15 UK sailors captured at gunpoint - Page 13

zraver · 03-27-2007, 19:15 PM

bahh, hit Iran wher eit hurts and keep hititng them until they give the guys back unharnmed. if they hurt them then you flatten Iran. This is the perfect reason to flatten the nuke sites and missile sites and castrate Iran. Even if the Mullahs cave after the 1st strike they still lose thier most important facility and massive amounts of face. By the time they figure out that taking on the UK and US is a losing bet they will be completely denuded either miltiarily or politically.

Think the massive effect Line Backer II had on North Vietnam.

**Parihaka** · 03-27-2007, 19:22 PM

Blair steps up pressure on Iran as US moves in

Quote:

Dominic Kennedy and Tom Baldwin in Washington

Tony Blair warned Iran yesterday that the dispute over the 15 British servicemen seized in Gulf waters last week could move into a “different phase” if diplomacy failed to secure their release.

His words, immediately condemned by Iran as “provocative”, came as the US Navy began its biggest show of force in the Gulf since the invasion of Iraq four years ago, with manoeuvres involving two aircraft carriers, a dozen warships and more than 100 aircraft.

As tensions rose, Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, had a robust telephone conversation with her Iranian counterpart demanding immediate consular access to the captured Britons.

In an interview on GMTV, Mr Blair said: “I hope we manage to get them to realise they have to release them. If not, then this will move into a different phase.”
Related Links

* Kidnapping could be traced back to arrests by US forces

Asked what he meant, he sqaid: “Well, we will just have to see but what they should understand is that we cannot have a situation where our servicemen and women are seized when actually they are in Iraqi waters under a UN mandate, patrolling perfectly rightly and in accordance with that mandate, and then effectively captured and taken to Iran.”

His spokesman later said that he had been referring to a “different” way of handling talks, such as showing why Britain knew that the two boats were outside Iran’s waters.

The decision to offer no resistance to Iran, although the Britons were said to have been operating in Iraqi waters, was down to the commander of the two boats. There was no air cover at the time because a helicopter had just returned to HMS Cornwall after watching the successful boarding of a merchant vessel.

Britain has Iraqi backing in its insistence that the 15 sailors and Marines were on “routine” anti-smuggling operations in Iraqi waters when they were seized at gunpoint in the Shatt al-Arab waterway. Iran says that they entered its territorial waters illegally.

Iran gave a warning that Mr Blair’s comments would only aggravate tensions. “The media campaigns and provocative . . . remarks regarding the violation of Iranian territorial waters by the British sailors are doing nothing to help settle the affair,” Mohammad Ali Hosseini, a Foreign Ministry Spokesman, said. “The British service personnel entered Iranian waters illegally and the case will follow its legal and judicial course.”

The American exercises included rapid-fire simulated air attacks. US Navy Commander Kevin Aandahl said that the operation would last several days and was not meant to be seen as a response to the capture of the British sailors — nor to threaten Iran. He added that warships would be staying out of Iranian territorial waters.

Diplomatic sources in Washington yesterday suggested that such sabre-rattling was designed to reassure other Gulf states such as the Sunni-led Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which are increasingly alarmed at the prospect of Shia Iran asserting itself across the region.

Pentagon military strategists have long since identified the threat Iran poses with its considerable naval strength to close the narrow Straits of Hormuz in the Gulf, through which much of the world’s oil supplies flow. The Islamic Republic conducted its own naval manoeuvres twice last year, in April and November.

The US military exercises this week involve more than 10,000 personnel making simulated attacks on enemy aircraft and shipping, hunting submarines and finding mines.

Commander Aandahl said that it was for “regional stability and security”. He added: “If there’s a destabilising effect, it’s Iran’s behaviour.”

Admiral William Fallon, the top US commander for the Middle East, used an interview with CNN to restate American claims that Iran is backing Shia militias in Iraq.

“The question is, what is Iran going to do about its behaviour?” he said. “Iranian behaviour has been not only unhelpful, but detrimental to peace and progress.”

