BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard

Subject: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Arnie
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 11:04 AM

Hard to believe that 15 of the Royal Navy's finest have just been kidnapped by Iranian Revolutionary Guards whilst in Iraqi waters. I wonder if they were out-gunned, out-fought or simply surrendered? There was a bloody big RN frigate nearby - what were they doing at the time? Doesn't reflect well on Her Majesty's navy does it - and this is the second time it's happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Beanie
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 11:37 AM

It is believed the group holding them collect Old Masters and young sailors.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Ayatollah Blair
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 11:55 AM

The Iranians were in Iraqi territory illegally. So were the British. Iran and Iraq fought over the Shatt al Arab for 8 years, that's why the Americans armed Saddam, remember...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 12:55 PM

'The Iranians were in Iraqi territory illegally. So were the British'

There is a difference. British and US forces are in acknowledged occupation of Iraqi territory and territorial waters. Iran is still claiming they aren't interfering in Iraq. You can call Britain's presence "illegal" but at least they aren't a pack of liars.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 12:59 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Who's Next? Iran or Korea?
From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 10:09 AM

15 British sailors detained by Iran
Updated 11m ago |   



LONDON (AP) — Iranian naval vessels arrested and seized 15 British sailors and marines on Friday in Iraqi waters moments after they searched a merchant ship, the Ministry of Defense said.
Britain summoned Iran's ambassador in London to demand their immediate release.

The British personnel from the frigate HMS Cornwall were "engaged in routine boarding operations of merchant shipping in Iraqi territorial waters," and had completed their inspection of a merchant ship when they were accosted by Iranian vessels, the ministry said in a statement.

"We are urgently pursuing this matter with the Iranian authorities at the highest level and ... the Iranian ambassador has been summoned to the Foreign Office," the ministry said.


ON DEADLINE: Read more about the British soldiers

"The British government is demanding the immediate and safe return of our people and equipment."

"I've got 15 sailors and marines who have been arrested by the Iranians and my immediate concern is their safety," the Cornwall's commander, Commodore Nick Lambert, told British Broadcasting Corp television.

Lambert said it was a routine boarding. The skipper of the vessel had "answered all the questions, and the leader of the boarding party cleared him to continue with his business."

Lambert said the Cornwall lost communication with the boarding party, but a helicopter crew saw the Iranian vessels approach.

A fisherman who said he was with a group of Iraqis from Basra in the northern area of the Gulf said he witnessed the event. The fisherman declined to be identified because of security concerns.

"Two boats, each with a crew of six to eight multinational forces, were searching Iraqi and Iranian boats Friday morning in Ras al-Beesha area in the northern entrance of the Arab Gulf, but big Iranian boats came and took the two boats with their crews to the Iranian waters," said the fisherman.

BBC reporter Ian Pannell on HMS Cornwall said the sailors had just boarded a dhow when they were accosted.

"While they were on board, a number of Iranian boats approached the waters in which they were operating — the Royal Navy are insistent that they were operating in Iraqi waters and not Iranian waters — and essentially captured the Royal Navy and Royal Marine personnel at gunpoint," Pannell said.

In June 2004, six British marines and two sailors were seized by Iran in the Shatt al-Arab between Iran and Iraq. Iran said that before that group was released, British diplomats acknowledged the British boats entered the Iranian waters by mistake.

Britain's Defense Ministry subsequently said, however, that the captives believed they had not entered Iranian waters.

The U.S. 5th Fleet said the Royal Navy sailors were assigned to a naval task force whose mission is to protect Iraqi oil terminals and maintain security in Iraqi waters under the U.N. mandate of the Security Council resolutions on Iraq.

The fleet said in a statement issued by its headquarters in Bahrain: "The boarding party had completed a successful inspection of a merchant ship when they and their two boats were surrounded and escorted by Iranian vessels into Iranian territorial waters," the statement said.

The Iranians seized the Britons at 10:30 a.m. Iraqi time, the statement added.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: bubblyrat
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 01:02 PM

I was in the Royal Navy for several years,back in the ' sixties. In those days, the lads would have fought like tigers to avoid capture, especially in international waters, but in today"s politically-correct climate, they are not allowed to say " Boo", let alone fight.I imagine that they surrendered in seconds, without a struggle, on Blair"s orders. Poor sods.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 01:07 PM

The Brits are supporting a UN Resolution.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST, Skeptic
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 01:24 PM

CIA / MI-6 operation. Provocation for war. Remember the phony Iranian hostage "crisis." Remember the Maine, Gulf of Tonkin, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 01:29 PM

"Remember the phony Iranian hostage "crisis.""



??????????????????????????????????????????????

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 01:36 PM

"Remember the phony Iranian hostage "crisis.""

Tell THAT to 'KEN TAYLOR

Former Canadian Ambassador to Iran

Ken Taylor is best known as the former Canadian Ambassador to Iran who, in 1980, risked his own life and his country's reputation, to help save the lives of six American hostages during the Iran Crisis. His heroism made him an overnight international celebrity. He received the United States Congressional Gold Medal and the Order of Canada. He was also portrayed by legendary actor Gordon Pinsent in the movie "Escape from Iran: The Canadian Caper".'

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 01:52 PM

I think that if the sailors/marines that were taken are harmed, the Iranian government will find out really quickly how effective the SAS can be.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 04:16 PM

Of course Tehran claims the Brits were in Iranian waters.

Who do you think would want to create an international incident?

Maybe the Iranians should torture them until they confess that the Americans put them up to it. ;>)

btw - the sailors are reported to be in good health.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 04:26 PM

FWIW: Just heard in a radio commentary that those waters have long been disputed. Perhaps it is a little early to reach conclusions about what exactly happened, and why ... ?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: bobad
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 04:27 PM

"Perhaps it is a little early to reach conclusions about what exactly happened, and why ... ?"

Not for some people it isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 04:27 PM

There is a vote on more rrestrictions against Iran in the UN. But I doubt one thing has anything to do with the other thing. I mean, really now . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 05:17 PM

They really need a referee in these situations to determine who was offside.

The place where they were detained appears to be in a part of the waterway which is claimed by Iran, under a treaty dating from 1975. The claim that this happened in Iraqi waters appears to be based on the fact that Saddam Hussein cancelled the treaty at the time he invaded Iran five years later. (Associated Press, Jerusalem Post)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 05:20 PM

Bubblyrat - I think you could be right!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 05:29 PM

Tonight's television news said they were Marines and they are being questioned about stealing cars.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Amos
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 06:04 PM

Odd, Skep -- the Tonkin Gulf was the first thought that crossed my mind. I also thought "How clever -- to parlay the Brits force so it doesn't look like the Gulf of Tonkin trick too closely...".

But then, I have been short of sleep lately.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: skipy
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 06:21 PM

We all KNOW that at some point we WILL HAVE TO NUKE THEM! The longer we hold off the worse it will get, face it, we are at 6 minutes to midnight, lets sort it!
Skipy
Oh! by the way I wish there was another way but I don't believe that there is.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Amos
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 06:49 PM

Skipy:

We "all" know no such thing. Are you talking to the voices in your skull?

In fact, we ALL know we must not do any such thing. At ANY point.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: folk1e
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 07:46 PM

IF Iran has been paying for others to "target" Brittish troops, is anyone surprised at this turn of events?
The Iranian ambassador has been summoned to a talk with Hazel Blears' flunky ...... Bet that scared him eh?
This is a cultural divide! Talking and one upmanship are second nature to them. Remember someone talking about the "mother of all wars"? I suspect a short "release them or we will ..... " would be more effective, if not this time then the next! Maybe that is what has happened anyway (just not admitting it)!
Violence is the first recourse of the enept!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: skipy
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 07:48 PM

Amos, o/k you are right, saying ALL is wrong of me, a % of us know it will come to this, what % well you choose, but it WILL come to this all the same, sadly, but IT WILL.
Regards Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: bobad
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 07:50 PM

I think so too Skipy.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Amos
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 08:39 PM

Well, I sure don't know that it will. If it does it will be the biggest testament to human insanity ever seen.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 23 Mar 07 - 09:06 PM

Agreed.


(I assumed Skipy was being ironic in his initial post ... yikes ... ).

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: number 6
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 12:25 AM

I'm another one who 'thinks so' skipy .... but I hope it will never come to that.

"If it does it will be the biggest testament to human insanity ever seen. "

And I also certainly agree on that statement.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 12:33 AM

We've already seen a little "testament to human insanity" on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 03:22 AM

Bearing in mind that a ship's boarding party is normally under the command of a very junior officer (Midshipman, or Sub-Lieutenant) and very lightly armed I don't think fighting presented itself as an option.

During the Borneo Confrontation a 'Ton' Class Minesweeper, HMS Cheriton (IIRC) had a Sampan loaded with explosives go-up alongside during a board-and-search operation. Cheriton lost both of her Midshipmen that night - one blew his head off with a 2" Mortar illuminating the Sampan, then when the ship went alongside, the second Mid jumped down into the Sampan and set of a bobby-trap. After that, the lessons learned were for the mother ship to lay off one quarter, send one boat with the boarding party and another boat with a fire support group to position itself of the target vessel's other quarter. In that way all arcs of fire were covered and the minimum number of your own people were put at risk.

Can't think what the Commanding Officer of HMS Cornwall was up to, they obviously weren't keeping a very close eye on things, otherwise 'Cornwall' should always have been in position between the vessel being searched and the direction of greatest danger, i.e. the Iranian boats would have had to have passed HMS Cornwall to get to the boarding party. Irrespective of position 'Cornwall' should have challenged the Iranian boats on their approach.

No doubt more will come to light as the situation becomes clearer.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 04:10 AM

There are a number of things that look odd.

1. In these days of SatNav it is hard to imagine that the position of the vessels is not readily determinable to within yards. But we do not know whether the Iranian position is that the UK vessels were the wrong side of an agreed border, or that the border is somehere other than where others think it is (Iceland, anyone?)

2. Do we know what the Iranian force was? Were the UK forces really hopelessly outgunned.

3. Even if the UK forces were hopelessly outgunned, so what? Isn't fighting and dying what soldiers do - part of the job description? Or did they have orders that precluded fighting an invading force (for, if the event was in Iraqi water, that is what the Iraninans were). By way of comparison, what would an Israeli force have done if they stopped a truck to inspect for weapons near but outside Gaza, and a large Hezbollah or Hamas force jumped them?

4. Why did the Cornwall, with all of the modern technology at her command, not know of the approaching attack force before the event happened, and warn the UK force in time for it to depart in haste (those inflatables are often VERY fast)?

5. Why, indeed, was the Cornwall not between the dhow and Iranian water?

6. Did the Iranian vessels approach from Iranian water, or had they previously been, unlawfully, in Iraqi water?

7. How is it that, in these days of spy satellites, we do not even seem to know what the Iranian force was?

8. Why have the Iranians no fear, it would seem, of the technically superior UK armed might in general?

9. Why have the Iranians no need, it would seem, of any economic or other benefit Iran currently receives from or via the UK?

10. Is it right that there is really nothing we can do, other than wait for the diplomatic ransom demand to arrive?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 06:16 AM

wrong century for the war of jenkin's ear......can't believe people would buy it.

mind you - some people discern artistic integrity in the Living Tradition...!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 06:23 AM

Its a ploy by Blair & Bush, so they have an excuse to nuke Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 06:27 AM

"Even if the UK forces were hopelessly outgunned, so what? Isn't fighting and dying what soldiers do - part of the job description?"

Yes - who does Tommy Atkins think he is, choosing not to throw his worthless life away when the honour of the Empire is at stake? Doesn't he realize he is mere cannon fodder? I'd see every manjack o' them hanged! Let the wogs have'm, I say - Gunga Din's a better man than any ten of'm! A fine show this lot would have made at the Charge of the Light Brigade ...

"Is it right that there is really nothing we can do, other than wait for the diplomatic ransom demand to arrive?"

Perhaps there IS "more" that could be done - but perhaps "more" is neither sensible nor expedient. We still don't know much about this incident. There's a lot of idle sputtering going on here ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 09:26 AM

Is it true that the Iran delegation asked Margaret Beckett to wear a veil?.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 09:54 AM

The exact line of the border is disputed.
Both sides might believe that they are right.
The Iranian action seems excessive.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 11:19 AM

There wouldn't be any point asking Margaret Beckett to wear a veil - nobody would care who saw her.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 11:51 AM

hypothetical
EYES ONLY
American Enterprise Institute
memo to Dick Cheney:

The more succesful motivations for a public to desire war have been acts of terrorism and kidnapping on the high seas. Due to the remoteness of the crime there are few problems regarding witnesses or enhancement of the facts.
A record of repeated incidents culminating in a sensationalized act of kidnapping, terror and torture have been demograghicly tested and show that the most effective victims are ; (in order of effectivness) kidnapping of the commander and chief, his family, his extended family, young women, high government officials, their families, and lastly sevicemen.
The most reproducible scenario would be the reported kidnapping of the first lady and children.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 01:31 PM

"Paradoxically, preserving liberty may require the rule of a single leader—a dictator—willing to use those dreaded 'extraordinary measures,' which few know how, or are willing, to employ."

quote
Michael Ledeen,
White House advisor and fellow of the American Enterprise Institute

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 02:23 PM

The Iranians are adamant that the prisoners have confessed to deliberately entering Iranian waters.
Every serviceman and woman knows, when captured, to give name, number and blood group only.
Even if they were guilty, the confession can not be true.
We can be sure that the iranians are lying. It is just a question of how much.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 02:30 PM

Shed a tear for the detainees-
No bacon and no bangers while they are hostage.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Phot
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 03:01 PM

Having done two back to back tours out there last year I have read this thread with total disbelief, do any of you know what the hell you are talking about?!

Terribus, the ships boarding party is not commanded by "some very junior officer" it is an experienced Lieutenant who is deputy head of the warfare department. The boarding party is divided into two parts, Green(Royal Marines with their own CO who will be a Captain) and Blue(Ships boarding party who have been trained for that role)

Skipy, if you are suggesting that the response to a kidnapp situation, and all the worlds troubles in the Middle East would be sorted out by a neuclear strike, I suggest you take the first train back to planet Zog, cause that's where you seem to be coming from!

Richard Bridge, the guys out there are governed by very strict Rules of Engagement(RoE) unless you are coming under direct fire you are not allowed to ues deadly force(There are other RoE in theater but they concern ships, also the other members of the coalition have their own RoE)

If I seem a bit pi**ed off and have singled out a few people for spouting off you are wrong, I'm furious!

Chris

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 03:06 PM

The last time I checked the territorial waters of the UK did not extend to the Persian Gulf, let alone the disputed Ras al-Beesha waterway.

That being said I would hope that cooler heads will prevail and that the sailors and marines will be returned in a week or so.

"No bacon and no bangers" might make a good chorus.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 03:13 PM

Interesting Chris.

A lot of people on this site don't trust the government and feel they are second guessing what the news media actually tell us is going on.

I'm sure we would all be interested in your analysis of what the situation is.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Mrrzy
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 03:16 PM

Committing the sin of posting to the thread title without reading all the thread - I'll be back! 1) Bully for the Brits for not turning it into a shooting war 2) Taking military people who are engaged in their duties in foreign territory isn't kidnapping, even if they weren't on your soil - 3) Seems everybody knew that particular territory was "disputed" so I hope nobody's surprised that all of the parties to the dispute claim it as theirs 4) (well, 1.5 really) hope they all come home safely.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Phot
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 04:42 PM

I don't trust the government, and I work for them!!

Chris.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 05:09 PM

Don't we all. It's tax time here.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 05:12 PM

I don't trust the Iranian Government full stop. They are pissing around with us.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 05:28 PM

Well said Phot.
"Even if they were guilty, the confession can not be true" ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 05:31 PM

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I'll see your question marks and raise you ?.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 06:23 PM

I wouldn't trust the Iranian government to tell the truth any more than I would trust the UK or USA governments, to name just two. But when it comes to invading other countries the Iranians do have a great deal less form.

What I'm not clear in this incident is whether the disagreement is about where the rubber dinghies were when the sailors were detained, or about where the border is.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 06:59 PM

Sorry, Phot, but IMHO the RoE permit you to use deadly force if threatened with same.

And your views about falsehood are illogical.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: heric
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 07:45 PM

The anonymous guest who does not get deleted has caused some confusion. Phot didn't say "Even if they were guilty, the confession can not be true," That was Keith. And the implied objection to what Keith said is based on semantics, and taking words out of their context. He meant that the Iranian claim that confessions were made is a false claim, even if the Brits were over "the" line.

You're welcome. Carry on.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 07:53 PM

McGrath: What do you mean by this (literally): "But when it comes to invading other countries the Iranians do have a great deal less form"?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 08:18 PM

Iran hasn't got anywhere like the record of invading other countries that the USA and the UK has. "Form" as in horseracing, meaning "record".

Foreign wars carried out by Persia/Iran have been remarkably uncommon over the last 2000 years.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 08:34 PM

Ah! It was that - to me, unfamiliar - use of the word "form" that threw me off.

Good point!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 08:47 PM

'"Even if the UK forces were hopelessly outgunned, so what? Isn't fighting and dying what soldiers do - part of the job description?"'

George Patton, who seemed to know a bit about soldiering, said it wasn't a soldier's job to die for his country. It was a soldier's job to make some other poor bastard die for HIS country.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Amos
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 08:53 PM

Well, I believe a certain Macedonian started from Persia, did he not? Stopping only when all the known world had fallen?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,John Gray in Oz
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 09:11 PM

Its irrelevant where the border is. The fact that the captain of the Cornwall had his ship out of eyeball range of his boarding parties meant that he couldn't give them close support. He should be court martialed for negligence.
Being involved with boarding parties in our Navy, during the VietNam
years, it was always comforting to look over your shoulder and see
the big "Warboat" about a kilometer away with some nice big bloody guns on it.

JG/FME

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 24 Mar 07 - 09:18 PM

Maybe he will be court-martialed. Or maybe there are mitigating circumstances that neither you nor I know about.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 12:31 AM

'Cornwall's commander, Commodore Nick Lambert, said he hoped the detention was a "simple mistake" stemming from the unclear border.'

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2979008&page=3

I don't think you should be allowed to make a "simple mistake" when there are ongoing negotiations regarding nuclear capabilities. I agree with John Gray in Oz, under the circumstances it is highly negligent.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 12:35 AM

The Brits are there to enforce a UN Resolution, AND they are also there at the request of the government in Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Arnie
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 12:52 AM

I see that the sailors and marines have now been moved to Tehran, which does not bode well for the future. As the US recently captured a few Iranian officials, who were obviously not in Iraq for the sightseeing, no doubt the Iranians will now try some sort of hostage bartering.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 01:02 AM

IRGC

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Cmdr. Lloyd Bucher
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 01:06 AM

"it was always comforting to look over your shoulder and see
the big "Warboat" about a kilometer away with some nice big bloody guns on it. "

Yes, it certainly would have been comforting.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 03:56 AM

"While the Constitution of Iran entrusts the military with guarding Iran's territorial integrity and political independence, it gives the Revolutionary Guard [Pasdaran] the responsibility of guarding the Revolution itself. Established under a decree issued by Khomeini on May 5, 1979, the Pasdaran was intended to guard the Revolution and to assist the ruling clerics in the day-to-day enforcement of the government's Islamic codes and morality. The Revolution also needed to rely on a force of its own rather than borrowing the previous regime's tainted units.

By 1986, the Pasdaran consisted of 350,000 personnel organized in battalion-size units that operated either independently or with units of the regular armed forces. In 1986 the Pasdaran acquired small naval and air elements. By 1996 the ground and naval forces were reported to number 100,000 and 20,000, respectively. "


Hey, can these guys read German History...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 04:26 AM

"The Brits are there to enforce a UN Resolution, AND they are also there at the request of the government in Iraq."

I think most of us know that, Peace.

The trouble seems to be that the territorial boundaries are unclear.

I don't find that hard to believe considering Canada has the same problem with U.S. fisherman. Seems we also have a little territorial dispute with Denmark. It happens all the time in waterways.

Under the circumstances, I think Iran now has a few bargaining chips.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Phot
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 05:56 AM

Richard, your interpritation of RoE would wind up getting you tried for murder! As it would any member of HM Forces who decided to open up, just because someone on the other side is holding an AK47 or other weapon, unless your life, or other person who it is your duty to defend, is in immediate danger you may not open fire!

Try walking the streets of Basra for a day or two with a fully loaded weapon, kids and adults throwing bricks at you, protests going on, and the sound of gunfire in the distance, the little white pice of card with your RoE on it is what catagorcily states what you can and cannot do. Thankfully I never had to return fire while I was there, I did have to cock my weapon a couple of times and it is not a plesant thing to do, and the last thing in the world I would ever want to do is pull that trigger!

When you know what you talking about, speak, until then, wind your bloody neck in!


Chris

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Phot
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 05:58 AM

And what views on falsehood?!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 06:11 AM

Seems to me that the armchair warriors should defer to someone who actually knows what he's talking about, and has been there! So his comments are based on experience, not theories or John Wayne type war movies.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 06:22 AM

Phot,

Certainly in my day boarding officer was either a mid or a sub-lieutenant (least experienced officers on board i.e. most expendable should things go pear-shaped). That was a Navy with more than 200 ships in commission, not every ship carried a detachment of Royal Marines, I suppose now that the fleet has shrunk to present day levels they all do carry Marines to make up the numbers, I must remember to ask my son about that. Doesn't alter the fact Phot that as Bubblyrat and I stated it would not have happened in my day as the way we did it either the parent ship or the boat carrying the fire support group would have deterred the Iranian force.   

By the bye, junior officer by definition = Lt-Commander and below, senior officer by definition = Commander and above.

Promotion within the ranks of junior officer is automatic and rate of advancement is marked by seniority and time served.

Promotion to the ranks of senior officer by selection once in "the zone", your seniority determining when you enter the zone for promotion.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Phot
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 06:40 AM

Teribus, Get into the present time! NO person on this planet is "Expendible". You "suppose", you don't know!

Christ! You armchair experts make me sick!

Chris.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 07:12 AM

"Well, I believe a certain Macedonian started from Persia, did he not? Stopping only when all the known world had fallen?"

That Macedonian was, in fact, a ... (wait for it!)... Macedonian! He conquered Persia before he set out to conquer the rest of the 'known world'. You can hardly blame the ancient Persians for that!

I know there's some tough concepts in there like, 'Macedonians and Persians were different ethnic groups' and 'the conquered are not responsible for the actions of their conquerors' - but keep at it - you'll get there!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Dillon
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 08:14 AM

Wallace was born in Ellerslie, near Paisly in Scotland. His father was a Malcolm Wallace and Wallace had two brothers, John and Malcolm and a sister. He was born around 1272. His early life is truthfully mostly unknown and most of what we think we know about his life is based on a oral poem by the minstrel Blind Harry, who told people of Wallace 200 (two hundred) years after Wallace was dead.

Wallace did kill the Sheriff of Lanark to avenge the killing of his girlfriend. Her name is thought to have been Marion Braidfute.She offered herself on a plate to him. The Sheriff (not Murron MacClannough). After he killed the sheriff (de Hazelrig) Wallace began to attract a following of loyal men who also wanted the English presence out of Scotland. He was a commoner or a minor noble, and never really had the support of the Major nobles, like Robert the Bruce,, Balliol or "Red" John Comyn. (all of English descent !). Wallace's name suggests his relatives were originally from Wales ! not an area of Scotland.

He did have some other minor nobles that fought with him, in particular a Sir Andrew de Moray (later called Murray), who was his loyal friend and right hand man. De Moray was skilled in warfare and was instrumental and vital to Wallace in his victory at Stirling bridge.


Wallace had a love affair with the princess of France, Isabella. Edward I, "Longshanks" was even more vicious than portrayed in the movie. His son, Edward II was indeed Gay, had a male lover, he was killed by his own men during a homosexual act.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 10:16 AM

And, more to the point, it was Wallace that drove the unnamed Macedonian out of the British Isles, taking several Persian princes as hostages, for which he was to be paid a king's ransom, but this was intercepted by one Mel "Prettyshanks" Gibson, enabling him to bankroll the movie ("The Massacre of Glencoe"), so the Persian princes were never released and in fact went on to become the infamous "parcel of rogues"; nevertheless, the Persians/Iranians have been smarting ever since and looking to even the score, and redeem their lost princes ...

At least, that's the way they taught it to us in school.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:39 AM

"unless your life, or other person who it is your duty to defend, is in immediate danger you may not open fire"

Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:40 AM

And yes, I'd forgotten about the Iranians detained in Iraq. That is obviously what it's about.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 12:48 PM

You're probably right about that, Richard.

They saw the opportunity and took it.

What country wouldn't? Didn't we see a similar situation on the border of Lebanon and Israel? I think its time to start negotiating for the return of prisoners on both sides.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 01:38 PM

"I think most of us know that, Peace. "

Speak for yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 02:12 PM

Sorry, Peace. I thought, that because your post was directly after mine, you were replying to me. I shouldn't have made that assumption or replied to you in that manner.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 08:37 PM

Since they were apparently in a sort of rubber dinghy too many bullets and everyone would have gone to the bottom.
.................
"Well, I believe a certain Macedonian started from Persia, did he not? Stopping only when all the known world had fallen?

No, he started from Macedonia, Amos. And that's more than 2000 years ago anyway.
.................
Tony Blair has now said that the sailors definitely weren't in Iranian waters when they were detained. And as he told us once, he is "a pretty straight sort of guy".

I think that definitely suggests that the Iranian claims about them being on the Iranian side of the border should not be dismissed out of hand.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rapparee
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 08:46 PM

Glad you're out of it, Phot.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 25 Mar 07 - 11:04 PM

thats probably what it is - bargaining chip for the revolutionary guard
detained in IRaq...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 02:05 AM

"What country wouldn't? Didn't we see a similar situation on the border of Lebanon and Israel? I think its time to start negotiating for the return of prisoners on both sides. "

I hope the response won't be the same as Israels!

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 03:41 AM

Luckily, the Brits were there at the request of Iraq. I don't think Iraq has any attention of bombing Iran. At least, lets hope not. I don't think Britain can do anything but negotiate a prisoner swap.

btw - Did anyone ever negotiate a prisoner swap when the Israelis were captured? Were they ever returned to Israel?

Lets hope Britain cares for its soldiers. So far they seem to be unharmed.

Is it true the Brits were stealing cars? Thats one of the stories being circulating. Unreal! Why were they boarding that ship, anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 04:14 AM

The release of the Israelis was supposed to follow their withdrawal, but non of the agreements was adhered to by Hezbollah.
They seem to be unharmed? The Iranians have allowed no one to see them and will not even say wahere they are. We can only hope.
It would be difficult to steal many cars in an inflatable boat, and even the Cornwall would not have cargo space. The vessel boarded was suspected of smuggling cars, and was shown on film to have cars on its deck.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 04:58 AM

In an article in Subhi Sadek, the Revolutionary Guard's weekly paper, Reza Faker, a writer believed to have close links to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, warned that Iran would strike back.

"We've got the ability to capture a nice bunch of blue-eyed blond-haired officers and feed them to our fighting cocks," he said. "Iran has enough people who can reach the heart of Europe and kidnap Americans and Israelis."

Times On Line 18th March.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 06:43 AM

Three years ago, eight British servicemen were detained by Iran after a similar confrontation.

Former Marine Scott Fallon was one of those captured.

He told BBC Radio Five Live he was subjected to mock executions and accused of spying.

"They just wanted to know our mission - why we were there, why we were in Iran.

"We had no answers to these questions. Our mission was in Iraq, where we were... I suppose the same thing will be going on with these guys.

"You don't know if they're trying maybe to pin something else onto you. In our case it was being accused of spies in Iran, which was all new to us".

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 08:46 AM

I think we should ALL get out of these countries and let them sort things out among themselves. This is a no win situation all the way round. We have spent to many lives rescuing other countries from stupidy, we must stop and let them do as they please within their own borders.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Wolfgang
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 09:56 AM

Kidnappings came day before UN resolution (GUARDIAN)

the arrests occurred just two days after Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, warned that the country could act "illegally" in response to western pressure.

"Until today, what we have done is in accordance with international regulations. But if they take illegal actions, we too can take illegal actions and will do so," Mr Khamenei said in his annual Iranian new year message.

The Iranians have been taking the sailors hostages. They don't care whether the act was illegal.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 10:29 AM

Lets hope they get released BEFORE April 6th, which is the planned invasion date of Iraq nuclear facilities by the United States of America. Although the attacks are only to last 12 hours, the ramifications will last for centuries...not to mention the radioactivity from the facilites and tactical "mini nukes".


http://fr.rian.ru/world/20070319/62260006.html

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: bobad
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 10:52 AM

Hmmm....it seems that the Russians have a lot of information that no one else does. I wonder if it is reliable inside info which they are using to try and undermine the attack or if they have been fed this info to get Iran to reveal it's defensive capabilities as a prelude to attack.

Spy vs.spy.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 04:46 PM

"Suspected of smuggling cars"

What are the Brits doing boarding vessels in the Ras al-Beesha waterway? Were the cars bound for England? Competition in the auto industry must be getting fierce.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 05:12 PM

I think its called harassment, Barry. As far as I'm concerned, the Brits got what they deserved. A serious warning to back off. In fact, the Brits look like bufoons. They accomplished nothing and gave the Iranians more power. Why don't they realize that by hassling Iran, they are poking at a hornet's nest? Haven't they realized by now that Iranian strategists are no joke?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 06:34 PM

So far as the Lebanon parallel is concerned it is now clear that there was in fact a border violation by Israel which initiated the skirmish that set things off.
......................

