What should our reaction be?
The Ship is in international waters.
The is easily identifiable and flying the American flag on a windy day.
The other county attacks with fighter jets and torpedo boats.
Life rafts are machine gunned.
The other country receives a great deal of foreign aid for the USA.
2006-09-12 16:40:08 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Did I say anything about Israel?
This is a purely hypothetical question.
2006-09-12 16:50:59 · update #1
Didn't that already happen once? Didn't Israel attack one of our ships in the gulf years ago?
2006-09-12 16:44:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This actually happened during the Iran /Iraq war during the 1980s.
The USS Stark was attacked by an Iraqi jet which fired two missiles killing over thirty servicemen.
But, as the USA was an ally of Saddam Hussein at that time, the blame was somehow attached to Iran by a very clever piece of political spin by President Reagan. The pilot was not punished.
2006-09-12 18:20:13 · answer #2 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That means either of two things: that the nation who commited it is no longer interested in maintaining diplomatic relations (and should therefore be considered an enemy of the USA), or the Yanks are dealing with a renegade enemy force which suddenly broke their nation's chain of command and is now attacking USA forces.
Either way...the proper reaction would be to blast the belligerent planes and torpedo boats out of the sky or water...then start the diplomatic bull-slinging, which should also mean an immediate blockade and shut-off of aid to that nation (to avoid either the government and/or rebels from getting money).
2006-09-12 21:02:21 · answer #3 · answered by betterdeadthansorry 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Korean war is a left-over vestige of a bye-long previous era - that of the chilly war. we don't desire South Korea as an best buddy for something. The SoKos ought to combat their very own battles. If the NoKo people do in comparison to their government, they should throw it off. We ought to get it out of our heads that it rather is our duty to circulate around initiating previous conflicts and perpetuating them continuously. Hillary Clinton ought to keep her mouth close except she, individually, is keen to die interior the DMZ with a rifle in her hand protecting South Korea from the North. Obama won't do something in terms of a protection stress reaction to North Korea with the aid of fact (a million) the yank rather everyone seems to be bored with a majority of those mindless foreign places wars for all time; (2) the U. S. government is broke from battling mindless foreign places wars for all time; (3) Obama is petrified of the North Korean military. The North Koreans did this just to coach to themselves that Obama is vulnerable-willed and skinny-skinned, beside working a broke us of a.
2016-11-07 05:23:54 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Back in the 80s a U.S. warship was, in fact, attacked by an Iraqi plane whose Commander in Chief was dearest friend and ally Saddam Hussein, whom we had put in power and supplied with money and tech support to build his military. It was written off as an unfortunate accident.
2006-09-16 16:26:43 · answer #5 · answered by rich k 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our reaction should be to try our hardest to make peace. The fact that said nation receives aid from the US would show their dependence on the US. We should try to exploit that.
"To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
And we should, of course, make sure that the people directly responsible for the attack are brought into account for their actions.
2006-09-12 19:31:45 · answer #6 · answered by Mr. Bojangles 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If your are speaking of the Israelies, I guess the answer is to keep giving them money and support them against the rest of the world when they decide to bomb a neighboring country back to the stone age. Oh, and make sure they have nuclear weapons. Musn't forget that one.
2006-09-12 16:44:03 · answer #7 · answered by Billy W 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Please, resume the meds.Oh,by the way the US does this sort of thing all the time. How did DoD deal with all those friendly fire instances in the past? Besides what your describing is an act of war. Any administration that would not react with force would be lucky to get out of office alive.
2006-09-12 16:51:26 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
.... the official conspiracy theory on the USS Liberty is that it was a false flag operation jointly with the US and Israel ... it was to be blamed on Egypt as a pretext for america to enter the war and take over the middle east in that time ... much as we used 9/11 to do it presently .... but anyway, the story goes that a russian spyship showed up and witnessed what was going on and the attack was halted and the plan never went through.
2006-09-12 16:49:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
All foreign aid would be cut.
The U.S ship would fight off all the attackers.
Our embassy would be evacuated.
We'd try to figure out what the hell was going on to try to negotiate peacefully with the other nation.
2006-09-12 16:44:32 · answer #10 · answered by chris 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