\"Reading Printer Friendly Page Tell A Friend
★★★★★ (90)
by Jim Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ · Book · Travel · #1779685

What the heck am I doing today? Shenanigans, General Tomfoolery or What? You never know

◀ Previous · Entry List · Next ▶
#1110143 added March 8, 2026 at 12:43pm
Restrictions: None
The World As It Is
The World As It Is


          Okay, another topic that will likely cause a lot of responses, maybe some resentment.  See what you think.

          We attacked Iran about a week ago, and President Trump received a lot of flack about not seeking the permission of Congress before the attack.  Yes, Congressional permission is required to declare war on another nation.  We haven't done that, we have not declared war. 

         I have to ask one question about that though.  And, if he had sought Congressional approval before the attack, would it have then been a surprise attack?  I've drawn my conclusions, you do the same.  No, I'm not happy that we attacked a country like we did.  The people of Iran (the general public) deserve so much more.  How many of them want war?  I bet it's a low percentage.  I've not been there, I'd love to go.  Everywhere I've been on God's Green Earth, the general public has been very friendly.  War is never an answer in my opinion.  But, negotiations, embargo's and the like had failed, the country's leaders kept the Military & Scientists building weapons and enriching Uranium to weapons grade.  I am not comfortable with them having Nuclear Weapons, are you?

          I've also seen a few things written about how cowardly it was a US Submarine to sink an Iranian Warship.  Hmmmm, as a Retired Submariner, I have to really disagree with that statement.  First though, this is why it was labeled as a cowardly attack

          1.  Attacking a Returning, Non-Combatant Vessel: Critics argue the Dena was not engaged in active combat, but was returning from a, "peace" mission (the MILAN 2026 exercise in India).  My reply - Active combat?  It was a warship capable of sinking other vessels, including submarines.  Yes, the boat could have messaged Washington DC about it's status, that would have been easily picked up by almost anyone.  Suddenly your peace mission is gone, so is the element of surprise.
          2.  "Defenseless" State: Claims suggest the ship was essentially unarmed or operating under "peace protocols" that restricted carrying live ammunition.  This is something that experts need to discuss, not me, not you.  We have no idea of their weaponry when attacked.  I will provide an incident from WWII.  The sinking of the USS Indianapolis (a cruiser) after it delivered the Atomic Bomb to the island of Tinian.  It completed it's mission and was returning home.  Almost 890 men died because of that attack,
          3.  Asymmetric Warfare: The attack involved a highly advanced U.S. submarine attacking a much smaller, 1,500-ton frigate, which was characterized as "not a fair fight".  Oh for crying out loud!  Since when has any country concerned itself about a fair fight?  Has any sneak attack been a fair fight? 
         4.  Lack of Warning: The vessel was reportedly struck without warning in international waters, thousands of miles away from the primary combat zone.  So critics think the vessel should have been warned in some way?  Should the submarine have broadcast a message that it was going to attack the ship?  And they were in International waters?  Oh my.  How much of the Earth's oceans are 'International Waters'?  Far more than you might realize.  64%.  ,"  These areas lie beyond the 200-nautical-mile Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of coastal nations, representing a "global commons" not under any single country's jurisdiction.
          5.  Abandoning Survivors: A major point of condemnation is that the U.S. submarine did not stay to assist, but rather left the ship's crew to drown, which some legal analysts and critics argued violated international humanitarian law.  This I am not happy about one bit.  I want you to notice one thing though.  Has the hull number/name of the Submarine been published anywhere?  Not that I know of.  Why not?  Because Iran would likely use that information to attack almost any crew members family, especially the Senior Officer families.  If they had taken prisoners, that information would have been easily learned.  No, I'm not happy we didn't pick up survivors.  I think maybe they could have jettisoned life rafts and the like.  Again, thinking back to WWII, how often did submarines of any nation pick up survivors?  It happened, but not very often.
          6.  "Bragging" about the Attack: The tone used by U.S. officials, such as describing it as a "quiet death," was viewed as callous and unethical.  No comment because I don't know details.

          A submarine operates in a stealthy manner.  It's job is to sink enemy ships, or in the case of Ballistic Missile Submarines, act as a deterrent, causing any enemy to rethink attacking the US when they may be attacked from unknown locations.  A Submarine's operation might seem cowardly to many, but that's how submarines operate.  I've referenced WWII a couple of times here, mainly because I know more about them in that conflict in WWI.  Yes, submarines were used in WWI.  Germany had over twice as many in service as the allies did.  I'll leave it at that.
*Thought*  Comment   •   View 8 comments

© Copyright 2026 Jim (UN: jim-d at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Jim has granted Writing.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work.
◀ Previous · Entry List · Next ▶