Peace in our time.
“Iranian Warships Confront U.S. Navy On ‘Daily Basis,’” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, September 8, 2015:
U.S. naval forces operating in and around the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping lane, are “routinely approached by Iranian warships and aircraft” on a “nearly daily basis,” according to a Pentagon official familiar with operations in the region.
During these interactions between U.S. and Iranian forces, American aircraft and ships are routinely photographed by the Iranians for intelligence purposes, according to the official, who said that most confrontations between the sides are “conducted in a safe and professional manner.”
The disclosure of these daily run-ins comes following the release of footage by the Iranian military purporting to show a reconnaissance mission over a U.S. aircraft carrier station in the Strait of Hormuz.
The clip, which was filmed at the end of August and is punctuated by dramatic music, shows U.S. personnel aboard the ship and shots of U.S. warplanes stationed on it.
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps “drones have carried out such missions many times; although the drone remains for a long time above the [American crew’s] heads, they didn’t notice it,” Iran’s state-control media reported in Persian at the time, according to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute. “In some cases, [the American crew] did notice the IRGC drone awhile after the filming and tried to drive it off by sending a helicopter or fighter jet after it.”
When asked about the veracity of the clip, a Pentagon official said that Iran conducts surveillance missions on a routine basis.
“U.S. Naval forces are routinely approached by Iranian warships and aircraft as they operate in the region, with the majority of all interaction by the Iranians conducted in a safe and professional manner,” the official said. “This happens on a near daily basis.”
“The Iranians’ primary purpose for approaching U.S. forces is for ISR [Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance] so these interactions are almost always characterized by the presence of Iranian photographers capturing photos and video,” the official added.
The United States also films these encounters, the official noted.
“During these interactions we, too, capture imagery for the record,” the official said. “Safe, professional, and routine interactions are of no concern, and we are fully confident in the ability of U.S. Naval forces to defend themselves. We also publicly acknowledge those interactions with the Iranians which we consider to be unsafe.”…
“I officially declare that under no circumstances will we refrain from providing material and moral support to Hezbollah, or to any group of the resistance to the U.S. and Israel,” said Hossein Dehghan, Iran’s defense minister, in an interview this month, according to a translation of his remarks.
Iran continues “to consider the U.S. to be the ‘Great Satan’ even after the nuclear deal,” Dehghan said.

john spielman says
I just cannot thank president Obama enough for securing” peace in out time”(thanks Robert) as we will now be able to live in peace and harmony from now on with the Republic of Iran. sarc
That was painful to write even as sarcasm as the Obmanation who sits in the Oval office is willingly kowtowing to muslimaniacs who will launch a apocalyptic attack on Israel and the West even if it means the destruction of Iran. Their theology of the last imam/ mahdi is far more dangerous than the suicide theology of the kamikaze of Shinto Japan in WW2
cs says
Why bother with such a nice bunch such as the Iranian regime, they are truly lovely guys, they remind me of… Well forget it.
They are up to no good, and this treaty is so dubious, it will eventually lead to war, and perhaps that was the intention from the beginning. I don’t know who is the most hateful bunch, if sunnis or shia, but Iran is really taking the piss.
Lia Wissing says
I like your neologism: muslimaniacs!!!
JIMJFOX says
Another good one— “Koranimals”
Bob Smith says
This will eventually turn into active combat.
The US should not have and aircraft carriers so close to Iran. They are high value easy targets. What advantage does it offer the US to have them so close?
Obama must be talking to the brass and giving advice.
Harry_the_Horrible says
I wouldn’t call ’em “easy” targets. Thanks the the USN’s emphasis on damage control training, they’d probably survive anything sort of a nuke or multiple strikes by BIG anti-ship missiles like the Sunburn.
But there would be hundreds if not thousands of dead.
Too bad we’re stuck with an internal enemy for President, or we could resolve this issue, pronto.
PRCS says
After the Sheffield incident (hit and ultimately sunk by an Excocet missle) during the UK/Falklands War, a great part of that damage control training included many, many intensive, graded mass conflagration drills.
RonaldB says
I can’t answer your question, but the question makes sense.
I have absolutely no idea of modern military tactics in light of the latest technology. However, during the cold war, I remember hearing of studies showing that the more advanced US fighters had a tremendous advantage over the less-sophisticated Russian fighters in one-to-one combat, but as the air became crowded, the technology became less decisive. And it was a strategy of the Russians to mass-produce their planes.
The Iranians might very well adopt a strategy of massive attacks by less-sophisticated ships and planes to overwhelm technologically-superior defenses. What about a strategy of massively mining the Strait of Hormuz to limit US maneuverability, and again, have massive, low-technology attacks?
The point is, I’m surprised that the military is so sanguine and overconfident at the relentless collection of intelligence by the Iranian forces. They’re risking a lot on the assumption that nothing will go massively wrong.
cs says
@RonaldB
I think the trend is exactly the opposite, that was true in the early seventies, when the soviets were producing mig-21 en mass. But now I believe the concept is more fighter as flying station for intelligent weapons. Based heavily on avionics and electronic devices who can predict the path of the enemy fighter, interfere in its capacities and remain relatively stealth. The USAF is mainly downing planes without even seen them. We will see though.
foley says
I would like someone to show me an Iranian “warship.” Every time there’s an article about Iranian “warships,” all I see is a photo of an American Navy vessel.
Harry_the_Horrible says
You can look them up on the internet. The Iranian navy has a bunch of old corvettes and frigates but they are armed with modern anti-ship missiles. They also have three Kilo class subs – very dangerous opponents in littoral waters.
The Iranians have also been developing small boats and mini-subs for warfare in the Gulf, but it remains to be seen if they are actually of any use.
Angemon says
Huh, why? it’s not like the Americans lack the means or skills to fend them off.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/19/us-pilot-scares-iranians-top-gun-worthy-stunt-you-/
mortimer says
Iran continues “to consider the U.S. to be the ‘Great Satan’ even after the nuclear deal,” Dehghan said.
That sounds like a declaration of war less one micrometer.
Sam says
Come on guys and gals, these are friendly Shiite flirtations to be closer to our sailors to improve “International Relations” as being a member of the world community. Obama prevented a war through his smarts that no one can relate to even a stupid liberal.
LSWCHP says
Dunno what the deal is here. A “confrontation” generally involves one or both sides lighting the other up with their fire controls radars. A warship will do this to specifically warn an aircraft or vessel that their actions are provocative and the crew is concerned. It’s called a “warn-off” and Google will tell you all about it.
Motoring around taking pictures, fingerprinting nav radars and acoustic signatures etc is just what navies do all day, otherwise they’d get bored.
David Arnold says
The “deal” is exaggeration, which RS would do well to avoid in order not to lose credibility.
Cindy says
Peacetime is there such a thing as that for Iran??? All they want to do is kill everyone who does not agree with them Do you ever wonder what would happen after they killed everyone off????
BT says
The Iranian regime wouldn’t dare to do what they do to our forces in the region under any other president especially a Republican President. It’s hard to believe that this happening to us. They hate us and wish us ill and yet, we sit down (Obama) and make useless deal with them that will eventually lead to war not peace. Peace through strength is the only option to deal with radical evil people like the Iranian regime.
What is the point of having all of this military power if we don’t use it sometimes.