American Warship threatens to open fire on unarmed civilian ship....in SCOTLAND!

Discussion in 'Your Bloody Soap Box' started by MountainPro, Oct 25, 2006.

  1. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    Incredible but true...this is a small 70 year old civilian passenger ferry during a river crossing that it makes every half an hour for years.

    with Americas track record on opening fire on unarmed clearly civilian vehicles, the captain was quite alarmed.

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/tm_headline=us-navy-declare-war-on-clyde-ferry&method=full&objectid=17980625&siteid=66633-name_page.html

     
    Tags:


  2. Eldrack

    Eldrack New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,353
    Likes Received:
    1
    Probably just a very lame practical joke..............
     
  3. slovakguy

    slovakguy Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    33
    ...i wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this as a practical joke. scotland has always been something of a breeding ground for troublemakers. remember william wallace, mary, queen of scots, presbyterians, & sean connery? i'll be rummy and dicky have some "slamdunk" intelligence that the ferry contained some suspicious characters, eh, bluetrain. ;)
     
  4. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    it was real alright. There is a large military excersice going on outside my office window right now...figher jets, warships, subs, helicopters....

    so they are gathered here in the Loch...

    the commander is just a stupid oaf is a more plausible explanation. cant identify civilain shipping flags from 1000 feet away.

    obviously shows you that size isnt everything.
     
  5. Scotty_Dog

    Scotty_Dog New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    3
    It all seems practical procedure. If any unidentified ship gets too close, warn the ship to identify itself. Simple really. See, sometimes bad shit happens when small ships get too close: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing, so it's better to be safe than sorry.

    I disagree, it seems as if the little ferry wisely followed the directions of the large warship.
     
  6. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, that's it...maybe the poor passenger ferry that crosses every half hour for years was going to ram these big tough warships, and blow them up a la the Cole. :rolleyes: Seems to me that the ferry was there first, no?

    Maybe too the fucking idyuts running the warships are ready to shoot at anything that moves. Can't have all of those weapons for long and not use 'em. Kinda doesn't help your testosterone level to use restraint and good judgment.
     
  7. Scotty_Dog

    Scotty_Dog New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    3
    The warship did use restraint and good judgement by requesting the ferry to identify itself, so what exactly is the problem?
     
  8. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    no restrain was used...threats were used instead.

    Why did the ferry need to identify itself? Its been doing that every day for the past....wait for it...90 years!

    Its the warship who is in foreign waters, not the ferry. Can you imagine a British warship anchored in New York harbour issuing the same threat of using live ammunition to the ferry that takes tourists to Liberty Island?

    The British ferry in question is a famous one.
     
  9. BottleCage

    BottleCage New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    1
    Actually it said they were doing a training exercise. And the article said
    "The first phase involved ships and submarines fighting off simulated terrorist attacks by small boats and jetskis manned by Royal Marines."

    So they were expecting to have small "enemy" boats in the area. Since these wargames are suppose to be as real as possible the commaders have to react like they were in a real situation. Also since I am sure the commader did not know the exact detail of when and where he had to assume that the boat was part of the wargame and sent a warning message first.

    What I find strange is that the local captains were not informed to stay away from the area.

    Using a public channel is a bit weird but I do not think the "Enemy" in real situations would have access to the private, encrypted military channels.
     
  10. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why'd you delete the original, "Hey fucktard" part before the rest of your asinine statement?

    Here's a thought: you got big balls and wanna fight? Go to Iraq. Don't forget to bring a few right-wingers with ya.
     
  11. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hi bottle cage...yes, i can see why you came to that conclusion but these ships are gathered on the River Clyde which flows from the city of Glasgow into the Altantic ocean. My office overlooks it and it is a busy commercial/industrial shipping lane.

    The actual exercise will take place 300 miles away in a restricted designated military training ground off the Scottish Hebrides. The ships were gathered in the Clyde becuase there is a naval base there.

    Having the exercie in the Clyde is analagous to training army troops in a busy down-town shopping mall using the general public and live ammo.
     
  12. Scotty_Dog

    Scotty_Dog New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    3
    I deleted it because I decided to use some restraint, much like the warship.

    And now here's a thought for you: if you're so morally high and mighty, why not pay for the stolen bike fork?
     
  13. Scotty_Dog

    Scotty_Dog New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    3
    So any real blame should be directed at the RN/Faslane and Commander Don Chalmers, not the US warship.
     
  14. stevebaby

    stevebaby New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,515
    Likes Received:
    2
    Unless the harbour has restricted space and the ferry has strayed into that space,then the warship is under an obligation to avoid a collision if its master believes one to be imminent.The obligation rests on the warship to change course.If the warship fails to change course,then the ferry master was correct to change his course.
    If the warship's commander was not informed of the presence of a civilian ferry making regular scheduled crossings then something has gone wrong.
    Given the relative speed capabilities of the two vessels it would appear that the ferry was unlikely to be in an overtaking situation.If the warship was overtaking the ferry then it is obliged to give way to it.
    Transmitting on VHF16 is clearly not intended for a naval vessel."Enemy" vessels would definitely not be using VHF16,which would be available to be overheard by every civilian vessel within range.They would be using restricted naval channels available to the "friendlies".
    If there was no risk of collision and the ferry was not in restricted waters then the warship has no right to tell the ferry to do anything and in British waters,no right to threaten to fire live ammunition at it.
    Actually,on the face of it the warship commander may be technically liable for criminal charges.
     
  15. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    absolutely, no arguement here...

    however, common sense should have told you that when moored in a busy shipping lane you may come across the occasional....err, ship.
     
  16. Scotty_Dog

    Scotty_Dog New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    3
    That's quite a few "If" qualifiers factored into your statements.
     
  17. Scotty_Dog

    Scotty_Dog New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    Likes Received:
    3
    According to the article you posted, the warship was not moored when it made the request for identity of the ferry.
     
  18. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    okay swap the word 'moored' for 'situated'.
     
  19. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    there is absolutely no risk of collision...

    the ferry travels across the river from the north shore to the south and back again...two ferries simultaneously serve the route.

    the warship wanted to pass through the ferries path and told it to stop or it will fire a rocket (or whatever they fire on civilain craft these days) at them...

    if the warship wanted past, its just a case of travelling at medium speed across the path, the ferries will adjust thier course to aviod any chance off collision.

    now, hundreds of ship pass in the path these ferries...none have ever hit one. These ship include an entire naval fleet including nuclear subs, other ferry companies and ships coming to and from the ship yards dotted along the Clyde which build and refit ships from small vessels to the QE2 (twice the size of the warship in question)...

    there was simply no excuse...they were being overly aggressive. The captain of the warship has apologised publically...which means he has accepted responsibility.
     
  20. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    YOu can only conclude one thing. It's those Bushites at work again - Bush and his minions and cohorts! :D :) :rolleyes:

     
Loading...
Loading...