Iran Captures and Holds British Sailors - Page 4

1. We have, and it served the world mightily well for decades. We kept western Europe from the grip of brutal communism. That's just one example.

2. Our WMD stockpile is just as much about an arms race as it is global dominance. The Cold War built the stockpiles. We just maintain them for a rainy day.

3. The US used the nukes, because we were attacked at Pearl Harbor, and did not want to waste even more lives in a mainland invasion of Japan. Their use was totally justified. Terrible, but justified.

4. We do. And thank God we do. Deterrence works.

5. You mean who is the only nation that has the guts to stand up to the same people that turn their children into bombs to kill innocent people? Yep, that's US!

6. You mean who has HAD to get involved for the sake of freedom across the world? In Germany? In Japan? In Bosnia? .... It's a damn good thing we DO get involved, Iraq not withstanding.

7. The USSR. Without a doubt.

8. That Manifest Destiny is a nice thing. And let's not pretend you need a military base to do what happened on 9/11, It is the NATURE of the terrorist nations we are confronting to not trifle with things like uniforms, Geneva Conventions, and bases. And in this "neverland" - we are not committed to giving nuclear weapons to terror groups. My god.

You need to think about what the US has done FOR the world, not just TO it.

You see that's where you prove yourself to be somewhat bigotted.

Objectively it is all relative.

Many Iranians think their Government sucks...and many think it is better.

Many Westerners think the Western system is better while some think it is not.

And some people - you for instance - think that it is not even open to debate, that you are just superior by right and it is not even worth thinking about.

There are words and descriptive names for that.....

You need to get a grip on reality. And maybe a few history books after 1950.

1. US
2. US
3. US
4. US/Israel
5. US/Israel
6. US/Israel/UK
7. US/UK
8. US/UK

Wow....put like that in black and white it's pretty sobering reading....really puts things in perspective....

You need to get a grip on a real response. Have anything to add?

Segovius put it so well, I will leave it there. Arguing with you and SDW2001 is like arguing with autistic children.

As the uncle of an autistic child, I say I hearty FSCK YOU.

I spent my Sunday with my friend's autistic son. Believe me for you two that was a compliment.

Civility lads

I think you have it wrong Artman. "I say I hearty FSCK YOU" sounds more like a proposition. Borat style.

Back on topic. I really hope the British sailors don't suffer from any "frat hazing". I think the Iranians are playing dumb hoping the disputed border excuse works in their favor.

1.7 nautical miles(3.1484 kilometers) isn't that much to begin with.

First, I am probably the only human on earth who thinks Borat is an idiotic character and movie. Hence the cluelessness.

Back on topic. This whole thing is childish on both sides. But the wheels of political stupidity and domination roll on...

But wait. Is Britain using the wrong map?

"Former British Ambassador Craig Murray is now challenging the legitimacy of the map just published by the British government in the current dispute with Iran over those 15 captured British sailors and marines.

"Fake Maritime Boundaries

I have been unpopular before, but the level of threats since I started blogging on the captured marines has got a bit scary. It is therefore with some trepidation that I feel obliged to point this out.

"The British Government has published a map showing the coordinates of the incident, well within an Iran/Iraq maritime border. The mainstream media and even the blogosphere has bought this hook, line and sinker.

"But there are two colossal problems.

"A) The Iran/Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British Government. Only Iraq and Iran can agree their bilateral boundary, and they never have done this in the Gulf, only inside the Shatt because there it is the land border too. This published boundary is a fake with no legal force.

"B) Accepting the British coordinates for the position of both HMS Cornwall and the incident, both were closer to Iranian land than Iraqi land. Go on, print out the map and measure it. Which underlines the point that the British produced border is not a reliable one.

"None of which changes the fact that the Iranians, having made their point, should have handed back the captives immediately. I pray they do so before this thing spirals out of control. But by producing a fake map of the Iran/Iraq boundary, notably unfavourable to Iran, we can only harden the Iranian position."

When I spoke with the former Ambassador he told me how dumbfounded he is by the way in which the mainstream media continues to treat this dispute.

The BBC for instance has already interviewed a supposed expert regarding the map, who vouched for its authenticity. But the point is, as Craig Murray, points out, how can such a map exist if the subject of boundaries has never been settled between Iraq and Iran? Turns out the expert had been referred to the BBC by the British Ministry of Defense--who also turned out the plan.

Sounds like the rerun of a bad movie we've already seen."

How about an American Covert Action Movie...

Report: U.S. Sponsoring Kurdish Guerrilla Attacks Inside Iran

Rambo...where are you when we need you?

Just Stop.



This story is getting bigger by the minute this morning:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/...ors/index.html

- UK says the boats were in Iraqi waters
- Iran releases data showing boats in Iraqi waters
- Iraq confirms the coordinates as in their waters
- UK PM announces Iran's coordinates are in Iraqi waters
- Iran changes its coordinates to a location within its waters
- Letter of admission produced
- extremists in Iran want the troops tried for espionage (way off shore?)

In most incidents involving a crossing at sea, the imposing ship is bluntly asked to leave; when it does, the matter is finished. Troops are not held.

Here's what Gates has to say about probable war with Iran.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17836178/?GT1=9145

Agreed.

About Pearl Harbor: it was allowed to happen (yes, for a greater good) and did not require the nuking of two cities and the loss of thousands of civilian lives. The US also did not have to invade Japan; that was a choice they made and didn't like and used to justify the nukes. Visited Hiroshima lately? I have, last year and will be there again for a few days this summer. The cancers still affecting the people who live there are beyond imagination; the war between nations may be over, but the war upon the Japanese people is still being waged.

The US stockpile of nukes is the result of lies the government fed us about the Soviet threat; the US had many times the number of nukes as did the Soviets (for quite some time), but the threat was hung upon us with the greatest of care. Ask a few Southern Islanders how soon they can go home: they will answer not for several thousand years (US testing of nukes after forcibly removing them from their homes resulted in the total loss of the very place they used to live).

About the efforts made at changing other countries: have a read here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central...ligence_Agency

See? Allah himself could come down and say "These were the GPS coordinates for the sailors" and folks would say "But Allah doesn't need GPS so this must be fradulent..."

Logs, radar, sat imagery...pointless.

Vinea

Well, there's an assload of dead asians that probably say "GOOD!". The better for the Japanese people to remember not to do that again. There is some doubt on that matter...but I believe that China would be a little tougher this go around given it has the capability to turn all of Japan into a glowing parking lot Aegis or no Aegis.

A country that won't surrender after all their allies have, and after their fleet is effectively gone is simply a country that would continue to be an ongoing threat. They should have surrendered the moment Germany fell. That they did not indicated that only an invasion would compel them to see reason since firebombing hadn't made much of an impact to their national will.

As far as PH goes...I have a good deal on ultra thick tinfoil...only $1.99/sq in.

Vinea

Oh! Yes! Right! It's totally different!

There's an assload of live American wingers that say that too....they're so into it in fact they want a repeat performance in the Middle East.

If we wanted to kill them all we would have already done it Sego.

Many of my friends are Chinese. They have no sympathy for Japan. I have little sympathy for Japan. The atrocities of WWII Japan equaled or exceeded those of Hitler. The bombs were horrendous, but no more than the terror that they stopped. We have been oversaturated with Hitler and the Jews. We hear little about Japan's assault of Asia.

Not really, most Americans are sane and compassionate in my experience...it's just that the minority of the insane ones are very loud.

You couldn't have 'done it' without someone amenable in the WH but even then you suffer from the fact that such a person - being a winger - must necessarily be of little brain and must inevitably fvck it all up.

That's why manufactured pretexts are needed. You have no momentum or mandate....basically just a small bunch of psychobillies who got lucky. Fair enough, every dog must have his day and yours is nearly over with very little to show.....

We have not done it because we don't want to do it Sego.

Looking around me I see a lot of people who worked hard and sacrificed much to be here in Texas USA. Germans, Chinese ,Indians an Iraqi and an Egyptian at the moment. They must see the things that we as a people have accomplished that elude you from your smoke filled room in The Village.

Then there is this article which disputes the location of the ship, and its relationship to the "border"... or the supposed border.

This sounds a little like the "two Israeli soldiers" episode last summer, which is similarly disputed: Israel alleges that its two soldiers were captured inside Israeli territory, while other source suggest that the two Israeli soldiers were inside Lebanese territory at the time of capture. Only one side of this story, of course, was publicized in the mainstream media. 3 guesses.

Guesses are not required.

Hesbollah publicly admitted that the soldiers were kidnapped whilst patrolling in Israeli territory.
The kidnapping was done to carry out a public promise made by Hesbollah's leader to kidnap Israeli soldiers and trade them for certain Israeli-held prisoners.

Israel, Lebanon and Hesbollah all agree on at least that much. So who's disputing it?

Uh-oh....looks like Frank's been watching Fox News again

It's pretty much an open secret that the whole episode was manufactured....virtually no-one (except the fanbois) is disputing it and yes, the two incidents are chillingly similar.

This current incident is yet another example of rank hypocrisy - imagine - this spurious 'border' is actually one enforced by Saddam when he was in power and the British didn't uphold it then....nor did the Iranians, and rightly so.

Basically it is Iranian territory annexed by Saddam and the British knew this. To be fair you could argue both sides have a claim to being right but that is no excuse for blatant provocation and trying to kick off an international incident in pursuit of the blood-lust for war.

Thanks God Iran has integrity and can;t be bought off - but then they wouldn't be i this situation I suppose; facing the mass murder of their populations like what happened to Iraq.

For the record, I don't think I've ever watched more than two minutes of Fox News in my life.

The episode was not "manufactured" by one side or the other, unless you are deluded enough to think that Israel and Hesbollah sat down and colluded on how best they could destroy Lebanon.

Now the case could certainly be made that Israel used the incident as justification for launching a wider conflict they had been considering for some time. But that is entirely different from saying an event was "manufactured".

If it isn't a real conspiracy, don't worry- that matters not. Especially when some conservative politician can be blamed for it. Its now reached into the realm of comedy. Nothing happens bad anywhere without being part of the neocon conspiracy.



Now in Fez!


EARTH TO BE HIT BY ASTEROID, EVERYONE RIGHT OF JOE LIEBERMAN TO BLAME.

Never a truer word was said in jest?

What was it folks say: Germans are ashamed of WWII, Japanese are embarassed?

Doesn't apply to all Germans or Japanese but that's a perception in Asia I think.

Vinea

Now I know you're not a serious person. How about Iran against Israel? How Syria against Lebanon?

You lack objectivity and world perspective. Pure tunnel vision for you.

... check that... in the perspective of a person who apparently sees the US as nothing more than a liability to the world. This internet you're using? Your gift from the United States Department of Defense.

Now a letter saying the UK should pull out.
Now a move by UK to have the UN pressure Iran.
Now a reversal of the plan to release the female.
UN pressures Iran.
Images of some guy favoring death for the Brits on CNN (taken in Tehran).

The UK should pull out - doesn't matter who says it or why.

Given that the US is funding the terrorist cells of the MEK to blow up Iranian infrastructure and civilians this guy on CNN is probably one of them they gave time off.

Look at it this way: you can bet your ass CNN do not have a film crew or permit anywhere in Iran.

And you can bet your ass that the Iranians would not let this film out on the remote chance it was real - so...there you go.

Btw: I heard a phone-m yesterday on this issue. One of the callers was asking why we (the sh..err public) knew the name of the woman hostage and not the others.

The answer - and this is from the BBC - was this:

"We did an interview with her on HMS Cornwall a few days before this incident and part of that interview was a deal with the Navy that [i]if for any reason her name became prominent in the public domain then they could name her on the condition they did not name any other service personnel that may be involved in any event she was associated with".

Basically they signed a deal a few days before to interview and have the rights to use her name but no-one else's.

I find that interesting though nobody else probably will.

I thought that was a Brit....and in the days when Brits were Brits and not toadying lackies,

Btw - you forgot cracking the Enigma codes and single-handedly defeating the Nazis as hapless Brits and Poles stood idly by......

Hmm, seems to me like Iran's regime is not in full control of the revolutionary guards that patrol at the border to Iraq. Looks like the revolutionary guards arrested/captivated these british soldiers in order to try to force the US to release the iranian officials/diplomats/whatever they arrested in Iraq.

Nightcrawler

Here ya go: ARPANET