It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US warship 'opens fire in Suez' Breaking News

page: 8
8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 10:34 AM
link   
reply to post by roadgravel
 


Well thats the big problem right there. You see the military does not own the ship, it was on a contract to transport munitions and equipment for the military. I looked up on the ship's history and it was used for humanitarian aid as well.

Think of during Gulf War when civilian passenger planes were used to transport troops to the region and goes back to carrying civilian passengers again. Should all the planes be painted gray with camouflage when it was under contract for the military? I don't know.




posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by LLoyd45
reply to post by deltaboy
 
Yeah, we're unique alright. Dubya has put us in the category of the Most hated country in the World.


No, he didn't put us in the category. We were already there. It just happened to become popular to hate us during his tenure. He just gave people an excuse.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   
I have not had time to read all the posts. Sorry.

I have been through the seuz canal on a few occasions. It is a nightmare. these guys are called the 'gully gully men' and they will sell ther own grandmother to get money. To be honest I am surprised it has taken this long for one of these guys to get hurt.

A container ship will not have the crew to understand the complex R.O.E involved in this area.

I feel for all involved.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by Shar
 


I could guess they didn't like the merchandise the person was trying to sell when heading towards their ship. But the U.S.S. Cole comes to mind.


Heh... yeah guess the guy who fired had one too many solicitors call his house during dinner. Damn them all.

But yes - after the USS Cole incident, i'm sure security in those regions on the water has been increased quite a bit.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
A ship carrying material for the war on terror, is a legitimate terrorist target.

While not discounting the account of a gunned-down cigarette salesman; I doubt the Sons of Liberty would have passed on a German ship supplying British powder and guns.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by citizen smith
 


It was Egypt's fault for not providing security for the ship and keeping people away from it. They did everything in the book to try and warn the people to stay out of their way. A U.S. sub and destroyer had just traveled through the Suez and that may have attracted allot of attention from the terrorist so they had to be very careful. My cousin is former navy and works on ships just like this all over the world for DOD contractors. They do all kinds of stuff. One time they had to remove tons of old WWII era bombs from Korea and bring them to the U.S. and he was never more worried being on a ship as that time just because of the age of the bombs. That ship that in the Suez could have been loaded down with bombs and they can not take the chance of a USS Cole type incident. My cousin may be on that ship and he may have been the one who pulled the trigger and if he was sitting at home safe and sound I still say they made the right call.

[edit on 25-3-2008 by Sky watcher]



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   
It sounds to me that whether there were casualties or not, these boats were warned verbally and with flares to back off. A US military ship of any kind will not be approached by a foreign ship or boat without concern, and you would have to be an idiot to keep coming once warned.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by Shar
 


Honestly now....admit it.......you instantly thought the worst of the US and automatically assumed blood thirsty killers were jumping for joy, right?




How dare you tell me what I was thinking. I spoke what I thought which was confusion. I had no clue what was going on which is what I said and why I asked.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Shar
 
You can't let comments like that get to you Shar. I'm sure the majority of people here realize you're an honest and sincere poster. I haven't read anything which would suggest otherwise.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by LLoyd45
 



Thank you. Yeah, I don't understand when people talk for other people like that. I said what I was thinking. He just had to read it to know that.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
How dare you tell me what I was thinking. I spoke what I thought which was confusion. I had no clue what was going on which is what I said and why I asked.


How dare you tell us what you were thinking!

Oh wait...I guess that's okay...sorry.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Some people can't be bothered to read an entire post or thread. It's much simpler to sieze upon one comment or phrase. and base their entire position on it. It's sad but true. I'm guilty of doing it too, so I guess I better stop casting stones about before I get hit in the head by a richocet. LOL

Chin up Shar!



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiracy Theorist
This just in:

US denies casualties in Suez Canal

We have the name of the man that was allegedly killed, Mohammed Moqtar Afifi, so it shouldnt be too hard to get to the bottom of this.

CT

[edit on 25/3/2008 by Conspiracy Theorist]


So given this peice of information, what do you think? Do you believe what the news is saying here in the US or do you believe the other news we have been reading and checking out?



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
The USS Cole was hit by a missile, not a suicide boat. you would need an incredible amount of loose explosives, ie without a war head, in order to penetrate and sink a cargo ship.

Its all very well saying terrorist will do anything.... But in the McCarthy era the same claims were made against communists. I dont deny the willingness of terrorists to martyr themselves for their cause but such comments breed hysteria. Also, excessive reactions to unknown threats will only lead to a strengthening of existing stereotypes and antipathy to those who commit them, increasing the propensity to terrorism.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


Am I wrong in my assumption that it was mercenary personnel? I guess it's a matter of opinion.

Where do we draw the line with what's considered military and civilian?

We know that many of the duty's that used to consume military personnel are now done by private sector. Simple things like laundry and food services. This incident was a direct consequence of blurring the lines between the military and the private sector.

When the Pentagon licenses private sector cargo ships and mans the ship with military personnel, how many service men does it take for that ship to be considered a military vessel? Does it take a christening and USS Naval issuance?

Just because the ship was contracted by the Pentagon and those that fired upon the smaller vessel wore a United States military uniform makes them no less of a U.S. government licensed mercenary.

One of the main definitions of a mercenary is a person that fights for personal gain. I realize the men that opened fire didn't commit these acts out of personal gain. But, if you think the Pentagon contracted that cargo ship for any other reason than to save MONEY, you're wrong.

Which brings up a point of: at what point does our United States Armed Services cease to be "military" and start to be recognized as a "mercenary force". I'd say that'd start at the point in which we invade foreign countries for the benefit of corporations.

But, like I said ... I guess it's just a matter of opinion.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I said the story would change.. It takes a while to get the right spin on them. By tomorrow you will hear yet another version where someone was killed since the media now has the victim's name.

They know in 30 days time hardly anyone will remember the incident anywho..



[edit on 3/25/08 by LLoyd45]



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by LLoyd45
They know in 30 days time hardly anyone will remember the incident anywho..


QFT!!

In thirty days time, we'll have much, much bigger news to worry about...

Mark my words.



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by heliosprime

Originally posted by Souljah
reply to post by heliosprime
 

Protect themselves from what?

Cigarette smoke?



How about this

Pirates

More Pirates

Irainian Thugs

Muslim pirates


Guilty until proven innocent kinda sucks for the dude on the other side of the barrel when it comes to killing people don't cha think?


Oh well, maybe they will work out their differences.

[edit on 043131p://25u39 by Lucid Lunacy]



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by goosdawg
 
I believe you're right goosdawg, I believe you're right..



posted on Mar, 25 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 
They'll be a few payoffs, some behind the doors trading, and the man's family will be given whatever the going rate for an Egyptian's life is on the current market. It'll be one of those Godfather type offers that they won't be able to refuse either.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join