How should the US respond to Iran detaining 10 US Sailors?

There is so much about this that strikes me as "odd". It's impossible to imagine both craft having the same malfunction, at the same time...so if it truly was a failure of their navigation equipment, I'm pretty certain these Sailors could use other methods of getting into International Waters safely. If one craft became DIW, then yes, the other would've provided cover; Even then, it's pretty hard to imagine two such craft being painted into such a corner they would be forced out of any option but allowing themselves to be towed in and taken into custody. Yes, I'm sure the political and tactical realities would've precluded a hell for leather showdown...but there's definitely more to this than meets the eye.

SGM, my guess is that a) they were outmanned and outgunned and b) were following ROE. If they were caught in Iranian waters, particularly if it truly was unintentional, they had no legal justification for resisting detainment without exacerbating an already tense situation. By resisting, they could have escalated what amounts to a law enforcement detainment into a shooting war.

Now, if they were in international waters and the same thing happened, it's a very different situation. Attempt at detainment in international waters could be considered an act of war.

Simple; the Rule of Engagement (ROE) along with some other "standing" orders made it very clear to the crew not to engage the Iranians nor offer any resistance. We've been down this channel before back in the 1980's in Beirut with the "Don't shoot back" club. Marines standing guard posts without ammo for their weapons and strict orders that when fired upon, don't shoot back (not that they could, etc.) And of course we all know what happened to the Marine Barracks.