Talk:USS Stark incident: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 23:47, 29 September 2015

Military history: Maritime / North America / United States Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Please clarify this page. The discussion is about an Iraqi attack but the lead-in is about an Iranian attack. Iraqi or Iranian? (I believe the correct answer is Iraqi).

jwjensen356@sbcglobal.net

75.17.119.140 (talk) 05:18, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Legalities

It is stated that "Legally the American warship was allowed to attack any hostile aircraft within twenty miles". What is the legal basis for this claim? International law, US law, US rules of engagement (which have no legal authority) or Iraqi law?124.197.15.138 (talk) 23:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is US rules of engagement - which have no legal authority, even in the USA, and often contradict international law.203.184.41.226 (talk) 04:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Rear Admiral Grant Sharp, USN Investigating Officer "The [Rules of Engagement](ROE) that were in existence on 17 May 1987 were sufficient to enable STARK to properly warn the Iraqi aircraft in a timely manner of the presence of a U.S. warship; and if the warning was not heeded, the ROE were sufficient to enable STARK to defend herself against hostile intent and imminent danger without absorbing the first hit." from http://www.navy.mi.th/judge/PDF/6%20ROE%20Case%20Studies[1].pdf --Senra (talk) 17:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above link is broken but I found the same quotation in an e-book. I have now replaced the sentence beginning "Legally ..." and added a reference to the e-book --Senra (talk) 21:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hostile Aircraft

The article states that the American warship was allowed to attack hostile aircraft. However the Iraqi forces were not considered hostile to America at the time of the incident. The attack occured during the context of the Iran-Iraq war. The Stark was not a combatant in that conflict. Her mission was to protect American-flagged ships, primarily oil tankers, from Iranian gunboats. See http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a051787ussstark. Iraq quickly apologized for the attack. As written, the article gives the false impression that Iraq was hostile to the US in 1987. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.89.77.22 (talk) 17:50, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hostile aircraft does not refer to any country's forces, but to the aircraft. Hostile is a category of identification, determined by the then ship's AIMS Mk XII (12) ATC-RBS, Identification, Friend or Foe system. It is doctrine based, on the aircraft's speed, direction, RF emissions, and other factors. The nationality of an hostile (or unknown) aircraft might be unknown; bliss(?). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.183.224.2 (talk) 23:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 23:46, 29 September 2015 edit 144.183.224.2 (talk) No edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 23:47, 29 September 2015 edit undo SineBot (talk \| contribs) Bots 2,554,375 edits m Signing comment by 144.183.224.2 - "" Next edit →
Line 21:		Line 21:
	The article states that the American warship was allowed to attack hostile aircraft. However the Iraqi forces were not considered hostile to America at the time of the incident. The attack occured during the context of the Iran-Iraq war. The ''Stark'' was not a combatant in that conflict. Her mission was to protect American-flagged ships, primarily oil tankers, from Iranian gunboats. See http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a051787ussstark. Iraq quickly apologized for the attack. As written, the article gives the false impression that Iraq was hostile to the US in 1987. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/128.89.77.22\|128.89.77.22]] ([[User talk:128.89.77.22\|talk]]) 17:50, 12 September 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->		The article states that the American warship was allowed to attack hostile aircraft. However the Iraqi forces were not considered hostile to America at the time of the incident. The attack occured during the context of the Iran-Iraq war. The ''Stark'' was not a combatant in that conflict. Her mission was to protect American-flagged ships, primarily oil tankers, from Iranian gunboats. See http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a051787ussstark. Iraq quickly apologized for the attack. As written, the article gives the false impression that Iraq was hostile to the US in 1987. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/128.89.77.22\|128.89.77.22]] ([[User talk:128.89.77.22\|talk]]) 17:50, 12 September 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

	'''Hostile aircraft''' does not refer to any country's forces, but to the aircraft. Hostile is a category of identification, determined by the then ship's AIMS Mk XII (12) ATC-RBS, Identification, Friend or Foe system. It is doctrine based, on the aircraft's speed, direction, RF emissions, and other factors. The nationality of an hostile (or unknown) aircraft might be unknown; bliss(?).		'''Hostile aircraft''' does not refer to any country's forces, but to the aircraft. Hostile is a category of identification, determined by the then ship's AIMS Mk XII (12) ATC-RBS, Identification, Friend or Foe system. It is doctrine based, on the aircraft's speed, direction, RF emissions, and other factors. The nationality of an hostile (or unknown) aircraft might be unknown; bliss(?). <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/144.183.224.2\|144.183.224.2]] ([[User talk:144.183.224.2\|talk]]) 23:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->