Iranians capture 15 Royal Navy personel

[Avatar4321]

Of course I do. Are you concerned about war?

But I'm curious to hear what you think the solution will be if it doesn't involve diplomacy.

War is a form of diplomacy. So of course it will be handled through diplomacy. Just wont necessarily be non-violent.

Iran is baiting the west right now. Everyone is concerned about war. Noone really wants it. but we dont always get to choose the times we live in.

 

[Dirt McGirt]

War is a form of diplomacy. So of course it will be handled through diplomacy. Just wont necessarily be non-violent.

Iran is baiting the west right now. Everyone is concerned about war. Noone really wants it. but we dont always get to choose the times we live in.

War is a form of diplomacy? I've always thought war was a result of diplomacy but whatever. I've no desire to debate semantics.

So what violent solution do you propose the UK do AND be able to bring those sailors home alive?

 

[UnAmericanYOU]

George Galloway, that Saddam's old pal, right? Mayor of London?

Liberals have a political party of their own here in Britain, it is called 'The Liberal Party'.You should shut up now.

Que? I thought it was the Labour[sic]Party that was the left-of-center British political party. And the Tories on the right, where's Maggie Thatcher when you need her?

The ball's in Blair's court, Blair being Blair, he'll probably try "diplomacy" first, but this IS Iran he's dealing with.

But fear not, the EU's going to try appeasement, no surprise:

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - A top European envoy on Monday renewed an offer from six world powers to talk with Tehran over its nuclear ambitions, and a senior Iranian negotiator agreed to stay in contact in an effort to find common ground.

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana's telephone conversation with Ali Larijani, Tehran's top nuclear negotiator, was the first exchange between the representatives of Iran and the international community since the U.N. Security Council toughened its anti-Iran sanctions because of the Islamic republic's refusal to freeze uranium enrichment.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6511249,00.html

If the UK just understood the Iranians more! This will show what Blair's made of, he talks tough and makes token actions:

Blair convenes Cobra team as crisis in Iran escalates
BRIAN BRADY

WESTMINSTER EDITOR

THE official notification, delivered in secure calls yesterday morning to senior Whitehall figures, was the latest dramatic behind-the-scenes move to get to grips with a crisis that is now engulfing the government.

After a day of shadow-boxing with a notoriously slippery regime, Tony Blair is set to up the ante: the plight of the Shatt al-Arab 15 is officially a crisis and he will need the Cobra team to handle it.

http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=462812007

We'll see. Thic incident has been compared to the Iran Hostage Crisis of the late 70s, it won't go on that long.

 

[red states rule]

From the moonbat left...............


Rosie Implies Captured Brits Are A Contrived 'Gulf of Tonkin' For War With Iran
Posted by Justin McCarthy on March 26, 2007 - 13:19.
On the March 26 edition of "The View," co-host Rosie O’Donnell discussed the Iranian seizure of British sailors. Rosie again gave out false information on national television and implied that this may be a hoax so to provide the president with an excuse to go to war.

"But interesting with the British sailors, there were 15 British sailors and Marines who apparently went into Iranian waters and they were seized by the Iranians. And I have one thing to say: Gulf of Tonkin, Google it. Okay."

Rosie may have missed the news that not only do the United States and Britain insist they were not in Iranian waters, but Iraq and France do as well. Veteran journalist Barbara Walters did not bother to correct Rosie.

For those of you not well versed on the Vietnam War, the Gulf of Tonkin incident was an allegation of North Vietnamese aggression on U.S. warships that led the United States into a long bloody conflict with North Vietnam. It was later revealed that the President Lyndon B. Johnson was unsure the event occurred. Was Rosie suggesting that captured British sailors is nothing more than a hoax to provoke a war with Iran? After all, Rosie now believes the September 11 attacks were orchestrated by the U.S. government. The transcript is below.

ROSIE O’DONNELL: But interesting with the British sailors, there were 15 British sailors and Marines who apparently went into Iranian waters and they were seized by the Iranians. And I have one thing to say: Gulf of Tonkin, Google it. Okay.

JOY BEHAR: Some other time. Some other time.

O’DONNELL: Well, you know...

BARBARA WALTERS: It could be a decision making time. It's a very difficult situation. It's at the United Nations. It’s being examined now. Should there be sanctions? Militarily, we certainly don't seem to be in the position to do something militarily. But it is a decision making time.

O’DONNELL: Yes, but it’s very interesting too that, you know, these guys, they went into the water by mistake right at a time when British and American, you know, they're two, they’re pretty much our biggest ally and we're considering whether or not we should go into war with Iran.

BEHAR: But the U.N. was about to sanction them, also have an embargo against Iran. And the, and the timing [unintelligible] so they distracted the whole world with this.

ELISABETH HASSELBECK: Right and they may be about to expel the inspectors right now, too, which could be considered [unintelligible]

O’DONNELL: Right or it could be just the Gulf of Tonkin, which you should all Google.

http://newsbusters.org/node/11646

 

[maineman]

oh look! it's a post from red states rule that consists of nothing but a tangentially appropriate article from newsbusters. what a surprise!

