14

As everyone already heard, recently Iran launched a missile strike on US military bases in Iraq. US didn't answer with anything but tweets.

Is it the first time after Cuban Missile Crisis, when armed strike on US forces remain unanswered with power? I mean that it is not anonymous strike from anonymous militant groups - it is fully authorized strike from another state, with advanced weapons.

PS While Cuban crisis US U-2 scout jet was downed by Soviet SAM missile systems.

  • 3
    Surely it has been pre-emptively answered by the attack which triggered it. – Eric Nolan Jan 9 at 12:31
  • 9
    Not agree with you. Pre-emptive answer is not an answer. Escalation chain is called so, because each and every turn triggers an answer, until someone stops. The question is just, is it a first time for a last period, when US stopped first? I can hardly imagine such situation in times of Bush-senior or Bush-junior. – user2501323 Jan 9 at 12:38
  • 6
    56 people died in a stampede at Soleimani's funeral, & another 176 when trigger-happy 🇮🇷air defense shot down a ✈ over Tehran. Whatever answer 🇺🇸 had in mind, 🇮🇷's done & more. – Tianxiang Xiong Jan 9 at 23:55
  • 1
    As everyone already hear. False. I had not heard about it until I read this question. – Andy Jan 10 at 1:50
  • @Andy, I'm really sorry, I've been sure, that all media have rumors about it. In my future questions I'll try to avoid such claims about rumor widespreading. – user2501323 Jan 10 at 7:48
18

It depends how you define "strike", but the North Korean capture of USS Pueblo came after the Cuban crisis. And during the capture Pueblo came under fire, resulting in the death of one crew:

The North Korean vessels attempted to board Pueblo, but she was maneuvered to prevent this for over two hours. A submarine chaser then opened fire with a 57 mm cannon, killing one member of the crew. The smaller vessels fired machine guns into Pueblo, which then signaled compliance and began destroying sensitive material.

The US did not retaliate militarily, as far as I know.

Likewise for the North Korean 1969 shootdown of EC-121 . The US did dispatch a large naval task force in response, and prepared plans to strike at NK airfields and various other targets, but ultimately that did not happen:

In the end, no action was taken against the North Koreans in the days following the attack. The new Nixon administration had little to no information about the location and availability of both U.S. and North Korean forces, as the administration had difficulty communicating with those in the Pacific. By the time this information was communicated to the planners, it was too late to react.[6] Both Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were ashamed at the outcome of the event, with Kissinger revealing that "our conduct in the EC-121 crisis as weak, indecisive and disorganized."[6] Once it became clear that no action would be taken against the North Koreans, Nixon promised that "they’ll [North Koreans] never get away with it again," and ordered a "resumption of aerial reconnaissance flights."[6]

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Surprising and very interesting, didn't know that. Good answer, as usual – user2501323 Jan 9 at 13:36
  • 5
    The US also didn't respond to Iran shooting down a drone. – xyious Jan 9 at 21:32
  • 2
    @xyious: That's not entirely correct. They responded with a cyber attack, In fact with more than one althogh the others may have been related to the Iranian actiona against Saudi Arabia timesofisrael.com/… If they were as sophisticated as Stuxnet, they could have caused infrastructure damage. The US has not released much in the way of details on these. – Fizz Jan 10 at 0:07

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .