decades.

Navy Admiral ready for war with Iran

Via NewsHog, this interview by our Navy Admiral in the Persian Gulf:

"Although our presence in the Arabian Gulf is for defensive and not offensive purposes, the US will take military action if ships are attacked or if countries in the region are targeted or US troops come under direct attack," Patrick Walsh yesterday told journalists in Bahrain.

The three-star vice admiral said that there was increasing concern about the intention of Iran in the region.

"The question is not what the US is planning, but rather what Iran is planning for the region," he said.

"When you look at the exercises conducted by Iran in the last nine months, you see the open display of suggestions. They are using mines in their exercises and, very importantly, they are conducting sea manoeuvres in the proximity of the Strait of Hormuz. Why would Iran conduct them in that region when they have so much space elsewhere?" About 40 per cent of all the world's traded oil passes through the strategic waterway, and last month, an Iranian newspaper warned that retaliation by Tehran could include stopping oil traffic through the Strait.

'Why would Iran conduct them in that region when they have so much space elsewhere?' Could it be because...you know... it's their coastline and their waters? Just because we've packed our warships into the Gulf and have been mooning Iran in hopes of creating a convenient international incident doesn't mean Iran can't play wargames, too.

(Stupid, yes. But with all our nyah nyahing outside on his lawn, he feels he has the right to turn on the sprinklers..... It just means the next step is we get to burn down his house...)

Just a reminder of how 'accidents' will happen in the Persian Gulf

In the Strait of Hormuz:

U.S. Navy nuclear submarines maintaining vigil off the coast of Iran indicate that the Pentagon’s military plans include not only control over navigation in the Persian Gulf but also strikes against Iranian targets, a former commander of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, Admiral Eduard Baltin has told the Interfax news agency.

“The presence of U.S. nuclear submarines in the Persian Gulf region means that the Pentagon has not abandoned plans for surprise strikes against nuclear targets in Iran. With this aim a group of multi-purpose submarines ready to accomplish the task is located in the area,” Admiral Baltin said.

He made the comments after reports that a U.S. submarine collided with a Japanese tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

“American patience is not unlimited,” he said. “The submarine commanders go up to the periscope depth and forget about navigation rules and safety measures,” the admiral said.

Currently there is a group of up to four submarines in the Persian Gulf area, he said. So far they only control navigation in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and in the Arabian Sea, he said. They might receive different orders in future: to block off the Gulf of Oman, that is the Iranian coast, and, if need be, launch missile strikes against ground targets in Iran, he said.

We've packed so many warships and subs into the area, 'accidents' are bound to happen:

The Straits of Hormuz carry a vast quntity of the worlds oil in a huge number of ships. Traffic is very heavy there. There is a “Traffic Separation Scheme” in place that separates opposing shipping traffic to reduce the possibility of collision in this vital, and narrow, passage.

The USS Newport News and the Mogamigawa were travelling in the same direction so the “Traffic Separation Scheme” did not offer any protection to them. Since the USS Newport News was fully submerged the Mogamigawa was not even aware of her presence and could not take action to avoid the collision.

As LondonYank observes:

Somehow I always thought it would be other guys who would sink a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz to block the Persian Gulf. I reckoned without the peculiar incompetence of this administration and the bad luck our military has had in the region.