Such small craft are NOT set up for two sexes.

In my estimation, this was special duty for her.

These craft are small enough to be flown around — even slung under a helicopter.

Hence, I take the entire pitch from the Pentagon and Oval Office to be bunkum.

Picking a VERY young crew is consistent with a high risk op.

It’s the way America fielded PT boats in the Pacific Campaign.

We even used “instant Ensigns” to command them.

How green could one possibly get?

The beauty of a really green crew is that their utter ignorance is double plus good during capture.

They can’t spill any beans.

And they come off as McHale’s Navy. Perfect.

With $170,000,000,000 waiting in the wings — there would be slim chances that the mullahs would hang on to McHale’s Navy.

As for spying from ‘brown water’ — that’s been an American specialty since WWII.

We’re always up to something — somewhere.

Now….
“Wait, don’t hurt us”

If they were told to ‘give up’ and let the Iranians take them, you would think at the very least they would’ve dumped any equipment and weapons they had into the water. Even if they were told to ‘surrender’ you’d think they would’ve done that much.

I blame it on both the command who was in contact with this boat at some point and the feminization of the military. Guessing that training was not what it used to be. How the sailors interact with the ‘enemy’ or a ‘foreign power’ has probably changed. That is what I’m guessing.

If you compare previous ‘capture’ type scenarios, this one was completely different than those of the past. No destroying of equipment, no attempt to defy the Iranians, complete compliance, even an apology. This is perhaps what is being taught now in boot camp or within the command structure.

If that is the case, we don’t have cojones any more. And it’s pathetic. The man in charge of the boat is most likely humiliated that he could not stand up to the Iranians and just had to sit there.

It is reported that Arminas intervened to protect a female school-mate from being sexually assaulted in December, only to have the Syrian he defended her from stab him in the back and through the heart on the first day of the next termUnder just war, sinkinng the navy of an unequal weaker state would be a war crime…similar to the idea of a sports team being real bad to beat the oposition by too wde a margin…anither feminist equalizing thing, like everyone gets a tropjy

on anithrr note

Everything came off perfectly — almost.

What would a good president have done, under the circumstances? What would have been the right response?

I suppose that question needs clarification, because it doesn’t yet specify WHICH decision-point we’re discussing. There was…

1. the point when they hadn’t yet been captured but the Iranians were too close for them to escape without incident;

2. the point when they had been captured, but the Iranians hadn’t yet started to misuse them; and,

3. the point at which the headscarfing and propaganda videos began.

My own personal opinion goes something like this:

At decision-time 1, you instruct the Iranians to assist them by offering fuel, or whatever, without boarding them, and to allow them to leave without incident;

At decision-time 2, you instruct the Iranians that you are disappointed — and deeply concerned for the welfare of the Iranian economy, military, and shipping capacity — that they have disregarded your earlier instructions…but that things can all end reasonably peaceably provided that Iranian behavior towards these captured personnel is exemplary;

At decision-time 3, you sink every Iranian-flag vessel on the sea, anywhere, wherever it is, civilian or not, unless it’s inside the territorial waters of an ally (i.e., don’t blow them up if they’re docked in the Thames). Then you deprive them explosively of half their oil wells, and instruct them that if they dp anything in response other than say, “Thank you, America, for showing us mercy and for your abundant graciousness in forgiving our deplorable mistreatment of your personnel” in response, they will lose the other half of their “petroleum privileges.”

But that’s just me.

I presume someone else would be a tad more moderate.

Okay, fine:

What would a good president have done?

Since it is their Messiah, they’ll have to serve as a conduit then. A pain sensor even.