British Forces Held By Iran

[-Tigger-]

http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/vi...7_1800,00.html

video released, complete crap, dodgey editing and also look at the distress she is in, im sorry but if they r being treated properly then she should not look so distressed and also u can tell in her voice she is not believing what she is reading out..

ps.. silents idea of sending in the SAS sounds like a good option (that is ofcourse if they rnt already there on standby).. we have proof that the UK was in iraq's waters.. and iran ofcourse doesnt buy it..

[Erik]

It's just brits...
















Kidding. But this will be taken care off. I opt to get a force of us to go to Iran and take him out during a speech.

[Mauser 98K]

i heard today that they now have proof that they was in iraqi water from the gps data, if that be the case then that is a clear act of war.

thy know where the iranian pres is and he makes frequent public speaches just send a tamohawk to get his ass.

[SilentTrigger]

That would send the brits to a sertain death unfortently.

[Erik]

Shouldn't of trespassed.

[-Tigger-]

Originally posted by twig
Shouldn't of trespassed.

incase u didnt notice, there is GPS proof that they were in iraq waters.. its iran that shud not have tresspassed.

a mob is calling them to be executed - http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...258238,00.html

.. if they get executed then well.. war is likely

[Mauser 98K]

if they get executed i would volunter to kill that sombich, only prob is military wont take me back, tried it and had to let me go due to microvalve prolaps of the heart, grrr i would be in there now if it wernt fer that, but it aint good fer ya to be under fire or in basic and ya heart start going nuts.

[Mauser 98K]

IRAN'S OUTRAGEOUS BEHAVIOR CONTINUES


Quick...what generates more headlines....the non-violations of the Geneva Conventions that allegedly went on at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba by the United States, or the actual violations of the Geneva Conventions by Iran? You guessed it...far and away it is the latter. Iran now says Britain must admit its soldiers trespassed into Iranian waters for them to get their soldiers back. This came after Iran paraded the soldiers on TV in violation of the Geneva Conventions. Just how much is Britain going to put up with here? Seems like a lot, although Tony Blair says it's time to ratchet up the pressure.

It's become obvious that Iran simply does whatever it wants. They keep pushing the envelope because nobody wants to push back. With each shove a new norm is created. The Iranian weird-beards know that we've lost the will, or the political ability to do anything about their nuclear weapons program, so they continue to develop the bomb. They know the Euro-weasels are too spineless and too addicted to their oil to do anything about 15 kidnapped British soldiers, so they parade them on TV. And they know the United Nations will never really pass serious sanctions...well, because China and Russia like that oil too. So now things are the way they are.

So now [Tony Blair says it's time to "ratchet up the pressure.] ." He says he's going to bring about international pressure on Iran. Ohhh...I'm sure Ahmadinejad is shaking in his high heels over that one. And further illustrating the difference between how we do things and how the British do things...Blair actually said he was glad the soldiers didn't put up a fight. Had these been U.S. Marines, we would've blown the Iranians to Mecca --- or would we? Isn't a shame that we can't be sure.

Late news ... Britain now says that it going to seek United Nations condemnation of the Iranian actions. Ohhhhhhhh. I'll bet the pucker factors are at an all time high now in Tehran.

On top of all this, Iran is now reneging on its promise to release the female British sailor. Iran may finally graduate from public repudiation to a stern talking to over that one.

<<<story here>>>>


<<<origional story here>>>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

here is another one, saying how the british was ordered to stand down and not defend themselves and was forced to watch their freinds led off into captivity, i say the iranians arntthe only1s to blame for them getting kidnaped, the chain of command needs to be kicked in the ass and redone and put some that have balls in.

HOSTAGE SAILORS -- BRITAIN'S IMPOTENCE
By ARTHUR HERMAN

<<<<<STORY HERE>>>>>


Rue, Britainnia: As Iran took British sailors hostages, the USS John C. Stennis arrived in the Gulf. Britain no longer has true aircraft carriers, and is on track to scrap much of its remaining navy.March 28, 2007 -- IT'S been a tough month for the British Navy. On March 7, it learned that Tony Blair's Labor government was going ahead with drastic cuts in its budget and number of ships. By this time next year, the once-vaunted Royal Navy will be about the size of the Belgian Navy, while its officers face a five-year moratorium on all promotions.

