 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:44 AM BBC report First BBC report with maps and locations. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:52 AM "a location that he said was in Iraqi waters" By whose map? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:54 AM What was the name of that Bay just off Vietnam? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Wolfgang Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:56 AM Indian vessel in this report, but still not Iranian. That Iran was so careless first to provide information about the location that was not in Iranian waters shows that they do not care about truth. They have taken hostages and now lie about the event. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Teribus Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:11 AM I realise that it is difficult to get scale of such a diagram but it does look as though "Cornwall" was far, too far away, from the boarding party to provide any form of support whatsoever, in which case the helo should have been ordered to stay in visual contact and not despatched on other surveillence work. Not surprisingly I'd tend to believe that the boats were taken inside Iraqi territorial waters, the ship they had just searched was, after all, headed for an Iraqi Port, Umm Qasr or Basra, taking into account the position of the nearest headland in relation to where it was going what would it be doing in Iranian waters? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:18 AM "By whose map?" The scale of the 'newspaper map' is utterly useless! ""Without such an agreement, international law requires countries not to extend their territorial waters "beyond the median line with neighboring states," said Martin Pratt of the University of Durham in Britain. But defining that line is difficult because of conflicting claims to rock formations, sandbars and barrier islands in the shallow waters of the northern Gulf, Pratt said. As a result, there may be "legitimate grounds for arguing for a different definition" of those median lines, Pratt said. "Until a boundary is agreed, you could only be certain that the personnel were in Iraqi territorial waters if they were within 12 miles of the (Iraqi) coast and, at the same time, more than 12 miles from any island, spit, bar or sand bank claimed by Iran," said Craig Murray, former chief of the Maritime Section of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. That means ships operating near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab – where marshes and sandbars make navigation difficult and where "ownership" of the water is ambiguous – could easily run into trouble. " ""There's a lot of room for making mischief, if that's what you want to do," Schofield said. " " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:24 AM Don't forget that is a British Report - taken from information Given by The British Govt! And they would never lie, would they - how many minutes to launch of those WMDs again? Now, "What was the name of that Bay just off Vietnam? " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:37 AM Galway? I am sure that the Iranians are being scrupulously honest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Wolfgang Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:46 AM Bay of Pigs? Also far from Vietnam. I give you a hint, Foolestroupe to prompt your recollection. Your scale is utterly wrong, In Vietname it wasn't a bay, it was a gulf. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: folk1e Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:54 AM There are two lines, the border between Iraq and Iran, and an operational border line set up on the Iraq side of the international border to prevent "operational misjudgements". The Marines were taken from the east of both borderlines....... British Vice Admiral Chester Style It would appear that the vast majority of people believe this (as do I) It would appear the RoE has, if not caused the incident certainly made it worse. Time for a rethink? Meanwhile the political pressure is mounting on Iran, making concessions more politically embarrasing for them. I Hope and think that the Marines will be returned unharmed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Charley Noble Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:55 AM Reviewing the link to the Cornwall in the BBC report, it appears I was correct with my guess of what was happening aboard this naval ship while its boarding party was being captured and spirited away by the Iranians: "We were on the deck of the Cornwall with the crew on hand with logistical support, cups of tea and large doses of banter. Then everything changed." Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Wolfgang Date: 28 Mar 07 - 09:03 AM folk1e, you seem to quote an admiral. From which source are you quoting? Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Donuel Date: 28 Mar 07 - 09:14 AM Its WAR ITS WAR were in the big time now ITS WAR Its time to kill and steal their cash its time to hit and smash and slash its time to shoot you big galoot its war its war its war. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Teribus Date: 28 Mar 07 - 09:35 AM Foolestroupe in full "Guilty until proven innocent, and even then we won't believe you" mode, I see. Just in case you missed it F, the positions (co-ordinates) were those given by the Iranians to the British, the first ones they gave were 1.7 nautical miles inside iraqi territorial waters. As useless as maps on a screen go you can see by the relative positions of the ships that the ship just having been subject to a search lies to the NW of Cornwall's position. The first position stated by the Iranians puts the boarding party in between Cornwall and the ship they had just finished searching. Then the Iranian Republican Guard Ooops and then gave a "corrected" position that makes no sense at all. Could well be Foolestroupe that your political bias and downright prejudice actually prevent you from thinking about the presentation of information and making any sort of rational evaluation of it. With you it always seems to be straight down the Party Line, irrespective of how ludicrous that may be. Hi Foolestroupe I've got a bridge to sell you. Forty-five minutes F, time it takes to authorise use of chemical or biological weapons and arm those munitions for use - Source standard "Cold War" threat lecture material.I recognised it for what it was and what it meant the instant I heard it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Wolfgang Date: 28 Mar 07 - 09:54 AM Vice Admiral Style, the deputy chief of the defence staff, said one of the two small British craft intercepted by the Iranian navy at gunpoint had a GPS (global positioning system) device on board. Information from that device, along with further evidence from a British military helicopter, proved the sailors were operating "well inside" Iraqi waters when they were seized last Friday, he said. The GPS relayed information back to HMS Cornwall, the ship the craft were operating from, meaning it was able to "continuously chart" their position. The vice admiral said the Iranians had given two different positions for where they claimed the Royal Navy boarding party - seized after they had made a routine boarding of an Indian-flagged dhow suspected of being used to smuggle cars - had been. He added that the location given by Iran on Saturday for the British personnel was inside Iraqi waters. After this was pointed out to Tehran, Iranian officials provided a second location, around two miles inside Iranian waters, on Monday. (from GUARDIAN) I don't believe that this man has said what folk1e has put in his mouth. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: GUEST,Peace Date: 28 Mar 07 - 11:29 AM The Iranian government is crazy as hell. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Donuel Date: 28 Mar 07 - 12:06 PM Rattle a sabre and raise the gas prices. barrels are going for $69, an all time high. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Mar 07 - 12:23 PM Donuel, "barrels are going for $69, an all time high. " Wrong again. Try checking things before you state them as fact. http://zfacts.com/p/196.html http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5612507/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Mar 07 - 01:21 PM "Even if the ship had somehow strayed into Iranian waters, Beckett said, "under international law, warships have sovereign immunity in the territorial sea of other states." "The very most Iran would've been entitled to do if they considered our boats were breeching the rules on innocent passage would've been to require the ship to leave their territorial waters immediately," the foreign secretary explained. On Monday, hard-liners in Iran urged the government to charge the Britons with espionage and put them on trial." http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/28/iran.uk.sailors/index.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: pdq Date: 28 Mar 07 - 01:43 PM Bomb Iran |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: dianavan Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:15 PM O.K. Wolfgang, so I'm not polite when responding to teribus. Why should I be? He said it was Japanese vessel. I said it was Iranian (I was confused - sorry if it was misleading but I meant it as a question). Now we know it was a merchant vessel flying and Indian flag. Teribus does not deserve an apology. Yes, there is confusion about the territorial boundaries. It also seems that the Brits were not properly informed about how 'touchy' the Iranians were about these boundaries. Iraqi fisherman seemed to know it was best to stay well within Iraqi waters. "The Iraqi military commander of the country's territorial waters cast doubt on claims the Britons were in Iraqi waters." So why did the Brits push the envelope? "We were informed by Iraqi fishermen after they had returned from sea that there were British gunboats in an area that is out of Iraqi control," Brig. Gen. Hakim Jassim told AP Television News in the southern city of Basra." http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=6f4e8311-22d2-43ba-8198-bcc3a9eeda83&k=83132 Odd how most of the media has failed to report the Iraqi side of this question when it is Iraq and Iran who know the traditional lines of demarcation. As far as I'm concerned its another case of U.S/Britain asserting their power in foreign territory. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:20 PM dianavan, "So why did the Brits push the envelope?" The location as given originally by the Iranians was clearly within Iraqi borders. Who said the Brits pushed the envelope? A better question would be "So, why did the Iranians push the envelope, and violate international law again?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:29 PM The fishermen were correct Dianavan. The boats were forced to leave Iraqi waters, illegally. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: dianavan Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:51 PM "There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that they were in Iraqi territorial waters," Commodore Lambert said of the British sailors. "Equally, the Iranians may claim they were in Iranian waters." - from Reuters Seems to me that there is plenty of confusion about the boundaries out there and who was where when. Bottom line is that Iran has 15 British military personnel. Maybe Britain should just say, "sorry" and hope their soldiers are returned safely or negotiate for a prisoner exchange. I don't think Britain is in a position to dig in its heels when there is so much ambiguity and when there are 15 lives involved. Chalk it up to confusion (I certainly am and conflicting accounts of the situation). I don't think anyone really knows for sure. Its definitely too close to call. Is it worth starting a war? Maybe Britain could start by apologizing to its citizens for providing insufficient cover for their military personnel in a disputed waterway. Iran was obviously waiting for this. Perhaps it is Iraq who should mediate this one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Wolfgang Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:57 PM An Iraqi fisherman said he saw Iranian forces detain British sailors and marines on Friday in a waterway between Iraq and Iran. The man also said that the ship British forces were searching was anchored in Iraqi waters (Toronto Daily News) That was the first news report. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Donuel Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:59 PM having checked your facts... Jeez you win Bruce. $69 a barrel is an all time high for ONLY the last 16 years* *unadjusted for inflation |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Mar 07 - 03:05 PM Domuel, Try again... "Jeez you win Bruce. $69 a barrel is an all time high for ONLY the last 16 years* *unadjusted for inflation " "Oil prices rally again, top $72 a barrel Inventory report shows gasoline demand rising at a slower pace Updated: 4:05 p.m. ET April 19, 2006 WASHINGTON - Oil prices leapt above $72 a barrel Wednesday, settling at a record high for the third straight day after a government report showed shrinking U.S. gasoline supplies and traders fretted about nuclear tensions between Iran and the international community." Please read the second clicky. This was ALMOST 1 year ago... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Wolfgang Date: 28 Mar 07 - 03:36 PM Iranian student groups have called for the Britons to be held until the United States releases five Revolutionary Guard members captured in Iraq in January. Al-Sharq al-Awsat, a Saudi-owned newspaper based in London, quoted an unidentified Iranian military source as saying that the aim of the capture had been to trade the Royal Marines for these Guards. "Orders were given to the marine units of the Guards to implement the first part of the plan which included besieging one of the British naval patrols in charge of combating smuggling and arrest the soldiers." from here Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Richard Bridge Date: 28 Mar 07 - 06:40 PM Pretty cut and dried on the frontier then. The latest information on the Cornwall's positioning seems to be that the local waters were too shallow for the Cornwall to be any closer without a risk of grounding. How big was the Indian cargo vessel, and how did it grow to that size from a dhow? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Teribus Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:41 PM "Iranian student groups have called for the Britons to be held until the United States releases five Revolutionary Guard members captured in Iraq in January." So now we are getting to the crux of the matter: Hey dianavan: Point 1. The Iraqi Republican Guards captured in Iraq in January (Note no dispute about this they were in Iraq, they were present in Iraq to with the express intent of killing MNF and Iraqi civilians) Point 2. The British Royal Navy personnel, who you assert, deserved everything they got, were acting under legitimate instructions according to United Nations Security Council Resolution within Iraqi territorial waters were kidnapped. Point 3. So Iranian Republican Guard wait until circumstances are right to abduct MNF personnel who are legally doing their duty in accordance with UN Security Council mandate - Now Iran and its President have pulled this stunt before. In order that their paid killers go free. Now dianavan