US commanders have suggested that the British sailors should have fought rather than allow themselves to be captured. Lieutenant-Commander Erik Horner, second-in-command on USS Underwood, the frigate working in the British-controlled task force with HMS Cornwall, said: “We not only have a right to self-defence but also an obligation to self-defence. [The British] had every right and every justification to defend themselves rather than allow themselves to be taken. Our reaction was, ‘Why didn’t your guys defend themselves?’ ”

Mr Hosseini said that British diplomats would be able to meet the 15 once investigators had completed questioning them about what they had been doing in Iranian waters.

So is this showmanship, or is it being treated as a Casus Belli for war?

**Parihaka** · 03-27-2007, 19:26 PM

Any objections to me merging this with the other larger thread?

smilingassassin · 03-27-2007, 20:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parihaka

Any objections to me merging this with the other larger thread?

Go for it, my bad starting a seperate thread.

**Parihaka** · 03-27-2007, 20:23 PM

Done.

gunnut · 03-27-2007, 20:23 PM

I heard this on the radio: the Iranians did this for OIL!!!

They need to boost oil price up to make it worthwhile for them. It currently costs them $20 per barrel to get the oil out of the ground. It costs the Saudis $4/bbl. Oil price falling to $50 is a bad, bad, bad sign for Iran, who even lacks refining capacity. They want oil at above $70/bbl mark and stay there to make a good profit. They have no industries. They have no access to advanced western technology. Their only source of income is oil.

smilingassassin · 03-27-2007, 20:30 PM

Things get even worse when those sanctons kick in.

Why oh why don't nations ever get the point that when they get sanctions levied at them clearly they are in the wrong....

Sanctions....Bad....get it?

Bluesman · 03-27-2007, 23:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowman

Diplomacy did not work for President Carter. Don't believe we would have re-taken the Falklands with diplomacy, either. I would subscribe to a short period of diplomacy, but we shoud definitely be prepared to issue an ultimatum within days. We cannot always avoid unpleasant situations by deferring the tough decisions until later. The Iranians committed an act of war; any patience that we demonstrate is beyond what they deserve.

Hear him, people. Absolutely correct.

Bluesman · 03-27-2007, 23:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bandwagon

Actually it did. His action failed when his paltry few helicopters crashed in the Saudi desert. Eventually the hostages were released through diplomacy involving the Algerians if my memory serves me. I do remember they returned home on the day of Reagan's inauguration.

It's not a tough decision if you are likely to achieve the opposite to your aim.

Actually, it did NOT work, unless you feel that the release of 44 diplomats was all that was on the line.

For 444 staright days, we were humiliated, made to appear weak (check that; we WERE weak!

), and 'the hostage crisis' was a crisis for US, instead of the perps that committed this outrageous crime. (And we still owe A-jad a debt of honor for it that I hope we'll have the opportunity to pay back.)

If this is what you consider a diplomatic victory, friend, I am beginning to see why it was the Iranians thought they could do this to British sailors and get away with it. Because if this is the stand taken, they already HAVE gotten away with it.

STRIKE THEM.

I reiterate: let this be a crisis for THEM. Let THEM have emergency meetings to figure a way out of this mess; let THEM go looking for help around the world to extricate their balls from the wringer they've gotten caught in. Let them CRAWL and abjectly apologize and meekly hand over what they wrongly seized. ANYTHING ELSE assures that this will happen again. Hell, why do we all suppose it happened THIS time?

Because they took your measure in 2004, and they've been doing it ever since, and they're doing it now.

STRIKE THEM.

Bluesman · 03-27-2007, 23:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smilingassassin

Things get even worse when those sanctons kick in.

Why oh why don't nations ever get the point that when they get sanctions levied at them clearly they are in the wrong....

Sanctions....Bad....get it?

Because if that's all there is, it's a weak gesture, almost meaningless, and usually only harmful to the populace, as it strengthens the hand of a despot. He and his thugs are now the sole source of staples that the population needs, so Mr. John Q. Iranian, do you support the regime, or do we just go ahead and tear up your ration card right here and now?

Sanctions are a gutless non-solution, a weak act by a 'Power' that is too squeamish to spill blood and REALLY exact a price from the malefactors. And everytime we resort to this counter-productive and totally ineffective tool, we just confirm in our enemies' minds that we're too timid to bring 'em the pain for real.

STRIKE THEM.

gunnut · 03-28-2007, 00:08 AM

I think we should work with our international allies to secure a diplomatic solution. Let diplomacy work its course. Force must be our last resort. We must continue to engage in negotiations for the release of these brave yet unfortunate souls caught in the web of lies concocted by the Bushitler regime.

How's my John Murtha impersonation?

Bluesman · 03-28-2007, 00:34 AM

Good'un.

Even funnier:

Quote:

March 27, 2007
Iran Blinks Under 'Cordial Pressure' from Tony Blair
by Scott Ott

(2007-03-27) — Iran announced today that it would release immediately the 15 British soldiers and marines it took hostage last week to avoid further “cordial pressure and devastating pleasantries” from British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

“In this test of wills,” said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, “we acknowledge the superior power of the adversary. We cannot withstand another onslaught of polite diplomatic language nor the withering, if unspoken, consternation we detect in the eyes of Tony Blair.”

A spokesman for Mr. Blair said, “Tyrants like Ahmadinejad, and the radical Mullahs who prop him up, understand only one thing: swift, targeted courtesy. And though we were reluctant to overreact to this little dust up, the Iranian leader now knows we mean business.”

The British Prime Minister’s spokesman added, “Our patience is virtually unlimited, but not infinitely unlimited. That’s why Iran blinked. They could see a day coming when the talking would stop, and we would reach into our arsenal of UN resolutions to consider more sanctions.”

lemontree · 03-28-2007, 00:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zraver

bahh, hit Iran wher eit hurts and keep hititng them until they give the guys back unharnmed. if they hurt them then you flatten Iran.

How come this is'nt tried against the Hezbulla?

Quote:

This is the perfect reason to flatten the nuke sites and missile sites and castrate Iran.

UK would'nt dare to, on the contrary it may follow, the US who has rewarded the very nation that was part of the genocidal attack that killed 3000 US and expatriate citizens on 9/11.

Quote:

Think the massive effect Line Backer II had on North Vietnam.

Also explain how did the above campaign contribute to victory.

baz0927 · 03-28-2007, 05:50 AM

We won`t flatten them but we will get are guys and girl back,even if we have to use force.

bandwagon · 03-28-2007, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluesman

Actually, it did NOT work, unless you feel that the release of 44 diplomats was all that was on the line.

For 444 staright days, we were humiliated, made to appear weak (check that; we WERE weak!

), and 'the hostage crisis' was a crisis for US, instead of the perps that committed this outrageous crime. (And we still owe A-jad a debt of honor for it that I hope we'll have the opportunity to pay back.)

If this is what you consider a diplomatic victory, friend, I am beginning to see why it was the Iranians thought they could do this to British sailors and get away with it. Because if this is the stand taken, they already HAVE gotten away with it.

STRIKE THEM.

I reiterate: let this be a crisis for THEM. Let THEM have emergency meetings to figure a way out of this mess; let THEM go looking for help around the world to extricate their balls from the wringer they've gotten caught in. Let them CRAWL and abjectly apologize and meekly hand over what they wrongly seized. ANYTHING ELSE assures that this will happen again. Hell, why do we all suppose it happened THIS time?

Because they took your measure in 2004, and they've been doing it ever since, and they're doing it now.

STRIKE THEM.

Explain to me how a totalitarian regime that abuses its people is going to persuaded by strikes. Instead strikes are likely to unite the nation behind the regime, and worse -the hawks will gain the upper hand, probably withdraw from the NPT and pull out all the stops for a nuclear weapons program. This would undoubtedly result in more strikes and a dangerous escalation also involving Iraq, Lebanon, Israel.

