execrable

story here

ExNavyAmerican

Something needs to be done about this... Someone should launch a retalitory strike, and tell them that there is no negotiation; they send the sailors back, or we won't need troops.

__________________
"I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever."
- Thomas Jefferson

Bluesman

This is exactly the sort of brinksmanship that we can expect more of from Tehran. Especially if it is met with a weak response.

It MUST be answered forcefully. And even then, confrontation is exactly what these guys want. So, in my opinion, they must be smacked for this, but hard enough to negate any good they would get from it. If it doesn't pay off for them, they'll stop. If it DOES pay, due to our fecklessness and cowardice...we'll get more outrageous provocations.

__________________
"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory."
- George Orwell

Dreadnought

Hmmm WWII style PT boats come to mind when I see stuff like this happen to the Brits. Im surprised that their home ship the Cornwall didnt see this coming.

__________________
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

ZFBoxcar

I agree with you guys. Like you said Bluesman, they will be expecting retaliation, so it must be big. They trained Hezbollah to do this to the Israelis and the retaliation didn't work out so well, despite being big (although run by a defense minister who's only training is being a union leader). When Hezbollah provoked Israel, it turns out they knew what they were doing. Therefore I am worried that the Iranians might have a good reason to think that Anglo-American retaliation will fail or hurt the Brits and Americans more than themselves. This crime can't be left unanswered though. Gotta get those sailors back.

JMH

It is interesting that Iran, for the second time, has chosen to capture British Naval personnel, perhaps they do not have any respect for British Sea power, short of using Trident, all the British could retaliate with is: A few Tomahawk Cruise missiles launched from Submarines, a few air strikes with a small number of fighters and harriers and shore bombardment with 4.5 inch guns. Only the US Navy and the USAF have enough firepower available in the Arabian Sea, Persian Gulf and Middle East to wipe out Iran. Iran perceives the west as divided, corrupt, decadent, weak and indecisive and for the most part they are correct. For right in the middle of this crisis the US Congress is displaying this weakness to Iran by initiating a vote to withdraw US forces from Iraq while those forces are still engaged in battle against terrorists and militia's that Iran supports, trains and equips with weapons, munitions and IED's. If this outrageous act, the capture of the Royal Navy and Royal Marine personnel, is not met with a harsh overwhelming response (of course this would have to come from the US) than Iran will continue to engage in increasingly provocative acts of brinkmanship to show the rest of the Muslim world how weak and indecisive the west is in the hope to scare the United Nations into backing down on sanctions against Iran (the UN won't pass the sanctions for fear that Iran would retaliate by torturing the British Naval personnel they have captured) while at the same time buying time for the US Democratic party to secure victory for Iran by forcing the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. But with President Bush in office, hopefully the Iranians will not get the tepid, weak response that they have come to expect from the US, as was demonstrated by President Carter during the Iranian hostage crisis.

Dreadnought

Where's Maggie Thatcher when the Brits need her the most. The Lady with the Iron ****.

sappersgt

Interesting that they picked British rather than US or any other coalition personnel. Is this an attempt to divide allies?

__________________
Reddite igitur quae sunt Caesaris Caesari et quae sunt Dei Deo
(Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things which are God's)

Bluesman

Probably was a target of opportunity, but I bet they see it as a god-given chance to do exactly that.

gunnut

That was my initial response. Why Brits rather than Yanks?

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

glyn

__________________
Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

Dreadnought

Perhaps one possibility: The Yanks when they do this search have a USN DD very close by and that certainly would have spelled trouble for anybody attempting to intervine in the search especially by watercraft.

Perhaps second possibility: Had they grabbed Yanks they may have felt Bush would have demanded they (USN) persue them into Iranian waters and a conflict may have erupted.

xerxes

This kind of events/incident/provokation happens all the time between two sides that have diverging national/international aims, and each time one side comes up with points to make the other side look the aggressor .. nothing new here ...

If the US/UK does the samething, it is said "intelliegence report pointed that way", if tehran does it, "it is called kidnapping and violation of right blah blah" from the Western point of view, and the inverse also applies. So while the brits will come with all their satellite mumbo-jumbo BS to prove that they were in internation waters, Tehran will come with itsn own mumbo-jumbo to disprove that. While, the US as part of its sabre-ratteling and message sending decided to takeover Iranian consulate, it was hailed in the west as "based on intelligence blah blah", while hailed in Iran as "pure kidnapping".

So nothing new here, no need to get over-emotional and start beating the wardrums and flocking to the banner of Caesar. They will be released in couple of days, if memory serves several US marines were also captured in 2004 and released in a few days/hours.

__________________
If we contrast the rapid progress of this mischievous discovery of gunpowder with the slow and laborious advances of reason, science, and the arts of peace, a philosopher, according to his temper, will laugh or weep at the folly of mankind. - Edward Gibbon

xerxes

you forget that US personnels were also captured by Iranians in 2004 near Iraq and released within days. It can be blown into an international crisis if Tehran, London and Washington wished to be that way by their action. Iranians are not stupid, while they (A-jad) talk too much, they greatly fear US military prowess.

No offense to you, but I find it funny that you think that Iran will decide to torture the captured British should US moves against them. That is the typical Western view.

EDIT: actually, I believe in 2004 they were also British. my mistake .

pdf27

They were Royal Marines, not US personnel last time. I can't see the UK responding in a manner that involves blowing things up (as that appears to be precisely what Iran wants us to do here - stir up external trouble to distract dissidents at home from their complaints, Galtieri all over again). What I can see however is say Lloyds of London refusing to insure tankers carrying Iranian crude due to "increased risk". That sort of thing could hurt Iran badly, but is hardly something the current government there can point to as an aggressive act by the West.
The other aspect to this is that rather a large number of EU countries have peacekeepers in the Lebanon, where they are vulnerable to Iranian proxies doing the same thing. So I suspect the UK may be able to get lots of Iranian financial dealings designated as "money linked to terrorism" fairly easily. Again, it hurts Iran without them having something to point to.

__________________
Rule 1: Never trust a Frenchman
Rule 2: Treat all members of the press as French