Iran attacks british forces

[richardm]

Furthermore, AS allies we expect you Brits not to do anything stupid like entering Iran's waters during a war with two of its neighbors! Why make a mistake like that?

Thank you for assuming that it's the RN who are lying and not Iran. Mind you, they're not immune to errors of navigation but denying it wouldn't seem to be very helpful.

Meanwhile, Blair says that if diplomacy fails, attempts to free them will move to a " different phase". No news yet on what this will be, of course. I find it hard to believe that we would start bombing Iran over this. I also don't believe that it would be an effective way to get them released.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Thank you for assuming that it's the RN who are lying and not Iran. Mind you, they're not immune to errors of navigation but denying it wouldn't seem to be very helpful.

Mr Blair was said the most important thing was the welfare of the eight sailors and seven marines from HMS Cornwall and securing their release.

"We have been clearly stating that we are utterly certain that the personnel were in Iraqi waters.

"We so far have not made explicit why we know that, because we don't want to escalate this."

That would probably be a GPS based plot from HMS Cornwall.

An Iranian source has told BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner the Britons are being interrogated to find out if their mission was intelligence-gathering.

The source said the investigation involved examining tracking equipment to determine exactly where the crew was captured.

In order for the Britons to be released "every vested interest in Iran would need to be satisfied they had not deliberately entered Iranian waters, nor were they spying", the source added.


This is the first of a few face saving moves, as the mission was clearly MISO.(Maritime Intercept/Security Operations)

DR

 

[Azure]

What the hell would they be spying on?

Oh wait...

 

[Kerberos]

Iran seems to be backing down, at least the Iranian embassy in Londons says that a negotiated solution is in sight.

http://politiken.dk/udland/article273571.ece (still in Danish)

Also the female sailor might be released soon according to the Iranian foreign minister.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/28/iran.uk.sailors/index.html (in English)

 

[NoZed Avenger]

The Brits released data showing that they were in Iraqi waters, and the US has steamed extra ships into the area, looking like a show of support and a vague threat if Iran doesn't start coming 'round to our way of thinking.

With the latest noises by Iran indicating that they might be willing to call it a mistake on Britain's part (i.e., the first stages of face-saving), things look a little more hopeful.

 

[Seismosaurus]

According to the news this evening, Iran claimed that they were in Iranian waters and gave some co-ordinates to back this up... which turned out to be in Iraqi waters! When this was pointed out the Iranians quickly said that no, they weren't picked up there, it was over here actually...

 

[Darth Rotor]

According to the news this evening, Iran claimed that they were in Iranian waters and gave some co-ordinates to back this up... which turned out to be in Iraqi waters! When this was pointed out the Iranians quickly said that no, they weren't picked up there, it was over here actually...

Sinbad the Sailor wept.

Are we watching Khalid Stoned Cops here? A freaking Megellan GPS costs less than 200 bucks.

DR

 

[Seismosaurus]

Sinbad the Sailor wept.

Are we watching Khalid Stoned Cops here? A freaking Megellan GPS costs less than 200 bucks.

DR

And apparently the nice folks in the Royal Navy were kind enought to not only take one along to the ship they were inspecting, they also took a photograph of somebody holding it up showing their location with the ship clearly visible in the background. Isn't that convenient?

 

[Art Vandelay]

How can they be accused of spying? Isn't a soldier properly uniformed, by definition, not a spy?

While that won't please the "Nuke all ragheads" brigade, there wouldn't seem to be a better answer anywhere.

Better according to what standard? Rewarding hostage-taking simply causes more hostage-taking. The only way there should be a prisoners swap is if Britain goes into Iran and captures Iranian soldiers for the swap. No option which leaves Iran better off than they were beforehand should be even considered.

When the NK took our ship, we folded like a cheap table, apologized, then took back our apology like weasels. When China took our airmen, we again apologized, then again took back the apology. I can only hope that Britain isn't as spineless and dishonorable as we have been.

I find it just a little ironic that despite Iraq still being an issue - for the people getting shot at anyway - the downside of opening another front in the war on [strikle]islam[/strike] isn't obviously apparent.

The front is already there. The only question is whether Iran is going to be the only one fighting on it. What's mystifying to me is that people don't see the downside of declaring open season on Allied personnel. And that people use the word "ironic" when they clearly don't know what it means.

I also don't believe that it would be an effective way to get them released.

I don't see why getting them released is the central issue. The honor of Britain is far more important. Fifteen is lives is a small price to pay compared to the consequences of allowing Iran to intimidate Britain.

Are we watching Khalid Stoned Cops here? A freaking Megellan GPS costs less than 200 bucks.

But then they'd have to rely on The Great Satan for their position. And it's "Magellan".

 

[Dorian Gray]

Nothing like fanning a fire which had all but gone out, eh?

No, nothing. I would have blown on the embers, but I was afraid that would get this thread moved into the science section.

 

[Dorian Gray]

The withdrawal of UK troops is as was planned for at least the last couple of years. UK troops were to assume security responsibilities for certain regions in Iraq and as the Iraqis are able to take over those responsibilities the UK forces are withdrawn.

So the UK troops get moved to areas that aren't secure yet! Why should they get to say "well, suh, our area appears to be quite contained, so cheerio and ta-ta, see you next war"? All I'm saying is that if they leave instead of staying to help us out with the much harder Baghdad area, they are not really supporting us that much.

ETA: BTW, another thing that was planned is that we would be greeted as liberators with flowers, that we would find WMDs, etc., etc.

 

[Dorian Gray]

Thank you for assuming that it's the RN who are lying and not Iran. Mind you, they're not immune to errors of navigation but denying it wouldn't seem to be very helpful.

Meanwhile, Blair says that if diplomacy fails, attempts to free them will move to a " different phase". No news yet on what this will be, of course. I find it hard to believe that we would start bombing Iran over this. I also don't believe that it would be an effective way to get them released.

I literally said that it was a mistake - to wit, "Why make a mistake like that?". I didn't say anyone was lying, strawhunter. And glad to see that you agree they are not immune to errors, which my thesaurus tells me is a synonym for 'mistakes'. However, with GPS systems and other navigation systems, it seems unlikely that Britain could go anywhere by mistake.

UK troops have been detained by Iran before, for the same reason, in June 2004. I strongly believe that the sailors will be released. However, they are not technically prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions, just so you are aware. More like 'detainees'.

I would hope no one bombs Iran over this, or uses it as a pretext to bombing nuclear-related sites.

 

[Dorian Gray]

I don't see why getting them released is the central issue. The honor of Britain is far more important. Fifteen is lives is a small price to pay compared to the consequences of allowing Iran to intimidate Britain.

Honor is a horrible reason for letting people die. It's also a good way to start a war that goes on for 1400 years.

 

[Azure]

Honor is a horrible reason for letting people die. It's also a good way to start a war that goes on for 1400 years.

By backing down against Iran, you encourage them to pull **** like this more often.

 

[SezMe]

The front is already there. The only question is whether Iran is going to be the only one fighting on it. What's mystifying to me is that people don't see the downside of declaring open season on Allied personnel. And that people use the word "ironic" when they clearly don't know what it means.

"Allied" personnel??? We're discussing the Iraq war, not WWII. Try to keep up with the homework assignments, Art.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

Honor is a horrible reason for letting people die. It's also a good way to start a war that goes on for 1400 years.

I think his point was poorly made, but the gist seemed to be that folding in order to protect these 15 lives might well (and in his opinion would) lead to more and worse situations like this by encouraging the behavior -- trading a short term gain of 15 people released for a long term potential for hundreds or thousands of deaths or detentions later on.

So his calling it "honor" didn't really cover the point adequately (IMO), but that seems to be what he's getting at.

 

[Art Vandelay]

"Allied" personnel??? We're discussing the Iraq war, not WWII. Try to keep up with the homework assignments, Art.

Oh, sorry. I was unaware that once a term is used to describe the events of WWII, it is forever lost from the English language for any other use.

Are you ever going to get tired of making an ass of yourself over your ridiculous obsession with me?

I think his point was poorly made, but the gist seemed to be that folding in order to protect these 15 lives might well (and in his opinion would) lead to more and worse situations like this by encouraging the behavior -- trading a short term gain of 15 people released for a long term potential for hundreds or thousands of deaths or detentions later on.

So his calling it "honor" didn't really cover the point adequately (IMO), but that seems to be what he's getting at.

Thanks for giving another explanation. "Honor" is shorthand for a very complicated concept, and often it is not anything worth lives, but in this case it is. Look at the Iran-Iraq war. Hundreds of thousands of lives lost, and one of the contributing factors was the Iraqi perception that Iran was weak. Or WWII. Or the first Gulf War. Etc. Etc. Not vigorously defending one's reputation can have deadly consequences.

 

[Big Les]

Just in case Dr A is still reading this thread, it's worth noting that even the serving soldiers on arrse.co.uk are saying "or else what", from the perspective of those who have had their budgets cut year on year, yet are being asked to do more with less. Another interpretation of the post that doesn't require the poster to be slighting the UK or its armed forces, and wouldn't warrant your going off the deep end.

 

[richardm]

I literally said that it was a mistake - to wit, "Why make a mistake like that?". I didn't say anyone was lying, strawhunter.

Well, you know it was less the "Why make a mistake like that" and more the snotty "AS allies we expect you Brits not to do anything stupid like entering Iran's waters during a war with two of its neighbors!" which caught my eye. I inferred that to mean that you thought that they had, in fact been in Iranian waters and when they said they were not they were lying to cover this up. Conversely, when Iran insisted that they had been in Iranian waters then they were the ones telling the truth.

However, with GPS systems and other navigation systems, it seems unlikely that Britain could go anywhere by mistake.

You're doing it again!

And apparently the nice folks in the Royal Navy were kind enought to not only take one along to the ship they were inspecting, they also took a photograph of somebody holding it up showing their location with the ship clearly visible in the background. Isn't that convenient?

Now I'm being careful about drawing inferences this time, but in case you're wondering why they would have this convenient photograph: the ship that was raided is still at anchor where it was when the sailors were seized. They flew the Lynx out with the handheld GPS so they'd have a nifty photo showing all the elements.

 

[Darth Rotor]

How can they be accused of spying? Isn't a soldier properly uniformed, by definition, not a spy?

Yes.

But then they'd have to rely on The Great Satan for their position. And it's "Magellan".

Oops, thanks for the correction, and the Rev Guard, Al Quds, and Iranian Air Force were happy to fly F-4 Phantoms and F-14 Tomcats, and to man Hawk missiles, against Saddam. Great Satan makes good hardware. Good soldiers know that.

DR