BS: Sailors kidnapped by Revolutionary Guard

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: folk1e
Date: 30 Mar 07 - 07:21 PM

The difference between aspiration and expectation!

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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 04:25 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: 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: 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 - 04:02 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 01:18 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 - 01:05 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 - 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: 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 - 12:35 AM

Quoted from here.

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 - 12:22 AM

Security Council Resolution 1723.