Obama's response to Iran's aggression: Remain calm; all is well!

In response to Iran's capture and humiliation of innocent American sailors, John Kerry stated, "I want to express my gratitude to Iranian authorities for their cooperation ‎in swiftly resolving this matter."  Granted, he made this obscene statement after the sailors were released, but it boggles the mind how this administration continues to bend over backwards to ensure that its precious Iran deal does not crater.  And nothing could serve as a more stark metaphor – once again – than the famous scene from Animal House in which Kevin Bacon's character, while being paddled by his evil fraternity brothers, begrudgingly cries out, "Thank you, sir, may I have another?"

And while Obama ignored the hijacking of the two Navy patrol boats and kidnapping of the ten sailors on board in his State of the Union address, the rest of the world is mesmerized by the incident, wondering what really happened and how in the world the U.S. continues to prop up this rogue terrorist regime.  The administration has even delusionally gone so far as to use this shameful incident as an example of the wonderful relationship that now exists between Iran and the U.S.  But is it really delusional, or is all of the rhetoric flying out of the White House once again a Benghazi-style manipulation to obfuscate the facts and keep the American people in the dark about Obama's real foreign policy goals?

Cmdr J.E. Dyer has done a tremendous job of reporting and analyzing the incident as well as the administration's narrative about what transpired.  Dyer quoted a Navy SEAL who stated:

The claim by Iran that the USN boats "strayed into Iranian waters" is complete bulls***.

For an open-water transit between nations, the course is studied and planned in advance by the leaders of the Riverine Squadron, with specific attention given to staying wide and clear of any hostile nation's claimed territorial waters. The boats are given a complete mechanical check before departure, and they have sufficient fuel to accomplish their mission plus extra. If, for some unexplainable and rare circumstance one boat broke down, the other would tow it, that's why two boats go on these trips and not one! It's called "self-rescue" and it's SOP.

This entire situation is in my area of expertise. I can state with complete confidence that both Iran and our own State Department are lying. The "strayed into Iranian waters" story being put out by Iran and our groveling and appeasing State Dept. is utter and complete BS from one end to the other.  The boats did not enter Iranian waters. They were overtaken in international waters by Iranian patrol boats that were so superior in both speed and firepower that it became a "hands up!" situation, with automatic cannons in the 40mm to 76mm range pointed at them point-blank. Surrender, hands up, or be blown out of the water. I assume that the Iranians had an English speaker on a loudspeaker to make the demand. This takedown was no accident or coincidence, it was a planned slap across America's face.

Furthermore, just as everyone questions what Ambassador Stevens was doing in Benghazi the night of the attacks on the U.S. compound in Libya, Dyer questions what the boats were doing in such an uncharacteristically dangerous situation:

I'm asking why such a transit happened.  I can't see anyone in the chain of command thinking it was a good idea.  For one very important thing, there's not a sailor alive, if he's been in the Gulf, who doesn't know that IRGCN fast boats zoom around in the northern Persian Gulf every day, operating from Farsi Island.  In a period of Iranian naval adventurism and heightened tensions, why expose two lone Navy small boats to that – a situation in which they could quickly be overwhelmed?

Addressing what may have motivated the Iranians to take such an aggressive step just days before Obama is due to release $150 billion to these terrorists, Dyer noted the comment made by Iranian armed forces chief Major General Hassan Firouzabadi that this should be a lesson to Congress.  Dyer observed:

Well, what do you know.  An incident that was supposed to be entirely accidental, involving a mechanical breakdown and two U.S. Navy boats straying inadvertently into Iranian waters, with the Iranians sort of implicitly seizing the boats because they were stranded at sea (although that was never clarified, but more in a minute on the topic) – this culmination of total happenstance should serve as a "lesson to troublemakers in Congress" who want to impose new sanctions?

Maybe Firouzabadi is suggesting that God placed broke-down U.S. Navy boats in Iran's way as a means of supernaturally rebuking "troublemakers" in Congress.

It's hard to see how else an unplanned seizure of U.S. military assets could serve as a lesson to American lawmakers, especially on such a very specific topic.

But the more likely explanation is the simpler – realistic – one: that Iran meant the seizure of the Navy boats and crewmen to be a lesson to Congress.

This renews the question what really happened, and what the on-scene pretext (if any) was for the seizure.

One fact with regard to this military and diplomatic fiasco, however, has been underreported.  From Ace of Spades:

The question [of where the boats were when captured] could be answered by the several GPS devices on the boats. The Iranians, however, chose to retain them with the US State Department's blessings, when it returned the crewmen. It's unknown whether the Iranians returned the small arms and the cryptographic and communications equipment on the boats.

That the Iranians kept the GPS units suggests that our boats were in international waters. That no US ship or aircraft responded to defend them suggests that maybe they were not – or resources are just too thin in the region, after a decade of dismantling the Navy.

So the administration consented to the Iranians' stealing equipment off two Navy vessels.  Lovely.  This is on the heels of the Pentagon "losing" a hellfire missile that suddenly turned up in Cuba.  Unfortunately for the Obama administration, all of their diplomatic endeavors with the Castros didn't have quite the same charm as with the mullahs, since Cuba is refusing to return the missile.  And lest no one is seeing a pattern here, recall that Iran downed a U.S. drone in 2011 and built a replica that it successfully tested last year.

There is no way to determine how it is that our military equipment (and thus secrets) continually falls into the hands of our enemies – I mean our new allies – under this administration.  Stupidity, incompetence, carelessness, and any other number of possible explanations come to mind.  As the FoxNews saying goes, "We report, you decide."

I will leave readers with one final image, once again of Kevin Bacon at the end of Animal House:

In response to Iran's capture and humiliation of innocent American sailors, John Kerry stated, "I want to express my gratitude to Iranian authorities for their cooperation ‎in swiftly resolving this matter."  Granted, he made this obscene statement after the sailors were released, but it boggles the mind how this administration continues to bend over backwards to ensure that its precious Iran deal does not crater.  And nothing could serve as a more stark metaphor – once again – than the famous scene from Animal House in which Kevin Bacon's character, while being paddled by his evil fraternity brothers, begrudgingly cries out, "Thank you, sir, may I have another?"

And while Obama ignored the hijacking of the two Navy patrol boats and kidnapping of the ten sailors on board in his State of the Union address, the rest of the world is mesmerized by the incident, wondering what really happened and how in the world the U.S. continues to prop up this rogue terrorist regime.  The administration has even delusionally gone so far as to use this shameful incident as an example of the wonderful relationship that now exists between Iran and the U.S.  But is it really delusional, or is all of the rhetoric flying out of the White House once again a Benghazi-style manipulation to obfuscate the facts and keep the American people in the dark about Obama's real foreign policy goals?

Cmdr J.E. Dyer has done a tremendous job of reporting and analyzing the incident as well as the administration's narrative about what transpired.  Dyer quoted a Navy SEAL who stated:

The claim by Iran that the USN boats "strayed into Iranian waters" is complete bulls***.

For an open-water transit between nations, the course is studied and planned in advance by the leaders of the Riverine Squadron, with specific attention given to staying wide and clear of any hostile nation's claimed territorial waters. The boats are given a complete mechanical check before departure, and they have sufficient fuel to accomplish their mission plus extra. If, for some unexplainable and rare circumstance one boat broke down, the other would tow it, that's why two boats go on these trips and not one! It's called "self-rescue" and it's SOP.

This entire situation is in my area of expertise. I can state with complete confidence that both Iran and our own State Department are lying. The "strayed into Iranian waters" story being put out by Iran and our groveling and appeasing State Dept. is utter and complete BS from one end to the other.  The boats did not enter Iranian waters. They were overtaken in international waters by Iranian patrol boats that were so superior in both speed and firepower that it became a "hands up!" situation, with automatic cannons in the 40mm to 76mm range pointed at them point-blank. Surrender, hands up, or be blown out of the water. I assume that the Iranians had an English speaker on a loudspeaker to make the demand. This takedown was no accident or coincidence, it was a planned slap across America's face.

Furthermore, just as everyone questions what Ambassador Stevens was doing in Benghazi the night of the attacks on the U.S. compound in Libya, Dyer questions what the boats were doing in such an uncharacteristically dangerous situation:

I'm asking why such a transit happened.  I can't see anyone in the chain of command thinking it was a good idea.  For one very important thing, there's not a sailor alive, if he's been in the Gulf, who doesn't know that IRGCN fast boats zoom around in the northern Persian Gulf every day, operating from Farsi Island.  In a period of Iranian naval adventurism and heightened tensions, why expose two lone Navy small boats to that – a situation in which they could quickly be overwhelmed?

Addressing what may have motivated the Iranians to take such an aggressive step just days before Obama is due to release $150 billion to these terrorists, Dyer noted the comment made by Iranian armed forces chief Major General Hassan Firouzabadi that this should be a lesson to Congress.  Dyer observed:

Well, what do you know.  An incident that was supposed to be entirely accidental, involving a mechanical breakdown and two U.S. Navy boats straying inadvertently into Iranian waters, with the Iranians sort of implicitly seizing the boats because they were stranded at sea (although that was never clarified, but more in a minute on the topic) – this culmination of total happenstance should serve as a "lesson to troublemakers in Congress" who want to impose new sanctions?

Maybe Firouzabadi is suggesting that God placed broke-down U.S. Navy boats in Iran's way as a means of supernaturally rebuking "troublemakers" in Congress.

It's hard to see how else an unplanned seizure of U.S. military assets could serve as a lesson to American lawmakers, especially on such a very specific topic.

But the more likely explanation is the simpler – realistic – one: that Iran meant the seizure of the Navy boats and crewmen to be a lesson to Congress.

This renews the question what really happened, and what the on-scene pretext (if any) was for the seizure.

One fact with regard to this military and diplomatic fiasco, however, has been underreported.  From Ace of Spades:

The question [of where the boats were when captured] could be answered by the several GPS devices on the boats. The Iranians, however, chose to retain them with the US State Department's blessings, when it returned the crewmen. It's unknown whether the Iranians returned the small arms and the cryptographic and communications equipment on the boats.

That the Iranians kept the GPS units suggests that our boats were in international waters. That no US ship or aircraft responded to defend them suggests that maybe they were not – or resources are just too thin in the region, after a decade of dismantling the Navy.

So the administration consented to the Iranians' stealing equipment off two Navy vessels.  Lovely.  This is on the heels of the Pentagon "losing" a hellfire missile that suddenly turned up in Cuba.  Unfortunately for the Obama administration, all of their diplomatic endeavors with the Castros didn't have quite the same charm as with the mullahs, since Cuba is refusing to return the missile.  And lest no one is seeing a pattern here, recall that Iran downed a U.S. drone in 2011 and built a replica that it successfully tested last year.

There is no way to determine how it is that our military equipment (and thus secrets) continually falls into the hands of our enemies – I mean our new allies – under this administration.  Stupidity, incompetence, carelessness, and any other number of possible explanations come to mind.  As the FoxNews saying goes, "We report, you decide."

I will leave readers with one final image, once again of Kevin Bacon at the end of Animal House: