not that I support Iran over England, however, british soldiers were in Iranian waters. it was a wrong move.
if Iranian battleship was off the coast of England and pass the border, what do you thing England would do? take a wild guess...
Iran seizes 15 British troops in Persian Gulf
- Thread starter Mr.Spock
- Start date
not that I support Iran over England, however, british soldiers were in Iranian waters. it was a wrong move.
if Iranian battleship was off the coast of England and pass the border, what do you thing England would do? take a wild guess...
why not? the the iranians could have put pressure on them, forcing them to lie.
that's a good point. its clear that we may never know what really happened then, but isnt that strange that the same scenario took place yesterday?
If Tehran is looking for a deal as big as Iran-Contra these Sailors could have a more extended stay. But I doubt this is the right opportunity. Given one, I would not put it past the Bush Administration (and their RN subjects) to seek to do the converse of Reagan's deal- diverting the heat to a Democrat Administration. But those are bigger, murkier intrigues that probably won't hold up these negotiations.
I fully expect Tehran will play the incident in the media for a few days, and then release these detainees unharmed. Last time (2 years back) Iran held British sailors for 3 days before release. So far, Royal Navy sources insist their personnel were not East of the center of the Shatt-al-Arab, which is the internationally-recognized demarcation between Iraqi and Iranian waters. Other witnesses such as Iraqi fishermen, say that they were.
I expect the truth will come out soon regarding exactly where the Royal Navy RIBs were intercepted. I don't think this is as big a deal as some media people are spinning it. However, in the wake of the arrests in Iraq of Iranians, there may be some more insistent negotiations on the part of the Iranians this time around, prolonging the release.
I'm not so sure. Iran holds most of the winning cards in this poker game. If "the West", namely the USA is provoked into initiating hostilities with Iran, Iran will be the victor. It's been very wise to let cooler British heads patrol the Shatt. American sailors might have opened fire in a similar confrontation, with disastrous consequences.
Last edited:
The Brits have no desire to mired in a third, messy occupation of a Middle Eastern country. If they wanted to invade, then yes, this would be a perfect event to rally behind.
But from a pragmatic, rather than dogmatic, standpoint, it's in the best interest of both nations to treat it as an misunderstanding.
Which is exactly what Britain is doing. They'll let the US play reactionary worldcop.
Good to see not everyone is prone to running screaming into the night.
I hope this incident turns into a really, really nasty pissing match with Iran attacking the US Navy and the British Navy with missiles and aircraft ...or perhaps 4,000 Iranian fanatics swimming out to attack the aircraft carriers with hammers and chisels!!
I'd love, absolutely LOVE, the world to get into another major, MAJOR war! I'm tired of all these little piss-ant conflicts that don't amount to shit except for killing fuckin' civilians. If we're gonna' fight a war, goddammit, let's fight a fuckin' WAR!!!
BOMBS, MISSILES, BULLETS, ARTILLERY, TANKS, BATTLESHIPS, GAZILLIONS OF SOLDIERS WITH UNIFORMS AND GUNS,... ....and no fuckin' terrorists permitted to join in on the fun!
Baron Max
I'd love, absolutely LOVE, the world to get into another major, MAJOR war! I'm tired of all these little piss-ant conflicts that don't amount to shit except for killing fuckin' civilians. If we're gonna' fight a war, goddammit, let's fight a fuckin' WAR!!!
BOMBS, MISSILES, BULLETS, ARTILLERY, TANKS, BATTLESHIPS, GAZILLIONS OF SOLDIERS WITH UNIFORMS AND GUNS,... ....and no fuckin' terrorists permitted to join in on the fun!
Baron Max
I wouldn't accept one from you if you were the last fuckin' person on Earth! In fact, I wouldn't accept anything from you if you were the last person on Earth.
If you were dying of thirst, I wouldn't let you lick the sweat off my ....ahh, arm.
If I had a million pounds of rice, and you were starving to death, I would give you one single little grain ....even though I hate rice!
Baron Max
awwwwwww...
Baron Max:"I'd love, absolutely LOVE, the world to get into another major, MAJOR war! I'm tired of all these little piss-ant conflicts that don't amount to shit except for killing fuckin' civilians. If we're gonna' fight a war, goddammit, let's fight a fuckin' WAR!!!"
Cretin.
Baron Max:"I'd love, absolutely LOVE, the world to get into another major, MAJOR war! I'm tired of all these little piss-ant conflicts that don't amount to shit except for killing fuckin' civilians. If we're gonna' fight a war, goddammit, let's fight a fuckin' WAR!!!"
Cretin.
Me neither. I wasn't sure what the Iranians would hope to acheive from taking 60 US citizens captive during the Iran hostage crisis. Iran is now a government full of imperialists.
Actually, it DOES matter if the british soldiers were on Iraqi territory or not. If they were on Iraqi territory, not only are the British soldiers innocent, but the Iranian government is severely shattering its reputation. If the British soldiers are guilty of trespassing on Iranian territory, this'll ruin UK's relations with Iran.
" Iran is now a government full of imperialists... this'll ruin UK's relations with Iran."
Let's not get "carried away". Iran similarly detained 2 British sailors and 6 British marines in 2004, and they were released in 3 days without significant fuss.
Let's not get "carried away". Iran similarly detained 2 British sailors and 6 British marines in 2004, and they were released in 3 days without significant fuss.
Oh come on, Baron. Don't ask her questions like that. Sam is THE unbiased voice of the "real" Islam on sciforums, and as such is immune to any silly human failing such as bias. Now please stop ruining her image.
Sam and others like her would have been doubting that the British saillors were in Iranian waters, they would have called it a setup by the Coalition, they would have called it a million things other than what it was - a simple act of aggression by a country which is pissed off that it isn't being allowed to supply its militant cousins in Iraq. They wouldn't believe that such a peace loving, oppressed government such as the Iranian one would do such a thing, and anyone could see that it must be a setup instigated by the CIA and probably involved Israeli operatives.
Oh. They've already said all that, haven't they.
They don't need to supply their militant cousins in Iraq. The Shias are in power, remember? The US government is training and arming them. And the Sauds are training and arming the Sunni insurgents. All they need to do is sit back and watch it unravel.
And that is precisely what they'll do. It is precisely what they'll keep doing, and it is why Iran will do it again... and again.
North Korea just got concessions they wanted by throwing a hissy fit. I'm quite certain Iran watched that episode with some interest.
You don't teach a wayward child to behave by laughing at its antics. You don't teach it by ignoring it. And you certainly do not teach it by giving a gift every time it throws a tantrum.
They should just MOAB the whole bloody lot of them and be done with it. The world could do with a lot less people, and the middle east would be a great place to start.
Ah yes, of course. So on the strength of that argument, the Brits should simply let all the Iranian vessels come and go as they please, because it isn't them supplying anyone.
Right?