| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran | ||
| Coast Guard cutter fires warning shot at Iranian dhow in brief altercation | ||
| 2014-08-27 | ||
U.S. military officials said the trouble started when the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Monomoy, which regularly patrols international waters in the Gulf, approached an Iranian dhow, a traditional sailing vessel used by fisherman and traders. According to the U.S. account, the cutter dispatched a smaller boat, apparently to try to get closer to the dhow and possibly climb aboard. The dhow was less than friendly; its crew pointed a machine gun at the visiting party. In response, the Monomoy fired a warning shot, which apparently had its desired effect. The dhow sailed off, the cutter retrieved its personnel from the small boat and went its own way.
| ||
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #12 What's grating is that this particular article was written by the Washington Post's supposed Pentagon journalist. At my most charitable, I'd term the writing as "deliberately casual." Were I somewhat less charitable, I'd term it "dismissive," and an attempt to deflect from a current military tactical and strategic situation that conflicts with the media narrative that there's no "war in the Gulf." |
| Posted by: Pappy 2014-08-27 23:07 |
| #11 Like I said,... Indeed, Pappy. I was just snarking about equipment for what has been described in various reports as either a sail boat or fishing vessel. I find it curious that none of the stories seemed to consider a machine gun as an unusual bit of kit. But then again, the news blurbs were written by journalists, the same class of people whose confusement between rubber bullets and earplugs suggest a lack of familiarity with firearms, power tools or lawn mowers. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2014-08-27 20:43 |
| #10 Pappy, Besoeker, Pheremble Crairong2347: thank you for this informative seminar for Rantburg U. Once again my greed for knowledge has been fed. :-) |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2014-08-27 20:23 |
| #9 Like I said, dhows are used as intel platforms and for smuggling. Such a weapon is applicable to both. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2014-08-27 17:29 |
| #8 its crew pointed a machine gun Curious equipment for a fishing boat. Not unheard of here to use dynamite or the odd hand grenade for a fishing trip. I suppose a machine gun would be useful for gators. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2014-08-27 16:34 |
| #7 As military personnel under the UCMJ and the laws of war, or as pirates, or what? That is a good question. My initial answer would be 'UCMJ' and Geneva Convention, since it appears that they are deploying under DOD auspices. I will find out. Pappy, I like the way you addressed me, and I am very aware of the CG's ability to do law enforcement (I live near a sub base). Old and perpetually exercised habits like professionalism are hard to break. As far as the oversupply of information, it's not personal, but rather directed at other readers on the Burg that may not have your range of knowledge. However, it would appear that we are much more interested in lawfare in the Persian Gulf than in the Rio Grande/Gulf of Mexico. Even granted that there are only a relative handful of personnel; the question arises as to "Why there?". I wouldn't call it "lawfare." To me, that refers to the use of a legal system by legal professionals to harass or inflict damage on an opponent (or an enemy.) As far as "why," probably the simplest answer is that the Coast Guard has the assets and abilities that the Navy, for various reasons that I won't belabor here, does not, or cannot, provide. Ideally, it should be Gulf nations that perform most of the missions, particularly interdiction and maritime enforcement. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2014-08-27 16:15 |
| #6 Pappy, I like the way you addressed me, and I am very aware of the CG's ability to do law enforcement (I live near a sub base). However, it would appear that we are much more interested in lawfare in the Persian Gulf than in the Rio Grande/Gulf of Mexico. Even granted that there are only a relative handful of personnel; the question arises as to "Why there?". |
| Posted by: Pheremble Crairong2347 2014-08-27 16:11 |
| #5 It's quite simple, meneer, though the answer is not necessarily to your liking. No, you're right. I'm with 'Maggie' on this one. Not that it matters much these days to jihadists, but if detained, or captured in a shoot out, how are these brave Coasties handled? As military personnel under the UCMJ and the laws of war, or as pirates, or what? Thanks for the details. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2014-08-27 12:14 |
| #4 It's what happens when you wage Lawfare instead of Warfare. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2014-08-27 11:51 |
| #3 It's quite simple, meneer, though the answer is not necessarily to your liking. The USN (and its Marine Corps component), while authorized to conduct boarding and search operations, is prohibited from taking legal and enforcement action. Coast Guard personnel, on the other hand are not part of DOD and are considered maritime law-enforcement personnel. At least one USCG member is hence always part of a USN boarding team. With the realignment of naval assets in the Gulf, the Coast Guard took over maritime security and inspection ops, particularly in the northern part of the Gulf and in Iraqi territorial waters. There are also not a lot of USCG assets out there - six 110-foot cutters and about 300 active/reserve personnel on 12-18 month deployment. BTW, that total is not much more than a Navy destroyer crew. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2014-08-27 11:35 |
| #2 Not to hard to figure out Besoeker; if they are in the Persian Gulf, they are NOT in the Gulf of Mexico! Spread 'um thin to make 'um porous. |
| Posted by: Maggie Slavick5999 2014-08-27 10:16 |
| #1 I have a difficult time figuring out why our Department of Transportation is conducting interdictions operations in the Persian Gulf whilst our borders and waterways are being overrun by the drug cartels and illegals. Perhaps someone could get me up to speed on this. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2014-08-27 03:21 |