None of the media coverage I've seen has appeared to address a key question. This is, when Britain says they were in Iraqi waters and Iran says they were in Iranian waters, is the disagreement about where they actually were physically, or is it about where the border actually lies? Has anyone else had any better luck in finding the answer to that?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,worker
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 06:39 PM

The Brits may have got what they deserve, but do the 15 concerned souls deserve what they are going through, and I shutter to think what they will go through as tiem goes on. We seem to forget the individual human element in these international incidents.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 06:56 PM

No answer that I've heard, McGrath. It seems either as if those pertinent facts are unclear, are being withheld, or that our various journalists are too lazy or dimwitted to find out.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 07:33 PM

GPS coordinates should be able to pinpoint the position of the British boat to within a few yards. As to the Iranians, I think they have fucked up. That was a bad move on their part, because if they don't release the Sailors/marines, they will pay a penalty they may not want to risk having to pay. I think they will find themselves outside the community of nations. Notice that even the EU, often fast to speak against the UK/US involvement in the mid-East were vocal in their condemnation of the Iranian move. Bullshit 'confessions' from people who have been captured are seen as such by most of the world. Iran is trying to 'pump up' its own citizens to have them support the present government while the sanctions tighten. And tighten they will. Meanwhile, no Iranian foreign government official will be safe anywhere but Iran, and even then, some of the Spec Ops folks may be given license to have the Iranian government see things differently. The best move the Iranians could make right now would be to release the prisoners. The men being held serve no useful purpose for Iran. They are, in fact, fast becoming a liability. The problem has always been one of "when you grab a tiger by the tail you'd better have a plan in place to deal with its claws". I don't think Iran does.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 08:08 PM

We really don't know much about the key elements in this incident. The Iranians were not in a hurry to release the American captives from our Embassy (US) back in 1979. They released them when it was in their own interests, when a new president took office. I'm not sure what the Iranians are looking for this time around, but they'll probably take their time coming to a decision.

The classic rescue is probably out of consideration, given the track record of rescue attempts in this area before.

I would urge patience, hard as that may be for the families involved. And I would urge the armchair warrior types here at Mudcat to find something else to sputter about.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 08:19 PM

Iran seems a place where there are a different factions vying for power (along with a democratically-minded opposition). It's possible that there is not a clear, unbroken line of authority from the president to whoever is holding the sailor-hostages. Hard to know if the president can snap his fingers and have the prisoners released, or what kind of games he has to play ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 08:24 PM

"And I would urge the armchair warrior types here at Mudcat to find something else to sputter about."

I shall certainly ask your permission in future.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 09:18 PM

"The problem has always been one of "when you grab a tiger by the tail you'd better have a plan in place to deal with its claws".

I don't think Britain or the U.S., does, either. That should be quite obvious. If they had any idea what they were up against, they would have accomplished their mission in Iraq and been home by now. Now they are trying to tangle with Iran. When are they gonna figure it out that these guys do not play by Western rules? The best thing they can do is go home before its too late.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 26 Mar 07 - 11:34 PM

"Lets hope they get released BEFORE April 6th, which is the planned invasion date of Iraq nuclear facilities by the United States of America. "

Anyone wanna bet WHERE the guys are now being held - Saddam is not the only one with bright ideas.... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 03:53 AM

The link claims that "a Russian weekly newspaper" claims that the US will 'hit' Iran in the first week of April and speculates that it may be on April 6 because of its being a significant date for the Muslims. It does not give a source for any of its 'information'.

It may be true. It may be false. We'll soon know. I do get tired of people who make questionable blanket statements in the guise of being factual.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 05:18 AM

Good Friday is a pretty "significant date" for others too...

A day long associated with Death and Destruction...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 07:24 AM

The co ordinates have yet to be releaed, but in any case the exact position of the border is unclear.
It was defined as the centre of the channel, but because that changes with time it was agreed to reassess it every ten years.
That was before the Iran/Iraq war and the reassessment has never been made.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 07:42 AM

With the dispute being known & I'm sure that there were notices to mariners on all available charts there should've been no one within the disputed area. Who's the fool now? Or do Navies not read charts? Naval GPS is not accurate in yards it's accurate in feet. It seems to me more of a blatant move to provoke an incident. Why else would the Cornwall stand off out of site unless to allow the incident to happen. The Iranian gun boats would never have taken the sailors with the Cornwall within siten or range & the Cornwall would've most likely stoped it, what choice would they have in plain veiw of all hands watching. I'd say that this was no error in anyone's judgement but a power play on the part of the coalition to stir up the waters & to try & find a way to use the incident to their advantage. What do they care for 15 sailors if the ploy works.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 08:15 AM

The Executive Editor of the Iran News, published in Teheran, said "My understanding of the situation is that this (abduction) could be a reaction to the UN sanctions which were passed two days ago... the revolutionary guards had promised that some sort of reaction would be forthcoming from Iran. "
With respect, I value his opinion over yours Barry.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 08:15 AM

Barry-

Your reasoning makes more sense to me then what's been reported by the British. But maybe the crew aboard the Cornwall were taking a break for tea or grog while the Iranians slipped in. Maybe the Iranians were cleverly hiding behind the freighter being inspected all the while.

Only time will tell!

Sorry, Peace, if I ruffled your pin-feathers.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 08:30 AM

Or maybe there was more than one patrol operating, and the ship could not be in two places at once?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 11:44 AM

"the situation is that this (abduction) could be a reaction to the UN sanctions which were passed two days ago... the revolutionary guards had promised that some sort of reaction would be forthcoming from Iran." (Keith)

You got that right. So when the opportunity presented itself, Iran saw the opportunity.

On Britain's part, it was "...a blatant move to provoke an incident." (Barry)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 11:48 AM

From the www

"In Iran, a crowd of hardline students chanting "Death to Britain" gathered on Tuesday on the shoreline close to where the Britons were captured and demanded firm action against the sailors, Iran's semi official Mehr news agency reported."

SSDD

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 12:52 PM

They do seem awfully keen on chanting "Death to" things don't they, for people that possess the abundance of peaceful intent that dianavan and others on this forum would have us believe. Odd.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Wolfgang
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 01:05 PM

Re: US attack on Iran April 6, 2007

Those who cannot read the French in Donuel's link can read it here in English.

I still don't believe it for a second.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,skeptic
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 01:14 PM

A couple of years ago the CIA employed "students" to run through the streets of Tehran setting fires, etc. I could look that up if necessary, but the CIA admitted at the time that the students were operatives. And the Khomeni "hostage crisis" was all staged by the CIA. Anytime you see "students" in an Iranian bruhaha, just sub CIA for students.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 01:35 PM

"And the Khomeni "hostage crisis" was all staged by the CIA."

Some backing for this statement would be useful.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Blindlemonsteve
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 04:25 PM

I bet the Iranians dont give back the GPS equipment they have nicked, like they didnt last time, you can be sure that the British forces would have outgunned them, but its a political hot potato, the last thing either the U.S or the U.K want is an armed conflict with Iran at this moment, that would cause an escalation of conflict.

But.....they had better release them very soon, reading between the lines...there could be a very serious penalty for the Iranian captors if they dont.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 04:45 PM

To MGOH: Here is the best answer (such as it is) to your question.

I probably haven't read enough, but do we know where the Cornwall was in relation to the incident?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 04:54 PM

The article heric recommends is worth looking at. Here's an interesting quote:


A 1937 treaty gave Iraq full rights to most of the Shatt al-Arab and fixed the border on the Iranian shore. Iran resented the terms, maintaining it accepted them only under pressure from the British. Lingering bitterness over the treaty may have influenced last week's Iranian action.

"The fact that British forces were involved made the (latest) incident especially sensitive for Iran," says Simon Henderson of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "Iran resented this display of British dominance."


(Me again). There are layers upon layers of history in this region - and some of it does not reflect well on Britain and the US, from my limited knowledge of the whole thing ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 05:40 PM

At the very least the Cornwall should not have been in disputed waters, if it was. But boarding a foriegn vessel for any reason in either another nations territorial waters or in international waters is illegal unless they were flying a British flag. Of course with Iraqi consent that's a different story. But smuggling cars? That's doubious!

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 06:00 PM

Interesting piece that heric gave the link to. Clearly it's not quite as clear as has been suggested by Tony Blair. But then that is hardly surprising.

Whatever the actual facts it seesm pretty clear that a low key approach is more likely to end up with a happy outcome for the poor bloody sailors cuaught in the middle. Perhaps an invitation by the British to the Iranians to set up joint anti-smuggling patrols in these disputed waters, to avoid future misunderstandings...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 06:47 PM

I have been wondering if the backup firepower also saw a need for a low-key approach to the circumstances, beyond just a diplomatic mien on the part of its commander. Just speculating.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 06:55 PM

Barry, they have Iraqi consent AND a UN mandate to monitor shipping there.
They were acting legally.
Dianavan, those were not my sentiments, but those of the Executive Editor of the Iran News.
full interview here

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 09:24 PM

"Barry, they have Iraqi consent AND a UN mandate to monitor shipping there.
They were acting legally."

Not if they were in Iranian waters. Therefore they should've steered clear of disputed territorial waters just knowing that the trouble it would impose. As far as boarding shipping for inspection does the UN sanctions provide a clause for blockading of Iranian ports & whom & what does it restrict in it's trading, cars, from where? Will it be food next?
Bottom line is that they (the Brits) knew the boundries were disputed & they should have steered clear of those areas so as not to provoke an international incident. They didn't, they pushed the envolope, so there you go, where else does the fault for starting this lay?

No matter what anyone says, no foreign military belongs inside the borders or waters of Iran.

Barry

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 09:40 PM

It's still too soon to say that they were in the disputed waters - we just don't know.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 11:32 PM

from

"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: 27 Mar 07 - 11:32 PM

ooops - from http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20070327-1151-iran-wherestheborder.html

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 11:35 PM

Its not too soon to say they were in disputed waters. Read heric's link. Those waters have been disputed for a long time and since the Brits knew the boundaries were unclear, they should not have provoked the incident. In fact, it appears the Brits were being bullies and Iran called them on it.

btw teribus - I never said that Iran possessed an 'abundance of peaceful intent'. I do think they are more advanced than Britain when it comes to intelligence and military strategies and, without a doubt, they are much smarter that you. Trouble is teribus, you're thinking follows a predictable pattern. You can't seem to think outside the box. That enable Iran to run circles around your western mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 27 Mar 07 - 11:59 PM

6th April, Dianavan - can't wait - to hear all the excuses why nothing happened followed by all the speculation about the next most likely date selected at random. IIRC Little Hawk's prediction is sometime late April, early May.

When states start abducting the citizens of other countries it normally shows a certain degree of desperation. The one thing that has not been discussed but I believe does come into play is that the Shat-Al-Arab is an international waterway and cannot be closed by any party who might lay claim that it, or parts of it, are within territorial waters. To do so is considered by the UN to constitute an act of war (This is what initially sparked off the 1967 "Six Day War")

I take it now dianavan that you no longer believe that the British personnel involved were "stealing" cars? How anybody could have given that lunacy any credence at all given the circumstances surrounding the incident I haven't a clue, I mean they would have to barking mad.

I also like the way the Mudcats "Fellow Travellers" automatically switch to the "Guilty until proven innocent, and even then we won't believe you" mode - So ludicrously predictable.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 12:27 AM

teri - I never 'believed that the Brits were stealing cars'. Early on I said that I heard that story and was asking if anyone else had.

I never even commented on the April 6th prediction. Please direct your comments appropriately.

If Shat-Al-Arab is an international waterway, why did the Brits board an Iranian vessel? Could it possibly be that they wanted to provoke an international incident? I'm actually glad that Iran had the balls to confront them and kidnap their soldiers. Doesn't that just burn you, teribus, when those sand niggers outsmart you and end up looking like the cat that just ate the mouse?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 12:44 AM

Of course, dianavan, I bow to your superior wisdom and knowledge.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 12:52 AM

"By Terri Judd, aboard HMS Cornwall in the Persian Gulf
Published: 24 March 2007

In the black of night, our patrol boat skimmed across the Shatt al-Arab waterway, looking out for intruders on the disputed waters.

I was accompanying a Royal Marine patrol as it cruised Iraqi waters looking for suicide bombers trying to attack the two oil platforms that export 90 per cent of the country's oil. The patrol was also hunting smugglers bringing arms and contraband into the country.

Until this point, our only contact with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards had been polite, but stiff, contacts over the radio. On Thursday, when HMS Cornwall spotted an Iranian ship on the Iraqi side of the waterway, she approached to warn them off. The Iranians slunk into the blackness without demur.

All changed dramatically yesterday morning when 15 Royal Marines and Navy personnel, including one woman, approached a JAPANESE merchant ship suspected of smuggling second-hand cars into the country without paying tax. Suddenly, their inflatables were surrounded by boats of the Revolutionary Guards and they were overpowered and taken into Iranian national waters."

An Iranian ship dianavan?? Above is an eyewitness account.

The following quote lifted directly from your post speaks volumes about you dianavan:

"Doesn't that just burn you, teribus, when those sand niggers outsmart you and end up looking like the cat that just ate the mouse?"

You poor bitter little thing you.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 01:03 AM

The latest BBC News on the subject.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6501555.stm

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 01:34 AM

teribus - I asked a question. Why did the Brits board an Iranian vessel? It was not a statement.

The villain linked a recent article that should help straighten out this mess:

"BBC diplomatic correspondent James Robbins said the UK could confront Iran directly with satellite pictures and other evidence to show the personnel had not strayed into Iranian territorial waters."

I can see why it is disputed. If you look at the maps at the bottom of the page, it wouldn't take much one way or another to be stepping on someone's toes.

What do the Japanese say about this?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 01:56 AM

When you walk past a junk yard dog & don't know exactly how long it's leash is, go ahead get close & when the dog bites you start yelling no fair the leash wasn't supposed to be that long.

The Brits got bitten & no ones sure whose to blame becasue the dog may or may not have stepped off the side walk.

Well fool, if you weren't sure you should've stayed far enough away. And you may have been sure but if you weren't pestering the dog in the 1st place you wouldn't be crying about it's bite now.

So well have to wait & see. If the Iranians were wrong hopefully they'll give back the sailors & be done with it. What about if they're right, what then?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:11 AM

Either way Baz the owner of the dog is in trouble and the dog stands a damn good chance of being put down.

Now we shall wait and see what excuses come to the fore when it is proved, as I am certain that it will be, that the Republican Guard Patrol Boats entered Iraqi/International Waters to abduct RN Personnel who were acting within the mandate of a dully authorised UN Security Council Resolution and providing protection, safeguard and security for such as pass on the seas upon their lawful occasions.

But there's one thing I am certain of Baz, the junk yard dog, or dogs won't be poking their noses out of their kennels for some time to come. I think they are fully aware of the reception that might be waiting for them.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:17 AM

The owner may be in trouble or may be able to talk their way out of trouble & the dog may get put down, reguardless you still have the bite. Was it worth it when all that was needed was to just stay a bit farther off. Simple.

PS; T, call me Barry, Bar, Bellboy, beachboy, bellyboy anything but Baz, at first I was wondering what you were talking about & then it hit me YUK.

Thanks
Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:29 AM

UK abbreviation of the name Barry - Baz.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:35 AM

"Either way Baz the owner of the dog is in trouble and the dog stands a damn good chance of being put down." T

Not in the US. 'Junk yard dog' in the US is in a category all its own.

Of course, the dog would not be tied outside; he would be inside the fence. But if some idjit climbed inside the fence and got mauled, it wouldn't be the dog that got in trouble.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 02:40 AM

T, I'm not from the UK

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 03:40 AM

To compare a Muslim with a dog is seen by Muslims as a very strong insult. Interesting that this word came to your mind, Barry, when thinking of Iran.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 03:45 AM

What's the matter Baz? Dog came off the "sidewalk" and bit you?

It looks strongly as if the boats knew where they were, so the only argument that they were in Iranian water would be an unexpected location of the border, if I may put it like that. That strongly hints at an Iranian intention to provoke.

Next unanswered questions - where was the Cornwall? Where were the Iranian vessels that got to the freighter before the Cornwall did? Why did no-one see them coming?

The argument that the Cornwall and other shipping should have stayed off any water the Iranians could conceivably have taken a fancy to is unacceptable for it is a licence for territorial aggression.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 03:45 AM

Amnesty report on Iran

The 15 young sailors are being held an interrogated by these people.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 04:15 AM

According to Terri Judd's article, the "Cornwall's" Helo had overflown the Japanese vessel and reported that all was well. The helo was ordered to continue its surveillence duties in another area. The boarding party then completed their inspection of the vessel and returned to their boats. At this time "Cornwall" lost radio contact with the boarding party and the helo was ordered back to check out the situation. As it flew over the Japanese ship the helo pilots saw the crew of the ship waving and pointing towards the Iranian side of the waterway to where six Iranian patrol boats were escorting the two British RIBs towards Iran.

After all the dust has settled, and hopefully after "Cornwall's" crew members have been returned unharmed, I trust that the Ministry of Defence fully investigate the circumstances that led to this incident. Personally I feel that the Officer in Command of the situation, and the Commanding Officer of HMS Cornwall should be brought to book for it, everything about the whole episode sounds as though this boarding party were sent off in a very slap-dash manner and that sufficient measures were not put in place, and kept in place, to ensure their security - in a potentially hazardous or dangerous situation that is inexcusable.

I would imagine, or least hope, that the OIC has drastically reviewed procedures for searching suspect vessels and put in place strong measures to deter interference by third parties.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 04:24 AM

Keith 15 YOUNG sailors? what the hell good would 15 old sailors be, why always add YOUNG soldiers, sailors, they wouldn`t do much climbing the rigging if they were ancient mariners, they would have been safe and sound on Lake Windermere, and that IS guarding the home waters.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 05:05 AM

Ard, you just feel that youngsters will find it even harder to cope.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 05:19 AM

Some commentators are saying that British forces may have been selected by the Iranians because their stricter rules of engagement made them a softer target.
The US forces were much more likely to defend themselves.
Had the Cornwall been on the spot, she could only have tried to block their course, not fire on them.
The Iranians would view the greater concern for life as a weakness to be exploited.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 06:44 AM

teribus - I asked a question. Why did the Brits board an Iranian vessel? It was not a statement. (Dianavan)

Dianavan,
you have asked a presuppositional question. Such questions cannot be answered in any meaningful sense. The polite way of reacting to such questions is to correct the statement made in the question. That's what Teribus has made. Just to repeat the question including the statement under dispute after the correction makes you look as if you had not read Teribus' post.

If the vessel was actually Japanese as Teribus' post says the question why the Brits board an Iranian vessel is complete nonsense. If you have information that the vessel was actually Iranian post it here.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:14 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6492705.stm
This is a report by a journalist on the Cornwall at the time.
It gives a background to the incident.
The Navy has now released co ordinates of the locations.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:34 AM

Games the Iranians appear to be playing: source: ABC news.

According to British Vice Admiral Chester Style, the Iranians "provided a position on Sunday, a location that he said was in Iraqi waters"--1.7 nautical miles. By Tuesday, Iranian officials "provided a revised position 2 miles east, placing the British inside Iranian waters."

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 28 Mar 07 - 07:42 AM

Now that's perfectly clear isn't it? Nobody could have been confused then.... :-)

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
(to the tune of "Barbara Ann")

Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, BOMB IRAN!
Let's take a stand, bomb Iran.
Our country's got a feelin'
Really hit the ceilin', bomb Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

Went to a mosque, gonna throw some rocks.
Tell the Ayatollah..."Gonna put you in a box!"
Bomb Iran. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
Our country's got a feelin'
Really hit the ceilin', bomb Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

Ol' Uncle Sam's gettin' pretty hot.
Time to turn Iran into a parking lot. Bomb Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

Call the volunteers; call the bombadiers;
Call the financiers, better get their ass in gear.
Bomb Iran. Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
Our country's got a feelin'
Really hit the ceilin', bomb Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

Call on our allies to cut off their supplies,
Get our hands untied, and bring em' back alive. Bomb Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
Our country's got a feelin'
Really hit the ceilin', bomb Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, BOMB IRAN!
Let's take a stand, bomb Iran.
Our people you been stealin'
Now it's time for keelin', bomb Iran.
Bomb, bomb, bomb, 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

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:23 AM

I'll take this one, 200

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:24 AM

Dianavan, all your questions have already been answered.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:53 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/

This site has link to Iranian video. Merchant ship is briefly shown.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 08:07 AM

The Iranians have gone back on their offer to release one of the hostages.
They say they have done this because of Britain's "incorrect attitude".

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 09:00 AM

Only if Britain goes to the UN Security Council or freezes relationships with Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: bubblyrat
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 09:09 AM

I don"t think that it has anything at all to do with Territorial Waters. The sailors / marines were taken prisoner by units of the ruling political party, not the Iranian Navy. They were hovering / loitering close by, probably for some time, just waiting for the opportunity to grab a boarding -party, and take them hostage, then humiliate them in the eyes of the world, as they"re doing now.Why ?? God knows !! Pride ?? Prestige ? "Face " ?? The Iranians are not Arabs , don"t forget----they are Persians, and would love the Arab countries to fear and respect THEM . What better way ,than to very publically humiliate Britain in the eyes of the whole world, whilst at the same time testing the USA "s resolve by demanding the release of Iranian prisoners !!?? If anything, it"s a stroke of genius !!Of course, if Britain had STRONG leadership ( Churchill, Thatcher ) then this farcical situation would either have never arisen, or would have been dealt with quickly, ruthlessly and decisively, but under Trembling Tony, the situation will probably drag on for months or years !! And what the Hell is my country doing, sending the mothers of young children out to risk their lives ( and mental health--She will never be the same, not now ) in God-forsaken and highly unstable places like The Gulf ??? What price sexual equality now, ladies ???

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 09:11 AM

It is now pretty clear that unless you belong to the "oh, let's have the border over there a bit" school of thought that the events were actually in Iraqi water.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 09:25 AM

They have suspeneded the release of the British woman. So things go from bad to worse.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 09:45 AM

I suspect that this apparent reversal of a decision that had apparently been made has to do with in-fighting amongst Iranian factions ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 09:46 AM

Barry and Dianavan,

Point of fact: The original location where the capture occurred, GIVEN BY THE IRANIANS was in Iraqi territory. Not disputed. The Iranians then changed the claimed location AFTER this was pointed out to them.

I think you two are the ones who are out of your depth, here. This was a further violation of international law by Iran.

So of course you want to blame the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 11:06 AM

Iran: UK sailors entered 6 times
POSTED: 10:48 a.m. EDT, March 29, 2007

Story Highlights• Iran: British sailors crossed into Iranian waters six times
• Larijani says Britain's words, attitude causing delay in release of woman sailor
• U.N. Security Council to discuss issue Thursday
• Female sailor says she and crew "trespassed" into Iranian waters

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iran says the 15 UK military personnel detained last week entered its waters six times before they were arrested, and announced that the promised release of the woman sailor was suspended due to Britain's "behavior" in the matter.

An Iranian naval spokesman said Thursday there is videotape and documents, including global positioning numbers, to back up their claims.

The latest salvo in the standoff came as Iranian military commander Alireza Afshar announced that the release of Faye Turney was being suspended.

"The wrong behavior of those who live in London caused the suspension," Afshar said, according to the Mehr news agency.

The latest salvo in the standoff came as Ali Larijani, the secretary of of Iran's Supreme National Council, warned that Britain's tough stance in the matter was causing a delay in the release of Faye Turney. (Watch as dispute grows more bitter )

On Wednesday Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki had said Turney would be released "very soon."

Larijani said Tehran would like to resolve the issue through bilateral discussions and an investigation of legal and technical issues, and again asserted that the British patrol boats entered Iranian waters illegally.

In London, a spokesman for British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Thursday that Britain would not seek a confrontation with Iran on the matter.

"We want this resolved. We do not want a confrontation over this. We want this resolved as quickly as possible," the spokesman told reporters.

British Foreign Minister Margaret Beckett announced Wednesday that Britain was freezing all bilateral diplomatic business with Iran until the 15 Britons were freed.

The dispute has sparked anti-British protests in Iran, raised Middle East tensions, already high over concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions, and sent shockwaves through the oil market. (Oil shock)

Thursday marked the sixth day Tehran has defiantly refused Britain consular access to the detained sailors.

They were arrested March 23 as they conducted anti-smuggling patrols near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab, at the northern end of the Persian Gulf.

The waterway has long been the site of tensions between Iraq and Iran, which both claim it as their territory.

Britain insists its sailors were in Iraqi waters, but Iran says the vessels clearly entered its territory six times before the crew members were detained.

The arrests prompted a flurry of diplomatic activity in and outside the Gulf, with several countries calling for the immediate and unconditional release of the Britons.

The United Nations Security Council is expected to discuss the issue Thursday.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon met with Mottaki on the sidelines of the Arab League summit in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Thursday to talk about the situation.

'Friendly, hospitable'
In a videotape broadcast Wednesday on the Iranian Arabic language network Al Alam, Turney, wearing a black scarf covering her hair, said that her crew had "trespassed" into Iranian waters. (Watch Turney identify herself and describe what happened )

"Obviously we trespassed into their waters," she said.

"They were very friendly, very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we'd been arrested. There was no aggression, no hurt, no harm. They were very, very compassionate," Turney added.

It was not known when the videotape was shot, or if Turney, 26, was able to speak freely, since she is being held against her will.

Turney -- who holds the rank of leading seaman, roughly equivalent to a petty officer first class in the U.S. Navy -- appeared to be in good physical condition and wore a black scarf to cover her hair. (Read Turney's profile)

In other scenes, she was shown smoking a cigarette as she spoke with someone off camera.

The British government reacted angrily to that video and another showing Turney and other crew members eating a meal.

Beckett said she was "very concerned about these pictures and any indication of pressure on or coercion of our personnel who were carrying out a routine operation in accordance with international law and under a United Nations resolution in support of the Iraqi government."

Wednesday, the British Ministry of Defense gave what it said was proof that the British ship carrying the sailors and marines never strayed into Iranian waters.

British Vice Adm. Charles Style said the global positioning system on the ship proves the vessel was "clearly" 3.1 kilometers (1.7 nautical miles) inside Iraqi waters.

Iran insists the ship was inside its territorial waters and, according to Style, provided a map with coordinates on Saturday in an attempt to prove the point.

Style said those coordinates actually "turned out to confirm they were in Iraqi waters" and Iraq has supported that position.

Upon pointing that out Sunday through diplomatic contacts, Style said Iran then "provided a second set of coordinates" on Monday that were "in Iranian waters over two nautical miles" from the position shown by the HMS Cornwall and confirmed by the merchant vessel the British personnel boarded.

The "change of coordinates," Style said "is hard to legitimate."

Letter also released
Iran also released a letter it said was written by Turney to her parents. The letter was handed to the British ambassador to Iran in Tehran on Wednesday, the state-run news agency reported.

"We were out in the boats when we were arrested by Iranian forces as we had apparently gone into Iranian waters. I wish we hadn't because then I'd be home with you all right now. I am so sorry we did, because I know we wouldn't be here now if we hadn't," the letter said. (Read letter)

CNN cannot confirm that Turney wrote the letter or, if she did, whether she did so under duress.

The television station broadcast video of what appeared to be a handwritten letter, signed "Faye." (Watch CNN's Aneesh Raman's analysis of what's striking about this video )

"I want you all to know that I am well and safe. I am being well looked after. I am fed 3 meals a day and have a constant supply of fluids," the letter said.

Meanwhile the U.S. navy was wrapping up its largest exercise in Gulf waters since 2003. (Full story)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 11:42 AM

Mob calls for execution

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1258238,00.html

Very civilised

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 11:49 AM

from above...
"The United Nations has issued a statement calling for the immediate release of the 15 British sailors and marines being held captive by Iran."

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 01:28 PM

What is so stupid about using the location of the merchant vessel is that it is the location of the gunboats, at the time of the apprehension, that is in question. This is complicated by the fact that the gunboats seem to have lost contact with the Cornwall. I'd like to know more details about the helicopter. Did it see the Iranian boats approaching? Did they approach from Iranian water or Iraqi water? Why is it that the Iranian boats were so difficult to detect if they were in Iraqi water? Why wasn't there enought time for the Brits to flee deeper into Iraqi water?

Too many unanswered questions.

And no, I don't think it can be called excessive force in the face of sanctions. Why is it Iran is condemned for fighting back by taking hostages? Is it O.K. to make a nation suffer economically but its not O.K. to grab 15 hostages in a disputed territory? How do most people (nations) react when bullied and threatened?

Iran fought back when everyone else thought they would back down. Obviously, sanctions aren't working in this situation. Why? Because Israel wants to be the only nuclear power in the region. Is that fair? Either all countries disarm or a balance of power is required.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 01:32 PM

Dianavan,

"its not O.K. to grab 15 hostages in a disputed territory?"

Point 1, which you keep ignoring- The IRANIANS gave the position that they captured the British at- which was clearly, ( By the standards of BOTH sides) in Iraqi territory.

Point 2, Correct, it is against international law to grab hostages in this manner, EVEN if they HAD been in Iranian waters.

You persist in making statements that are not supported by the facts of the case.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 01:41 PM

Point 1 - This is one side of the story and I have seen no proof that it is true or an explanation from Iran.

Point 2 - Please provide a source that says it is against International law to protect your own territory from foreign gunboats.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 01:57 PM

"Point 1 - This is one side of the story and I have seen no proof that it is true or an explanation from Iran."

Fine- let me tell you ALL sides: ( not that you will listen)

The IRANIANS stated the position that they captured the British at- which was in Iraqi territory.

The British said that they were in Iraqi territory.

The ship being searched said it was anchoered in Iraqi territory.

The Iraqi fisherman stated that the British were in Iraqi territory.


"Point 2 - Please provide a source that says it is against International law to protect your own territory from foreign gunboats. "

OK, then the Brits, as empowered by the Iraqis, HAD the right to blow away the Iranian gunboats when they came into Iraqi waters????

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:12 PM

"And no, I don't think it can be called excessive force in the face of sanctions. Why is it Iran is condemned for fighting back by taking hostages? Is it O.K. to make a nation suffer economically but its not O.K. to grab 15 hostages ..."