Do you think the regime will act in the interest of the people? If you start with strikes, the only way you would get the emboldened regime to change tack is by invading Iraq-style in order to try and topple them. Forget it: Iran is not Iraq.

Explain also how strikes are not going to get the hostages killed.

I think the IRG took the Brits not because of 2004 (2004 is not 2007), but because it was an opportunity they were looking for. They might have taken Americans. But in fact Britain is hated more than America in Iran. Irregardless of that, - I reckon the IRG would welcome strikes. It's likely that currently the prisoners are a source of tension between the IRG on one side and the leadership, (as well as the pragmatists around Rafsanjani). Strikes would unite them and sideline Rafsanjani.

03-27-2007, 20:23 PM	#186 (permalink)
gunnut *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 01-27-06 Location: DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia Posts: 10,274 Country:	I heard this on the radio: the Iranians did this for OIL!!! They need to boost oil price up to make it worthwhile for them. It currently costs them $20 per barrel to get the oil out of the ground. It costs the Saudis $4/bbl. Oil price falling to $50 is a bad, bad, bad sign for Iran, who even lacks refining capacity. They want oil at above $70/bbl mark and stay there to make a good profit. They have no industries. They have no access to advanced western technology. Their only source of income is oil. __________________ "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

03-28-2007, 05:50 AM	#194 (permalink)
baz0927 Fish *Military Professional* Join Date: 02-19-07 Location: Wirral/UK Posts: 49 Country:	We won`t flatten them but we will get are guys and girl back,even if we have to use force. __________________ Fear Naught.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Britain Appeals To UN In Sailors' Case	Ironduke	International Politics	338	04-23-2007 16:24 PM
Battleship History Article	rickusn	Battleships Forum	3	01-17-2007 11:16 AM
Al Qaeda Declines in Northern Iraq, Military Officer Says	Shek	The War in Iraq	6	09-16-2005 19:03 PM
Future of afghanistan	raja khan	Operation Enduring Freedom	113	09-20-2004 19:23 PM

03-27-2007, 19:15 PM	#181 (permalink)
zraver Contrary by nature. *Military Professional* Join Date: 10-22-06 Location: Arkansas Posts: 3,404 Country:	bahh, hit Iran wher eit hurts and keep hititng them until they give the guys back unharnmed. if they hurt them then you flatten Iran. This is the perfect reason to flatten the nuke sites and missile sites and castrate Iran. Even if the Mullahs cave after the 1st strike they still lose thier most important facility and massive amounts of face. By the time they figure out that taking on the UK and US is a losing bet they will be completely denuded either miltiarily or politically. Think the massive effect Line Backer II had on North Vietnam.

03-27-2007, 19:26 PM	#183 (permalink)
Parihaka Moderator Join Date: 11-10-04 Location: Te Ika a Maui Posts: 10,017 Country:	Any objections to me merging this with the other larger thread?

03-27-2007, 20:23 PM	#185 (permalink)
Parihaka Moderator Join Date: 11-10-04 Location: Te Ika a Maui Posts: 10,017 Country:	Done.

03-27-2007, 20:30 PM	#187 (permalink)
smilingassassin *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 12-12-03 Location: Vancouver Canada Posts: 2,751 Country:	Things get even worse when those sanctons kick in. Why oh why don't nations ever get the point that when they get sanctions levied at them clearly they are in the wrong.... Sanctions....Bad....get it?

03-28-2007, 00:08 AM	#191 (permalink)
gunnut *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 01-27-06 Location: DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia Posts: 10,274 Country:	I think we should work with our international allies to secure a diplomatic solution. Let diplomacy work its course. Force must be our last resort. We must continue to engage in negotiations for the release of these brave yet unfortunate souls caught in the web of lies concocted by the Bushitler regime. How's my John Murtha impersonation?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)