just exactly where is your grip on reality in all this? Please explain it to everybody on this forum why: You are on the side of those who would enter Iraq illegally to murder Iraqi citizens. While you are opposed to those who wish to prevent such atrocities. Not only are you opposed to rights and liberties of those servicemen and women but you seem to actually welcome their possible incarceration for crimes that they are clearly innocent of. I would hope that most on this forum would welcome some form of explanation for your viewpoint on this situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:44 PM Ha! Now the Iranians are complaining that several of their alleged 'diplomats' seized some time ago have been prevented from having contact with Iranian officials... Ah - Pot calling Kettle Games, I see... The problem with constantly spouting hypocritical bullshit about being "The World Defender Of Freedom And Democracy" is that others may believe this bullshit and actually expect you to live up to it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:57 PM "Foolestroupe in full "Guilty until proven innocent, and even then we won't believe you" mode," Sorry - but it's OK when you and your ilk do it... oooo, it's ilk season again... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:06 PM All that the best Satellite Navigation system can do is identify a physical location of an event. The question of its political location - whether it is in Iraqi waters" or "Iranian waters" - is another matter entirely. The fact that the term "disputed" has been used in relation to the waters concerned is an indication that there is some doubt about these matters. And it would seem common sense when conducting stop and search operations to avoid doing it in territory that is disputed. Why search a cargo ship headed for a port in your control to see if it is carrying cars while it is at sea in any case? Why not wait till it docks? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 28 Mar 07 - 08:13 PM "Could well be Foolestroupe that your political bias and downright prejudice actually prevent you from thinking about the presentation of information and making any sort of rational evaluation of it. " Could well be Teribus that your political bias and downright prejudice actually prevent you from thinking about the presentation of information and making any sort of rational evaluation of it. Tonkin, To-o-onkin Tonkin Bay and my finger's on the trigger! Tonkin Bay - now lets light the fuse! Hey Mr Taliban, tally up up me grandma! Foreigners come, and I want they go home! Make big bullshit fighting for Democracy, Foreigners come, and I want they go home! "Forty-five minutes F, time it takes to authorise use of chemical or biological weapons and arm those munitions for use - Source standard "Cold War" threat lecture material.I recognised it for what it was and what it meant the instant I heard it. " Looks like the RAF is flying high today... "With you it always seems to be straight down the Party Line, irrespective of how ludicrous that may be." We appear to be in different parties... "Hi Foolestroupe I've got a bridge to sell you. " Oh - competitors in the same business we are then, I see... "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, BOMB IRAN!" Catchy, isn't it?! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: folk1e Date: 28 Mar 07 - 09:11 PM wollfgang I quoted from a BBC TV source! The vice admaral seems to have the same opinion as me ...... the marines were on "our side of the border" even allowing for a safety element for the disputed bundary! This is, by all reasonable deduction a case of political expediency that would not have occured if it were the Americans instead of the Brittish! I am sure the outcome will be favorable to the "brits" but it may be some time in the coming. I am also unsure of the benifit of the American state f mind that would make this event more unlikley. Short term , they will win every time but it is the long term that will be rememberd for the future. Questions will have to be asked of the command of the warship involved, I only hope that the lessons will be learned! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Gulliver Date: 28 Mar 07 - 10:26 PM Wherever they were, they were a bloody long way from England! I suppose they suspected there were some WMDs in the vicinity. They'll get off scot-free anyway, not like the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis that have died or been injured as a result of the US/British invasion. Shame on them... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Dickey Date: 28 Mar 07 - 10:36 PM Is Iran following the rules of the Geneva convention? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Charley Noble Date: 28 Mar 07 - 11:00 PM Odd, no mention yet on this formum of the rumor that a female sailor will be freed soon by the Iranians, after she apologized for violating Iranian terriotry. Her apology, of course, doesn't mean that the British actually crossed this imaginary line. Only that she is smart enough to cooperate with her captives. Some here would prefer, I fear, that the captives refuse to cooperate or even be belligerant. I consider her behavior reasonable. Charley Noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: GUEST,meself Date: 29 Mar 07 - 12:42 AM Maybe our fellow 'catters are falling behind on the news. Also no mention of the video footage of the sailors, with the "apology", being shown on "Arab TV". Hard to know what that female sailor has been through. Can't imagine it's been pleasant for her ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:00 AM McG. " Why search a cargo ship headed for a port in your control to see if it is carrying cars while it is at sea in any case? Why not wait till it docks? " The ship was (still is ?) at anchor and had been observed transferring cargo to barges. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:03 AM I hope, Charley, that she was just being smart in co operating. The last time this happened, the marines were threatenend and intimidated and subjected to fake executions. Nice people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:06 AM Dicky, the Geneva convention forbids the exhibition of prisoners of war. We are not at war however. It was illegal to abduct the people even if they were clearly inside Iranian waters, which no one believes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Barry Finn Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:27 AM "Please explain it to everybody on this forum why: You are on the side of those who would enter Iraq illegally to murder Iraqi citizens." T shouldn't be you asking about why the US/UK entered Iraq illegally to murder? I wouldn't be surprized if they were now entering Iranian waters in the same fashion. Why would I be surprized with their present track record. "It was illegal to abduct the people even if they were clearly inside Iranian waters, which no one believes" Do you know that for a fact Keith? A hostile military in the waters of another nation? The US Coast Guard will take fishing vessels & crew belonging to other nations if caught fishing in our waters. As a matter of fact they borded my fishing vessel & took me in tow against my expressed wishes & permission & I wasn't even lost nor fishing. Talk about not knowing seamanship, they caused damage to the vessel (26' Novi Lobster boat) & wouldn't pay for it because my exust pipe exploded at sea & we had to jury rig it to get home but they sited me for the exust fumes & towed me causing a sampson post to rip up from the keel & then didn't know when to hit reverse in time to avoid their bow from kissing my ass. Don't go thinking that a Navy's seamenship is what it was was in the days of Nelson. For that matter I've sailed with an Israeli Naval Captain & crew & some American too & they weren't worth the salt you'd put in coffee. "The ship was (still is ?) at anchor and had been observed transferring cargo to barges." A Dhow transfering cars at sea is a sight that I'd love to see. A Dhow has shallow enough draft to easily off load at piers & docks, they're very maneuverable vessels in tight quarters. Plus to off load at sea means some one is carrying some serious hoisting capabilities, with some heavy duty equipment, when it'd make more sense (not to mention safety) to hit a dock side travel lift or crane. Can't see why they'd prefere doing the job twice? But maybe there's a good reason, who knows? We'll see, I'm sure. T, 60$ a barrel is only the cost of the barrel. At present, if we are in fact after oil & the control of it, it's costing us far more than that just to get to it! "All that the best Satellite Navigation system can do is identify a physical location of an event. The question of its political location - whether it is in Iraqi waters" or "Iranian waters" - is another matter entirely." MaGraph is right about that, then take into consideration the current, tide, wind direction (= drift) add to that having to stay out of shallow water & within any channel makers (if any) while underway. With a 4 knot current, a 18 knot breeze & a 3 knot tide (those are very reasonable conditions), that 'could' result in a 25 knot per hour drift to a vessel of some size depending on keel & sails, maybe more maybe less. In 15 minutes time they could have been miles from where they were 1st boarded providing they weren't motoring & factoring all these conditions at the same time. That would take some seamanship. Far more than I'd say a junior with few years at the wheel would have, IMHO. "Is Iran following the rules of the Geneva convention" Are we? There are so many "ifs", "whats", "whos" that were known to be avoidable if they were to be played this close to the bone that boarding a vessel in those watres was at the very least a very stupid decision & at worst a very wrong intentional & disastrous move. Hopefully the only heads that'll roll will be those that made this into an international disaster, & I'm not talking any Iranians either! Who the Hell's in charge? Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:43 AM Anyone breaking fishing regulations can expect to have boat and gear impounded. The Dover Straight is the busiest shipping lane in the world. It is not international waters but French and British. Any vessel of any nation can be there, as long as they do not fish. Also, a warship is regarded as sovereign territory, like an embassy, and may not be boarded. It can be requested to leave and escorted away. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:46 AM http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6501555.stm Barry, the picture on this report shows the ship. The helicopter crewman is holding a GPS receiver. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:49 AM Barry you can be sure Britain is not breaching Geneva convention. There are plenty of people who would be eager to point out any infringement of any international agreement. A degree of desperation is entering your posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: dianavan Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:11 AM "All that the best Satellite Navigation system can do is identify a physical location of an event. The question of its political location - whether it is in Iraqi waters or "Iranian waters" - is another matter entirely." Exactly, McGrath. I know I posted this before but I think its important to listen to what the Iraqi Commander said and to take the fisherman's story seriously. They are the people most familiar with territorial traditions. The locals are sure to have a better understanding of the situation than anyone else. Of course teribus would have us believe that the superiority of the Royal Navy should never be questioned. "The Iraqi military commander of the country's territorial waters cast doubt on claims the Britons were in Iraqi waters. We were informed by Iraqi fishermen after they had returned from sea that there were British gunboats in an area that is out of Iraqi control," Brig. Gen. Hakim Jassim told AP Television News in the southern city of Basra." http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070324.wiran0324/BNStory/Front There is just too much that doesn't add up. Why were the Brits boarding a merchant vessel at sea? Was it at anchor or travelling to port? How big was this vessel? Even if it was in Iraqi waters, does this mean that the British dinghys (gunboats) did not stray into Iranian waters? What kind of games were they playing with the helicopter crew? Why were they out of contact with the Cornwall? But most of all, why would the Iraqi commander and the Iraqi fishermen be concerned about the British being in Iranian waters? My guess is that they knew Britain was being disrespectful and that their actions would cause an incident. The Iraqis know better than to challenge the Iranians and they were worried about the obvious transgression. Its another case of Britain being out of its league. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Barry Finn Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:13 AM No, I didn't think that the Brits were violating any GC's here, it's not really their hand in that to play at the moment & I would hope that the same goes for the Iranians too. But that question should be asked all around, we sure weren't abiding by it. Though I did see a video of them on the news eating & looking in good condition, I'd say it was more to show decent treatment (or at least portray that) of them rather than the photos being used as a threat, hopefully. The picture of the airman holding a hand held GPS is likely to be showing his own vessel's (Cornwall?) position & not the dhow, that is not a dhow he's hovering above, so where they boarded & where the dhow was is still very much in question & we do know the Cornwall was out of site of the boarding vessels (at least I think we do). The distance of site of horizon at a height of 6' is 7 miles at sea in calm waters, though beyond a mile or so it's difficult to spot a small vessel anyway, the higher vantage point the better. So if the sailors in the boadring vessel couldn't see the Cornwall they could've been a min of only a few miles away or they could've been at the least 7 miles away or better, I'm sure the the Cornwall sit high enough to get a good long distance view if they were watching (God help the sailor who wasn't & was suspossed be). At this distance did they know where they were when they boarded & after they finished? On the news this evening I did hear an apology but it wasn't from the female sailor it was just an apology from no one in perticular. But at this point in time an apology means nothing & may never come to mean anything. We can only guess. She'll say whatever her government tells her to say after it's all said & done with. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:22 AM Barry, that is the merchant ship, not the cornwall. You also get a glimpse of the ship in the Iranian footage of the arrest.(also on BBC site) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard From: Barry Finn Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:23 AM "Exactly, McGrath. I know I posted this before but I think its important to listen to what the Iraqi Commander said and to take the fisherman's story seriously. They are the people most familiar with territorial traditions. The locals are sure to have a better understanding of the situation than anyone else." 1st rule of seamanship, when in strange waters "Ask the locals"! Barry |
