I beg to differ with at least one detail that seems to be floating around. Ive read it as a boat "rammed" the destroyer, but then i read another report that says teh boat was helping the destroyer into port in refueling ops.
Now at first (before that report) i was scratching my head as to why the destroyer wasnt alert to such a "kamikaze" attack. But it does make sense that a small support craft would be able to get right up beside the Ship without any problems if it was acting as a maneuvering tug.
It may not have even been a terrorist attack in the first place. I think this is something that the Clinton Administration will screw up even more. Who knows. Obviously, if it was an attack, the terrorists felt they can get away with it in as much as helping thier cause. and THAT is the sad part. If it wasnt, then This administration needs to quit blaming errors on out part on "terrorists".
(Example, TWA flight 800, which *was* shot down by the Navy... HUNDREDS of witnesses saw the same thing on that one, the missile streaking UP from the ocean and hitting the Jetliner... yet they were all deemed "unreliable"... BULL-SH*T!!)
A co-worker was on a Nuclear Carrier in the Atlantic, and my oldest brother was on a Frigate in the Atlantic *and* Pacific, we've talked about these types of things at legnth and alot of these incidents happen (or are allowed to happen) due to US Navy incompetance. It only takes one guy to be a little "lax" and something like this happens.
***********
The preceding has been an EDITORIAL. So dont get all pissy with me!
***********
------------------
Fear Oil.
[This message has been edited by GreenNinja (edited October 12, 2000).]