Surrender Was Unnecessary

ComNavOps has faulted the boat crews for surrendering without resistance.  Some readers have suggested that this was the only prudent thing to do and that the boat crews would have been killed to no purpose had they resisted.  Here is the proof that surrender was not necessary.

From the full Navy investigative report we learn the following.

• Various crew First observed two small boats at 1-2 nm.
• Observed weapons on the boats at 800-1000 yds.
• Both boats manned their weapon stations as the Iranian boats approached.  Some guns were loaded, some were not.
• As the boats approached to within 100-300 yds, several crew members observed that each Iranian boat had a single COVERED crew served weapon.
• The Iranians uncovered their weapons at 100-300 yds.  In addition, each Iranian was seen to be armed with an AK-47.
• One of the Iranian boats had two crew and the other boat had a single crew member.  Here are the relevant quotes from the full report.

IV.H.31. (U) According to most accounts, one of the boats had two Iranians on board, while the other boat had only one Iranian onboard.

IV.H.32. (U) Concerning the boat with one Iranian, crewmembers observed the Iranian ?frantically? shifting between driving the boat, manning a weapon, and talking on a radio.

So what was the situation when the US boats were initially approached?  A grand total of three Iranians, two on one boat and one on another, threatened two US boats armed with four 0.50 cal machine guns and 10 crewmen each of whom were also armed with personal weapons of various types.  One of the Iranian boats was, essentially a non-factor, being crewed by a single person and incapable of simultaneously maneuvering and fighting.

The engine was repaired and both boats began to accelerate away.  The Iranians were seen pointing their weapons at the 802 boat.  It was at this moment that the boat 802 coxswain refused to continue accelerating and stopped the boat.  At this point, the 802 Boat Captain initiated the surrender.

So, two fully functioning US boats armed with four 0.50 cal machine guns and 10 crew with personal arms surrendered to two Iranian boats with two crew-served machine guns and a total of three crew members without a shot being fired.  At the moment of surrender, the US boats had twice the firepower and more than three times the crew numbers and surrendered without a shot being fired.

It bears repeating.  At the moment of surrender, the US boats had twice the firepower and more than three times the crew numbers and surrendered without a shot being fired.

Shortly after this decision, a third Iranian vessel showed up followed, eventually, by a fourth.

According to the report, at the moment of mutiny and surrender, the two Iranian guns were pointed at the 802 boat.  Thus, the 805 boat had the opportunity to fire, unhindered and unopposed, on the Iranians which would have prevented the surrender and seizure of the boats but did not do so.

The more we dig into this incident, the worse it gets.

The surrender is an example of cowardice, a violation of the Code of Conduct, and mutiny.  There is no other way to view this incident.

___________________________

Side Note:

Some readers will, undoubtedly, suggest that it was “right” for the US boats to surrender because they were in Iranian waters.  From a legal perspective, that’s totally false.  All countries have the right to conduct a procedure called Innocent Passage through another country’s territorial waters.  Setting that aside, however, at the moment of surrender the boat crews were totally lost and believed they were in international waters.  Thus, they believed they were being attacked and seized in international waters.  By definition, that’s an act of war and should have been resisted with force – see, again, the Code of Conduct.  All of the rationales for surrendering based on being in Iranian waters were promulgated after the fact when the crews eventually learned where they actually were.  The crews believed they were in international waters and, as such, were obligated to resist and defend their boats and themselves.