 

[maineman]

and actually, there are many more parallels to the Pueblo incident than to the Gulf of Tonkin.... unless Iran is trumping up the brit's actions to justify THEIR entry into the fray.

 

[red states rule]

and actually, there are many more parallels to the Pueblo incident than to the Gulf of Tonkin.... unless Iran is trumping up the brit's actions to justify THEIR entry into the fray.

Please loosen your tin foil hat

 

[maineman]

Please loosen your tin foil hat

what do you mean?

are you suggesting that this situation does not closely mirror the Pueblo incident?

are you suggesting that the Iranians might not have taken the brits hostage in international waters and only claimed that they were in Iranian territorial waters in order to provide themselves rationale for entering this conflict?

 

[red states rule]

what do you mean?

are you suggesting that this situation does not closely mirror the Pueblo incident?

are you suggesting that the Iranians might not have taken the brits hostage in international waters and only claimed that they were in Iranian territorial waters in order to provide themselves rationale for entering this conflict?

Libs see the vast right wing conspiracy in their shadows as they walk

 

[maineman]

Libs see the vast right wing conspiracy in their shadows as they walk

you really are a moron. what about my statement has anything to do with liberal or conservative? why are you incapable of answering my questions....

let me list them again:

are you suggesting that this situation does not closely mirror the Pueblo incident?

are you suggesting that the Iranians might not have taken the brits hostage in international waters and only claimed that they were in Iranian territorial waters in order to provide themselves rationale for entering this conflict?

 

[red states rule]

you really are a moron. what about my statement has anything to do with liberal or conservative? why are you incapable of answering my questions....

let me list them again:

are you suggesting that this situation does not closely mirror the Pueblo incident?

are you suggesting that the Iranians might not have taken the brits hostage in international waters and only claimed that they were in Iranian territorial waters in order to provide themselves rationale for entering this conflict?

Not surprised you blame the victim. Libs always seem to support America's enemies

 

[maineman]

Not surprised you blame the victim. Libs always seem to support America's enemies

your reading comprehension skills are ZERO...I am not blaming the victim at all - unless you think that Iran is the victim...try rereading what I wrote and using your head for more than a hatrack.

 

[maineman]

no further comment RSR? wanna show me how I am blaming the victim?

 

[maineman]

Not surprised you blame the victim. Libs always seem to support America's enemies

are you ever going to explain how you came to this bizarre conclusion? Will you show me where I did that in my statement above?

 

[red states rule]

no further comment RSR? wanna show me how I am blaming the victim?

saying how it all part a of grand conspriacy

Next you will say how Pres Bush arranged the capture of the ship

 

[CSM]

and actually, there are many more parallels to the Pueblo incident than to the Gulf of Tonkin.... unless Iran is trumping up the brit's actions to justify THEIR entry into the fray.

I tend to think the same way. The Iranians have good reasons for this action which could include a bargaining chip for prisoner exchange, justification for more active role in Iraq, putting pressure on the international community to ease possible sanctions against them for pursuing nuclear weapons, and maybe even to gain esteem in the Middle East (taking on the big boys and surviving.) Lots of advantages for Iran with this.

 

[maineman]

saying how it all part a of grand conspriacy

Next you will say how Pres Bush arranged the capture of the ship

where did I say anything was a grand conspriacy? where did I say anything that blamed anyone other than the Iranians themselves? You misread my words and now do not have the grace to admit it.

 

[maineman]

I tend to think the same way. The Iranians have good reasons for this action which could include a bargaining chip for prisoner exchange, justification for more active role in Iraq, putting pressure on the international community to ease possible sanctions against them for pursuing nuclear weapons, and maybe even to gain esteem in the Middle East (taking on the big boys and surviving.) Lots of advantages for Iran with this.

exactly...it is a win for Iran.... and it makes sense for them to falsely claim the territorial waters thing.... it's tough to disprove now that the action is over.

 

[CSM]

exactly...it is a win for Iran.... and it makes sense for them to falsely claim the territorial waters thing.... it's tough to disprove now that the action is over.

Yes and no...IF (and that is a big 'if') the Brits had a GPS tracking device (many units in Iraq do) then their position is known within less than 30 feet at all times. Such information should be in classified computer logs and probably is. US units are all equipped with this functionality ... not sure about all coalition partners but I am almost certain the Brits are.

Such technology wont keep the Iranian propaganda machine from cranking out bullshit though.

 

[maineman]

Yes and no...IF (and that is a big 'if') the Brits had a GPS tracking device (many units in Iraq do) then their position is known within less than 30 feet at all times. Such information should be in classified computer logs and probably is. US units are all equipped with this functionality ... not sure about all coalition partners but I am almost certain the Brits are.

Such technology wont keep the Iranian propaganda machine from cranking out bullshit though.

I agree..... they can claim that the log entries were adjusted.