Iran Seizes 15 British Troops

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:25 pm

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,, ... 81,00.html

How will the British people react to this, especially if they are not released post haste? I feel like this is... extra stupid.. by Iran, especially given the recent upswing in "Iran is aiding the Iraqi insurgency" claims and their recent and continued defiance of the world re: their nuclear weapons program. Do the Brits of the board think that there will be a military action if the British government's demands of safe and quick release are not met?

Post by **Best First** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:54 pm

My pesonal initial response is to wait and see how it plays out - i don't think we are quite as reactionary when our sodies get mixed up in stuff here, either in terms of media or public reaction.

that's not to say we don't care or wish to see this addressed as soon as possible, but based on an understanding that this is part of what can happen in teh armed forces and there's a certain amount of gamesman ship around stuff like this.

People getting hot and bothered at this safe will not help.

So at presnt all i am really doing is hoping they are being treated well and diplomacy is progessing as fast as it can.

I certainly do not forsee any sudden military action for now.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:12 pm

I expect it will go down the diplomatic route for now, if for some barmy reason they do not release the soilders and somthing more sinister happens to them then I would expect military action in the most extream of cases, but for now I dont think thats anywhere near the current situation.

Blacksword · Post by **Blacksword** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:06 pm

Lets not forget that something very similar happened in 2004 with British sailors and the Iranian government. The situation is a bit more complex given that the area where they were taken is a disputed zone between Iraq and Iran, but lets hope that it will end the same way as the last incident: with the safe return of the sailors.

Hot Shot · Post by **Hot Shot** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:24 pm

I can't say it wasn't somewhat expected. Iran has tended to poke the world with a stick. I just hope this conflict doesn't grow. The US can't get in another war due to the massive debt and unpopularity Bush has racked up on the pointless one we're currently in, and I certainly don't want another. Let's hope Iran doesn't do anything stupid.

Post by **Denyer** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:09 pm

Leatherneck wrote:How will the British people react to this

Watching the news and getting on with things, unless foreign governments do something really stupid.

If you want to know what Britain is likely to do in any given instance, watch Yes, Minister. (That's not being facetious at all.)

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:10 am

So, puppet trial or something http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 563877.ece ?

On the outside this seems like a no brainer for the Iranians, but then again, so do a lot of things.

Post by **Best First** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:49 pm

one thing that makes this more precarious, which i tend to forget (as you just get used to the notion that everyone hates the US most (sorry)), is that Iranians, as a rule, really, really, really hate the British - its a legacy of the Empire that, as a nation, we are pretty much considered the shadowy hand behind everything bad that has happened in Iran for the last 50 years, even amongst opposing groups within Iran, its entirely probable both will suspect that Britain is scheming behind their opponents.

not ideal.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:18 pm

Out of interest, if they do hold a trial, whats irans punishment for treason?

I have a sneaking feeling it might be a death sentance?

Im surprised the yanks are sitting Marines out in the Iran water now just waiting for them to be picked up, any excuse to a drop a bomb on them right now...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:55 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:Out of interest, if they do hold a trial, whats irans punishment for treason?

I have a sneaking feeling it might be a death sentance?

Probably, but remember that treason is betraying your own country, while espionage is stealing secrets from another. The flow of information may be the same, but the nationality of the perpetrator is the opposite.

Iran's punishment for espionage is the death penalty.

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:13 pm

One theory that has been floating around and has been, I guess supported by Iran's demands is that this was in an attempt to get the Brits to pressure the US into trading US held Iranian hostages for these British sailors. However, at least from the information we've been privy to over here, it seems as though the British soldiers were very decidedly in Iraqi waters and hence not infringing upon the sovereignty of Iran, whereas the captured Iranians were in Iraq involved in military actions/training against coalition forces.

Hopefully, this doesn't boil down to the "time tested and proven" theory of "appease the evil dictator" that's worked so well in the past, like in WWII with Hitler. I think that given Iran's need to import fuel [they only have one oil refinery in country, so they import most of their oil products] a prudent next step for the British, presumably supported by the Americans, would be to prevent any gasoline/diesel/etc tanker from docking in Iran, and perhaps a covert mission to sabotage the refinery.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:57 pm

I say we nuke them, and then head down the winchester.

Hot Shot · Post by **Hot Shot** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:16 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:I say we nuke them, and then head down the winchester.

We'll need to pull the 10 or so innocents out first, but I still love the plan.

With all this talk about the death sentence, I don't see how this can't get out of hand. From Iran's shady behavior I say espionage was a good idea. Nuclear experiments for power...Riiiight.

Post by **Best First** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:46 am

[quote="Leatherneck"]

Hopefully, this doesn't boil down to the "time tested and proven" theory of "appease the evil dictator" that's worked so well in the past, like in WWII with Hitler. quote]

That's an amaziongly crap analogy to be honest.

Iran is nothing like Germany and the context is totally different.

I'd say in general the more tried and tested theory with "evil dictators" is to sell them arms isn't it?

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:51 am

Not much new today other than the PM says we (the UK) have evidence to prove the 15 were in Iraqi waters.

Not to sound synical but I dont think Iran give a ****.

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:54 pm

Best First wrote:
I'd say in general the more tried and tested theory with "evil dictators" is to sell them arms isn't it?

Only when you sell them to both sides of the war, in fact!

I was more getting at how we as the world have been handling Iran with such trepidation lately because everybody is afraid of it being viewed publicly like another Iraq. Unfortunately, they're quite obviously different situations but are fundamentally similar; the world is looking to prevent the proliferation of large scale weapons. And hell, at least Saddam denied his production, whereas Ahmadinejad is doing it quite openly. Add into the mix the situation with these 15 sailors and marines... and it can either become a warning to Iran to quit ******* around or it can embolden them.

Post by **Best First** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:33 am

Leatherneck wrote:
Best First wrote:
And hell, at least Saddam denied his production,.

sorry, are we still living in the fantasy land where we are believeing Tony and George that there was compelling intel that he had WOMD?

Cos he blatently ****ing didn't, did he?

Iran and Iraq are very different propositions.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:57 am

He blatently did tho - we sell arms to 'evil dics' - like u said

Post by **Best First** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:08 am

nothing that was in any way a threat to us though, which was the claim.

Plus, if that is the new world order, well **** me there's along list of place we need to invade.

Not to mention we still sell the **** to people of dubious morals on a daily basis.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:24 am

I note that the US has moved to carries into the gulf - not in Iranian waters of course but they are carying out naval exercises.

Also, the MOD reveals information to show that our troops were in the Iraqi waters.

So where is all this oing, if Iran says it doesnt want to let our troops go, then what exactly?

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:58 pm

If they were American troops, the U.S. would be threatening military action, flexing their military muscles, and giving "they ain't with us, so they are against us" speeches. If the U.S. was certain Iran had no nuclear capability to hit Israel, they would have used this capturing as reasonable evidence that Iran is a terrorist nation against freedom, and proceeded to invade, despite pleas from Congress not to.

As this is the UK, I suspect the British soldiers will be questioned by Iran, and released by them in a few days to weeks.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:04 pm

Well, an ATC colleague of mine who's a driver for the Army had to rush a foul-mooded high-ranking officer, who just happens to also be the guy whose in charge of all UK forces out in the Gulf, out to an airbase straight from a meeting earlier this week, so it would seem that the hot spot may be about to get a whole lot hotter.

As another ATC colleague whose got a relative in the RAF (actually, most of them do) put it, "we could well be at war by the weekend!"

Maybe a little over the top, but as far as diplomatic relations between Iran and the UK have gone for the past 50-odd years, there could well be some sort of conflict by Easter.

Edit:

Yaya wrote:As this is the UK, I suspect the British soldiers will be questioned by Iran, and released by them in a few days to weeks.

Doubtful. The UK is seen as a greater evil to Iran than the US is.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:26 pm

Rebis wrote:Well, an ATC colleague of mine who's a driver for the Army had to rush a foul-mooded high-ranking officer, who just happens to also be the guy whose in charge of all UK forces out in the Gulf, out to an airbase straight from a meeting earlier this week, so it would seem that the hot spot may be about to get a whole lot hotter.

As another ATC colleague whose got a relative in the RAF (actually, most of them do) put it, "we could well be at war by the weekend!"

Maybe a little over the top, but as far as diplomatic relations between Iran and the UK have gone for the past 50-odd years, there could well be some sort of conflict by Easter.

Edit:

Yaya wrote:As this is the UK, I suspect the British soldiers will be questioned by Iran, and released by them in a few days to weeks.
Doubtful. The UK is seen as a greater evil to Iran than the US is.

Doesn't matter. Israel calls the shots in much of world politics. Until Iran is confirmed to have no nuclear weapons that can hurt the 51st state, no such armed conflict will occur.

Once such confirmation is received (which will take a while as Ahmedinajjad isn't falling for the 'let us UN guys come in and make sure you don't have anything that can hurt us' trick), then expect military action.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:16 am

Israel calls the shots in much of world politics? - it does?

Are you saying that because they are mostly Jewish and your a Muslim?

I dont Israel calling the shots in in the Europe or the US, or China, japan, actually I dont see them calling the shots anywhere but then im not a Muslim, so perhaps I dont see things the same way.

Ignoring all of that, the TV report of the biritish soilders last night was as bad as England V Andora.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:43 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:Israel calls the shots in much of world politics? - it does?
Are you saying that because they are mostly Jewish and your a Muslim?

Being a Muslim certainly has made me more aware of the power of the Jewish lobby in Washington. As the US is the most powerful nation in the world, that's quite a lot of say so and leverage. Say one word against Israel, and you have a snowballs chance in hell of being elected as President, for example.

My being Muslim is irrelevent. Israel calls the shots, politically speaking, in the Middle East and in America.

Can we fault them in their solidarity and influence? They stick together as a nation, cover each others back. That's something to be commended.

But facts are facts. No war with Iran will occur until it is confirmed that Iran cannot hit Israel.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:15 pm

Well Iran hits Israel via those guys in charge in Palestine (forgot thier name)

So they fight them by Proxy.

But I would have thought the main reason for a war in Iran, would be if Iraq develops a weapon that CAN hit iran directly. like a nuke.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:23 am

While Sadaam was busy keeping his own house in order, the Ayatollah was busy ensuring Iran coud develop nuclear energy, whether for living or as a defense.

In todays world, having nuclear weaponry doesn't make you a villian. It makes you safe.

The US, Russian, Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea, China, etc., they all understood that, and have accepted it as a means of survival. Sadly, nuclear weaponry is the only real deterrent to all out war.

So why the hoopla over Iran having the same? Because Israel is a "stone's throw away" so to speak. The US wouldn't dare jeopardize Israel.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:32 am

Because Iran is seen as more unstable, they seem willing to use a Nuke offensivly.

They said on TV they want to wipe israel from the face of the earth.

Also, Iran has a long history of proxy wars, so giving an A bomb to some group of people for them to use is a realistic scenario.

Im not really fussed over the US being mates with Israel, all these nations blow each other up over religions reasons, which is ******* stupid on so many levels.

Iran is a threat, it shouldnt have nukes becauses it will use them directly or more likely by proxy, I see that as only a matter of time.

I actually belive that Iraq was just an excuse to move [composite word including 'f*ck'] loads of troops next door to Iran. plus it sends all the religious nuts to Iraq, and off US soil.

Simple and highly effective tactic.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 1:07 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote: I actually belive that Iraq was just an excuse to move **** loads of troops next door to Iran. plus it sends all the religious nuts to Iraq, and off US soil.

Simple and highly effective tactic.

I would hardly call the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi's as "simple and effective". See, that's the problem. American blood should not be worth more than Iraqi blood, or Israeli blood, or whatever.

See, you criticize religion as root of evil, yet do not recognize what patriotism has done to your train of thought.

Predabot · Post by **Predabot** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 3:37 pm

I will agree, that Nationalism and patriotism are rather ****ed concepts in the global world we live in today.

Maybe they were valid when we lived in small tribes, with only a few millions in overall homo Sapien population, but not nowadays.