Posted 12:03 AM by steve

The dog that didn't bark....

It appears a combination of luck and bad aim was responsible for the missiles missing the US warships in Jordan.... And, as Jay points out, even had they hit, the damage might not have been too severe.

While others debate which group is responsible, I would like to know why there is no mention of the ship's defenses being brought into play. One would think that after the Cole, the US Navy would be extremely sensitive to the possibility of coming under attack while in supposedly neutral/friendly ports in the Middle East, and indeed, according to a Navy spokesman, U.S. warships in the Middle East always operate under increased security.

I would assume that 'increased security' means having defensive measures in place and being prepared to use force to defend the ships from hostile forces... whether to guard against another attack like that on the Cole, an attack by aircraft, or an attack by missile. Both ships, the USS Ashland and the USS Kearsage, have defensive weaponry. Yet, there's no mention of anti-missile defenses being used.

Is this because their respective Captains and crew were asleep at the wheel and not ready to take action? Is it because the ship's proximity to the location from which the missiles were fired was too close to allow time for anti-missile defenses to be brought to bear? Or is it the reason we're not hearing of any defensive measures taken by the crews of the two ships because both ships were operating under ROEs that precluded their using their capabilities to defend themselves?

I sure hope the Navy isn't forcing our sailors to fight with one hand tied behind their back.... again.

|