Because Iran is under UN sanctions for IRAN's actions in violating both UNR and the NPT, which IRAN signed and agreed to. If you have a problem with the UN enforcing its resolutions, then perhaps we should get out of it and do whatever we think is appropriate.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:12 PM

As I said BB, dianavan in full blown, "Guilty before proven innocent and even then I won't believe you mode". How rational.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:14 PM

I do not consider dianavan to be stupid, just unwilling to look at the facts before deciding what she wants to have happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:27 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)"

"British Vice Adm. Charles Style said the global positioning system on the ship proves the vessel was "clearly" 3.1 kilometers (1.7 nautical miles) inside Iraqi waters.

Iran insists the ship was inside its territorial waters and, according to Style, provided a map with coordinates on Saturday in an attempt to prove the point.

Style said those coordinates actually "turned out to confirm they were in Iraqi waters" and Iraq has supported that position.

Upon pointing that out Sunday through diplomatic contacts, Style said Iran then "provided a second set of coordinates" on Monday that were "in Iranian waters over two nautical miles" from the position shown by the HMS Cornwall and confirmed by the merchant vessel the British personnel boarded."

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:33 PM

bb - You have stated, "The Iraqi fisherman stated that the British were in Iraqi territory."

Get your facts straight.

"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

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:38 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)"


Now, I know we cannot trust those lying Canadians to get anything right...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:46 PM

oops - cross posted

bb - Why is it that you focus on where the ship was anchored? Seems to me the focus should be on where the gunboat was at the time it was captured.

Your evidence has been filtered by the British Govt. since the original report by the fisherman and the Iraqi military commander. Perhaps this has to do with the set of coordinates. One set for the merchant vessel, second set for the capture of the gunboats.

The perspective, at this point, depends entirely on the way its being reported by the media. Seems to me that alot of pertinent information is being ignored, changed, or omitted. Perhaps this is why the Iranians have decided to keep all of their hostages. There are two sides to every story.

Bottom line is the safety and well-being of the hostages. Britain should begin to immediately negotiate a prisoner exchange instead of spending all of their energy attempting to save face.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:46 PM

At this point I'm not trusting anybody! Any one who's 100% sure is a fool.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:53 PM

There are times when I'd be pleased if Mudcat would take over negotiating disputes between different countries. This is not one of those times.

"We" don't know where the hell the British sailors were when the Iranians captured them.

"No one" really knows where the international border is in the waterway between Iraq and Iran.

And just maybe, the British have been more aggresively excercising their inspections of local cargo traffic.

And just maybe the Iranians were looking for an opportunity to capture some British military personnel to swap forits citizens that the Coalition of the Willing is unwilling to release that were resident in the so-called council office in the Kurdish region of Iraq.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:55 PM

According to the BBC...
His spokesman said he was referring to a "different way" of handling talks, which could involve making public reasons why the UK was certain the group was in Iraqi waters.

It is understood this could include producing evidence such as boat co-ordinates and details of the searched vessel apparently still anchored in Iraqi waters.

The spokesman told reporters: "We are utterly confident that we were in Iraqi waters, and not just marginally in Iraqi waters but in Iraqi waters. It's a case of tactics and if and when we have to prove that."

However, one high-ranking Iraqi official has expressed surprise that British forces were operating in the area.

Brigadier-General Hakim Jassim, commander of Iraq's territorial waters, said: "Usually there is no presence of British forces in that area, so we were surprised and we wondered whether the British forces were inside Iraqi waters or inside Iranian regional waters."

NOTE that it does NOT say they WERE in Iranian waters, just that the Iraqi official did not know.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6500583.stm?lsf

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:55 PM

Well all I know is if Iran doesn't back down, they run the risk of getting bombed like Iraq. Then we have more instability.

Is that what everybody wants.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 02:59 PM

Local fisherman states the Brits were in Iraqi waters.

The ship being searched was anchored in Iraqi waters.

The location given by the IRANIANS was in Iraqi waters.

The Brits claim they were in Iraqi waters.

The Iraqi official, who did not know the Brits were in the area, wondered if they were in Iraqi or Iranian waters.

Ipso facto, the Brits MUST have been in Iranian waters, according to Dianavan

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:39 PM

Dianavan,
Look at the link I gave earlier.
As I said it gives a link to IRANIAN TV footage. There is an image of the arrest close under the anchored merchant ship.
That is why the position of the anchored ship is relevant. Her master says it was anchored well inside IRAQI water.
I also gave a link to a photo of a GPS held over that ship showing that it had moved a few hundred yards as the anchor dragged but was still over a mile inside.
That poor young sailor has now had to write another letter saying how lovely her jailers are, and how she wants British troops to leave Iraq.
You are taking the wrong side here Dianavan.
For shame.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:41 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6508039.stm

Dainavan, click the button that says "Iranian TV footage"

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:45 PM

Dianavan, this page has a still from the video of the hand held GPS.
You can see the co ordinates.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6502947.stm

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:49 PM

Dianavan, this page from the video is zoomed out to show the anchored ship under the GPS.
Still doubt where it was ?
Even if they had been in Iranian waters, which you alone in the world believe, the kidnapping was illegal, and the treatment of the hostages despicable.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:50 PM

Sorry. Getting angry. Forgot link.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6501555.stm

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 03:51 PM

"The first British tactic had been to offer Iran an easy way out by giving it the GPS reading and suggesting that it might have made a mistake.



Iran at first offered a different co-ordinate, according to British officials, and then, when it was pointed out that this was in Iraqi waters, another reading was given, this time on the Iranian side.


UK VERSION OF EVENTS

1 Crew boards merchant ship 1.7NM inside Iraqi waters
2 HMS Cornwall was south-east of this, and inside Iraqi waters
3 Iran tells UK that merchant ship was at a different point, still within Iraqi waters
4 After UK points this out, Iran provides corrected position, now within Iranian waters
However the initial quiet effort led nowhere, so a decision to escalate the issue was taken.

When discretion failed, public diplomacy was launched with a world-wide lobbying effort, based on the GPS readings.


GPS reading

The GPS read-out was made where an Indian merchant ship was boarded by the British inspection party on Friday.

At a briefing for reporters at the Ministry of Defence in London, a quietly-spoken but precise Vice Admiral Charles Style, Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, said the incident took place 1.7 nautical miles (3.14 kilometres) inside Iraqi waters. The territorial waters, he indicated, were fixed by a notional line extending from the centre of the Shatt al-Arab waterway, which is the border between the two countries. This line was in accordance with international law and custom, he said.

The British coordinates were obtained from the captured boats by a data link to HMS Cornwall. He gave them as 29 50.36 North and 048 43.08 East. (Note: the reading on the photo at the top, taken from a helicopter over the ship still at anchor two days afterwards, is slightly different as the ship's captain said the anchor had dragged since the incident).

The coordinates given by Iran to the British were not detailed.

The admiral insisted that the British were in the right, as they were acting under Security Council resolution 1723 (which authorises the multinational force in Iraq) and with the approval of the Iraqi government in protecting its oil facilities, coast and shipping. There was no doubt where the dividing line was, he said, despite historic disputes between Iran and Iraq over these waters. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6502947.stm


btw, from the same site:

"The British Foreign Secretary Mrs Beckett said that Iran had assured her there was no linkage to other events, including presumably the detention of five Iranian officials by American forces in Iraq not long ago. "

And we know the Iranians would not lie to us...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Stringsinger
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:01 PM

What on earth were they doing there?

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:26 PM

Who? The Brits or the Iranians?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 04:53 PM

Where's Ollie North when ya really need him?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 05:01 PM

the treatment of the hostages despicable.

That's speculative. It might turn out to be accurate speculation, but at this point there seems to be no evidence indicating that they are being treated badly.
.........
I was a bit puzzled by folk1e: "The vice admiral 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 boundary!" (28 Mar 07 - 09:11 PM), when previously he'd quoted him as saying "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...." I imagine that folk1e must have typed "east" when he meant "west" - makes quite a difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 05:32 PM

mc grath
Did you see the interview with the sailor girl before she was taken?
Did she strike you as being of strong political opinions and knowledge?
Did she come across as the kind of person who would address a letter to Britains politcal representatives (not MPs as you and I might call them)?
What do you suppose inspired her to write those alien sentiments?
For shame.
You are defending evil.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 05:51 PM

How many Iranians are there in England, sort of now-ish?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 05:56 PM

A gun to one's head can inspire lots of letters.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: bobad
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 06:33 PM

As well as a "blessed right hand."

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 06:36 PM

Yes Peace
The british marines taken by Iran about 3 years ago were threatened with death, stood in open graves and had weapons fired over them.
Over and over.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 06:45 PM

I don't know how many of you recall the fellow from the Vietnam War (I think) who was flashing his middle finger while he was filmed. His hands were in front of him on the table, and he was holding them in such a way as to have his middle finger sticking out all by itself. He then went on to talk about how his country (USA) was involved in an illegal war, and that the USA was bad, and that he as a soldier was wrong for being there, etc. A follow-up story claimed he got a real shit-kicking and lots of solitary confinement and a drop in his daily caloric intake for that when the NVA found out what the middle finger meant.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: folk1e
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 07:51 PM

Appologies ..... I did mean WEST of the border line(s)!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 08:02 PM

I would think it highly likely that members of the UK armed forces are advised that, when taken captive, making statements of that kind is a perfectly acceptable, and indeed advisable, behaviour. It seems pretty normal practice in these kind of situations,anyway. Sometimes prisoners go in for coded ways of indicating they are putting on an act.

Confessions of this sort by captives are pretty evidently meaningless - as meaningless as guilty pleas by prisoners making plea bargains, like that Australian kid the other day who'd been banged up in Guantanamo Bay for years.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 08:19 PM

And, of course, we really have no idea what's going on there. Maybe the captives are being treated terribly; maybe they're being treated well ... anything any of us say beyond that is just idle speculation, at best. We'll find out eventually, though ... patience, people!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Mar 07 - 11:26 PM

bb - Why do you keep saying, "Local fisherman states the Brits were in Iraqi waters." when I have already linked a source (Globe and Mail) that says otherwise?

Keith - Shaming me is a waste of breath. Guilt isn't something that works well on me. I am not defending evil. Quite the contrary. I'm trying to get to the truth by questioning all accounts of this incident. I know that there are two sides to every story.

I don't think you can draw any firm conclusions when the media accounts are contradictory and there is so much that has been omitted, filtered and revised. I do not think you or anyone else can make any judgement based on a video clip that was a few seconds long. It was blurry, quick and edited. Besides that, it is quite possible that it was digitally enhanced.

There is plenty of propaganda coming from both sides and anyone who chooses to escalate this incident into a war is evil and that includes Britain. I am a long way from feeling shame or defending evil. In fact, I am proud of my ability to stand back and look at the situation objectively which is more that you or bb can do.

You have had your nose rubbed in your own shit by a few Iranians who were able to outwit the British Navy. Now you are just trying to save face by pointing your finger at the evil doers and shaming others. Its a pretty thin excuse for poking at a hornets nest and then crying when you get stung.

I think its pretty obvious that the U.S./Britain have been itching for a battle with Iran and have created an incident by overstepping their boundaries in an area that has been disputed for decades. Nothing else really makes sense.

Why would Iran want to battle with the U.S. when it is the U.S. that has the nuclear bomb? Thats a bit like David and Goliath wouldn't you say?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 12:08 AM

It now seems that some UN member states have some doubts as to weither or not the British were actually acting under UN Mandates, saying that there may not exist any such Mandates. While Russia & South Africa still refuse, so far to put blame on Iran with Russia questioning the British claims to haveing been in Iraqi Waters.

To me it seems that no one is convinced of anything & many still have unanswered questions which prevented the UN's coming down hard on Iran like the UK/US had hoped for. I would think that these member nations know a hell of a lot more than we do & it also seems that what they do know isn't a whole hell of a lot to go on. And all along we had it all figured out!

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: heric
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 12:16 AM

Yes this was a pretty good process we had here.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 12:22 AM

Security Council Resolution 1723.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 12:33 AM

Synopsis of the Resolution--and there's lots of room to 'interpret' in there.

Security Council Resolutions

S/RES/1723 (28 November 2006) The situation concerning Iraq

Synopsis of Resolution 1723: A Chapter VII Resolution, Resolution 1723 extends the mandate of the multinational force in Iraq until 31 December 2007 and "reaffirms the authorization for the multinational force as set forth in resolution 1546 (2004)." Resolution 1723 also "notes that the presence of the multinational force in Iraq is at the request of the Government of Iraq." The authorization of Resolution 1546 referred to by Resolution 1723 states, in part: "the multinational force shall have the authority to take all necessary measures to contribute to the maintenance of security and stability in Iraq." The extension of the mandate created by Resolution 1723 contains the qualification that "the mandate for the multinational force shall be reviewed at the request of the Government of Iraq or no later than 15 June 2007, and declares that [the Security Council] will terminate this mandate earlier if requested by the Government of Iraq." Resolution 1723 also extends "the arrangements established in paragraph 20 of resolution 1483 (2003) for the depositing into the Development Fund for Iraq of proceeds from export sales of petroleum, petroleum products, and natural gas" until 31 December 2007, which may be reviewed at the request of the Iraqi Government or no later than 15 June 2007.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 12:35 AM

Quoted from here.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 12:54 AM

Peace - This really has nothing to do with Iraq and all to do with US/British and Iranian relations. We know the Brits are there to 'help' Iraq but what were they doing in Iranian waters? - or were they in Iraqi waters? Thats the central question and one that is not likely to be answered since there are very few, impartial, eye witnesses(unless you count the fisherman).

For something other than the U.S./British perspective, read this:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IC30Ak04.html

"According to an Iranian political analyst seasoned in "threat analysis", Iran's ability to play hardball with Britain serves the national interest at a time when Western powers manipulate the Middle East landscape almost at will. "Iran is sending a clear message that the 'buck stops here'," he told the author.

Apparently, the message is not lost on Iran's neighbors, and at the opening ceremony of an Arab summit in Riyadh, Saudi King Abdullah warned "foreign powers" to stop meddling in the affairs of the region, since the days when they could impose their wills on the people of the region had passed."

And lest you think this source is unreliable, Kaveh L Afrasiabi, PhD, is the author of After Khomeini: New Directions in Iran's Foreign Policy (Westview Press) and co-author of "Negotiating Iran's Nuclear Populism", Brown Journal of World Affairs, Volume XII, Issue 2, Summer 2005, with Mustafa Kibaroglu. He also wrote "Keeping Iran's nuclear potential latent", Harvard International Review, and is author of Iran's Nuclear Program: Debating Facts Versus Fiction.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 12:56 AM

Please don't address me. Address the post if you must. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 01:05 AM

I would agree, Saudi King Abdullah when he stated that the war with Iraq was illeagle he was sending a clear message.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 01:18 AM

King Abdullah has also stated that he would back the Sunnis if the US pulled out of Iraq. He has his interests to support also.

BTW, I am not taking sides in the dispute until I know where the Brits were. If they were in Iraqi waters, the Iranians are wrong. If not, then Iran has a case for taking the prisoners. But it is fast approaching the point where that will cease to matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 01:34 AM

You may be right
An' ya may be wrong
But ya got to close
Now ya 15's gone

who's right & who's wrong may still be questionable but who's dumber is certianlly not.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 01:40 AM

On THAT we agree. G W Bush wins by a furlong.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 01:41 AM

Either side can make errors that lead to such incidents. Either side can deliberately arrange provocations. There's really no way for anyone here to know what's going on there except the people most directly involved.

I know one thing, though. Whatever it was that happened, it's definitely not worth starting a war over, and it should not be used as an excuse to, because that won't help anyone one bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 01:48 AM

Dianavan, the video you thought might be digitally enhanced was Iranian. Why would they do that to undermine their own case? Anyway, can you digitally enhance an image of a ship that is not there?

The evidence against is just your fishermen. Perhaps they made it up. perhaps for money. Perhaps they don't like us. And how do you know what they said Dianavan? no one has stood them in front of a camera, or a microphone, or taken a written statement. We have only heard it in translation and third hand via an iraqi general who may feel more loyalty to his Shia brothers in Iran than to Britain.
As objective evidence it is worthless, but you choose to believe it and disregard hard video evidence and the independent testimony from the Indian ship.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 02:05 AM

McGrath,
"I would think it highly likely that members of the UK armed forces are advised that, when taken captive, making statements of that kind is a perfectly acceptable, and indeed advisable, behaviour."

No they are not. They are instructed to volunteer no information or opinion beyond name and number.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 02:44 AM

Er - actually BF what Russia and Malaysia said was that they could not independently verify location, not that they doubted it.

Which, in the case of Russia, who have their own world surveillance capability, I rather doubt.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 04:02 AM

Keith - There is no such thing as "hard video evidence" in the digital age and all of the so-called eye-witness accounts are heresay.

If you truly believe what you have said, "...an iraqi general who may feel more loyalty to his Shia brothers in Iran than to Britain," don't you think its time for Britain to go home? The British and Iraqi are supposed to be working together are they not?

Regardless of the truth of the situation, your disdain for Iraqis and Iranians is obvious. Its your misguided belief in British superiority that underlies your arrogance and prevents you from understanding anything about the problems of the Middle East.

You give Brits a bad name.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 04:11 AM

Why don't Iran let the sailors go, then they might get a bit more respect, and it might calm things down a little.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 04:20 AM

Thats an excellent idea, Villain. If Britain were to apologize, it would probably happen immediately.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 04:25 AM

Dianavan, if I were that arrogant, I would assume all Iraqis love us.
I was accepting the obvious fact that some do not, and putting it into the balance of evidence.
I like to think that is objectivity.
You assume that they all hate us.
That is prejudice, and like all generalisations, an insult to the people sterotyped.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 04:28 AM

Nobody is going to apologise Dianavan. However the longer Iran hang on the worse it gets for everybody.

Anyway it now seems that Iran isn't asking for an apology,

The Iranians do not ask for a formal apology, but call for the establishment of a technical forum to ensure British forces do not enter their territorial waters again.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1258295,00.html

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 04:41 AM

Dianavan,
I am puzzled by your position on the Iranian TV footage.
You are woried that they may have faked it, in which case they are lying, and in the wrong.
And if they have not faked it, it shows that they are lying, and in the wrong.
Or have I missed something ?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 05:22 AM

Keith - Maybe its because you keep trying to put me in one camp or another. I'm saying that anything can be digitally manipulated and that the video was brief, edited and blurry. Not what I would call proof of anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 05:23 AM

"Why would Iran want to battle with the U.S. when it is the U.S. that has the nuclear bomb? Thats a bit like David and Goliath wouldn't you say? "

You haven't seen the movie "The Mouse That Roared", have you? In that it clearly explains WHY the USA could NOT invade that tiny little country - the best they could do was 'offer to send them aid"....

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 05:41 AM

The British incursions into the Irish Republic were numerous, lots of times there soldiers were reported in the border counties of Donegal Louth and Monaghan.
On one occasion 7 SAS were arrested in County Louth, on this occasion there was an apology, on most of the other occasions the British denied this, quite often helicopters landed in County Louth, as for the Iran incursion, an open mind would be the best option.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 07:12 AM

"bb - Why do you keep saying, "Local fisherman states the Brits were in Iraqi waters." when I have already linked a source (Globe and Mail) that says otherwise?"

Because I have already given the source that said so, and shown how your link does not state anything of the kind- It stateds that the Iraqi official did not know they Brits were there, and WONDERED if they were in Iraqi or Iranian territory.

Try reading posts before you complain about them.

"Shaming me is a waste of breath. Guilt isn't something that works well on me. I am not defending evil. Quite the contrary. I'm trying to get to the truth by questioning all accounts of this incident. I know that there are two sides to every story. "

It helps to actually look at what BOTH sides have said, not just the side you seek to justify.


"I do not think you or anyone else can make any judgement based on a video clip that was a few seconds long. It was blurry, quick and edited. Besides that, it is quite possible that it was digitally enhanced. "

This was the Iranian video clip? Why would they have digitally enhanced it? Could it be they have some false claim to make????


Hard to understand what you are saying:

"In fact, I am proud of my ability to stand back and look at the situation objectively which is more that you or bb can do."

"I don't think you can draw any firm conclusions when the media accounts are contradictory and there is so much that has been omitted, filtered and revised. I do not think you or anyone else can make any judgement based on a video clip that was a few seconds long."

"I think its pretty obvious that the U.S./Britain have been itching for a battle with Iran and have created an incident by overstepping their boundaries in an area that has been disputed for decades. Nothing else really makes sense."

How can you look at both sides, say there is not enough evidence to decide, and THEN decide?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 07:20 AM

"Thats an excellent idea, Villain. If Britain were to apologize, it would probably happen immediately"

Only if you have already judged and convicted the Brits, without evidence ( according to your own statments)



If Iran were to release the kidnappped sailors and marines, and apologize, there would be a lot less tension, and less reason for potential conflict. THAT would calm things down.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 07:36 AM

Some one got the next move, eh? Or maybe they'll just all piss into the wind! Trust none of what you hear & only half of what you see (?). I trust neither at all & those here even less! Well no I trust most here as to their hearts but not so much their minds. I still wouldn't trust any of the involved nations for a New York City second.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 08:11 AM

15 Britons In a Sea Of Intrigue

By David Ignatius
Friday, March 30, 2007; Page A17 Washington Post

BERLIN -- We are in a season of skulduggery in the Middle East, with a strange series of events that all involve the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. The murky saga is a reminder that the real power in Iran may lie with this secretive organization, which spawned Iran's firebrand president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The Revolutionary Guard orchestrated the seizure of 15 British sailors and marines last week near the mouth of the Shatt al Arab waterway between Iraq and Iran. The British say they have technical data to prove that their people were outside Iran's territorial waters when they were captured, and they have protested vigorously to Iranian diplomats. But the Iranian Foreign Ministry doesn't seem to know anything about the case. Indeed, it may have been one of the indirect targets.

The Revolutionary Guard seized the hostages, if that's the right word, at a time when it is under intense and growing pressure. U.S. troops captured five of its intelligence operatives in January in the Iraqi city of Irbil. Perhaps the Guard's commanders wanted some bargaining chips to get their people back.

There are larger forces at play, too. The Revolutionary Guard was targeted in the U.N. sanctions enacted last weekend against Iran's nuclear program -- which, as it happens, is run by the Revolutionary Guard. The elite military group may have wanted to retaliate by imposing its own brute sanctions against Britain, one of the five permanent members of the Security Council.

European officials note that the provocative move comes as speculation grows about new discussions between the United States and Iran -- a dialogue the Revolutionary Guard may oppose. Representatives of the two nations met in Baghdad this month as part of a regional conference on Iraqi security, and it was expected that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would meet her Iranian counterpart at a follow-up meeting in Istanbul in April. That meeting may be in jeopardy if the British sailors and marines aren't returned soon.

The Revolutionary Guard may also have hoped to sabotage diplomatic negotiations over the nuclear issue. U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said several weeks ago that the United States was getting "pinged all over the world" by Iranian intermediaries who wanted a resumption of talks. Iran's chief negotiator, Ali Larijani, hinted at such a message in his recent contacts with the European Union's top diplomat, Javier Solana. But the prospect of nuclear talks may have been blown out of the water, as it were, until the British issue is resolved.

Maybe that was the goal of seizing the sailors and marines. The Revolutionary Guard, after all, can't be happy about curbing the nuclear program that would allow it to project power even more aggressively.

But what's making the Revolutionary Guard so jittery? Why is it behaving as if someone had made off with its family jewels? Maybe that's where the last of the mysterious events comes in.

On Feb. 7, a top Revolutionary Guard officer named Brig. Gen. Ali Reza Asgari vanished in Istanbul. This is no small fish. He is a former deputy defense minister who, during the late 1980s and early 1990s, had been Iran's key operative in Lebanon, helping organize its proxy army, Hezbollah. According to Bob Baer, who was a CIA case officer in Beirut at that time, Asgari was the primary contact for Hezbollah's leader, Hasan Nasrallah, and its most feared terrorist operative, Imad Mughniyah. "Asgari was in the IRGC's chain of command when it was kidnapping and assassinating Westerners in Lebanon in the '80s," Baer wrote in Time.

So what happened to Asgari, a man who knows some of the Revolutionary Guard's most precious secrets? Officials in Washington, Paris and Berlin shrug and say, sorry, they just can't be helpful on this one. But a leading Israeli daily, Yedioth Aharonoth, reported soon after Asgari's disappearance that Mossad had organized his defection. An Israeli defense source was quoted in the Sunday Times of London on March 11 as saying that Asgari "probably was working for Mossad but believed he was working for a European intelligence agency."

The betting among spy buffs is that Asgari was recruited in what's known as a "false flag" operation. His handlers may be Israelis posing as officers of another intelligence service, perhaps even during the debriefing. Such speculation was piqued two weeks ago when the German defense minister, Franz Josef Jung, was asked during a visit to Turkey whether Asgari was in Germany. "I cannot say anything on this issue," he replied.

In the perverse spy story that is the Middle East, we have started a strange new chapter. This one has killers and kidnappers galore, and a plot to die for.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 08:45 AM

I like your (or his) heading BB it could be the start of a song "Sea of Heartbreak" style, a croner's ballad. Hope someone writes a decent ending for it though.

"And a plot to die for" & more, and more to come,,, too.

great speculation on behalf of the writer, loaded with many may's & maybe's. A western journalist trying to think in the boots of an easterner, well it was an enjoyable cut & paste to read at the least.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 08:47 AM

To turn to an issue that is inevitably bound to get drawn into this one, if it doesn't get sorted out soon - the Iranian diplomats being held by the US after being detained (no doubt "kidnapped" would be how it would be described in Iran)in northern Iraq.

It wouldn't do any harm if they were allowed consular access, and some omformation was given of what is happening to them. I imagine their families might even be rather pleased to have them "paraded on TV" looking reasonably well and comfortable - at least they'd know they were alive, and have some indication they weren't being tortured.
.........................
"They are instructed to volunteer no information or opinion beyond name and number." I'm sure that is the official position. But official positions aren't always the last word. These kind of statements by prisoners are pretty frequent, and so far as I know no peanlties are imposed on them following release, nor should they be.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 08:49 AM

BB-

Now that's an interesting story. Thanks for sharing!

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 08:50 AM

Barry,

His line, not mine. But it is good.

I never represented it as other than the editorial it is- but it provides food for thought about how much Britain "instigated" this.


"Meanwhile, EU foreign ministers on Friday demanded Iran release 15 Britons, though some warned against escalating the dispute and said their diplomatic ties with Tehran would not be immediately affected, The Associated Press reported. "

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/30/iran.uk.sailors/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 09:01 AM

"But the Iranian Foreign Ministry doesn't seem to know anything about the case. Indeed, it may have been one of the indirect targets."

This kind of in-fighting/power-struggle is what I've been suggesting ... It's no more justified to condemn "Iran" than it is to condemn "America" or "Britain". It makes rhetoric more awkward, but it is certain factions or bodies within these countries that one really is objecting to.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 09:39 AM

Sorry BB I am a bit confused with your post>>"Thats an excellent idea, Villain. If Britain were to apologize, it would probably happen immediately"<<

Britain will not apologise

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 09:49 AM

A quote, that I was replying to:


**********************************************************
From: dianavan - PM
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 04:20 AM

Thats an excellent idea, Villain. If Britain were to apologize, it would probably happen immediately.

********************************************************************

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: heric
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 09:59 AM

This thing has just risen to 3,000 google news articles. It is bigger than Anna Nicole Smith!

all 3,000 news articles »

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 01:38 PM

Heric-

Impossible! No news story could be bigger than the stories generated by the death of Anna Nicole Smith. That will remain true unless the British nuke the Iranians, and even then I'm not certain. But maybe cooler heads will prevail.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 01:40 PM

I said, "I think its pretty obvious that the U.S./Britain have been itching for a battle with Iran and have created an incident by overstepping their boundaries in an area that has been disputed for decades. Nothing else really makes sense"

That is based on what I have seen and heard so far. It doesn't mean I support Iran. In fact, I don't support either side. I support the people who suffer as a result of the conflict. It is harldly a firm conclusion.

As to the apology; after succeeding in kidnapping the Brits, you don't really think the Iranians would give them back for nothing do you? The ball is in the Iranian court. If the Brits want them back(regardless of who is right or wrong) the Brits will have to admit that they were in Iranian waters. Thats the way I see it.

As to what the fisherman said, I choose to believe the original, unfiltered version as reported by the Iraqi military commander.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 02:00 PM

Sorry BB and Dianavan - I should have looked back at the previous posts higher up. Doh :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 06:13 PM

Indications are that Iran isn't after an apology or an admission of any border violations from the UK government, and will settle for a prcedure that would elinminate the risk of future violations. In other words a face-saving way out of a mutually dangerous situation for both sides.

Maybe they'll get round to something on the lines of my earlier suggestion of joint anti-smuggling patrols...

The problem is on both sides there are people who want to take advantage of the episode to stoke up the fires.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 06:14 PM

'"Meanwhile, Iran released a third letter supposedly from Turney, the only woman in the crew, in which she says she has been "sacrificed" by Britain.


"I am writing to you as a British serviceperson who has been sent to Iraq, sacrificed due to the intervening policies of the Bush and Blair governments," the letter Friday said.'

She would write 'servicePERSON'?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: skipy
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 06:45 PM

Thats an excellent idea, Villain. If Britain were to apologize, it would probably happen immediately.
What bollox! we are right, they are wrong!
Live with it!
Skipy

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: folk1e
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 06:48 PM

There is also a video of a third marine appologising for "trespassing without permission" (whilst being prompted)
I am unsure what exactly the purpose of the videos is, but it cannot lend any credibility to the captors. I suspect there are a number of disparate groups within the "Iranian" banner so applying motives becomes pointless ........then again what do I know?

On another point (and without wishing to become part of it) it is sad to see some members scoring (or attempting to score) points of others rather than further the discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 06:58 PM

One can hope these confessions might be a way of providing a way out of an embarrassing impasse. "We've got our apology from the people who were there, so there's no need to aske the UK Government to apologise. So now we can let them go."

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: folk1e
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 07:21 PM

The difference between aspiration and expectation!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 07:52 PM

Skipy - I don't beleive that Britain is guilty whatsoever and I dont beleive Iran wil get an apology either.

I do beleive if Iran does not stop arsing about, they could get nuked or something like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 08:08 PM

It wouldn't be hard to come up with a verbal formula which could be interpreted by the British Government as denying any frontier violations while being interpreted by the Iranian Government as accepting that they had happened. The key would be to build the formula round a determination to avoid any such incidents in the future.

But of course that would be dependent on both sides actually wanting to avoid using this as as a stepping stone to heightened conflict.

That isn't unrealistic. The thing people tend to ignore is that Iran is only a few years out of a disastrous war forced on it by Iraq, which was comparable in terms of carnage to the Great War, in which Britain and the USA were in effect sided with Saddam Hussein's aggression.

Insofar as Iran is at least toying with the idea of developing nuclear weapons this is far better seen as arising from a desperate determination to avoid anything similar to that happening again, rather than as from expansionist ambitions.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 08:40 PM

"Insofar as Iran is at least toying with the idea of developing nuclear weapons this is far better seen as arising from a desperate determination to avoid anything similar to that happening again, rather than as from expansionist ambitions. "

Remarkably like Germany was after WWI - and how a little kernel (leader of the nuts!) convinced many to go along with him to 'Restore the Honour of the Country!"

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 11:28 PM

Another possibility. According to the Economist, the Iranian government is under great pressure to raise the price of gasoline, now about 1/5 of market rate to Iranian motorists. This is likely to happen in May--the large subsidy will be reduced--and if it happens, will be a huge shock, since Iranians see cheap gas as proof the government is redistributing the oil wealth back to the the people--which is one of Ahminejad's big election promises.

I would think a deliberate distraction--especially an attempt to claim the upper hand over a major Western power--would play well.

Of course, the Iranian government will claim that Iran is the wronged party.

And it would be just perfect from the Iranian regime's perspective if the West were in fact to attack Iran--that's the only way to guarantee rallying behind the regime.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 11:54 PM

McGrath - I hope you're right when you say,

"It wouldn't be hard to come up with a verbal formula which could be interpreted by the British Government as denying any frontier violations while being interpreted by the Iranian Government as accepting that they had happened. The key would be to build the formula round a determination to avoid any such incidents in the future."

While I know for sure that the statements of the hostages are bogus, the Iranian people do not. It is a way for Iranian politicians to convince their people that the U.S./Britain are a threat. Its called propaganda.

I believe that the U.S./Britain are a threat to Iran but I do not need phony confessions to convince me. For the sake of the Middle East, I hope this conflict can be resolved sooner than later.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 12:15 AM

"Indications are that Iran isn't after an apology or an admission of any border violations from the UK government, and will settle for a prcedure that would elinminate the risk of future violations. In other words a face-saving way out of a mutually dangerous situation for both sides."

McGrath has it best. After all Britan had outlined the original border to be the banks of Iran. Later the border was moved to the center of the river + etc. This could be used as the excuse to define the border without leaving any room for disputes with Britan acting as moderator (it'll also make up for their !st border blunder) between Iraq & Iran. Britan would be seen as doing something possive (a good guy) for Iran (helping to clear up the border issue) without either nation losing face. Iran wouldn't be losing face because it finally has it's own border issue cleared up & can free up the sailors and be seen by their own as getting something back in return.
The only problem would be the US trying to get involoved by adding their 2 cents worth & having the whole thing turn nuclear & blow up in everyone's face. Keep the US out, remember that our guy can't follow a road map (DUI at the wheel), imagine him as a drunken skipper trying to chart a course in disputed & confused waters, he'd have a hard time getting past a barroom door.   

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 12:15 AM

I'll take 300 too.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 12:33 AM

In fact there have already been substantial protests, by students and others, against Ahminejad's perceived recklessness and against his junketing, to Latin America, among other places, while the Iranian economy goes to hell in a handbasket.

A manufactured crisis against a Western bogeyman--especially, as I said, if the West reacts violently-- would distract the population nicely.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:58 AM

Religion and politics: The game they played with Faye Turney seems to indicate that all is not right in the world of Iran's internal politics. I wonder if there's a coup in the offing?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:17 AM

I was wondering when the Americans would get into it.

US rejects Iran captives exchange http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6512927.stm

Now the scene hots up.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:24 AM

So when did the USA annexe Great Britian?

Musta blinked...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:28 AM

"US officials have ruled out a deal to exchange 15 Royal Navy personnel captured in the Gulf for five Iranians seized by American forces in Iraq. "

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:32 AM

Brillant example of 'Divide & Conquer' Politics - now who said those guys were dumb?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:40 AM

Why the surprise even the Iranians stated very clearly that the issues relating to, UN/IAEA nuclear programme, the five Iranian Republican Guards in Iraq and the UK Sailors and Marines are all completely separate.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:51 AM

Iran is fucked up. They have at least two official voices--depending on the hour. Thee if the clerics get into it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:52 AM

That should read 'Three'.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 08:39 AM

During the present troubles in the north of Ireland the British patrolled the waters bordering the Irish Republic, they had a boat on constant watch in Carlingford Lough.   Irish fishing boats were constantly hauled in by raiding parties from the Brit boats, and this was usually in Irish waters.
Despite constant pleas by the Republics Government this form of harassment continued, remember the old song, Rule Britannia, Britannia waives the rules, and with the Brits it is the same the world over.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:34 AM

Of course, of course, of course (yawn) yeah right

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Keith A o Hertford.
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:58 AM

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE130342007?open&of=ENG-IRN
This Amnesty International report tells how this wicked regime treats its own prisoners.
There are dozens more Amnesty reports current.
The Now Show on BBC Radio 4 found the plight of the hostages and their desperate families highly amusing.
Only in Britain.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:20 AM

Yes, the Iranians seem to be masters of hardball "diplomacy" . As has been said, at the start of the crisis they clearly stated that an exchange of the British sailors for the the Iranians captured in Iraq was not their goal. If they had said it was the object of this artificial incident, it would have been transparent. Now they can wait while UK sentiment to get the prisoners released builds. And in fact what have the Iranians found in Iraq been charged with? Is there any proof they are guilty of a crime?   The sailors are obviously completely innocent.

If the request for the exchange stems from the UK, the Iranians can "generously" comply. If the Bush "admininistration" is unwilling, the rift between the UK and US is increased.

And if the crisis builds--and military action against Iran is started, the shaky Ahminejad government can appeal--successfully-- for patriotic resistance. And it will "prove" to his own people that--even if the nuclear sites were to be successfully destroyed this time in air attacks--a huge if, considering how scattered they are, with some underground-- attaining a nuclear weapon is the only way to avoid bullying by the West.

But those who feel that the British started this crisis intentionally should think again. Who has more to gain from the incident? It's patently obvious the British have nothing to gain. And the shaky Iranian regime has everything.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:27 AM

Those who think the British started this crisis should think for a first time. Iran was playing to the crowd--the UN vote. Fifteen people mean nothing to them. Pawns. In this case, they have bit off more than they are prepared to chew. They will lose the political dimension of this. True, their 'brothers' in the Mid East will look to them with admiration for tugging the tail of the British. But the international community sees this group in Iran for what it is. And what it is ain't nice.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:38 AM

And of course if the US does attack Iran--which would be to prevent Iran's becoming a nuclear state--feared mightily by some of our Mudcatters, who are rattling sabres rather loudly, like the usual Bushite suspects elsewhere,--- the US will be responsible for any deaths that stem from that--as in Iraq.   And be supported neither by the UN-- nor the US electorate-- this time. No blank check for Bush again. So if he tries it, immediate impeachment and conviction. And it will clinch the title for him, if there was any doubt--the all-time worst US president.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 12:44 PM

Ron, you're right. So why did the Brits play it so close to the bone?
What were they thinking & what was their agenda? They could've been a bit more careful & sayed at least far enough away so's not to be within a margin of error. Had they, all this speculation & the present sabres rattling would not be happening. Does no one think with foresight or is this delibrate, at the very least it's the movements of idiots, at worst can only be imagined.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 01:39 PM

Abrry, there was no error. ONly the Iranians (and DIanavan, who thinks it was an invasion with pigs) suggest (and that mendaciously) any border crossing by the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 01:45 PM

Exactly! Knowing Iran's defensive position, why did Britain push the envelope. Why not stay well away from a territorial dispute? It was very brazen of the Iranians to capture the Brits when they were outgunned and outmanned but the fact is they did it and wherever the border may or may not be is no longer the primary concern. The object should be the return of the British captives.

One thing for certain, Iranian 'honour' is not something to take lightly. In other words, there must be a way for them to return the hostages and save face. Unfortunately, with no apology or admission of guilt by the Brits, and no chance of negotiating a hostage exchange, it leaves the Iranians only to consider a final option. That option would be to try the Brits in their courts.

In the meantime, the Iranians will use this hostage incident for PR and strengthen their regime at home. It also helps to turn worldwide public opinion against the U.S. Unfortunately, the British hostages become the sacrificial lambs.

btw - If people think Iran is treating their hostages badly, lets have a look at the Iranian hostages in U.S. custody.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 01:45 PM

Look, it is now clear to me.

The British must have known where they were to within yards if not feet with modern satnav.

The commander of the Cornwall must have known both where the border is and where the Iranians say it is.

Therefore either the British were playing for this situation (which does seem rather improbable) or the Iranians were lying more than usual inspired by religion (indeed any religion) which often has that effect.

We've all taken harder decisions than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 01:49 PM

"it leaves the Iranians only to consider a final option. That option would be to try the Brits in their courts." -

Oh, come on, dianavan. Listen to yourself ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:24 PM

My understanding is that the Brits were greatly outgunned, and taken by surprise by what seems very likely to have been advance planning by the Iranians.

Have the Iranians admitted/agreed that the Brits were taken at the exact location of the merchant vessel? Have the merchant ship's officers confirmed or contradicted that?

(Has no one attempted to get the lock on these civilians as witnesses? There is a lot at stake.)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:31 PM

>>One thing for certain, Iranian 'honour' is not something to take lightly. In other words, there must be a way for them to return the hostages and save face.<<
Why Dianavan They made the mistake. let them apologise to the Brits. F*** their pride, they shouldn't have done it in the first place.

Why should the Brits apologise for Iran's stupid agrression and what is clearly out of order.
All I can say is if Iran harms those sailors, Iran are going to be in deep shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:32 PM

heric - How could a few Iranians in a gun boat, outman and outgun the British Navy with a ship, a helicopter and a couple of dinghys in the area? Unless of course, it all happened very near the Iranian shoreline.

I'm interested in learning more about this.

I agree that the 'innocent' bystanders need to be questioned more thoroughly but by now I'm sure they have been de-briefed by the Iraqis as well as the Brits.

Why don't the Brits just say, "Oops, sorry for the confusion," and get their people back?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:36 PM

Why don't you talk with your Iranian friends and get them people back dianavan before things happen that Iran can't handle.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:43 PM

Where is the logic in threatening to kill many people over a few of your people who have merley been arrested, but not harmed?

Seems to me that everyone's national pride is getting a little out of hand here. This is not something to go killing people over. It's the kind of thing that often happens in tense border situations in or near a war zone. Such things have happened in Korean waters more than once in the last few decades, and we did not fight another Korean war over it, did we?

This is as big a problem as you choose to make it, and I don't see it as a very big problem...unless people lose their heads.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:45 PM

Why would I do that when Britain can't even take care of their own. Emphasis on:

"the commander of HMS Cornwall apparently ordered them to surrender."

"With a pitifully weak navy and allergies of their own, the British were unable (or refused) to defend the sailors once they were surrounded; the commander of HMS Cornwall apparently ordered them to surrender. This despite the fact that British and especially American naval forces are putting pressure on Iran in increasingly aggressive ways — indeed the British navy was put on high alert weeks ago, in expectation of a bad reaction from Tehran. Now Tony Blair has asked Washington to stand back while he negotiates the release of the sailors from a position of weakness and utter humiliation."

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWI3NDc1MGI3YjYyYzllODZiNzUwZGZiNmNiNDJhNDQ=

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:55 PM

Sorry LH - cross posted. My reply was to Villain.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 02:59 PM

As much as I have NO use for Tony Blair, and as much as I dislike the US policy such as it is in Iraq, I think the Iranians have fucked up big time on this. DDespite a recent statement by the Saudi leader that he would support the Sunnis if the US pulled out of Iraq, he was parenthetically clear that he would do that because his real fear is Iran and the Shi'ite majority there. Iran has had and continues to have a history of getting its people worked up over issues that really aren't. This bullshit--the arresting of 15 marines/sailors--is a play to the peanut gallery in Iran. Within days crowds were shouting "Death to Britain" then a few "Death to Americas". What I think has happened is that Iran badly miscalculated the reaction of the Brits. Britain is the union that sailed 1/3 of the way around the world to wage a war against an entrenched enemy whose supply line was shorter than theirs. The work of the SAS and then the troops who landed was awesome. The Navy and the Airmen/women took their share of casualties, but there was never any doubt in my mind that the UK would win. On some issues they are just too fuckin' proud to give up. (The years after Dunkirk attest to that, and the defense of the Falklands (and before someone starts with 'they were the Maldives and Argentia owned them', I have heard that one before).

The Iranians may think they have pride, but I know they really have no idea what they are up against on this. If they have any damned sense at all, they will release the hostages--because that is what those 15 people are--THEN deal with the IraqisBrits on where the line really is. I give it tops ten days and shit will start to happen. Some of it will escalate I don't doubt. I think it won't involve nukes, but it will be bloody. The result will be the fall of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I can't say I'd be sorry to see him go, and define go how you will.

Iran has already lost the political dimension. All Iran can do now is either release the hostages or keep those hostages deal with the anger of a nation that will NOT back down. Sometimes pride goeth before a fall, and sometimes it precedes a real shit kicking.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:01 PM

d'van - The Cornwall was out in deeper water, by an earlier report referenced above but I can't recall which one.

The helicopter left the scene, for reasons I don't remember exactly and which I think were a bit unclear - I think it was just too routine and boring for them to hang around, and something called them them toward the Iraqi shore.

One BBC report, however, says that the helicopter saw the Iranians approaching, and that I do not understand. (This is referenced up above at 23 Mar 07 - 12:59.)

(Also up above, 28 Mar 07 - 12:52 AM, it shows Terri Judd, reporting from the Cornwall, says the Iranians surrounded the Brits as they approached the merchant vessel. Strange an onite reporter could get it so wrong, five or so days after the event.)

For reasons still unknown to the West, the boarding party's gps stopped functioning at the time of their apprehension. (I forget where I read that.) Some conjecture that the Brits threw it into the sea, perhaps to preclude Iranian access to it. (I think this was very helpful in that the Iranians could not bring it into Iranian waters, while still transmitting.) This device was monitored and apparently displayed at the Cornwall continuously and in real time. From what I can tell, this is extraordinarily good evidence, especially in combination with the merchant vessel's records, of exactly where the incident occurred. I don't see how Russia or others could dismiss it. The only way it can be dismissed is to say that the records could have been altered after the fact, aboard the Cornwall, while not generating inconsitencies elsewhere, which seems very unlikely.

I finnaly got to view the DOD video on the BBC site, and as referenced by Keith, above. They guy referenced four or five similar boardings in the same area shortly before this incident. These earlier events would certainly help the Iranians plan their little excursion. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6501555.stm) This little excursion also greatly enhances their "street cred" in the Middle east, which you know means a lot to them.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:07 PM

The commander of HMS Cornwall may have wanted to avoid unnecessary bloodshed, which speaks well of him. So far there has been no bloodshed, as far as we know. Does anyone really think we'd be a whole lot further ahead if there had been?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:11 PM

We don't call the military (or other) personnel of another power "hostages" when we take them prisoner. Has anyone besides me ever noticed that?

When the USA or Britain or Israel take someone from any other country prisoner, our media does not refer to those people as "hostages".

It's a fine example of how our media works to focus and influence hearts and minds, isn't it? ;-)

You need your program to keep you informed at all times who the good guys and bad guys are, so you know when to boo and when to cheer and when to call for blood. Just like in pro wrestling.

What the Iranians do is like what we do. They don't call people they arrest "hostages". We don't call people we arrest "hostages". It's the same self-serving rhetoric on all sides, as far as I can see. Everyone thinks it's the other guy who is in the wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:13 PM

(I ~think~ Lambert ordered the boarding party to surrender.)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:16 PM

No of course not meself, but when you get people like dianavan potificating about Iran, then obviously us Brits are going to get pissed off with people like him/her. Even maybe the Americans.

Dianavan, wake up and realise the enormity of what Iran has done. Stop taunting and get sensible.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:19 PM

You might be right, LH, unless the Iranians, as alleged, intentionally violated international law, in which case hostages becomes a more accurate term than "arrestees." We don't know the truth (or the applicable law) yet. That's why Russia's "we just can't tell what the fats are" position is so frustrating.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:20 PM

You're right, Peace, it's Ahmadinejad. I knew my spelling didn't look right. But I expect, and I hope, that your predictions of bloody conflict over this so soon are too pessimistic. There are still many possibilities of real diplomacy getting the sailors released, unharmed.

I'd still like to know what, aside from Bush's pride, prevents an exchange of the Iranians taken in Iraq for the sailors taken by the Iranians.

And anybody who says that would be rewarding aggression is invited to propose a better solution.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:21 PM

Oh, Villan, you know the yanks are just chomping at the bit. Every moment of restraint is to their great credit.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:27 PM

"Everyone thinks it's the other guy who is in the wrong. "

In this case, LH, the other guy IS wrong. The Iranians arrested 15 people with whom they are not at war. They refuse to return them to their country of origin. They are using those people as chips in a poker game. What other word works? Involuntary guests of the Iranian state? If that makes it sound better, OK. But it don't change the situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:27 PM

Yes indeed heric.

Iran and dianavan are taunting everybody, but they will get their come uppence.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:31 PM

There will never be any way of proving to everyone's satisfaction whether or not the Iranians violated international law. It will remain merely a matter of opinion.

The Iranians think the USA violated international law when arresting some of their people a while back. It's all a matter of opinion.

There is absolutely no point in killing a few hundred thousand more people over this latest incident, but I'm sure that doesn't worry whoever would like to have a war over there. War is always good business for somebody.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:33 PM

"No of course not meself, but when you get people like dianavan potificating about Iran, ... "

My remark was primarily a response to dianavan's quote to the effect that the order to surrender was some kind of a sign of weakness on the part of the commander and by extension the British navy. At least, that seemed the implication to me ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:38 PM

dianavan used to make my blood boil at times, too. That was before I met the person who writes under that nom de plume, who is a first class person of character. Our problem now is that the Brits let the US administration get away with too much lying, too recently. It is unfortunate, for exactly this reason and the type of situation we have here.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:43 PM

I disagree with you, LH, that countries should not attempt to devise international protocols and laws. Many more people are likely to die without them than with them.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 03:45 PM

Ron, I have to google his name every time I need to use it. Asshole would work, but then people might think I'm talking about Bush and it would get confusing at that point.

LH, I agree that a war over this makes no sense, but what you or I think in that regard means bugger all. Right now the Iranians are making no sense. They have arrested 15 people. If it's an arrest, what are the charges and when is the trial? If it isn't an arrest, what the hell is it? The UK is not at war with Iran and neither is Iraq. The fact the arrested people are in the military but are not at war means they fall outside the Geneva protocols regarding prisoners of war. If that is so then they should be treated as civilians and have to face Iranian criminal law. But you and I both know it's not about law. It is about Iran using 15 people to make a point. Hell, if that had been me making the arrest, I would have taken the captured crew to a police station, charged them with trespassing, called the press, made an issue of it and then asked the jude to give them a sentence of 'time served' and requested that the UK send a boat to take back their people along with a note that read, ". . .and don't friggin' do it again!" But this is not about law or right. It is about Iran pushing a limit. As I said, I think they can get one more week out of it before stuff begins to happen. Do I hope stuff happens? Absolutely not. But please don't propose in this instance that Iran is righteous. Too much militates against that position.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:15 PM

Well this is the latest. What a load of b******s

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1258488,00.html

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Old Grizzly
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:16 PM

That's the last time they give the girl the map

D

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:19 PM

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:30 PM

"our brave border guards who followed the path of the martyrs"?! Proves he's lying - there are no paths on the open sea. Even I know that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:35 PM

http://www.news.com.au/sundayheraldsun/story/0,,21471083-663,00.html

Dianavan, to make a change from BBC, here is the biggest selling Australian paper to tell you that the Indian ship's crew confirm the British version of events.
Who said that the GPS stopped working? The iranians broke the link to the Cornwall and all contact was lost, inculuding their GPS feedback.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:44 PM

heric - "That was before I met the person who writes under that nom de plume, who is a first class person of character."

Thanks, but now you have blown my cover, I'm blushing.

I'd agree with Ron - What, besides pride, prevents an apology or a hostage exchange?

Its time like this that masculine ego infuriates me. Why not just swallow your pride and get everyone home safely instead of getting your feathers ruffled and starting a war? Finger pointing never solves anything. Accepting your part of the problem goes a long way toward arriving at a solution. Lets face it, Britain can hardly be called an innocent victim.

btw - Iranians are not "my friends". I would hate to live under the Mullahs or Arabian Politicians. I do, however, admire Persian culture, especially their scholarship. I actually think that they are much more advanced in their military strategies and tactics. They make the west look like bumbling idiots. Thats what I mean when I say, be careful when you play with the big boys.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 04:50 PM

"Its time like this that masculine ego infuriates me."

Margaret Thatcher who odered the Falkland War to begin was not a guy. That remark is uncalled for, IMO, and has nothing to do with the situation. Two of the guys being held have apologized. So did the gal. Why is it a testosterone issue to you? SSDD.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:01 PM

If the Iranians are not your friends, why are you so insistant that they are in the right. have they got you under guard as well ?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:03 PM

...because I think women generally solve problems differently and because they do not let testosterone govern their thinking. This is clearly a territorial dispute and the leaders of both countries are handling it like the male species in the wild. Its all about pride and territory. A woman from Iraq and a woman from Iran and would solve this in a minute. The children would be returned to their mother one way or another.

Thatcher is woman???

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:13 PM

Tony Blair and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are men?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:21 PM

"A woman from Iraq and a woman from Iran and would solve this in a minute."

Not sure what the woman from Iraq has to do with it ... but anyway, I'm reminded of the closing line of The Sun Also Rises: 'Yes, isn't it pretty to think so?'

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:38 PM

heric - I am not suggesting that countries should not attempt to devise international protocols and laws. I am suggesting that this situation is not worth starting a war over. Period.

You'll recall that the Israelis went to war awhile back, ostensibly over the kidnapping of 2 Israeli soldiers. Well, that resulted in the deaths of several thousand people in Lebanon (and some more in Israel), about 160 more Israeli soldiers in combat, and the destruction of a lot of property on both sides of the line, and it did not achieve any of its objectives, and they did not get back the 2 Israeli soldiers.

A big mess, in other words. A lot of people lost loved ones for absolutely nothing.

What could happen now because of the arrest and detention of a handful of British sailors by Iran would be a far bigger mess. I'm advising against that. I'm saying not to fight over it.

Peace - I am not particularly suggesting that the Iranians are righteous. ;-) (I'm sure they think they are righteous, but I am not suggesting they are.) You say that it is about Iran using 15 people to make a point. Yeah, that's right. Best not to overreact to their point, in my opinion. They would be smart not to start a war. We would likewise be smart not to start a war.

Of course, you or I can't do diddly about it, can we? It's not our decision.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 05:54 PM

True, LH. The problem with increased tensions is that people and countries cross lines and often there is NO way back. The old saying: It's easy to grab a raccoon by the tail. But then ya need ten people to help you let it go. One day the brinksman/womanship will take the world to the edge, and the good fortune of 1962 will no longer be with us all. Makes a guy want to sing, because there's jack-all else a guy can do.


Oh, you playboys an' playgirls
Ain't a-gonna run my world
Ain't a-gonna run my world
Ain't a-gonna run my world
You playboys an' playgirls
Ain't a-gonna run my world
Not now or no other time.


I first learned that song from Gil Turner. After all these years and all these wars, a guy'd think we'd know better by now. Fuck, I really wish I took drugs.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 06:16 PM

You guys are beating your heads against a wall. Dianavan is the type that would have justified the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor as having been made in self defense because the US had no business installing a base that close to Tokyo.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 06:19 PM

>>heric - I am not suggesting that countries should not attempt to devise international protocols and laws. I am suggesting that this situation is not worth starting a war over. Period.<<

Okay then. Nothing to talk about.

I did, however, see you write this:

>>What the Iranians do is like what we do. They don't call people they arrest "hostages". We don't call people we arrest "hostages". It's the same self-serving rhetoric on all sides, as far as I can see. Everyone thinks it's the other guy who is in the wrong. <<

If Americans made a military incursion across the border to "arrest" some lumber executives for price-fixing or something, then held them in Guantanamo pending lumber tarriff negotiations, I don't think you would say "It's all the same, arrest/kidnap, potatoe/potahto."

dianavan: Yes, I'm sorry and I regretted it afterward. You ARE an antagonistic b**ch. No one could fake it like that. I don't know what got into me.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 06:21 PM

"Brinkswomanship"? Hey, I'm pretty liberal but you've gotta draw the line somewhere ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 06:50 PM

I'm saying, heric, that when a country does something like detain some sailors or soldiers from another country in a border area, they always say that they were justified because the other guys were trespassing. The Iranians in the actual incident probably fully believed the British were trespassing. It may have been an error...by the British...or by the Iranians. If so, neither one will want to admit publicly that they made an error. This sort of thing happens. People's pride gets in the way of finding agreement, just like it does on this forum in these discussions.

And you and I are in no position to decide who made an error or who is lying, are we?

Accordingly, I see no particular reason to take political sides in the matter.

When I was saying was that when we take people prisoner they are not called "hostages" by the media. I was just pointing out a peculiarity of human psychology...because one person's hostage can be another person's legitimate prisoner when it comes to politics. It just depends whose story you believe, that's all. Our media will NEVER call a bunch of Iranians that we take prisoner "hostages" (whether they truly are or not).

That's what I was drawing notice to. Certain words are used in the media to charge people up and get them mad. "Hostages" is one such word. It's not necessarily an appropriate word in this case, because this is a squabble over a purported border violation.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 07:06 PM

This has all got all got way out of hand.

One - It would never have happened in Thatchers day.

Now - I would demand that the Iranian Government within 24 hours releases our servicemen and return their equipment full and intact. I would call on the United nations to back up that demand, because the ONLY reason that those British sailors were there in first place was because they were backing up a United Nations Security Council resolution. Failure to comply would mean that a state of war exists between the the sovereign State of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and the sovereign State of Iran. To all of those who have started to laugh, consider this, the UK is perfectly capable of waging this war Iran is not. This is the tight-rope that Iran knowingly treads. The basic fact remains that should the shit hit the fan, the most that Iran can do is is kill 15 British Servicemen, Britain on the otherhand can obliterate the whole of Iran - Their call.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 07:15 PM

Those thousands of dead Iranians would be great consolation to the parents of the fifteen dead seamen, I'm sure ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 07:35 PM

I noticed that when the suggestion that the US might offer to release the five Iranians it arrested in exchange for the sailors, the sailors were referred to as captives rather than hostages. Presumably to avoid referring to the Iranians who've been banged up by the Americans as "hostages".

There's no reason to think that the Iranians are at all likely to kill the sailors. Their biggest risk is being killed in some daft rescue attempt or military reprisal, in yet another variety of death by "friendly fire".

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 07:43 PM

Don't Attack Iran! Release the Sailors!
The seizure of the British sailors by the Iranian navy is a deliberate piece of coat-trailing by the Iranian regime. They are flexing their muscles.

That they feel safe in doing that is one measure of the weakening of the USA as a results of its setbacks in Iraq and Afghanistan, and those wars' byproduct of a comparative strengthening of Iran, which now has dominant influence in western Afghanistan and southern Iraq.

We have no idea whether or not the British ship was in Iranian waters. If it was, it shouldn't have been. No matter how far inside Iranian waters they were, the ship could hardly have posed a threat to Iran.

Teheran had, and has, a choice about making an "incident" out of it.

Not very long ago the prospect of a US attack on Iran seemed to loom very large. That the Iranians have chosen to make an "international incident" out of this episode, indicates the comparative strength they now feel against America and Britain, weakened by events in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is, however, possible that the clerical fascists who rule Iran have miscalculated. The Bush regime is capable of responding with air raids, if not, for now, with an invasion. We should strongly oppose such attacks.

The USA is bogged down in Irag and Afghanistan. When it got bogged down in Vietnam, in 1970, America struck out wildly at neighbouring Cambodia, which was a base for their Vietnamese opponents.

They bombed Cambodia "into the stone age".

Bush and his gang may calculate that a "strong" response to Iran now would help them overcome Bush's opponents in the US Congress, who have just voted to set a one-year deadline for US withdrawal from Iraq.

The religion-crazed Christian fundamentalist US President and his entourage, and the religion-crazed Islamic clerical fascists who run Iran, are equally capable of wild and irresponsible deeds.

No socialist should have any sympathy with the Iranian regime, which has sparked this crisis, just because their enemy is George Bush and the American state.

This is a brutal and reactionary regime, which has recently rounded up and jailed hundreds of teachers — the exact number is not known — for daring to go on strike.

We oppose attacks on Iran because of our solidarity with the peoples of Iran, not because of any solidarity with the Iranian regime.

No to an attack on Iran! No to the clerical-fascist regime!


That is from here.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 08:35 PM

" . . . an Islamic headscarf as she told Iranian television, 'Obviously we trespassed into their waters. They were very friendly people.'"

I can't get this out of my head. It must sound ridiculous no matter what language it is translated into. This is not a language issue. It makes the Iranians in charge seem cartoonishly stupid, or cleverly cruel as they enjoy something that can only be intended as humiliation.

Of course the Iranian people are not, as a whole, cartoonishly stupid.

Now might be a good time to rent some excellent Iranian DVD's, such as Children of Heaven

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 08:54 PM

The bastards can afford to pay terrorists and try to create fissionable material. This is Iran today. The civilized and peaceful people some of you laud. The ones who know juuuuusssst where the Brits were.

"Iran - Teachers' Norouz Present. This Year....."Brutal Crackdown"
Mar 21, 2007

The authorities in Iran have arrested up to 1,000 teachers in a brutal crackdown that signals their determination to break a pay revolt. Riot police beat demonstrators with batons as they tried to gather outside Iran's parliament and education ministry and herded them into police vans and buses before transporting them to detention centres across Tehran."

That is from this site.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 08:57 PM

"You ARE an antagonistic b**ch. No one could fake it like that."

Thanks, heric. I have now been redeemed. I must admit I enjoy being anonyomous on the internet because I can, in fact, say things that I would never say face to face. Men have several methods of silencing women when women say things men don't want to hear.

I don't want a war over this any more than anyone else. In this case, I think that Iran has felt sufficiently threatened in the last year or so to be alarmed by the presence of the British Navy so close to their shores. We see a similar reaction when human beings are bullied and threatened on a personal level. The victim will often let the rage build to a point of boiling over and doing something that is unexpected and it is usually harmful. Do I need to give examples?

There seems to be an inability for many on this forum to be able to put the shoe on the other foot. Do you think Iran has been immune to what is happening in Iraq? Don't you think it would be frightening if a war was raging in the country next to you? Don't you think you would ally yourself with people who shared a common language and religion? Why would you expect anything else?

What I don't want to see is Britain trying to prove they are 'right' by killing and maiming innocent, Iranian citizens. It is so much easier to swallow your pride and negotiate a release than getting all puffed up and starting a war. Whats the point?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:04 PM

"Men have several methods of silencing women when women say things men don't want to hear"

SOME men. And there are women like that, too. You repeatedly attack ALL men because of some you seem to have had a rough time with. Stop hanging around with that kind of men.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:32 PM

I suppose if the British continue to escalate threats they may succeed in getting the 15 sailors and marines killed by an angry mob. I'm surprised that the British haven't pursued a more patient strategy. Does anyone seriously think anything positive will be accomplished by trying to bomb Iran back to the stone age? There don't really seem to be a lot of options here other than patience. Why run the risk of generating more sympathy for Iran from Islamic people all over the world?

Learn something from our (US Coalition of the Willing) brilliant success at regime change in Iraq. We are hardly more loved or respected, within or beyond Iraq, for our efforts over the last 5 years.

I do wish that more of the folks at Mudcat who have had military experience would demonstrate a clearer understanding what can be accomplished by military action. What can be accomplished appears to me to be very little, and much more likely to make things worse.

However, if the Iranian Navy captures one of our lobster boats off the coast of Maine, I'll advocate blowing 'em out of the water!~

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:39 PM

"Men have several methods of silencing women when women say things men don't want to hear"

Can someone tell me just one of those methods? Thanks!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 09:45 PM

Charlie: No one on this thread IS advocating that.

memyself: You have a great sense of humour.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 10:23 PM

Those whose seemingly rational outer demeanour conceals a hidden inner desire for revenge, bloodshed, and mass murder (and such people exist in Iran, Britain, and America, as well as elsewhere, including on this forum) will secretly be quite pleased by this crisis. They will hope it leads to the bloody conflict they secretly desire and that it causes a very high death count among those whom they have labelled as "evil". I hope they are all bitterly disappointed in that expectation, and no conflict happens, and the British sailors are returned none the worse for wear, and life goes on.

But I wouldn't necessarily bet on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 10:31 PM

"bomb Iran back to the stone age"

History says the people of Iran did pretty well then... one of the leading creative world forces...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:09 PM

Hmmm - I do not wish to turn this into a battle of the sexes but I will gladly point out one way men silence women when they express their opinion. "You ARE an antagonistic b**ch." - heric

I will also call your attention to the number of women who dare to enter a discussion such as this. Although not everyone can be identified by sex according to their name, I think you should look at the posting history of this thread. Maybe someone can figure out the appoximate number of women who are able to express their opinion openly without fear of being scoffed at. I am not trying to say that all women hold the same opinion as me but I am saying that not many even dare express themselves, regardless of what they are thinking.

Peace - I know that not all men think alike. Thats a no-brainer. I do think men can easily silence women with words. Some choose to do so, some do not, but I can guarantee that not many women lead with their chin, even on the internet. Why do you think that is?

Anyway if you want to start a thread about this, I will happily go another round. I may not be stronger but I am definitely faster and more agile (hey, maybe thats why I can identify with the Iranians).

Thanks to the internet, for the first time in my life, I can actually speak my mind without fear and you can't shut me up. You can, however, decline to read what I say if you want. Your choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:14 PM

>>You ARE an antagonistic b**ch." - heric<<

?? I thought you were mad at me for saying that you WEREN'T!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:24 PM

Dianavan, I have no wish at all to shut you up. However, I will not leave your consistent attacks on men to go unanswered. You may have your anonymity and all that, but the spreading of stereotypes and innunedo is just a cheap form of racism. You can wrap it up any way you want, but that's what it is.

"Peace - I know that not all men think alike. Thats a no-brainer."

If you mean that then why did you say the following:

"Men have several methods of silencing women when women say things men don't want to hear."

You want to be able to slag men when it's convenient yet be able to claim you are subjected to antagonism from men when a guy responds. Forget it. This type of argument is the same shit I went through with people who harbour hatreds of races and religions. I will have nothing to say to you from now on, but neither will I let posts like that go. Nice speaking with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:24 PM

Well, go figure. I thought we were friends. Maybe we are. ;^} Its impossible to detect your tone of voice. So, just to keep it all on an even keel:

You are a chauvinistic bastard !

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:32 PM

okay that'll work!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: heric
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:41 PM

(sorry about that, bad joke over the internet is all. I do that a lot.) Now let's get back to saving the British Navy.)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 31 Mar 07 - 11:54 PM

"Now let's get back to saving the British Navy"

'Just put it on the mantlepiece'

From the Goons by Spike Milligan...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 02:32 AM

Most men say what they believe to be true. If what you say above, Dianavan, about yourself, is true, it seems that you don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 03:14 AM

Richard - I have no idea what you are talking about. A specific quote would help.

Anyway - It looks as though Iran has offerred Britain an easy way out. Obviously Iran knows how to compromise, lets see if Britain can do the same.

"The Foreign Office also confirmed it had replied to a letter from Iran's Foreign Ministry. The Iranian letter did not ask for an apology, only a future "guarantee" not to enter Iranian waters. The British reply was apparently aimed at seeing whether that might provide a window for a diplomatic solution."

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news/&articleid=303503

I think thats pretty generous, considering this bit of information:

"...Craig Murray, a former British diplomat and Foreign Office specialist on maritime affairs, said, "There is no agreed maritime boundary between Iraq and Iran in the Persian Gulf. Until the current mad propaganda exercise of the last week, nobody would have found that in the least a controversial statement."

"In postings on his Web site, www.craigmurray.co.uk, Mr. Murray referred to charts shown by the Royal Navy to reinforce its argument, saying: "The Iran-Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British government."

Britain should have done the right thing and negotiated directly with Iran from the beginning. Instead Blair goes running to the U.N., the E.U. and big daddy in the U.S. He makes himself look very weak and totally inept as a leader.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 03:41 AM

Charley,
"
I suppose if the British continue to escalate threats they may succeed in"
Britain has made no threats at all, and never even implied the use of other than peaceful means.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 05:41 AM

I heard on The ABC news that Iran had already charged the 15 with spying. The month of March had not yet finished at that time...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 07:51 AM

Dianavan, we have discussed the uncertainty of the line before.
It may not be something that either side would agree to draw on a map, butfor practical day to day purposes an unofficially agreed demarcation is kept to.
The Navy has been operating here for years now.
The Iranians have never before made a challenge or even a complaint.
It is not the Navy who started to make a big issue over where the line is.
The Iranians suddenly decreed that the boats had crossed the invisible line on the water and also suddenly felt so strongly about it that they captuerd boats and crew at gun point.
They also initially got the location wrong, or more likely right.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 08:06 AM

Three weeks ago Iran had a strike involving over 100,000 people. Their economy is a mess and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's leadership is on the block. There are factions in Iran jockeying to take his place. So why does an incident that can 'take the minds of the folks at home' off the domestic crisis not come as a surprise? The whole thing is a trumped-up issue that will unite the people of Iran against a common enemy and allow their thoughts to stay off the crap economy and idiotic leadership in their everyday lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 08:23 AM

Qassem Soleimani and Ali Khamenei. Names to remember.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 08:27 AM

Suleimani, pardon me all to hell and back.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 11:05 AM

Peace--

I certainly agree with you. In fact that's what I said 30 Mar 11:28 PM.

The incident is transparently an attempt by the regime to take Iranians' minds off their own troubles, try to make them forget about their discontent with their own leader, and provide an obvious common enemy--while visibly attaining the upper hand over that enemy.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 11:17 AM

Then I agree with you, Ron.

The whole thing is just too, too, too, uh, pat.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 11:27 AM

I also mentioned the usefulness to the regime of a distraction--31 Mar 12:35 AM. I think Peace has it precisely right.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 11:33 AM

In fact it's exactly the same thing that Bush did it in attacking Iraq. The irony for Bush is that he actually was in better shape with the US electorate than he thought--there was widespread support for the attack on Afghanistan--even in the world at large. He just thought he'd extend his reputation as a conquering hero (in his mind). But somehow it appears to not have worked out.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 11:34 AM

"did in attacking"

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 11:39 AM

Keith-

I must have misinterpreted what Blair meant by saying that if the the seizure of the British marines and sailors was not resolved quickly that things would "move to a different phase." British is not my native language, and some of its nuances escape me.

I do agree with Peace and Ron with regard to what triggered this incident.

I'm just concerned that the British don't reinforce the power of the Iranians who have engineered this "crisis."

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 11:41 AM

"Obviously Iran knows how to compromise"

!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 01:16 PM

Charley, he was asked what he meant by that at the time, and he said that he meant releasing the evidence he had, which turned out to be the Iranian's error of location, and the GPS location of the merchant ship.
Also the new phase turned out to mean approaching UN and EU.
There really have been no threats to use other than peaceful means. Some of our newspapers have attacked him for being weak and pusilanimous over this.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 01:20 PM

I also agree that this was a PR stunt for the Iranian army and Ahmadinejad. Those phony confessions and the videos were made for Iranian audiences. I hope a diplomatic solution can be found.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 01:41 PM

Wow. Now I am with you Dianavan.

Big kisses :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 01:42 PM

Unhand that woman, you cad!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Rasener
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 01:48 PM

Not till I have done my dastardly deed!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 02:19 PM

Keith, Blair had no evidence at all.

"But what about the map the Ministry of Defence produced on Tuesday, with territorial boundaries set out by a clear red line, and the co-ordinates of the incident marked in relation to it?

I have news for you. Those boundaries are fake. They were drawn up by the MoD. They are not agreed or recognised by any international authority."



http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23391078-details/How+I+know+Blair+faked+Iran+map/article.do

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 02:19 PM

Um ... what about it?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 02:38 PM

"One thing for certain, Iranian 'honour' is not something to take lightly"

If Iranians had the slightest trace of honour they would not allow themselves to be led by a band of religious-lunatic arseholes, in turn led by a scruffy, unkempt, lying, religious-lunatic arsehole, towards a nuclear arms race which they can only lose by.

The commander of HMS Cornwall acted to orders, Dianavan. The British Navy does NOT run about like a band of wild-west cowboys, firing off rounds at anything that moves. They are a highly-trained and disciplined force. His reaction during the incident was governed by standing orders which take into account the politics at play out there at the moment, and by a very high level of training. Your comments suggesting that he somehow failed show how little grasp you have of what really goes on, and how easy it is to be a smart-arse when you're sitting safely and comfortably out of harm's way in British Columbia.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 02:47 PM

Cross-posting: my "what about it?" was in response to GUESTBob's comment.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 02:50 PM

"One thing for certain, Iranian 'honour' is not something to take lightly"

I hope somewhere some Arab is saying, "British 'honour' is not something to take lightly" ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 02:52 PM

I hope that they're both at least thinking,,,,,,,,,of each other. I'm not betting on it though.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:19 PM

I hope the chained and hooded Brits are soon released it is so humiliating, only uncivilised nations use such cruel methods.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:30 PM

Yes we have that little problem, too, in addition to the lying. God damn the neocons.

But remember the last ones held were subjected to repeated mock executions. It's not necessarily just a funny scarf and silly scripts.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:46 PM

Insanity: Doing what you've always done and thinking you'll get different results.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ebbie
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 04:49 PM

"I think you should look at the posting history of this thread. Maybe someone can figure out the appoximate number of women who are able to express their opinion openly without fear of being scoffed at. I am not trying to say that all women hold the same opinion as me but I am saying that not many even dare express themselves, regardless of what they are thinking." dianavan

I wouldn't read too much into it, dianavan. I, like perhaps other women, am reading and thinking about this. I don't know enough factual things about the situation, and I'd rather not conjecture from a position of ignorance. When I know what I'm talking about, being scoffed at- by either men or women - doesn't worry me.

As for being "anonymous", it seems to me that you are operating out of fear.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 05:58 PM

I should have said, Iranian pride instead of Iranian 'honour". Two different things, really. Iranian pride is part of their cultural identity.

Ebbie, don't be so catty. I'm not operating 'out of fear'. Don't presume to know what motivates me. I am saying that I would be too intimidated to enter a political discussion with men face to face or to express disagreement.

If you have something to contribute to the thread, please do so. Otherwise, I'd prefer a PM.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 06:04 PM

"Iranian pride is part of their cultural identity. "

Pride is part of everyone's cultural identity.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ebbie
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 06:14 PM

Anything posted publicly can be responded to publicly.

There's nothing wrong with fear. At times it keeps one alive.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 06:18 PM

Err- have a short think. If there are no agreed boundaries, then the UK forces could not have been on the wrong side of the boundary, and the Iranian attempt to assert a boundary is a matter of illegitimate territorial aggrandisement.

If there are boundaries (revert to usual stuff about Sat-nav)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 06:26 PM

"I hope the chained and hooded Brits are soon released it is so humiliating, only uncivilised nations use such cruel methods. "

However it seems perfectly acceptable to the Yanks when they do it to others...

Oh, I see, you mean...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: folk1e
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 06:30 PM

now now boys........

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 07:12 PM

Peace - Of course you're right. Pride is part of everyone's cultural identity (hopefully) but for Persian's it HUGE.

Ebbie - I know there is nothing wrong with fear. It is not, however, what motivates me. If you want to discuss this further, either PM me or start a separate thread on the subject.

Richard - Thats right. Read the article. There are no internationally recognized boundaries. I would guess, however, that the locals (Iran and Iraq) do have a working knowlege of the boundaries. Britain, on the other hand, is not local. Why were the Brits sent to patrol waters that were in dispute? Why does Britain think that they get to establish the boundaries?

I wouldn't doubt that Iran created this situation just so that Iraq and Iran could settle the question once and for all. With the threat of an invasion looming, its probably a good thing to have it absolutely clear. After all, Iran will want to protect its borders.

Lets hope that internationally recognized boundaries will be established, Britain will agree not to cross those boundaries and that the hostages will be returned shortly.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 07:21 PM

"However it seems perfectly acceptable to the Yanks when they do it to others..."

Perfectly acceptable to the Bush Administration, one might clarify, and they have few qualms about hiring other countries to do what they do not have the stomach to do.

Such comparisons are likely to reflect well on the current treatment of the British detainees by the Iranians who control them. Perhaps it's better to simply refer to the Iranians as "arseholes" as Strolling Johnny does above and forget about what the Bush Administration does.

Leave no stone unthrown in this debate!

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 07:27 PM

"Pride is part of everyone's cultural identity (hopefully) but for Persian's it HUGE."

So what? It's not like the Brits are renowned for their humility ... Iran - well, really, the Republican Guards, we shouldn't drag the rest of the unfortunate citizens of that unfortunate country into this - should have thought about their country's precious pride before they made it look like so ridiculous and petty in front of the world ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 07:38 PM

The bastards can afford to pay terrorists and try to create fissionable material.

Just like us in fact... But on a rather smaller scale.

And they don't seem to treat their captives in the same imaginative ways   developed in places like Abu Ghaib and Guantanamo Bay.

Of course that doesn't mean the Iranian captors don't fall far short of decent behaviour. Just not quite so far short as some other people.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 08:31 PM

So, DV, if you accept that if either the UK personnel were on the right side of a line, or there is no agreed line, then Iran is wrong. It is only if there is an agreed line and the UK were the wrong side of it that the UK is wrong. Capish?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 09:27 PM

Not exactly, Richard.

Iran may have been acting upon what they (and the Iraqis) believed to be the boundary - or at least one that has been respected by both countries. Its called local knowlege. The Brits appeared on the scene and they made their own map and decided where they thought they boundary was without international consensus. I doubt if the Brits bothered to consult with Iran regarding the boundary, either.

For Blair to state, in the boldest of terms, that he was absolutely right was more than political posturing, it was a bold face lie.

Iran could have detained the sailors and let them go with a warning but Blair (instead of negotiating their return) created an international incident out of it which put Iran in an uncompromising position. In other words, if Blair was going to make a big deal out of it by running to the U.N., the E.U. and the U.S., Iran may have decided to keep the sailors until the question of the boundary was settled once and for all.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 09:58 PM

You talk as if all the Iranians can do is respond to the evil British. In fact, it should be very easy for them to release the sailors AND save face - they've already broadcast images of them "confessing"; all they need to do is release them and make some kind of grandiose, insulting statement, and the matter will be over. Obviously, whoever is holding the sailors wants to prolong the crisis, possibly for reasons of domestic politics.

As to Blair "running to the U.N., the E.U. and the U.S." - we have no idea what's going on behind the scenes. Blair's activities may well be the visible part of a tactical scheme that is not being advertised.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Apr 07 - 10:30 PM

We've been discussing this as if the boundary was clear cut and as if incidents such as this had never happened before. The Brits know full well that the Shatt al-arab is a very sensitive issue. Saddam tore up the 1975 agreement and went to war with Iran for control of the Shatt al-arab. Since then, there has been no agreement regarding this waterway and, in fact, Iranians have fiercely defended it. Its not as if Britain was unaware of this. Its happened before.

"Following eight years of inconclusive warfare, the issue of the border in the waterway remained unresolved, hence Iran's determination to punish any breach, real or imagined. As a result Iran retains a strong military and naval presence in the area and is prepared to use them. Ever since the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and subsequent occupation of the southern area by coalition forces, British patrols have reported that they regularly come under attack from Iranian forces while using the waterway."

http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.1284398.0.0.php

"The arrests of the eight British sailors in 2004 was a "very symbolic act," Charles Tripp, a Middle East specialist at the University of London, told Associated Press at the time. "It is a very sensitive border for which three-quarters of a million Iranians died."

The eight British servicemen were blindfolded and paraded on Iran's state-run television, which was seen as a powerful message to pro-Western Arab states such as the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, proof that Iran could flex its muscles against a powerful western nations such as Britain.

Iran later denied London's allegation that it forced the eight servicemen into its territorial waters and then detained them in a premeditated show of force."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070323.wbritprev0323/BNStory/Front

In 2004 it only took 3 days of direct negotiation with Iran to secure the release of the sailors. Why was it that this time Britain seemed to be incapable of negotiating a release? Blair went to the U.N. and the E.U. and the U.S. seeking help. Why? Was he trying to find an excuse to go to war?

I'm very glad that the U.N. and the E.U. were not fooled into backing an invasion. Whats worse is that Blair and Bush were probably in this together. I hope Iran can prevent a war and hold the warmongers at arms length until they have the ability to defend their country.

...and some of you can see no reason why Iran would feel threatened? Give your head a shake.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 02:22 AM

"Leave no stone unthrown in this debate!"

I think you meant "Leave no stone unthrown in this debacle!"

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 02:40 AM

So, DV, if you re-read what you said, you say it is OK for Iran unilaterally to declare a border (which, as it happens, it seems they actually hadn't despite their squabbling), but not the British. That is an unacceptable double standard.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 02:59 AM

"it is OK for Iran unilaterally to declare a border, but not the British. "

So... it is OK for The British unilaterally to declare a border, but not Iran.

So... it is OK for The US unilaterally to declare a border, but not Iran.

So... it is OK for Iran unilaterally to declare a border, but not The US.

So... it is OK for Blind Freddie unilaterally to declare ...

I'm getting dizzy here...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 03:31 AM

I don't know nuttin' about the water borders off Iran. I do know that very often a country - and sometimes a state- claims sovereignty in the ocean beyond what its neighbors and other powers allow, whether it's three miles, 12 miles or 20.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 04:04 AM

Dianavan
You have recently been making much of the "fact" that no recognised border exists.
Dianavan,the line of the border has played no part in this dispute.
The maps produced by BOTH sides do actualy show the SAME border!
All the dispute has been about which side of that AGREED border events took place.
The initial co ordinates given by Iran were on the Iraqi side of the agreed line.
When that was pointed out, they changed the co ordinates and not the line.
The mischief making pundits and experts on international boundaries ignore the fact that in the absence of a treaty, a practical day to day agreement has to be made or you will have a battle every day.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 05:53 AM

Off line till after Easter.
Best wishes all.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 07:00 AM

Finally the great President Bush weighed in on the issue.

he said "THe PResident of Britain needs to handle this situation"

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 07:07 AM

Charley - I didn't say that all Iranians are arseholes, just that certain powerful Iranians are Arseholes. I stand by that.

What's clear is that the religious-nutcases that run the show in Iran are absolutely determined to use this incident to 'prove' to the ordinary people of Iran who live in abject fear of them just how 'powerful' they are. They will continue to lie through their teeth until they've wrung the last ounce of profit from what was, and should have been treated as, a very minor incident.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 08:31 AM

Strollin' Johnny-

Claification accepted and apologies offered in return.

What you were saying "...led by a band of religious-lunatic arseholes, in turn led by a scruffy, unkempt, lying, religious-lunatic arsehole..." still seems to me like an undiplomatic jinguistic statement but it may be an accurate one. But none of us, that I'm aware of, holds diplomatic credentials. Let the shit fly!

Back in the 19th century the U.S. sent soldiers ashore onto a disputed island in Puget Sound, a dispute generated in part by the shooting of a pig. The U.S. forces were led by a former Confederate officier who had led a dramatically unsuccessful charge at the Battle of Gettysbug in our uncivil war. The British sent in major naval units from neighboring Victoria but before the island (or the fleet) was blown to bits cooler heads managed to achieve a compromise. Hopefully a settlement will be achieved in the above incident, the British soldiers and sailors appropriately court martialed for being sensible rather than maintaining the traditional stiff upper lip.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 08:36 AM

Oh, here's a link to the "Pig War of Puget Sound" for those who are willing to be distracted from the current debate: Click at Your Own Risk!

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 09:05 AM

The laeder of the free world went on to call the UK marines "hostages" which was a word that the "president" of the UK was trying to avoid.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 09:09 AM

Whoops, I see that "The Pig War" took place in 1859 before our uncivil war, which would make Captain Pickett a future Confederate officier, not a former one. Sorry for any confusion.

The U.S. general in command by the way was the apparent "arsehole" in this dispute and was later shifted away from the Pacific Northwest to the St. Louis, Missouri, area where he kept inventory for the army stockyard there; he retired in 1863 after not being offered a "fighting" command.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 12:36 PM

Strollin' Johnny -

I don't think its the "religous nutcases" in Iran who are running this show - its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Revolutionary Guard. The Mullahs don't always agree with each other or with Ahmadinejad and we don't really know where they stand at this time. I don't think you can pin this on the Mullahs. Ahmadinejad is the radical, even by Iranian standards.

Yes, it was a minor incident but Blair backed Ahmadinejad into a corner by seeking international support - that transformed it to a major incident. Blair should have negotiated with Iran directly like in the past.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: bobad
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 01:05 PM

On this morning's CBC radio program The Current, a reporter being interviewed in Tehran said that Ahmadinejad had no real power, that he was just a loud mouth and troublemaker.

You can hear it here.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Amos
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 01:23 PM

Inside view from an Iranian-US citizenr ecently returned from a viit to family in Tehran:

1. The economy is a madhouse with individual eggs selling for $20, although gas is cheap at $1/gal.
2. No-one seems to have any faith in the President or his government.
3. There is no unity of voice or decision and no central decision authority between President, Ayatollah, Prime Minister and other branches. So they woffle and dispute and contradict each other a lot.
4. The city is terrorized by crime with multiple doors on every home and poeple taking their sereos out of their cars even if just going away for an hour, for fear the car will be stripped on their return.
5. He says as far as he can see the hunger is wide spread and not limited to Tehran.

It does sound like this is a powerful nation standing up to the bullying of the international community to me.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 02:30 PM

Amos - Do you mean it does or doesn't sound like a powerful govt.?

bobad - I think Ahmadinejad is on his way out but I don't think that it will change the theocracy. Regardless, the boundary issue has to be resolved. If you listen to Scofield on that same link, he gives a good explanation of why the boundary is in dispute.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Amos
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 02:32 PM

Sorry - I meant this does NOT sound like a powerful government, rather a confused and squabbling one.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 03:34 PM

Iranian diplomat: No need to try Britons By NASSER KARIMI
44 minutes ago



TEHRAN, Iran -       Iran's chief international negotiator on Monday called for an end to "the language of force" in the dispute over 15 British sailors captured in contested waters of the Persian Gulf and said there was no need to put the crew on trial.

ADVERTISEMENT

The comments from Ali Larijani, who last week had suggested that the crew "may face a legal path," came as both Iran and Britain appeared to be seeking a way to soften their approach to the dispute. Earlier Monday, Iranian state radio said there would be no more broadcasts of the detained crew, though it said all 15 captive Britons had admitted illegally entering Iranian waters.

And in London, an official said Britain had agreed to consider discussing with Iran how to avoid future disputes over contested waters in the Persian Gulf. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the dispute.

Larijani said his country's priority "is to solve the problem through proper diplomatic channels."

"We are not interested in letting this issue get further complicated," he told Britain's Channel 4 television news. "We definitely believe that this issue can be resolved and there is no need for any trial."

Britain contends the sailors were in Iraqi waters, however, and has refused Iranian demands for an apology. It has also criticized the airing of footage of four of the sailors confessing so far, saying the statements appeared coerced and the broadcasting of captured military personnel violated international norms.

Larijani, the top Iranian negotiator in all his country's foreign dealings, had suggested last week that the eight sailors and seven marines might be put on trial. Iranian television has aired footage of several of the crew members appearing to admit that they trespassed in Iraqi waters.

Larijani called for all involved to stop using "the language of force."

"There is a difference of view between the UK government and the Iranian government, and this issue should be resolved bilaterally," he said.

On Britain's part, "a guarantee must be given that such violation will not be repeated," he added,

Larijani also called for a delegation "to review the case, to clarify the case, first of all — to clarify whether they have been in our territorial waters at all." He did not say who might be in such a delegation.

"Through sensationalism, you cannot solve the problem," he said.

In video Sunday, the captives appeared on the state-run Arabic-language TV channel Al-Alam in separate clips, pointing at the same map of the Persian Gulf.

The first sailor, who was identified as Royal Marine Capt. Chris Air, said the Iranians supplied the group with GPS coordinates which he said were "apparently" in Iranian waters.

Air pointed with a pen to a location on the map where he said two boats left a warship of the U.S.-led coalition in       Iraq around 8:30 a.m. on March 23. He said the seven marines and eight navy sailors were captured around 10 a.m.

He said "we were seized apparently at this point here on their maps and on the GPS they've shown us, which is inside Iranian territorial waters."

The second sailor, identified as Lt. Felix Carman, pointed to an area on the map and said that location was where he and the 14 others were arrested.

"I'd like to say to the Iranian people, I can understand why you are so angry about our intrusion into your waters," he said.

Britain has released its own maps and GPS coordinates showing their location to be in Iraqi waters at the time of the capture.

In a letter sent in response to a note from Iranian officials, Britain agreed to consider discussions about how to avoid similar disputes in the future, said the British official. Britain's response — most of which has been kept secret — may have prompted the report Monday from Iran's state-run radio.

British Prime Minister       Tony Blair's spokesman earlier in the day called the broadcast confessions "stage-managed," and said Britain had not changed its demand for the sailors' unconditional release.

The 15 Britons were detained by Iranian naval units on March 23 while patrolling for smugglers as part of a U.N.-mandated force monitoring the Persian Gulf. They were seized by Iranian naval units near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab, a waterway that has long been a disputed dividing line between Iraq and Iran.

Al-Alam broadcast longer videos of the Britons earlier this week, including footage on Friday of captured marine Nathan Thomas Summers apologizing for entering Iranian waters "without permission" and admitting to trespassing in Iranian waters.

Al-Alam also aired video on Wednesday showing Faye Turney, the only woman in the group, wearing a headscarf and saying: "Obviously we trespassed." Iran has also made public three letters purportedly written by Turney. The last letter contained an apology.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 04:40 PM

Thanks for the post, BB.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 04:45 PM

Well, that's an improvement.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 05:00 PM

"...led by a band of religious-lunatic arseholes

That's Iran or the USA?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 05:56 PM

Both.

(We came REAL close in Canada, too, when Stockwell Day was giving it a go. He makes George Bush look like a genius. Thank about that for a sec.)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 09:26 PM

Looks like Blair has been taking lessons in Diplomacy from the US.... now that's a terrifying thought...

It appears that the US _AND_ UK have been Diplomatically outmanoeuvred by Iran.... hehehehehe!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 09:31 PM

Maybe the negotiating teams could settle the whole affair with a wholesome game of chess. No nukes allowed and no cloaked pieces!

Then they could all sit down together for some lamb BBQ and saffron rice.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 10:04 PM

Supposedly the outlines of a deal are now being worked out--source: AP ( I think, the same source as BB's report.)


Proposed deal:

1) All the captives go free.
2) UK says we never apologized.
3) Iran says UK tacitly acknowledged that the border area is in dispute. UK does not deny this.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 10:29 PM

Sounds like a good way for everyone to pretend that honor has been satisfied... I like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 02 Apr 07 - 11:19 PM

Jaw jaw is better than war war.

W Churchill.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 12:59 AM

Congratulations, McGrath.

You got it right when you said, "It wouldn't be hard to come up with a verbal formula which could be interpreted by the British Government as denying any frontier violations while being interpreted by the Iranian Government as accepting that they had happened. The key would be to build the formula round a determination to avoid any such incidents in the future."

You should be a diplomat.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 05:53 AM

He is. Life all becomes quite clear after a certain age...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:02 AM

Meanwhile the Iranians are bringing on-line another 1000 or so centrifuges for their "atoms for peace" program. They should be able to generate enough high level nuclear material within two years to blow their entire country to bits. That would be sad.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:15 AM

"Life all becomes quite clear after a certain age... "


... for some, it's when they reach double digits...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:19 AM

"...led by a band of religious-lunatic arseholes
That's Iran or the USA?"

Both, McG.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 11:07 AM

Iraq official: U.S. pressed to release detained Iranians
POSTED: 9:36 a.m. EDT, April 3, 2007

Story Highlights• Iraq official: Release of Iranians would help free 15 British troops held by Iran
• U.S. has said the five Iranians were providing help, weapons to Shiite militias
• Iraqi official says Iraq helped gain Monday's release of Iranian diplomat
• Official will not say who was holding the Iranian diplomat

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- A senior Iraqi Foreign Ministry official said on Tuesday that the government was "intensively" seeking release of five Iranians detained by the U.S. military more than two months ago in northern Iraq.

"We are intensively seeking the release of the five Iranians," the senior official said.

"This will be a factor that will help in the release of the British sailors and marines" held by Iran since March 25. (Watch signs Iran may be looking for way out of standoff )

The official also said that the Iraqi government had exerted pressure on those holding an Iranian diplomat, who was released Monday and returned to Tehran on Tuesday. The official would not say who had held the diplomat.

The U.S. military has said the five Iranians, who were arrested January 11 in the northern city of Irbil, were part of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard force that provides funds, weapons and training to Shiite militias in Iraq.

Two days after the raid, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said President Bush approved the strategy of raiding Iranian targets in Iraq as part of efforts to confront Tehran.

Iran had insisted that the five detained Iranians were engaged exclusively in consular work.

The Iranian diplomat who was released on Monday was kidnapped in mysterious circumstances two months ago. (Full story)

Iranian authorities reported the release of Jalal Sharafi, the second secretary at the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, and said he would return to Tehran later Tuesday.

An official at the Iranian embassy confirmed Sharafi's release, but said he did not know who was responsible for freeing him.

"He was kidnapped and I don't have further details," said the official, who added Sharafi had already left the country.

"He was released yesterday [Monday]," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity for not being authorized to speak to the media.

Sharafi was seized on February 4 when his car was intercepted by vehicles carrying armed men in the Karradah district of Baghdad. The gunmen, who wore Iraqi uniforms, forced him into one of their vehicles and sped away.

Iran said he had been taken by an Iraqi military unit commanded by the U.S. forces, and said it was holding the Americans responsible for his safety.

The U.S. authorities denied any role in his disappearance.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 01:59 PM

Thanks for that post BB, very interesting.

Seems that if what BB posted is true, that the Iranians are getting back more than a worthless apology & they still hold the 15 sailors to boot.

2nd rate military? The shame of it is the Iranians did it in public, under semi-legal circumstances all the while exposing an illegal kidnapping by ? They now could be seen by the world as being justified in thaier actions, in a tit for tat sot of way.

If that was their ploy, all along, as others here have suggested, then they are far more tactical & tactful than most here have given them credit for.

2nd rate military?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 05:13 PM

"Iraq also says it is lobbying to win the release of five Iranians seized by US forces in January." Financial Times, U.K.

Iraq has always maintained that it doesn't want to get between the U.S. and Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 06:07 PM

So much for the claim that the Iraq government is in charge of things, and the US and co are just there to help out, when the Iraqis have to "lobby" for these people to be released. And, so far, lobby unsuccesfully.

Here is todays's front page story from the Independent: The botched US raid that led to the hostage crisis

Once again the Cockburn Principle applies, as expressed by the late Claude Cockburn, who advised anyone listening to a politician (or to anyone speaking on behalf of a politician) to always be sure to ask themselves "Why is this lying bastard lying to me?".

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 06:22 PM

When push comes to shove in any way other than phusical muscle, the 'American Empire" is eventually gonna fail, because they think they are smarter than they really are.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 06:47 PM

It is also going to fail because its activities are becoming intolerable to a great majority of the world's people.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 07:16 PM

Amen LH... when the benefits are outweighed by the disadvantages, you stop inviting bores and drunks to your parties...



"is eventually gonna fail, because they think they are smarter than they really are. "

I should have really said

When push comes to shove in any way other than physical muscle, the 'American Empire" is eventually gonna fail, because they think they are smarter than everybody else, and also that they are much smarter than they really are.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 07:34 PM

"when the benefits are outweighed by the disadvantages, you stop inviting bores and drunks to your parties..."

Come to think of it, I haven't been invited to any parties in a while ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 07:59 PM

From the article linked by McGrath, in the Independent:

"The US is also reportedly backing Sunni Arab dissidents in Khuzestan in southern Iran who are opposed to the government in Tehran."

Who said that Iran was not being threatened by the U.S. and Britain?

Reading that article made me angrier than I have been since the U.S. invaded Iraq. Who dares to support either Bush or Blair? How incompetent do they have to be?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:01 PM

It's not a case of incompetence, it's a case of misplaced loyalty.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:05 PM

It may be that, but more cogently it's a case of appeasing Saudi Arabia. However, anyone who doesn't realize that dissidents in Iran will be supported by the US just as 'jihadists' in other countries in the Middle East are supported by Iran has no grasp at all on politics in that area of the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:29 PM

But that doesn't stop people waxing indignant about Iran and Hezbollah and so forth. Axis of Terror and all that stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: C. Ham
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:32 PM

Once again the Cockburn Principle applies, as expressed by the late Claude Cockburn, who advised anyone listening to a politician (or to anyone speaking on behalf of a politician) to always be sure to ask themselves "Why is this lying bastard lying to me?".

Yeah, much better to believe the Holocaust-denying Iranian revolutionaries.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Little Hawk
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:35 PM

Why do we have to believe any of them? (on either side, I mean) They are all self-serving and ruthless.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Gulliver
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 08:50 PM

About time the Brits were caught at their dirty tricks. The captured seamen/women have admitted they were in the wrong. Time for Blair & Co to admit the same and then get out of the locality--where they've no right to be...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 09:14 PM

Bush certainly has no grasp on the politics, thats for sure. Read the article McGrath linked.

Bush "... identified Iran and Syria as America's main enemies in Iraq though the four-year-old guerrilla war against US-led forces is being conducted by the strongly anti-Iranian Sunni-Arab community. Mr Jafari himself later complained about US allegations. "So far has there been a single Iranian among suicide bombers in the war-battered country?" he asked. "Almost all who involved in the suicide attacks are from Arab countries."

Its the Sunni-Arabs who are the insurgents in Iraq. Why back the Sunni-Arabs in Iran? He's trying to play two ends against the middle and some people are buying Bushs' attempt to blame Iran. For what? They are not the aggressors. Why would anyone believe anything Bush has to say about Iran or anyone else?

Why do you think it is the Iranians who are funding the terrorists, Peace? What proof do you have? How many terrorists or suicide bombers are Iranian? If you look closely, its probably the Arabs or the Americans who have something to gain, not the Iranians. If you're such an authority on the Middle East, you should learn to differentiate between Arabs and Persians and stop blaming Iran for the problems in the Middle East. Learn to know your enemy.

Why should the Iraqis have to negotiate the release of Iranians kidnapped by the U.S. on their soil? I thought Iraq governed their own country. If Iraq wants them released, that should be the end of it. Let them go.

And get this - If it weren't for the Kurds, we wouldn't know anything about the abductions. Even the kurds like the Iranians more than Americans.

So - O.K., one Iranian has been released. Lets at least see the other four on t.v. so that we know they are not being tortured by the U.S.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 09:15 PM

"But that doesn't stop people waxing indignant about Iran and Hezbollah and so forth."

True. It doesn't and shouldn't. Nor should the USA/Britain be let off the hook. But there is a definite move on this thread to treat the Iranian bastards like they are hard-done-by innocents. Fact is, they have become a very backward people who live under a religious fuckwit. They have a surplus of billions, and their economy is a mess, but they have money to spend on the military. Kinda like the US and the UK. If you intend to call one country crap, you should also be prepared to say the same of the others. (That is not a response to you, Kevin.)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 10:08 PM

"...they have become a very backward people who live under a religious fuckwit."

Thats not a fact but an opinion.

If you were Iranian, you would prefer the Shah?

Seems it was their choice, not yours.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 10:21 PM

I am aware it was their choice. I did not suggest it was my choice. And yes, it was my opinion. And my opinion about it is just as valid as yours. And this guy was enlightened, right?

Go take up your frustrations with someone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Apr 07 - 11:58 PM

By the sounds of it, you're the one who is frustrated.

I can accept your opinion but not when you call it fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 12:27 AM

You shall know them by their sense of humor...

Iranians have arguably the second best sense of humor in the entire middle east.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 12:31 AM

I do not give a rat's ass what you do or don't accept, Dianavan. We will never get along about anything, and I am as glad about that as you are. Goodnight.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 12:32 AM

Peace, whats wrong, you were the most compassionate person a year ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 12:37 AM

No more.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 12:40 AM

Donnel, in light of recent events coming to the surface, I think that what they did was pretty funny too. So whose got the best sense of humor in the middle east? It must be Bush cause it seems that the jokes are always on him or at least always at his expense or maybe Blair's.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 09:25 AM

Just announced on BBC, sailors released , Iran described it as a gift to Britain, George Bush would have preferred the oil-fields.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 09:26 AM

Good news! Can we all agree on that?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 09:28 AM

Better news if they were patrolling the Straits of Dover. Do you all agree?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 10:26 AM

It is good news that they have been released but it is a disgrace that they were captured in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 10:29 AM

Well - yeah, sure. Definitely. But surely we can be allowed a moment to savour our relief at the peaceful resolution of this crisis ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 10:33 AM

(My post was in response to ard's ... although I suppose it's applicable to eanjay's as well ... ).

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 10:41 AM

My post just reflects how I feel about it all since I have not posted to this thread before.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 10:44 AM

....except 23 March 5.20pm and 24 March 11.19am!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 11:08 AM

dianavan,

You state:

"Why should the Iraqis have to negotiate the release of Iranians kidnapped by the U.S. on their soil? I thought Iraq governed their own country. If Iraq wants them released, that should be the end of it. Let them go.

And get this - If it weren't for the Kurds, we wouldn't know anything about the abductions. Even the kurds like the Iranians more than Americans."


The post I made stated:

"BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- A senior Iraqi Foreign Ministry official said on Tuesday that the government was "intensively" seeking release of five Iranians detained by the U.S. military more than two months ago in northern Iraq.

"We are intensively seeking the release of the five Iranians," the senior official said.

"This will be a factor that will help in the release of the British sailors and marines" held by Iran since March 25. (Watch signs Iran may be looking for way out of standoff )

The official also said that the Iraqi government had exerted pressure on those holding an Iranian diplomat, who was released Monday and returned to Tehran on Tuesday. The official would not say who had held the diplomat.

The U.S. military has said the five Iranians, who were arrested January 11 in the northern city of Irbil, were part of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard force that provides funds, weapons and training to Shiite militias in Iraq.

Two days after the raid, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said President Bush approved the strategy of raiding Iranian targets in Iraq as part of efforts to confront Tehran.

Iran had insisted that the five detained Iranians were engaged exclusively in consular work.

The Iranian diplomat who was released on Monday was kidnapped in mysterious circumstances two months ago. (Full story)

Iranian authorities reported the release of Jalal Sharafi, the second secretary at the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad, and said he would return to Tehran later Tuesday.

An official at the Iranian embassy confirmed Sharafi's release, but said he did not know who was responsible for freeing him.

"He was kidnapped and I don't have further details," said the official, who added Sharafi had already left the country.

"He was released yesterday [Monday]," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity for not being authorized to speak to the media.

Sharafi was seized on February 4 when his car was intercepted by vehicles carrying armed men in the Karradah district of Baghdad. The gunmen, who wore Iraqi uniforms, forced him into one of their vehicles and sped away.

Iran said he had been taken by an Iraqi military unit commanded by the U.S. forces, and said it was holding the Americans responsible for his safety.

The U.S. authorities denied any role in his disappearance. "

So, the US is still holding FIVE (5) Iranians. The one released was by the efforts of the Iraqis, with unknown captors, and ONLY Iran had blamed the US. Since the US has denied capturing THAT Iranian, your comment does not show a willingness to give BOTH sides of the story a chance to be told.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 11:09 AM

Iran president to free UK sailors
POSTED: 11:02 a.m. EDT, April 4, 2007
Story Highlights• Iranian President Ahmadinejad meets UK detainees after announcing amnesty
• Ahmadinejad says 15 to be pardoned and freed as "gift to Brtish people"
• Downing Street welcomes remarks; 15 to be released to UK Embassy in Tehran
• Ahmadinejad commends bravery of border guards who detained the 15

Adjust font size:
TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has met with some of the 15 British military personnel held in Iranian custody for almost two weeks, shortly after pardoning the group and vowing to set them free.

Iranian state television showed footage of Ahmadinejad shaking hands, smiling and chatting with the detainees. One of the 15 was heard to comment in English: "We are grateful for your forgiveness."

Ahmadinejad announced the amnesty at the end of a lengthy news conference on Wednesday in which he said the 15 detainees had violated Iran's territorial waters, calling their release "a gift to the British people."

"I declare that the people of Iran and the government of Iran -- in full power to place on trial the military people -- to give amnesty and pardon to these 15 people and I announce their freedom and their return to the people of Britain," Ahmadinejad told a news conference.

The action was a goodwill gesture for the Iranian new year, he said, adding that Iran had received a letter from Britain promising not to intrude into Iranian waters.

"The British government sent a letter to our Foreign Ministry and said it would not happen again. Of course, our decision had nothing to do with the letter. It's a decision made by our government to give a gift to the people of Britain," Ahmadinejad said in answer to a reporter's question.

An Iranian diplomat in London told The Associated Press that the 15 would be handed over to the British Embassy in Tehran. Iranian state television said they would leave Iran by plane on Thursday, AP reported.

"They will go through some brief formalities and then they will go to the embassy," he said. "They can go on a British Airways flight to Heathrow, they can go through the UAE, it is up to the British Embassy in Tehran in coordination with the Foreign Office here."

A spokeswoman for British Prime Minister Tony Blair welcomed the announcement: "We are now establishing exactly what this means in terms of the method and timing of their release."

In New York, Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said: "If this news is confirmed, then it's tremendous news and we're delighted."

In Washington, White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said, "President Bush also welcomes the news."

Ahmadinejad had earlier praised the border guards who captured the 15, presenting their commander with a medal for bravery.

"I thank the border guards who bravely protect our borders and also arrested the violators, and I grant them the bravery medal to their commander," Ahmadinejad said.

Ahmadinejad was speaking after a senior Iranian official on Wednesday welcomed UK efforts to negotiate the release of the marines and sailors.

Iran's parliament speaker Gholamali Haddadadel told an Iranian state broadcaster's Web site that British efforts to negotiate the detainees' release were "appropriate."

"The British are trying to solve the issue of their arrested soldiers with negotiations and this is appropriate action," Haddadadel was quoted as saying.

But he added: "The British should agree to their mistake and change their behavior of before."

Haddadadel is considered an influential figure within Iran because of his connections with the country's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to whom he is related by marriage.

A spokeswoman for British Prime Minister Tony Blair confirmed late on Tuesday that diplomatic moves had been made towards Tehran. (Watch how tempers have cooled in diplomatic dispute )

Iran had insisted that Britain must admit its military personnel intruded into Iranian territorial waters and "guarantee this violation would not be committed again."

Britain insists the sailors and marines were well inside Iraqi waters when Iran captured them on March 23.

Iran had released several videos showing the 14 men and one woman in which they appeared to be in good health. Iran also released videotaped confessions from four of the sailors -- including the woman, Faye Turney. (Watch the two crew members describe their 'intrusion' )

Britain said the confessions were coerced and expressed its outrage at the videos' release.

The newest images, published Tuesday by the Iranian news agency Fars, show crew members talking in a group and playing a game.

Other developments

A U.S. military official said Washington officials were considering a request made by Iran to allow Iranian representatives access to the five detained Iranians captured early January by U.S. forces during a military raid in northern Iraq. "The request has been made but nothing has been approved," the official told CNN on Wednesday. (Iraq pressing U.S. to release Iranians)


Iranian officials in Kish Island said a U.S. inquiry into an American citizen who has been missing for several weeks in southern Iran was made for "political purposes," according to IRNA, Iran's state-run news agency.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 01:18 PM

That is one long-winded crap-spreader.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 01:24 PM

And that was my response to BB`s excellent imitation of Dr Goobels .

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 01:31 PM

ard,

Sorry if the facts of the matter have no meaning to you. Dianavan stated "Quite the contrary. I'm trying to get to the truth by questioning all accounts of this incident. I know that there are two sides to every story.

I don't think you can draw any firm conclusions when the media accounts are contradictory and there is so much that has been omitted, filtered and revised."

You have some sort of problem with me holding her to her stated comments?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 01:43 PM

IRAN INSULTED - war immenent!

A captured Marine said that their falafel was awful.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 01:44 PM

Did it ever occur to you that they, [the Brits[ and the USA shouldn`t be trespassing in other peoples countries and waters, bird brain Bush and his poodle Blair would make the world a much safer place if they took their murdering troops out of Iraq. It is as simple as that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 01:50 PM

Did it ever occur to you that they, [the Brits[ and the USA WERE NOT trespassing in other peoples countries and waters? It is as simple as that.

Or are looking at the facts a foreign idea to you?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 01:59 PM

Sigh...

I'm pleased that the Iranians have seen fit to release the 15 British sailors and marines without conditions.

I do believe the London did acknowledge in a letter that the border in the waterway was "in dispute" and it would endeavor to stay further away from its whereabouts in the future.

The Iranian president did request that the British not punish the sailors and marines for their "confessions." I do wonder if the 15 will be tortured, tried, and sentenced to by hung for "disgracing" the British Crown or whatever, but it's more likely that they'll be admonished and released to their eagerly awaiting families and friends.

I doubt if any of the parties involved in the negoitiations surveyed the wise (and not so wise) words in this thread but I feel better having this forum for discussion of unworldly events.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,a brit
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 02:00 PM

On hearing the news this afternoon that Iran were returning the members of our navy as a gift, I tried to imagine how this incident would pan out on a smaller scale, such as a scenario with you(Y) and your neighbour(N).

Y: Hey, You have stolen 15 gnomes from my garden. Give them back.
N: No I haven't. They were in my garden, so I am going to keep them.
Y: They were not in your garden. They are mine and I want them back.
N: No you cannot have them, I am keeping them.
Y: If you don't give them back I'm going to get very angry.
N: Tough. I am keeping them. They are really happy. Look, I will show you a photo.
Y: Why has girly gnome got an empty crisp packet on her head?
N: She prefers it. All Girly gnomes do.
Y: I am getting really annoyed now. If you don't give back my gnomes I will never speak to you again. And if you still don't give them back I'm going to beat you up.
N: Yeah, you and whose army?
Y: Well, my mate George across the road is upset with you and has promised to help me beat you up. You know that he always backs me up........eventually. Even that turkey the other side of you thinks that you are out of order.
N: They are my gnomes, but if you want them that much I shall give them to you as a present.
Y: And I promise that I will not beat you up now.

Y: ( under your breath and with a wry smile ) But I will in the near future.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 02:21 PM

Did it ever occur to you that they, (the Brits and the USA) MAY OR MAY NOT have been trespassing in other peoples countries and waters & that they MAY OR MAY NOT have been in those waters acting on no one's authority and/or mandate but they may or may ni=ot have been acting on there own.

Had they tried to stay a farther distance than 1.7 nuatical miles from a known disputed border they wouldn't have been in this mess in the 1st place.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 02:26 PM

"Had they tried to stay a farther distance than 1.7 nuatical miles from a known disputed border they wouldn't have been in this mess in the 1st place"


Had the Iranians stayed on their side of the known disputed border, they wouldn't have been in this mess in the 1st place.


Even the initial Iranian coordinates, along with the civilian ship captain, the Brits, and the Iraqi fisherman state that the Brits were in Iraqi territory.


By the standards YOU are saying, I will now sue you for trespassing on my property, since you are not on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 02:34 PM

Neither nation, so far, can make a positive claim that any other nation (including the UN) with except as gospel. And it was Britain that made the 1st move. And it seems that both are excepting that no one is right but that it won't happen again. All else is hearsay, he say, she say. But Iran did get back it's lost puppy, which could be the start of another embrassment to George.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 02:38 PM

"And it was Britain that made the 1st move."


How do you think this? Searching commercial vessels in IRAQI waters by request of the IRAQI government and the UN mandate is making the first move?

Oh, I guess you have already decided WHO is at fault, regardless of the facts.

First the execution, then the trial...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: alanabit
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 03:19 PM

The captives are now on their way home. Let's hope there will be no crowing about it. Perhaps the good sense of their release will set a precedent for the future. Now perhaps some of those kidnap victims in other places around the world can be released too.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 03:25 PM

From Time...


Who Got the British Sailors Released?
Wednesday, Apr. 04, 2007 By CATHERINE MAYER/LONDON AND AZADEH MOAVENI/TEHRAN Enlarge Photo
British navy personnel, seized by Iran, wave to the media after their meeting with the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at the presidential palace in Tehran, Iran, Wednesday, April 4, 2007.
AP
Article ToolsPrintEmailReprints The President of Iran was clearly relishing his role as beneficent liberator of the 15 British Marines and sailors detained by Iran for nearly two weeks. At a press conference today, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called the release a "gift to the British people" on the occasion of Easter as well as a commemoration of the Prophet Muhammad's birthday. The smiling President then met with the British detainees, nodding his head munificently as they lined up to offer thanks for their release. "It is for Islam," he reminded one. He joked to another: "You ended up on a compulsory visit, didn't you?"

As much as today's events appeared to be another episode of the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad show, the Iranian president's actual role in ending the crisis may have been less than meets the eye. The office of the presidency in Iran does not really have a say in matters of foreign policy. Indeed, British analysts were quick to credit another political personage for the resolution of the drama. John Williams, the former Director of News of Britain's Foreign Office, asserts that Dr. Ali Larijani, the secretary general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, was more important in calling the shots. "It seems that around the weekend, Dr. Larijani decided to settle this and took control," says Williams. "He has proved himself a significant power broker, a man who, if he feels it is in Iran's best interests, will do business with the international community." Other observers warn against giving Larijani too much credit. Supreme Leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenei, they say, may have decided that Iran had squeezed as much advantage out of the situation as possible and simply got Larijani to do the legwork to end the crisis.

Observers in Britain don't doubt that the release of the detainees was in Iran's best interest. "If the saga had dragged on, it would have led to an escalation of international opinion against Iran," says Chris Rundle, a former British diplomat in Iran, noting that it took Iran 13 days to coordinate its policy. Sir Christopher Meyer, Britain's former ambassador to the U.S., describes the decision as "a shrewd move. The detainees were a wasting asset." The sudden announcement also reinforced a sense that Iran, and not Britain, was dictating the pace.

Having Ahmadinejad deliver the breakthrough news may have been intended to buttress that image. He remains a symbol of Tehran's defiance of the West, and, for a politician of limited power, Ahmadinejad still knows how to play his role to maximum advantage. Nazenin Ansari, the diplomatic correspondent of the London-based Persian-language weekly Kayhan, believes he and Iran's hardliners have benefited from the showdown with Britain. "What we have seen is a shift to the right," she says. Reformists had been making progress, but "in Iran politics is all about changing the atmosphere. The current has now shifted in the same way it did during the 1979 hostage crisis."

In his press conference, Ahmadinejad said the captives would have been let go sooner but that the "British government behaved badly, and so it took a little while." When asked what prompted the sudden release, he said London had sent a letter promising that such incidents would not be repeated. While careful to point out that the British sailors were being released "as a gift, and not as a result of the letter," the president's reference to a British concession served as a face-saving device, rationalizing the sudden release after much clamor in Iran for a possible trial of the British service personnel.

The Iranian leadership — including Larijani, Ahmadinejad and certainly Khamenei — believes that Tehran's popularity among the world's Muslims, particularly for its face-off against America, gives it leverage in dealing with the West. "Iranians had bruised egos because of international pressure over their nuclear program and the detentions of their personnel by the U.S. in Iraq," says Ansari. "What we've seen is a public relations exercise to take command of the Arab street once again." Says Shahid Malik, one of the first Muslims elected to Britain?s parliament: "This was yet another example of how adept Ahmadinejad is at communications in the way he targets the Muslim and non-Muslim world." During the press conference, Ahmadinejad made the expected jabs at the West, referring to the U.N. Security Council as "an organization they've created" and its resolutions as "pieces of paper they keep passing." He then accused Britain of involvement in a series of bombings in Iran's ethnic minority provinces in the past two years, while saying he would avoid going into detail lest the session "turn bitter."

Downing Street welcomed the move with public caution and mopped brows behind closed doors. As the crisis dragged on, government sources acknowledged that Iran's intransigence was exposing Britain's comparative impotence. It had failed to secure a strong denunciation of Iran's actions from the U.N. Security Council; its European allies were balancing support for Britain against their business interests; and although Prime Minister Tony Blair warned a failure to reach a quick resolution would lead to a "new phase" in response to the detentions, nobody detected in his words the martial sounds of rattling sabers. "There's no mood here for military adventures in Iran or elsewhere," says Malik. "Iraq wasn't what we thought it would be. There's a somber mood in this country."

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 03:34 PM

Yes BB Britan made the 1st move . They boarded a vessel that may or may not have been in Iranain or Iraqi waters.Knowing well that the border was disputed & that they were on the fine line of it. That was their call & their move. The Iranian move was in reaction to that, weither or not it was an excuse is something else but the Brits did supply the excuse to be used.

So far their is no proof of a UN mandate, that was one of the complaints when trying to get the UN to go along & denounce the Iranain act.

The Brits are now a branch of the Iraqi Coast Guard, since when was this delegated to them & by whose authority was this duty excepted. Do we patrol Singapore's water just because we've been invited to. If one flies an Iraqi Flag in Iraqi waters then they can do as the law allows. When one flies a British Flag in British waters then they can do as the law allows. But no one has the right to board my vessel in foreign waters when flying a foreign flag. Unless they have the overwhelming firepower to do as they please.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 03:44 PM

"They boarded a vessel that may or may not have been in Iranain or Iraqi waters.Knowing well that the border was disputed & that they were on the fine line of it."

According to all parties, the position of the ship was clearly within Iraqi waters. No maybes.


Sitting in your livingroom, you are within 1.7 km of the property boundary. Does this give me the right to come into your house, and kidnap you?

You chose to be within 1.7 km of the property line, after all.


Check back for earlier posts by others with the UN resolution that the Brits were acting under. THAT is the mandate, not the resolution about the kidnapping. Having participated in the invasion, there are certain responsibilities that the UN requires of the occupying powers.
Refusal to act upon those responsibilities IS in violation of the UN resolution.

The Iranians acted in an illegal manner, EVEN if the Brits had been in Iranian waters. International law does not allow the capture of military personnel except during declared war, only the escorting of them out of the disputed area.

In addition, it was NOT the Iranian ARMED forces, but the Revolutionary Guard, which is NOT under military control. Their actions against the hostages were in violation of the Geneva conventions, had this been in wartime.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 04:31 PM

"No maybes" you gotta be kidding. You know better than the experts. Read this.

The Iraqi-Iranian Sea Boundary: An Assessment Apr-3-07 01:52 pm
The International Boundaries Research Unit at the University of Durham has produced an excellent analysis of the Iranian-British dispute. It begins with this map of the area and the placement of the respective claims:

The group makes several very useful clarifications.

First, there is no agreed boundary between Iran and Iraq:

No maritime boundary has ever been agreed between Iran and Iraq. However, the boundary in the Shatt al Arab river agreed in 1975 (1) extends to the mouth of the river at the astronomical lowest low-water line, which is located nearly 10 nautical miles seaward of the high-water line that most maps show as the coastline. The southern terminal point of the agreed boundary lies just under 1.7 nautical miles northeast of the position at which the British Ministry of Defence claimed that incident on 23 March took place.

Second, according to this analysis, the British Defence Ministry Map had some problems.

The line shown on the Ministry of Defence maps published on 28 March is described as the "Iraq/Iran Territorial Water Boundary". This is somewhat misleading. The line shown actually comprises (i) the section of the Iran-Iraq land boundary that follows the Shatt al Arab between the high- and low-water lines, and (ii) the median line between the two low-water lines running through the territorial sea.

The map above, prepared by IBRU, shows the agreed boundary in the Shatt al Arab and the median line constructed between the low-water lines depicted on United Kingdom Hydrographic Office charts (nos. 1235, 2884 and 3842). The low-water lines in the vicinity of the mouth of the Shatt al Arab depicted on the charts were derived from satellite imagery acquired in 2002.

Third, they offer the following discussion about the locations of the seizure:

Based on the coastal geography depicted on UKHO charts, the following points can be noted:

If the merchant vessel was located where the British Ministry of Defence claims (29° 50.36'N, 48° 43.08'E), the incident appears to have taken place on what is technically land territory rather than in the territorial sea. More importantly, the point is clearly south of both the 1975 boundary and the median line between the two low-water lines.
Both of the positions that the Ministry of Defence stated were supplied by the Iranian government lie just seaward of the land boundary terminus. The position that was initially reported (29° 51'N, 48° 45.11'E) is 0.5 nautical miles south of the median line; the revised position (29° 51.9'N, 48° 45.11'E) is 0.3 nautical miles north of it. (2)

Fourth, the group makes the following assessment of several "complicating factors":

Whatever the true location of the incident, there are a number of reasons for exercising caution before making categorical assertions about whether the incident took place in Iraqi or Iranian waters:

The unstable coastline
The coastline in the northern Gulf is far from stable, and it is quite possible that there is a legitimate dispute over the alignment of the median line. Iranian charts may show a different low-water line from British charts, and Iran is perfectly entitled to define its baseline using Iranian charts. While it seems unlikely that the mouth of the Shatt al Arab would have shifted sufficiently for the point given by the Ministry of Defence to be located on the Iranian side of the median line, if the incident took place further east (as the Iranian government is claiming) then it is quite possible that Iran has legitimate grounds for its claim that the British boat was operating on the wrong side of what is a de facto if not a de jure boundary. It is also arguable that the unstable coastline represents a special circumstance that justifies delimiting a territorial sea boundary that departes from the median line.

Iran is not a party to the law of the sea conventions
Iran is not a party to UNCLOS, nor to its predecessor, the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone. Iran might therefore argue that it is not bound by the (identical) provisions of those conventions regarding baselines and territorial sea delimitation. However, if these these provisions have become customary international law (and that is widely considered to be the case) they would be binding on Iran.

Iran's straight baselines
Iran measures its territorial sea from a system of straight baselines. Even though the legitimacy of these baselines is questionable (straight baselines should only be drawn around coastlines which are deeply-indented or fringed with islands, and Iran's coastline is neither of these things) they certainly complicate the jurisdictional picture in the boundary area.

Issues relating to the 1975 boundary agreement
Article 2 of the 1975 protocol defining the land boundary made provision for the boundary to continue to follow the thalweg of the Shatt al Arab if the thalweg shifts as a result of natural causes; however, changes in the bed of the river "which would involve a change in the national character of the two state's respective territory" would not alter the course of the boundary. In Article 6 of the protocol it was agreed that a joint survey of the Shatt al Arab would be made at least every 10 years. No such joint survey appears to have taken place, so there may be a question as to whether the boundary still follows the line defined in 1975 or whether it actually follows the course of the thalweg of the river today.

Some commentators have cast doubt on whether the 1975 boundary agreement is still valid. It is true that Iraq unilaterally abrogated the agreement in September 1980 and declared its sovereignty over the whole of the Shatt al Arab. However, in the aftermath of the eight-year war between the two countries that followed, Saddam Hussein confirmed Iraq's recognition of the 1975 agreement in a letter to President Rafsanjani in August 1990.

One further point to note about the 1975 protocol: Article 7 provided for freedom of navigation for Iranian and Iraqi vessels "regardless of the delimitation of each country's territorial sea".

(Many thanks to Senior Fellow Doug Shaw for bringing this assessment to our attention.)

"No Maybes" you know better right.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 04:38 PM

Here's a link to the site & the map
from my above post.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 04:41 PM

no link- want to try again? I would like to check it out.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 04:41 PM

Sorry, try this Map

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 04:42 PM

Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 04:47 PM

"If the merchant vessel was located where the British Ministry of Defence claims (29° 50.36'N, 48° 43.08'E), the incident appears to have taken place on what is technically land territory rather than in the territorial sea. More importantly, the point is clearly south of both the 1975 boundary and the median line between the two low-water lines.
Both of the positions that the Ministry of Defence stated were supplied by the Iranian government lie just seaward of the land boundary terminus. The position that was initially reported (29° 51'N, 48° 45.11'E) is 0.5 nautical miles south of the median line; ..."

As I said, the parties agreed initially it was in Iraqi territory. SOUTH is in Iraq, NORTH is in Iran, according to the map.

And as I said, EVEN if the Brits had been over the line, the Iranians DID NOT have the right to capture them.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 04:49 PM

I get a feeling that some people are feeling a bit let down by the fact that this has been sorted out peacefully. No torture, no prisoners in orange jump-suits with bags over their heads. And now they are going to be home for Easter. These Iranians clearly don't know how these things are supposed to be done.

I'd not be the least surprised to find out in the course of time that we were being lied to about the actual facts of this case. As for the question about who was lying, and who (if anyone) was telling the truth, I'm not holding my breath to know either way.

Meanwhile God knows what is happening to the Iranians seized by the Americans, and held somewhere in defiance of the wishes of the Iraqi government.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 05:06 PM

I'm glad I'm on good terms with my, neighbors. Boundary coveting neighbors can drive you right up the wall, and so far we don't even have a wall along our property lines. If we did, the cats would ignore it anyway, along with most of the neighborhood school children.

BB-

I do hope you and your neighbors are also on good terms.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 05:09 PM

Agreed McGrath

"As I said, the parties agreed initially it was in Iraqi territory. SOUTH is in Iraq, NORTH is in Iran, according to the map."

Nobody has agreed to that.

"And as I said, EVEN if the Brits had been over the line, the Iranians DID NOT have the right to capture them."

Can you show this to be law, anywhere? This seems to contradict our recent practice of our outsourcing of torture victims.
Sorry, whose laws are we practicing & abidding by now?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 05:18 PM

"Territorial Waters
Passage of ships through territorial waters is governed by balancing the rights of maritime powers to innocent passage and the rights of Coastal States to their security and territorial integrity. These rights are both customary and codified in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). "

http://www.lcnp.org/disarmament/nwfz/submission%20on%20NWF2.htm

"Non-compliance by warships with the laws and regulations

of the coastal State

If any warship does not comply with the laws and regulations of the coastal State concerning passage through the territorial sea and disregards any request for compliance therewith which is made to it, the coastal State may require it to leave the territorial sea immediately."

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part2.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 05:19 PM

"Article32

Immunities of warships and other government ships

operated for non-commercial purposes

With such exceptions as are contained in subsection A and in articles 30 and 31, nothing in this Convention affects the immunities of warships and other government ships operated for non-commercial purposes."

from he above UN site...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 05:21 PM

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 06:05 PM

Thank goodness bb isn't on the British negotiating team or those sailors would never have been released!

Iran has set a good example regarding the detainment of prisoners. I hope that Bush takes notice and returns the Iranians who are being held in defiance of the Iraqis. I still do not know why Bush thinks the U.S. has the authority to hold these men.

At least I hope Bush lets the Iranians see prisoners to make sure they are not being tortured. According to the Kurds, it was all a case of mistaken identity and the Iranians were there at the request of the Kurds working on a bilateral defense strategy. The charges against the prisoners are completely bogus.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 06:23 PM

From my understanding, the guys the US were after were ALSO there at the request of the Kurds - and this was public knowledge and official; the US forces came in without so much as a by-your-leave, but happened to miss grabbing the guys they wanted; grabbed some smaller fish instead ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 06:47 PM

Thats the story I heard, too.

The U.S. has absolutely no right to hold these Iranians. I'm surprised Britain got their sailors back but I guess Iran differentiates between the U.S. and Britain. I'm not so sure I would be so generous.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 06:48 PM

A clever show of 'Chivalry' in generously giving back the 15.

Saladin inspired 'Western Chivalry' by giving a horse to Richard to replace one lost in battle.

Western Europe and the US may not get it, but the Middle East will.

Cleverly outmanoeuvred!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 07:25 PM

Do rubber dinghies actually count as "warships"?

I somehow suspect that if, for example, some Cuban sailors were found bobbing about on craft like these just offshore at Guantanamo Bay, they would not be escorted politely back into "Cuban waters". And that's even with Guantanamo Bay and its offshore waters all actually being part of Cuba.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 07:29 PM

The Iranians have pulled the PR coup of the year. Neat one. I hope that the UK sends best wishes to that country when it celebrates the birthday of Mohammed. I fear it won't be so. This presents an opportunity for countries to talk. It would be a class act if Blair went to Iran to thank their government. Hell, never pass up a Kodak moment. But I won't hold my breath on that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 07:37 PM

A "PR coup"? Maybe in the Middle East; I can't imagine MOST people outside are terribly impressed. And, jeesh, Blair would "look a right wimp" if he went any further than he already has to "thank" the Iranians. IMO, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 07:47 PM

Sure he'd look a wimp. But it's not like he has any choice about that. He has the opportunity to upstage the Iranian government, show the people of both Iran and Britain that they can be made of brass from time to time, and walk away with the beginning of a friendship in that part of the world. Hell, no one else has any friends there.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Gulliver
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 08:03 PM

Saladin inspired 'Western Chivalry' by giving a horse to Richard to replace one lost in battle.

Richard repaid the complement by disembowelling and executing 3,000 Muslim prisoners (mainly women and children) outside Acre in 1191. As St. Bernard of Clairvaux said: "The Christian glories in the death of a pagan, because thereby Christ himself is glorified."

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 08:09 PM

Spain, Portugal, Greece, Sicily, Serbia, Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungary, the bloody conquests in Africa and Asia, the Sudan today: All those things did not take place without bloodshed. If you intend to spread the blame, spread it evenly. BTW, the countries above were invaded by Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 09:51 PM

BTW, my post above does not mean I excuse the excesses of the 'Christians' during the Crusades. But implying that Islam is a peaceful religion with a sedate, calm and rational group of followers is revisionist history. Little has changed to this day with either of those groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Apr 07 - 11:15 PM

BB
"Iran is not a party to UNCLOS, nor to its predecessor, the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone."

And as far as my property line, "it was never in dispute". Why would you compare my small, private domain to the borders of a nation?

As to the taken of the 15 sailors being illegal, if that is in fact the case, I can only say that we are guilty of far worst when we take foreign nationals & civilians, from foreign soils & secertly ship them foreign to secert jails to be held incognito & tortured. "Extraordinary Rendition" violates human & civil rights
violates the Geneva Conventions & is a crime against humanity & a war crime. The Iranians look like cub scouts along side of US.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 12:17 AM

"He has the opportunity to upstage the Iranian government, show the people of both Iran and Britain that they can be made of brass from time to time" -

(Not sure if being made of brass is a good thing or a bad thing, but) it WOULD be nice if these great statesmen would take the "potlatch" approach to their power struggles - humiliate your foe by heaping an embarrassment of riches on him - might help with that pesky little problem of the unjust distribution of the world's wealth, too -

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 03:00 AM

Finn, by the "logic" of the Middle East, if your neighbour decides the boundary puts your garden in his garden, then it is a "disputed boundary", and by your logic he can now claim you are a peeoping tom in his back garden, while you are sitting on a deckchair soaking up the sun in yours.

I usually agree with Dianavan and disagree with Bearded Bruce (albeit I disagree with the usual professional Irishmen) but on this thread it seems to me that DV is simply barking mad and BB displays both rational thought and mastery of the facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 03:26 AM

Gee, Richard, maybe you could be a little more specific. It seems to me that Iran definitely came out of this smelling like a rose while the British had to eat their words.

Perhaps its because I referred to the U.S. backing the Arab-Sunnis in Iran. Gee, Richard, do you think they might be backing the Arab-Sunni insurgency in Iraq, too? You seem to be a big fan of the Sunnis so maybe thats why you think I'm mad.

Hmmm, maybe its because I think Iran has a right to defend its territory against Arab-Sunnis, or Brits or the U.S. or whoever..

You know, if Iraqis had done what the British did, I might have come to a different conclusion being that they're neighbors and all but...unless you can prove to me that the Brits had a U.N. mandate to be skirting the borders of Iraq and Iran in an inflatable, well - lets just say I think they got exactly what they deserved.

They were poking at a hornets nest and they got stung.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: ard mhacha
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:23 AM

Poor demented Bearded Bruce, the USA and Britain are foreign usurpers as far as Iraq and Iran are concerned, that hole is becoming ever deeper, thousands of dead because of the plundering, blundering goons in the Bush government, followed into this disaster by his poodle Blair, surely common sense tells that it is time to GO.
As for the blood-bath which is supposed to take place after the war-criminals leave, what do you believe is happening now?.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Billy Suggers
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 06:23 AM

We're declaring peace with Iran, as they turned out to be cheeky chaps with a GSOH. They're now looking for ard mhacha instead as Mr Bush thinks his name sounds like it ought to have a beard on it
:)

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 06:46 AM

Bridge, by your logic you must be drowning in your neighbor's garden or pool.
Here's where the mid east logic differs from the British, the Brits have been cossing borders illegally for the past millennium & claiming they've a God given right to. Once again,,,,,

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 08:10 AM

"Iran definitely came out of this smelling like a rose "

Jeesh, that's not the whiff I'm getting from that direction ...

"the British had to eat their words" -

Which words are those, exactly?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 09:24 AM

Guest meself-

I do like your suggestion that Western powers try to "humiliate your foe by heaping an embarrassment of riches on him..."

What do we have to lose except for some cheap imported trinkets from China?

It would really be difficult for the hard liners in Iran to organize a protest march on our embassies because of that. Who knows, the leaders might even be amused and be provoked into sending out pastries to all of the above.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 10:16 AM

There were drawbacks to the competitive potlatch - but it would make more sense to exhaust your country's resources by ostentatious give-away in order to gain political objectives than by warfare which not only exhausts material resources but also wastes the cream of a generation. And after you have blown your wad on a potlatch, then your enemy has to buckle down and get to work for as many years as it will take him to produce and accumulate the goods to at least equal, but preferably exceed, what you gave him.

In a number of aboriginal cultures, in various parts of the world, social status is achieved by how much you give away, rather than by how much you horde. This is how they deal with the problem of unequal distribution of wealth. We get the smallest taste of that when some moneybags makes a display of endowing a charitable foundation or an art gallery.

The colonial authorities tried to stop the potlatch precisely BECAUSE it limited long-term accumulation of capital. The potlatch was seen as thoroughly incompatible with the new order, even subversive of it ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,GPS
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 01:28 PM

Would the rogue who two weeks ago fiddled with the settings of the system please stand up and take responsibility for this silly and dangerous prank!

Oh and CIA as well as MOSAD you may not take the credit for the idea!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 01:32 PM

It's MOSSAD.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 02:12 PM

From Time:

What Message Was Iran Sending?
Wednesday, Apr. 04, 2007 By SCOTT MACLEOD/CAIRO

Already facing U.N. sanctions and speculation about a U.S. attack over its nuclear program, Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines on March 23 had the makings of a new Middle East crisis that could spin dangerously out of control. So, Tehran's decision to free the captives in what President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called a "gift to the British people" was a notable victory for Iranian pragmatists over hard-liners — one that could even build momentum within Tehran's power structure and in Western capitals for a diplomatic solution to the standoff over Iran's uranium-enrichment program.

Iran claimed it had arrested the Britons for illegally entering Iranian waters, a charge London hotly disputed. Although President Bush declared that Iran had seized the 15 sailors and marines as "hostages," Iran's treatment of its captives from the start indicated that it sought to make a point rather than provoke a war. In contrast to images of blindfolded hostages when Iranians stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran in 1979, Iranian footage this time showed the British captives in their uniforms sitting together and eating — a diplomatic affront, but hardly a menacing scene.

The capture of the Britons seemed designed to send three messages to London, and more importantly, to Washington:


Don't think about attacking Iran, because it has the capacity to threaten Western interests in the Gulf and throughout the Middle East, directly as well as through allies in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine;

Expect Iran to instigate trouble if the West continues to punish Iran for what it sees simply as exercising as its legal right to nuclear technology; and,

Iran will play tit-for-tat if U.S. forces continue arresting Iranian officials working inside Iraq, as in the Jan. 11 raid on an Iranian consular facility in Erbil where five Iranians were detained.

Iran's sudden decision to release the Britons may mean that the Western pressure on the Iranian regime is bearing fruit. A day after the Britons were taken captive, the U.N. Security Council passed the second set of sanctions against Iran in three months — and a third round of sanctions is anticipated if Iran does not freeze its uranium-enrichment program, which the U.S. fears could enable Tehran to produce a nuclear weapon. As Under Secretary of State R. Nicholas Burns told the Senate last week, "Despite the fulminations of President Ahmadinejad, Iran is not impervious to financial and diplomatic pressure."

But the release of the Britons could also mean that Iran has achieved some of its objectives. The surprise announcement came just a day after the sudden release of an abducted Iranian diplomat in Iraq, who Iranian officials claimed had been arrested on U.S. orders. British, American and Iraqi officials denied any connection between the freed Iranian and release of the Britons. Iran also disclosed on Wednesday that its embassy in Iraq had finally been granted access to the five Iranians detained at Erbil.

The peaceful end to the naval dispute is a victory for diplomacy. Iranian and British leaders maintained constant contact through direct diplomatic channels, and kept their heads amid rising domestic political pressure on both ends to act tough. In particular, the outcome is a significant boost for Iran's pragmatists led by Ali Larijani, head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, and who is also Tehran's chief nuclear negotiator. Last year, Ahmadinejad's hard-line opposition had helped scuttle a deal Larijani was crafting in discussion with European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana that involved a temporary suspension of Iran's enrichment program. In announcing the release of the Britons, Ahmadinejad signaled that the more radical faction of Iran's leadership would not stand in the way of Larijani's dealings with the West. The question, now, is whether Larijani can achieve the same success in guiding Tehran to a compromise in Iran's nuclear showdown — and whether the U.S., following Britain's example, is willing to give diplomacy a real chance.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 02:56 PM

From the Wall Street Journal:

Mahmoud's 'Gift'
The right way to exploit any fissures in the Tehran regime.

Thursday, April 5, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Having kidnapped 15 British sailors and marines in Iraqi waters and paraded them before the world making "confessions," Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad now says he is pardoning them as a "gift" to the British people. As we go to press, Iran's news agency reports the Brits will go home today.

While we can be grateful for the captives' release, no one should conclude from this episode that the Iranian government is taking a new peaceful turn, or that its President has become Mahmoud the Munificent. If anything, the events of the past two weeks show the opposite--notably the influence inside the regime of the Revolutionary Guards, who provoked the incident by seizing the sailors in Iraqi waters only hours after a unanimous vote in the U.N. Security Council to stiffen sanctions against Iran's nuclear program. Their objective was clearly to create some negotiating leverage and humiliate Prime Minister Tony Blair, who is leaving office later this year. Hostage-taking has been a tool of Iranian foreign policy going back to 1979, and this was merely another turn of that wheel.

Mr. Blair's decision to use diplomacy to gain the sailors' release paid off, but as the second week of the hostage crisis neared its end, it was also becoming clear that British patience was beginning to wear thin. The implicit warning in the Prime Minister's comment Tuesday that the next 48 hours would be "fairly critical" would not have gone unnoticed in Tehran. That the mullahs are now releasing the hostages is not an act of charity but a recognition that the hostage-taking would cost Iran more diplomatically--and perhaps militarily--than it would gain.

One benefit of this episode is that it provoked the press to start reporting on the Revolutionary Guards and elite al Quds force. These highly trained and well-financed fighters are the regime's instruments of violence from Lebanon and the Palestinian territories--where they arm Hezbollah and Hamas--to Iraq, where Iranian-supplied weapons are killing American and British soldiers.

For that reason, it's important to separate Iran's hostage-taking from the entirely lawful arrest by the U.S. of five Iranians in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil in January. Some hyperbolic British reporting has linked the two, but the Iranians were part of a Revolutionary Guard network that was supplying money and weapons to killers in Iraq. It would be a bad sign, and only encourage more hostage-taking, if the five Iranians were now released quickly in what Iran might claim is a quid pro quo.





Britain made it clear from the outset of the crisis that its foreign policy would not be held hostage to the mullahs. In this, it found scant support from its European allies. They preferred the usual appeasement track, calling for "dialogue" and refusing Britain's request to threaten Iran with the end of government export guarantees if it did not release the sailors. The European Union bravely issued a declaration "deploring" the arrests while the U.N. weighed in with a statement of "grave concern."
The British military has performed magnificently in Iraq, where 136 servicemen and women have been killed. Even so, with the release of the sailors, we would like to learn the full story of why the hostages seemingly cooperated so readily with their captors. Videotaped confessions, in which the accused apologize for misdeeds they didn't commit, are staples of Iran's authoritarian regime, and the British apologies to their captors may well have been coerced. Yet it's hard to know what to make of yesterday's pictures of the sailors--in suits, not uniforms--smiling and shaking hands with a beaming Mr. Ahmadinejad. These weren't civilians but sailors presumably trained to resist propaganda displays.

While the release of the Brits is cause for celebration, we hope the world won't forget those who aren't getting out--the myriad political prisoners, often democrats, in Iran's dungeons. These are the truly courageous people the West has paid too little attention to as it focuses on diplomacy and business with Iran. Given his regime's persecution of Iran's tiny Christian community, Mr. Ahmadinejad's invocation of Easter as a reason for freeing the sailors is particularly offensive.

Many will be tempted to interpret the release of the hostages as evidence of Iran's essential reasonableness, conveniently forgetting who started the crisis in the first place. The lesson of these two weeks is not to slip back into negotiations with Iran in the hope of exploiting some division that may or may not exist between "moderates" and Mr. Ahmadinejad's allies.

The lesson is for the world to increase the diplomatic and sanctions pressure in response to Iran's threatening behavior and continued nuclear program. That is what will produce more fissures in the regime--as more and more Iranians understand the price of isolation and conclude that the mullahs and their Revolutionary Guards are leading them down a dangerous, losing road.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Phot in Devon
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 02:57 PM

If you watch the Sky aerial footage you might just see me at work! (Black trousers, white shirt and camera!)

Wassail!! Chris

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:06 PM

BB

Well, you can't say that the Wall Street Journal doesn't know which side its bread is buttered on:

"it's important to separate Iran's hostage-taking from the entirely lawful arrest by the U.S. of five Iranians in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil..." (Emphasis added)

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:09 PM

LOL

Colateral damage (new speak "Oops!").

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 06:05 PM

I think we can now all be thankful that they are home. Apologists on both sides can revel in the fact that their side saved face. Sabres can be rattled by all the protagonists here without fear of repercusion. Mysongenistic Brit haters can carry on living alongside the nuke the Arab brigade safe in the knowledge that the service personel who risk life and limb to keep them safe, on both sides, will continue to be used as disposable pawns in the big power game. Sad, vary sad.

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 08:24 PM

As for "given his regime's persecution of Iran's tiny Christian community" - which doesn't begin to compare with what has been happening to the ancient Christian community in Iraq, which was quite sizable until the occupation.
..........
It appears that the Iranian diplomatic staff taken prisoner by the Americans, and still held incommunicado in face of protests by the Iraqi government are now to be allowed consular access. It has been suggested that this might be tied up with the British sailor episode, since the refusal to allow such consular access was becoming very embarrassing for the British government.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 09:20 PM

McGrath-

Wouldn't it be better if we crucified the Iranian "diplomatic/guard" staff and sent their bodies back as an Easter present?

Charley Ignoble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: jimlad9
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 04:34 AM

Thank God that a peaceful conclusion has been reached.

I will try to be modest about the part I played in the situation.

I bet Mr Ahmadinejad is a catter and he read my other thread threatening to send him 4 cruise missiles.

As the immortal Corporal Jones said "They don't like it up 'em Sir".

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 07:22 AM

UK halts Gulf boarding operations
POSTED: 7:16 a.m. EDT, April 6, 2007

Story Highlights• UK to conduct inquiry into capture of 15 British service members by Iran
• British boarding operations in Persian Gulf suspended, head of navy says
• Captain told Sky News the patrol gathered intelligence on Iran as part of duties
• 15 sailors and marines reunited with families Thursday after return to UK from Iran

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Britain has suspended boarding operations in the Persian Gulf and launched a review into the circumstances that led to 15 military personnel being captured by Iranian forces last month, defense sources have confirmed.

The sailors and marines, who were seized from patrol boats on March 23, returned to the UK on Thursday after 13 days in Iranian captivity. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that the group had been "pardoned" as an Easter gift to the British people.

A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Defence said a "detailed inquiry" was under way and that debriefings of the group would continue at a military base in Chivenor, southwestern England, on Friday, the UK's Press Association reported.

Meanwhile, the head of the Royal Navy, First Sea Lord Jonathon Band, confirmed boarding operations involving British forces had been suspended.

"For the moment we have stopped UK boarding operations," Band told BBC radio. "We will obviously do a complete review."

Band said the review of the incident would consider intelligence, equipment and procedures as well as examining the rules of engagement for British forces operating in the area.

He also defended the conduct of the 15, several of whom appeared on Iranian state television during their captivity to apologize for their actions and were also filmed meeting Ahmadinejad and receiving gifts on behalf of the Iranian president prior to their return to the UK. (Watch how Iran's PR plan unfolded )

Band said the "confessions" by the group appeared to have been made under "a certain amount of psychological pressure."

"From what I have seen of them on the television and I met them personally when they returned to their families yesterday, I think they acted with considerable dignity and a lot of courage," Band said.

He also rejected suggestions that the patrol had been "spying" and said there was "absolutely no doubt" they were in Iraqi waters.

"We are certainly not spying on them," he said. "The Iranians in that part of Iraqi territorial waters are not part of the scene."

In an interview with British TV network Sky News, released on Thursday but conducted before the group's capture, the captain of the 15 said gathering intelligence on Iranian naval activity was a standard part of their duties.

Capt. Chris Air said patrols regularly encountered fishing boats in the area and talked to their crews about guarding against terrorism and piracy.

"Secondly, it's to gather int [intelligence]. If they do have any information, because they're here for days at a time, they can share it with us, whether it's about piracy or any sort of Iranian activity in the area," Air told Sky News.

"Obviously we're right by the buffer zone with Iran," Air added.

Sky News said on its Web site that it withheld the story until after the sailors' release to avoid giving the Iranians evidence for prosecuting the captives. (Timeline)

In a statement published by the Ministry of Defence's Web site on Thursday, the group said they were "extremely happy" to be back home.

"The past two weeks have been very difficult. But by staying together as a team we kept our spirits up, drawing great comfort from the knowledge that our loved ones would be waiting for us on our return to the UK," the statement said. (Watch the former detainees back on British soil )

No deals
Speaking in Downing Street as the British Airways flight carrying the 15 landed in London, British Prime Minister Tony Blair welcomed their release but reiterated that no diplomatic deals had been done to secure their release.

Blair said the group's homecoming was a reason to "rejoice" but noted that their arrival back to the UK came amid news of the deaths of four British soldiers in Iraq.

"We are glad that our service personnel return safe and unharmed from their captivity, but on the other, we return to the sober and ugly reality of what is happening through terrorism in Iraq," he said. (Watch Blair's remarks on the 15's release )

Blair said the group's sudden release vindicated the UK's "dual-track strategy" of pursuing bilateral dialogue while mobilizing international pressure, adding that their return had been secured "without any deal, without any negotiation, without any side agreement of any nature whatsoever."

He said the crisis had opened up new channels of communication with Tehran that it would be "sensible" to pursue, and he said it was the "right moment" to reflect on relations with Iran.

"But there cannot be any misunderstanding of the basis upon which that communication takes place," said Blair. "We have to hold absolutely firm in relation to support from any aspect of the Iranian regime for terrorism."

Responding to the claim by Ahmadinejad that the UK had sent a letter of apology to Tehran vowing not to intrude into Iranian territorial waters, Blair noted that the allegation was "nothing new" since British forces should not have been in Iranian waters, adding "obviously it's our contention that they weren't," in reference to the 15 marines and sailors.

Blair also dismissed suggestions that any deal had been made involving the release of Iranians held in Iraq.

"Let me make it absolutely clear: No, there are no agreements about any Iranian elements that may be held in Iraq because they're being held in Iraq as a result of the wrongful interference with the business in Iraq," Blair said.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 08:20 AM

From the Washington Post. NOTE: This is an editorial. Obviously, if you disagree with it, it has no relationship to the facts of the matter. Who cares what people think, anyway?

*****************************************************************

Britain's Humiliation -- and Europe's

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, April 6, 2007; Page A21

Iran has pulled off a tidy little success with its seizure and release of those 15 British sailors and marines: a pointed humiliation of Britain, with a bonus demonstration of Iran's intention to push back against coalition challenges to its assets in Iraq. All with total impunity. Further, it exposed the impotence of all those transnational institutions -- most prominently the European Union and the United Nations -- that pretend to maintain international order.

You would think maintaining international order means, at least, challenging acts of piracy. No challenge here. Instead, a quiet capitulation.

The quid pro quos were not terribly subtle. An Iranian "diplomat" who had been held for two months in Iraq is suddenly released. Equally suddenly, Iran is granted access to the five Iranian "consular officials" -- Revolutionary Guards who had been training Shiite militias to kill Americans and others -- whom the United States had arrested in Irbil in January. There may have been other concessions we will never hear about. But the salient point is that American action is what got this unstuck.

Where then was the European Union? These 15 hostages, after all, are not just British citizens but, under the laws of Europe, citizens of Europe. Yet the European Union lifted not a finger on their behalf.

Europeans talk all the time about their preference for "soft power" over the brute military force those Neanderthal Americans resort to all the time. What was the soft power available here? Iran's shaky economy is highly dependent on European credits, trade and technology. Britain asked the European Union to threaten to freeze exports, $18 billion a year of commerce. Iran would have lost its No. 1 trading partner. The European Union refused.

Why was nothing done? The reason is simple. Europe functions quite well as a free-trade zone, but as a political entity it is a farce. It remains a collection of sovereign countries with divergent interests. A freeze of economic relations with Europe would have shaken the Iranian economy to the core. "The Dutch," reported the Times of London, "said it was important not to risk a breakdown in dialogue." So much for European solidarity.

Like other vaunted transnational institutions, the European Union is useless as a player in the international arena. Not because its members are venal but because they are sovereign. Their interests are simply not identical.

The problem is most striking at the United Nations, the quintessential transnational institution with a mandate to maintain international peace and order. There was a commonality of interest at its origin -- defeating Nazi Germany and imperial Japan. The war ended, but the wartime alliance of Britain, France, the United States, China and Russia proclaimed itself the guardian of postwar "collective security" as the Security Council.

Small problem: Their interests are not collective. They are individual. Take the Iranian nuclear program. Russia and China make it impossible to impose any serious sanctions. China has an interest in maintaining strong relations with a major energy supplier and is not about to jeopardize that over Iranian nukes that are no threat to it whatsoever. Russia sees Iran as a useful proxy in resisting Western attempts to dominate the Persian Gulf.

Ironically, the existence of transnational institutions such as the United Nations makes it harder for collective action against bad actors. In the past, interested parties would simply get together in temporary coalitions to do what they had to do. That is much harder now because they believe such action is illegitimate without the Security Council's blessing. The result is utterly predictable. Nothing has been done about the Iranian bomb. In fact, the only effective sanctions are those coming unilaterally out of the U.S. Treasury.

Remember the great return to multilateralism -- the new emphasis on diplomacy and "working with the allies" -- so widely heralded at the beginning of the second Bush administration? To general acclaim, the cowboys had been banished and the grown-ups brought back to town.

What exactly has the new multilateralism brought us? North Korea tested a nuclear device. Iran has accelerated its march to developing the bomb. The pro-Western government in Beirut hangs by a thread. The Darfur genocide continues unabated.

The capture and release of the British hostages illustrate once again the fatuousness of the "international community" and its great institutions. You want your people back? Go to the European Union and get stiffed. Go to the Security Council and get a statement that refuses even to "deplore" this act of piracy. (You settle for a humiliating expression of "grave concern.") Then turn to the despised Americans. They'll deal some cards and bail you out.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 08:27 AM

Another editorial from the Washington Post.

Ditto.

**********************************************************
End of a Standoff
Does Iran's seizure and release of British sailors demonstrate pragmatism -- or belligerence?
Friday, April 6, 2007; Page A20


THERE WAS relief in Britain yesterday as 15 sailors and marines abducted by Iran and held for 12 days arrived home. Their abrupt release on Wednesday defused a slowly mounting international crisis -- but not before Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had taken the opportunity to parade the service members once more before television cameras, accept their humiliating thanks and unjustified apologies, and reap the resulting propaganda benefits at home and abroad.

Mr. Ahmadinejad and Iran's hard-line Revolutionary Guard Corps were the clearest winners in the affair. They carried out an illegal attack against a major Western power and got away with it. They recouped some prestige following recent reverses in Iraq and in Iran's domestic politics, and they may have extracted some concessions from their enemies: An Iraqi diplomat arrested in Baghdad two months ago was released Tuesday, while U.S. officials announced that they might allow an Iranian envoy to meet five Iranians detained by American forces in northern Iraq.

Meanwhile, the release of the captives prompted a predictable debate in the West. Those who insist that "dialogue" and "engagement" should be the only means of dealing with the Islamic regime cited the sailors' release as proof that quiet diplomacy can work. Mr. Ahmadinejad's showy performance was preceded by a quiet phone call between a senior British official and Iran's national security chief, Ali Larijani. Mr. Larijani is the contact for European diplomats seeking a way out of the standoff over Iran's nuclear program; there are hopes he can deliver a constructive response by Iran on that far more momentous issue.

We share those hopes. Yet the rosy analyses play down the salient fact of the sailors' case: Iran showed it remains prepared to take aggressive and illegal action to defend its nuclear program and other Revolutionary Guard interests. Two days before the sailors were captured, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei described international pressure against Iran as "illegal" and added, "if they take illegal actions we, too, can take illegal actions and will do so." He wasn't bluffing, and there's no reason to believe the aggression won't continue.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 08:30 AM

Another editorial. Same paper.

Ditto again...


******************************************************************
Calming the Waters in the Gulf

By David Ignatius
Friday, April 6, 2007; Page A21

Here's an American acronym we ought to translate promptly into the Iranian language of Farsi: INCSEA.

It's shorthand for a May 1972 agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union to prevent dangerous incidents at sea, and it's a model for how to begin reducing dangerous tensions with Iran.

The moment for such a dialogue is ripe, now that the Iranians have opted for a diplomatic resolution of the crisis they provoked two weeks ago when they seized15 British sailors and marines in disputed waters off the Iraqi coast. The British hostages are back home, but it's obvious that a better system is needed to avoid confrontations in the crowded waters of the northern Persian Gulf.

U.S. naval commanders with the Fifth Fleet in Bahrain have been interested for many months in the possibility of a "naval hotline." They know how quickly an incident in the Gulf could trigger an inadvertent escalation that could push the United States and Iran toward war. U.S. admirals are said to favor some system that would allow them to talk directly with the Iranian navy and, more important, with the elite Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps naval forces that seized the British sailors.

The current system for avoiding confrontations is informal and haphazard. The U.S. Navy, in effect, draws imaginary lines in the Gulf and stays within those boundaries. By repeating the same patterns over and over, it signals to the Iranians that it doesn't have hostile intent. But one unplanned action -- a loose torpedo that strikes an American warship -- and the two nations could be on the verge of war.

"Our naval commanders are very concerned about confrontation coming out of misunderstanding," says Eric Thompson, who directs the international affairs group of the Center for Naval Analyses, a Washington think tank.

The INCSEA agreement was negotiated during the dark years of the Cold War, after a series of dangerous incidents involving the U.S. and Soviet navies. In May 1967, two Soviet warships collided with the American destroyer USS Walker while it was escorting a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Sea of Japan. That was part of an ongoing game of "chicken" at sea, with American jets routinely buzzing Soviet warships.

What finally prompted action was an incident involving a British ship. The aircraft carrier Ark Royal collided with a Soviet destroyer in November 1970, killing a number of Soviet sailors. Moscow decided to accept an American proposal for "Safety at Sea" talks, and the roiling waters began to calm.

The American assigned to lead the U.S. negotiating team was none other than John Warner, then undersecretary of the Navy and now a U.S. senator from Virginia. As the negotiations progressed, Warner invited the Soviet delegation to his house for dinner -- where they watched President Richard Nixon announce the mining of Haiphong Harbor in North Vietnam. The Russian admiral leading the Soviet delegation turned to Warner and said, "I need another bourbon; this matter is for the politicians to decide," according to naval historian David F. Winkler in his book "Cold War at Sea."

INCSEA talks with the Islamic Republic of Iran aren't likely to involve bourbon. But the Cold War agreement offers some useful guideposts. The United States and the Soviet Union pledged in 1972 to try to avoid collisions, to refrain from close surveillance and to inform each other before potentially dangerous maneuvers. Most important, they agreed to exchange information promptly through naval attachés in the event of an incident and to hold annual meetings to review how the agreement was working.

This confidence-building measure followed the 1963 hotline agreement that established a direct communications link between the White House and the Kremlin. The October 1962 Cuban missile crisis had convinced both sides that the risk of misunderstanding in a crisis was too high -- and that they needed some reliable channel for contact. Surely we are at a similar moment now with Iran, when the risks of escalation are obvious to everyone.

Perhaps the British, who have diplomatic relations with Iran, could begin the dialogue about an INCSEA for the Persian Gulf. The goal would be an official blessing for navy-to-navy contacts. The British could then draw in the United States for a broader discussion about naval "rules of the road" in the Gulf. It might make sense to embed this naval hotline in a larger framework for discussing regional security, similar to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which helped defuse Cold War tensions.

Crisis brings opportunity. The British sailors and marines are back home. The Iranians are patting themselves on the back for exercising restraint. Now it's time for discussions that begin to move Iran and the West back from the brink.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 08:50 AM

CNN was getting right to the heart of the matter last evening, focusing on what they described as "ill-fitting" the business suits that the British marines and sailors were attired in. The suits looked pretty sharp to me but, then, my tastes probably predate the current styles available in Iran.

BB-

Thanks for posting the editorials. I bet there are more out there to harvest.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 11:50 AM

UK sailors 'blindfolded, isolated'
POSTED: 11:43 a.m. EDT, April 6, 2007

Story Highlights• British service members say they were subjected to "psychological pressure"
• UK to conduct inquiry into capture of 15 military personnel by Iran
• British boarding operations in Persian Gulf suspended, head of navy says
• 15 sailors and marines reunited with families Thursday after return to UK


LONDON, England (CNN) -- The 15 British military personnel captured by Iranian forces in the Persian Gulf were subjected to "psychological pressure" and kept in isolation during their detention, the group's officers said on Friday.

Lt. Felix Carman of the British Royal Navy, addressing a news conference at a military base in Chivenor, southwestern England, said the sailors and marines were well outside Iranian waters when the incident occurred -- despite previous statements to the contrary while in Iranian custody.

"Irrespective of what has been said in the past, when we were detained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard ... I can clearly state we were 1.7 nautical miles from Iranian waters," Carman said. (Read the full statement)

The sailors and marines, who were seized from patrol boats on March 23, returned to the UK on Thursday after 13 days in Iranian captivity.

Lt. Carman said they were kept in isolation, interrogated and blindfolded, and subjected to "aggressive questioning and rough handling."

Members of the group had been presented with two options, said Lt. Carman: To admit having strayed into Iranian waters or face up to seven years in prison in Iran.

Capt. Christopher Air of the British Royal Marines said they had "feared the worst" during their captivity when they had been bound, blindfolded and lined up against a wall while they heard the sound of weapons being cocked. "There was a lot of trickery and mind games being played," he said. (Watch the sailors describe their experiences in captivity )

Several of the captives appeared on Iranian state television during their detention to apologize for their actions. They were also filmed meeting Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and receiving gifts prior to their return to the UK. (Watch how Iran's PR plan unfolded )

Faye Turney, the one woman among the captives, had been singled out and "used as a propaganda tool," Carman said.

Air praised Turney for maintaining her dignity. He said she had been told the rest of the group had returned home and she was the only one still being held.

Air said a "conscious decision" had been taken not to engage the Iranians who took them captive. (Watch the sailors' denial that they were in Iranian waters )

"It was clear they arrived with a planned intent," said Air. "Had we resisted there would have been a mighty fight that we could not have won and with consequences that would have major strategic impacts."

Air said some of the Iranian sailors had been "deliberately aggressive and unstable."

"They rammed our boats and turned their heavy machine guns, RPG, and weapons on us. Another six boats were closing in on us. We realized that our efforts to reason with these people were not making any headway. Nor were we able to calm some of the individuals down... They boarded our boats, removed our weapons, and steered the boats towards the Iranian shore."

Able Seaman Arthur Batchelor said the 15's treatment by the Iranians had been "humane" but they had not been allowed to communicate with each other.

UK suspends boarding operations
Meanwhile, military sources said on Friday that Britain had suspended boarding operations in the Persian Gulf and launched a review into the circumstances that led to the 15's capture and detention.

A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Defence said a "detailed inquiry" was under way and that debriefings of the group would continue, the UK's Press Association reported.

First Sea Lord Jonathon Band, the head of the Royal Navy, confirmed boarding operations involving British forces had been suspended.

"For the moment we have stopped UK boarding operations," Band told BBC radio. "We will obviously do a complete review."

Band said the review of the incident would consider intelligence, equipment and procedures as well as examining the rules of engagement for British forces operating in the area.

He also defended the conduct of the 15 during their captivity, commenting that their "confessions" to Iranian state media appeared to have been made under "a certain amount of psychological pressure."

"From what I have seen of them on the television and I met them personally when they returned to their families yesterday, I think they acted with considerable dignity and a lot of courage," Band said.

He also rejected suggestions that the patrol had been "spying" and said there was "absolutely no doubt" they were in Iraqi waters.

"We are certainly not spying on them," he said. "The Iranians in that part of Iraqi territorial waters are not part of the scene."

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 01:30 PM

"Now it is far too early to say that the particular terrorist act that killed our forces was an act committed by terrorists that were backed by any elements of the Iranian regime, so I make no allegation in respect of that particular incident,"

"Just as we rejoice at the return of our 15 service personnel so today we are also grieving and mourning for the loss of our soldiers in Basra, who were killed as the result of a terrorist act," Blair said.

This is the same way that the U.S. led the public to believe that Saddam was responsible for 911!

Link Iran to terrorism in Iraq so that you have justification for an invasion of Iran. The five Iranian hostages were not the intended targets. They meant to kidnap men of higher rank but failed because the Kurds tipped them off. Now Iraq wants the Iranian released. How can the U.S. continue to detain these men if the Iraqis think it is wrong? Who has the power?

It is my understanding that while it may be true that Iran is supplying Iraqi Shiites with weapons, it is to protect the civilian population from the Sunni insurgency (something the military seems incapable of doing). They are involved in what is considered protection and reprisal killings. They are not targetting the U.S. or Iraqi military.

The deaths of U.S. and coalition forces are due to the Sunni insurgency and/or al-Qaeda. Al-Sadr wants the U.S. out because the U.S. is using Iraq as an excuse to start a war with Iran. If the U.S. would leave, the Mahdi militia and the Iraqi army would be able to quell the insurgency and allow the Shiite dominated, Iraqi government to control their own destiny.

I may be wrong and if I am, you are free to disagree but it appears that the U.S. has no intention of allowing a Shiite dominated, Iraqi government to succeed and that they are allowing the insurgency to gain momentum to justify their presence in Iraq. The end game is to invade Iran to eliminate Hezbollah and Hamas. All of this so that the U.S./Israel can gain dominance in the Middle East. If its true, the coalition forces are being used as cannon fodder in a war that will destroy more than Iraq and Iran.

Please tell me I'm wrong or bring the coalition forces home immediately!

For some odd reason, this post is not getting through. I'll hit submit again and hope this isn't a multiple post. What is going on? O.K., I've tried four times. Time to take a break and try later. Maybe I'm being censored.

I know, I'll remove the part about the Z*&^%$# conspiracy and see what happens. I do believe I'm being blocked.

Hmmm - Still no luck.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 01:32 PM

Was that a result of censorship or is there something technically wrong with Mudcat?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 01:36 PM

technical problem- I can't get a post into the "Popular Opinions" thread...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 01:37 PM

There seems to be a technical problem. It has been being addressed by people in the Help section (see top right of page just under Go)

A glitch - submit posting not working sometim

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Gulliver
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 06:19 PM

But implying that Islam is a peaceful religion with a sedate, calm and rational group of followers is revisionist history.

Peace, the vast majority of Muslims are indeed peace-loving (as are the vast majority of Christians, Buddhists, etc.). I've visited many Muslim countries (including Iran and Afghanistan).

Your listing of a (relatively small) number of countries that have been invaded by Muslims in the past pales in comparison with the number of countries invaded by Christians. Just to mention recent history: Who fought the bloody battles of WW1 and WW2? Who bombed the civilians in Germany cities? Who dropped the atom bombs? Who was responsible for the deaths in South-east Asia? Not to mention other bloody conflicts in the Balkans, Spain, Northern Ireland, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 06:25 PM

The Crusades were about 'Christianity'. Many of the later invasions you allude to were not done by countries as part of a religious war or attitude that says "We are doing this in the name of _________ (insert name of god/God there)." Read the post I responded to. And please don't cherry-pick.

I am as sure as you that most people who follow Islam today are folks who would prefer peace to war. Most Americans are like that, too. But don't whitewash Muslim fundies. And I won't whirewash Bush and his crew, OK?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 08:24 PM

"And I won't whirewash Bush and his crew, OK?"

"Whirewash"? Do you mean, "wirewash", as with a wire-brush? If so, go ahead with our blessing ...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 08:29 PM

Diana may be right on this one. I hope she's not but it's very difficult to have much faith in the Bush Administration really having an interest in creating a strong democratic Iraq. Hell, they have no interest in a strong democratic United States!

I also would urge folks not the cherry-pick their history. There is enough history around to condemn most religious groups, ethnic groups, or nation states.

Let's see what we can learn from this incident before it's buried by the pundits.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Gulliver
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 12:12 PM

Let's see what we can learn from this incident before it's buried by the pundits.

Yes, that Bush, Blair & Co should get the hell out of that part of the world. The Brits fought innumerable wars there--India, Burma, Afghanistan (where they got their asses kicked more than once)--since they started colonizing. Now they're back again, on account of oil this time.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Barry Finn
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 12:17 PM

So what's our excuse, that we're a little bit younger than Britian & that for being so young that we did't know any better. It seems like the pupil is surpassing the master.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 01:35 PM

BB-

Actually some of your contributions were editorials and some--in fact most-- were columns. There's a difference.    Columns do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff--only of the particular author. And I think you know that.    But thanks for giving the names of the column authors. Hope you continue to do that.

As I pointed out elsewhere, a further complication as regards the Wall St Journal is that the reporting--often--directly contradicts the editorials. And this was the case in the editorial you cited.

The WSJ editorials can virtually always be counted on to provide the more-Bushite-than-thou stance. But the reporting actually considers many other germane facts and possible interpretations. Pardon my prejudice in stating my belief that the reporting usually makes a lot more sense.

But the editorials are good for comic relief--for calm reasoning, not so much.

I wonder why you never seem to cite the reporting.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Gulliver
Date: 10 Apr 07 - 08:55 AM

Those doughty warriors who endured so much--being force-fed chicken jalfrezi and nan bread, tortured by being forced to sleep in cold beds, resisting for whole days before finally confessing to have trespassed on Iranian territory--are now, with the full approval of their superiors, selling their stories to the British tabloid press for six-figure sums.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6537901.stm

Meanwhile Al-Alam videos of their captivity show several of the sailors and marines eating at a long dining table, watching football on television and playing table tennis and chess.

Expect to see them on Big Brother any day now!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 10 Apr 07 - 11:53 AM

That is old news.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 10 Apr 07 - 12:10 PM

Old news or not I don't understand why this was allowed. Despite the promises to give some money to charity people will make a lot of money out of it. Also, some of the hostages were given a higher profile than others so they are likely to make more money than others. If I had lost a loved one in Iraq I would find it hard to stomach.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Dickey
Date: 10 Apr 07 - 03:46 PM

Al-Jazeera TV on January 30, 2007.

Mahmoud Al-Sayyed Al-Dugheim: We consider the Zionist plan to be dangerous to the Arab nation, but even more dangerous is the Safavid, Sassanian, Iranian plan to restore the Empire of Cyrus, which would range from Greece to Egypt, and the Arabian Peninsula, in addition to other regions. The Zionist plan was unable to penetrate the ranks of Islamic unity, the way the Safavid Iranian plan did. The collaborators with the Zionists throughout the Arab and Islamic world are too ashamed to reveal themselves, while the collaborators with the Sassanian, Safavid plan boast about it in public. Wasn't it one of their leaders who said yesterday: "We are a Lebanon in Iran, and an Iran in Lebanon"?
While the Zionist plan targets Jerusalem, which is holy to us, the Safavid plan targets Mecca and Al-Madina. If you go back to their books, which they do not mention in the media, yet these books exist and are accepted by them - they claim that their Hidden Imam will come to Mecca and Al-Madina, destroy the Al-Haram Mosque and the Mosque of the Prophet, and will dig in the graves of Abu Bakr and Omar, and burn them both, and then he will command the wind to blow them away. He will also dig in the grave of Aisha, the Mother of the Believers, and will execute her. All this is part of their plan.
The Shah was most definitely one of the sworn enemies of the Arabs, but he did not legislate a law to persecute the Sunni Muslims, who constitute one-third of the Iranian population. The new Iranian constitution persecutes Sunni Muslims in Iran, while it gives constitutional rights to the the Zoroastrians, the Jews, and the Christians. This constitution denies the Sunnis these rights. There is no Sunni mosque in Tehran, even though there are over two million Sunni Muslims there.
All these actions are part of the 50-year plan of the Protocols of the Mullahs of Qom. This plan has been published and is well known. It aims to infiltrate the Sunni Muslim countries, to annihilate them, and to sow civil strife between the ruler and his subjects, all within fifty years.
Listen to the following secret communique: "At the command and with the guidance of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Guide of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, and under the title 'The Shi'a of Ali Are Victorious', the extended conference of the world's Shiites was held in the holy city of Qom. It was attended by the leaders of all Shiite parties and religious authorities. The conference decided that a global organization must be established to annihilate the people who are left, to examine and analyze the current regional situation, to build a military force, to infiltrate governmental institutions through the women's organizations everywhere, and then to infiltrate intelligence agencies, and to finish off the Sunni leaders, even by assassination." This is the plan of the Hashashin, which still exists. There is a fatwa by their imams and religious authorities, which permits the trading and planting of hashish, in order to profit and to cover up their crimes.
While the American target is economic oil, the Iranian Persian goal is to massacre the Arabs, as is evident in all their writings.

http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=1380

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Apr 07 - 04:17 PM

Now that you have me trembling in my boots, can you please return to the subject?

Re: The British Hero, warriors who are capitalizing on their adventure.

I'm sure the British government will heavily censor anything they have to say. As such, it becomes free propaganda.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Gulliver
Date: 10 Apr 07 - 08:19 PM

If I had lost a loved one in Iraq I would find it hard to stomach.

Agreed.

One can see their colleagues, green with envy, queuing up to try to get kidnapped, thinking of juicy and lucrative stories to cancoct for the gutter press once they are freed.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 10 Apr 07 - 08:25 PM

And the difference between what they are doing and what Nixon, Lewinsky, Churchill, etc., did with books is what?

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 10 Apr 07 - 08:26 PM

Or Brickhill, bader, . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 05:27 AM

And the difference between what they are doing and what Nixon, Lewinsky, Churchill, etc., did with books is what?

There's quite a lot of difference IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 05:48 AM

I'm willing to listen.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 05:58 AM

Peace, I knew you'd want full reasons!!

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 06:48 AM

My understanding is that the UK government has now rescinded permission for the sailors to tell their stories for pay--is this not so? If it is, the argument becomes moot.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 07:16 AM

Ron Davies, they have but I understood that it was in all further cases. Certainly sums were agreed with some of them and stories did appear in newspapers at the weekend and also on television programmes.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 07:22 AM

Julia May, London
April 11, 2007

THE 15 British sailors seized by Iranian forces have been banned from selling their stories to the media after a Government reversal, but not before two detainees gave interviews for apparent five-figure sums.

On Monday, the Government banned media deals for the navy personnel — who were released by the Iranian Government on April 4 — following widespread protest about their special treatment. In a statement, Defence Secretary Des Browne admitted the Government had "not reached a satisfactory outcome" by allowing the sailors to make money from media interviews.

There is a lot more on this story and it can be found by typing in sailors stories on Google. No doubt there are lots of other sources of the same information.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 07:27 AM

Interesting. I wonder what the reaction in the US would have been if the sailors had been American. I have to say I have no idea--there's certainly a lot of exploitation of situations here to make money. Would there have been huge protests? Hard to say.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 11:56 AM

tacky

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 01:51 PM

Lucrative, indeed!

I understand the Iranians are now rushing the publication of a book with their side of the story, complete with full-color glossy pictures. They probably have a best-seller in the making.

I can't help but admire their marketing acumen.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 10:19 PM

I finally ran across an appropriate song:

From Louis Untermeyer, ed. (1885–1977). Modern British Poetry. 1920, p. 73.

By Anthony C. Deane. 1870–?

The Ballad of the Billycock

IT was the good ship Billycock, with thirteen men aboard,
Athirst to grapple with their country's foes,—
A crew, 'twill be admitted, not numerically fitted
To navigate a battleship in prose.

It was the good ship Billycock put out from Plymouth Sound,
While lustily the gallant heroes cheered,
And all the air was ringing with the merry bo'sun's singing,
Till in the gloom of night she disappeared.

But when the morning broke on her, behold, a dozen ships,
A dozen ships of France around her lay,
(Or, if that isn't plenty, I will gladly make it twenty),
And hemmed her close in Salamander Bay.

Then to the Lord High Admiral there spake a cabin-boy:
"Methinks," he said, "the odds are somewhat great,
And, in the present crisis, a cabin-boy's advice is
That you and France had better arbitrate!"

"Pooh!" said the Lord High Admiral, and slapped his manly chest,
"Pooh! That would be both cowardly and wrong;
Shall I, a gallant fighter, give the needy ballad-write
No suitable material for song?"

"Nay—is the shorthand-writer here?—I tell you, one and all,
I mean to do my duty, as I ought;
With eager satisfaction let us clear the decks for action
And fight the craven Frenchmen!" So they fought.

And (after several stanzas which as yet are incomplete,
Describing all the fight in epic style)
When the Billycock was going, she'd a dozen prizes towing
(Or twenty, as above) in single file!

Ah, long in glowing English hearts the story will remain,
The memory of that historic day,
And, while we rule the ocean, we will picture with emotion
The Billycock in Salamander Bay!

P.S.—I've lately noticed that the critics—who, I think,
In praising my productions are remiss—
Quite easily are captured, and profess themselves enraptured,
By patriotic ditties such as this,

For making which you merely take some dauntless Englishmen,
Guns, heroism, slaughter, and a fleet—
Ingredients you mingle in a metre with a jingle,
And there you have your masterpiece complete!

Why, then, with labour infinite, produce a book of verse
To languish on the "All for Twopence" shelf?
The ballad bold and breezy comes particularly easy—
I mean to take to writing it myself!

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Apr 07 - 11:10 PM

Excellent. Almost a Gilbert flavor.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 12 Apr 07 - 10:32 AM

Ron-

It really is a treasure and I'm amazed I've never run across it before.

Maybe I'll post it as a separate thread so more folks are likely to read it. This thread is evidently on its final plunge to the bottom.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: GUEST,Arnie
Date: 12 Apr 07 - 09:00 PM

This thread may be on it's final plunge to the bottom but may yet be resurrected by the resignation of Des Browne, Defence Minister. He's agreed that the buck stops with him, so now we're waiting to see whether he jumps before he's pushed! Personally I think he should go because this publicity stunt has become a total shambles.

Arnie at work

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Gulliver
Date: 12 Apr 07 - 10:45 PM

If only the rest of the Cabinet would follow suit...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: dianavan
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 02:09 AM

From the Herald -

"Military sources confirmed yesterday the British commander of the coalition flotilla which allowed 15 naval personnel to be captured by Iranian Revolutionary Guards could face internal disciplinary action.

Commodore Nick Lambert, an experienced officer who has completed four tours in the Gulf region, is the subject of a board of inquiry into why the boarding party was left exposed and vulnerable when the Iranians closed in."

Kinda makes you wonder, doesn't it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 06:54 AM

"Commodore Nick Lambert, an experienced officer who has completed four tours in the Gulf region, is the subject of a board of inquiry into why the boarding party was left exposed and vulnerable when the Iranians closed in."


Actually, that should be normal procedure in any incident. Can any Royal Navy types tell me the rules there?



"Kinda makes you wonder, doesn't it. "

What, that the RN is interested in determining the facts instead of jumping to political-based conclusions?

Sounds to me like they are being profesional.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 08:01 AM

Board of Inquiry will establish the facts of the incident and examine the reasons why things happened the way that they did. The Board will then submit its findings, from which Court Martial proceedings may, or may not, be initiated against the Commanding Officer.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: beardedbruce
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 08:12 AM

Thanks, T.

8-{E

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 09:48 AM

I would hope that there would be no rush to judgment in the formal Board of Inquiry on Commodore Nick Lambert's decisions on the day that his boarding party was captured by the Iranians. His descretion may not earn him a medal but direct intervention would have risked the loss of lives and a major international crisis. I for one will be interested to see how this one gets played out.

With regard to the Defense Minister, I don't have a clue about what role he really had in the "mismanagement" of the public relations campaign following the release of the captured sailors and marines.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 02:05 PM

Charlie,

I have absolutely no doubt at all that the 15 UK service-personnel were adbucted illegally inside Iraqi territorial waters, by units of Irans Revolutionary Guard.

The Board of Inquiry will look into how this force managed to get into position to effect that abduction undetected by the "mothership", the Boarding Party itself, or by the ship's helicopter.

Commodore Lambert will have to explain the following:
- Relative positioning of the forces under his command
- Inadequate support of the boarding party under his orders
- The decision to re-task the ship's helicopter when it may have been the only unit capable of providing close support to the Cornwall's Boarding Party

From what has been stated by senior naval personnel and by what has so far been reported the whole operation seems to have conducted in a very slack, almost lackadaisical fashion. If this is established Commodore Nick Lambert RN will face the heat for it as he, and he alone, was the man in charge - Rank may have its privileges, it also has its responsibilities.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Charley Noble
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 03:25 PM

Teribus-

I'm still not convinced that the boundary of Iraqi territorial waters is beyond dispute. "Unsettled" between Iraq and Iran might be a more accurate description.

However, I do appreciate your other thoughts on process and critique.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Peace
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 04:49 PM

I have NO trust at all in the governments of Iran, US or Great Britain. (I ain't too happy with Canada's either!) Bastards the lot of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 05:08 PM

Have the sailors decided which group they are going to join?

Taliban, Hezbollah, Al Quida, Brothers of ISlam, Peoples front of Iraq, IRaqi peoples front, Love boat IRanian style, Perky Turks for Islam...

Subject: RE: BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Apr 07 - 05:09 PM

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam?