CNN:
Iran on Saturday welcomed the rescue of 13 Iranian sailors by a U.S. Navy ship, calling it a “humanitarian act.”
The sailors were on a fishing boat that had been hijacked by pirates in the Arabian Sea, near the Strait of Hormuz. According to the Navy, a helicopter from the destroyer USS Kidd spotted a suspect pirate boat alongside the Iranian vessel on Thursday. The destroyer is part of the USS John Stennis Strike Group, which moved into the Arabian Sea from the Persian Gulf last week.
As the helicopter spotted the suspect pirate ship, the Kidd received a distress call from the fishing boat’s captain, saying pirates were holding him and his crew captive. A team from the Kidd boarded the vessel, took 15 suspected pirates into custody, and freed 13 Iranian hostages, the Navy said.
A spokesman for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, Ramin Mehmanparast, had positive words about the rescue when he spoke Saturday to the Arabic news network Al-Alam.
I recall reading in some essay about American military bases that the Roman Empire did not expand by brute force but by running a sophisticated protection racket. Meaning, Rome offered small and weak states protection (military bases) from their larger and stronger enemies. I even recall reading this essay six or so years ago on a sunny day in Portland (I’m almost positive it was in an issue of Foreign Policy). My point: For better or for worse, assistance is a more effective weapon than aggression.
Affective means something different than effective.
Why quote CNN saying that the Iranians said something nice in a news conference. Why not quote the Iranians?
Ancient historian here. Roman PROPAGANDA was that it expanded through wars in defense of allies. In reality it was perfectly happy to pick fights, attack enemies only after their ally had already lost, and even to attack its own allies. But you’re right, they don’t sound too different from us.
Weaponized affect! Strangely appropriate slip.
This will get a couple of days notice highly spun, in the Iranian press and disappear as a news item. The ayatollahs do not want peace with the west, it is not in their interest. Unfortunately for us, Iran is not a small nation which can be bullied or placated into submission. The Romans had the same problem with the Parthian Empire, which stretched from present-day Turkey to eastern Iran. It was their greatest and most indomitable rival. At the best of times all that could be acheived was temporary cessation of hostilities via huge bribes, or military exhaustion on both sides.
It’s more profitable to be our friend, if that’s what you mean. But Rome would be ruthless with it’s enemies. Thus the total destruction of Carthage the second time it attacked Rome. They didn’t leave a stone on stone. We rebuilt Japan and Germany.
@1, if you look closely, you will realize i was under a spell: ss, ff, gg. i wanted it all.
@2, I think you look very young for your age, not ancient at all. Distinguished.
Charles,
Obviously, I congratulate the forces that freed these hostages Iranian or not. Still, I hear some cynics saying America is “Killing Iran with kindness”.
Meh, don’t know. Maybe everything is “political” and has a price. I’m just glad all hands are accounted for.
Um, yeah. Because there is no logical explanation for why the Navy is going after pirates. There must be some grand imperial conspiracy to make sense of it.
Lord Supreme Uncle: I’m starting to like you.
The explanation is quite logical, actually… the law of the sea, dating from time immemorial, requires a vessel encountering a person or persons in distress to stop and render aid. The United States Navy was created in 1776 to protect shipping lanes from piracy. They were doing their job here.
Al Qaeda, Hamas, the Islamic Brotherhood, and most other fundamentalist ideology-based organizations are protection rackets: Let us tell you what to do/believe and we’ll give you food, shelter, and jobs.
A protection racket is if you make people pay you not to steal their hubcaps. It’s different if all you’re doing is actually protecting their hubcaps, and you don’t steal the hubcaps of those who decline. Otherwise, why not say that security agencies run protection rackets?
How long until the Republican candidates reference this as another example of Obama’s weak and failed foreign policy?