If that wasn't demoralizing enough, last Friday the Iranian Navy seized a patrol boat containing 15 British sailors and Marines, claiming they'd crossed into Iranian waters. They're now hostages and may well go on trial as spies.

The latest report is that the Britons were ready to fight off their abductors. Certainly their escorting ship, HMS Cornwall, could have blown the Iranian naval vessel out of the water. However, at the last minute the British Ministry of Defense ordered the Cornwall not to fire, and her captain and crew were forced to watch their shipmates led away into captivity.

There was a question whether the Blair government would end up leaving Britain with a navy too small to protect its shores. Now it seems to want a navy that can't even protect its own sailors.

For some time, Tony Blair has been trying to show that for all his support of President Bush, he is no warmonger. He has been a consistent "softliner" on Iran's nuclear program, supporting the Europeans' search for a diplomatic solution and repeatedly insisting that any military options be taken off the table.

Since January, the Blair government has broadcast its intentions of gutting the Royal Navy's surface fleet. At the same time, it also announced its plans for withdrawing 2,500 British troops from Iraq. The result? First, the Royal Navy is finished as a credible military force. Second, the British Army's redeployment from Basra has been widely interpreted as abandonment of the Iraq mission, rather than as moving on to Afghanistan after a job well done, as Blair insists.

And now the Iranians have hostages with which to wring more concessions from the British - including perhaps withdrawal of British vessels from the Coalition task force guarding the Persian Gulf.

The mullahs in Tehran clearly see the new pacifist trend in Britain not as a hopeful sign of future accord, but as supine surrender. Just as clearly, they have singled out Britain as the latest weak link in the Coalition fighting in Iraq and in the War on Terror.

If the Iranians can force Britain to join the other European powers on the sidelines in Iraq as well as in Afghanistan (where most NATO nations devote their time to finding excuses for not risking their soldiers' lives in combat), they will have virtually completed America's isolation from the rest of the world community. In effect, America's only reliable ally in Iraq and the War on Terror will be Australia - and a change of government there could well mean the loss of that ally, as well.

This will be a tragedy - but not for America. The United States has grown used to doing the fighting and dying the other industrialized democracies refuse to do in order to defend themselves and their interests.

Britain has been an exception. In places like Bosnia and the Persian Gulf, and in operations like Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom, its help has been solid and genuine, as well as important in a symbolic sense. America always looks better when a couple of frigates flying the Royal Navy's White Ensignare side by side with those flying the Stars and Stripes. U.S. sailors also know that in a real fight, the men of the Royal Navy, which our navy men still call the "Senior Service," will never let them down.

That contribution has never been vital to America - yet it was a badge of honor for Britain. It had echoes of past glory as an empire, of course, but also of Britain's historic role as protector of a civilized and stable world order, and specifically the role of the Royal Navy. The British navy had wiped out the slave trade; it had single-handedly defied tyrants from Louis XIV and Napoleon to Hitler; and it served as midwife to the ideas of free trade and the balance of power.

Now those days are gone for good. Yet, if today's Britons thought that by shedding that historic responsibility they could buy themselves some peace of mind, the current hostage crisis has just proved them wrong.

Seventy years ago, another generation of British politicians believed that disarming themselves would help ease world tensions after World War One. Farsighted and progressive planners cut the Royal Navy by nearly two-thirds and ceased the fortification of vital naval bases like Singapore so as not to alarm other powers. In the name of international peace, Britain signed treaties formally limiting the size of its fleet, and as late as 1935 reached an accord with Adolf Hitler allowing him to build the submarine fleet that the Versailles Treaty had denied him.

Six years later, Hitler's U-boats were turned loose to harry British shipping and the Japanese stormed into Singapore, forcing the greatest mass surrender in British history.

Today, British politicians seem determined to make the same mistake. They exude the spirit not of Winston Churchill or Margaret Thatcher but of diplomat and Labor Party stalwart Harold Nicolson, who used to sigh to friends in the dark days after France's surrender in 1940: "All we can do is lie on our backs with our paws in the air and hope that no one will stamp on our tummies."

The capture of 15 British sailors should serve as a warning. Nations cannot "opt out" of their responsibilities in the War on Terror when they feel it, like players in a pickup basketball game or cricket match.

Enemies like the mullahs and their terrorist allies recognize no time outs, no neutral ground. They see only strength and weakness, those nations they can manipulate and those they have to fear. Today they clearly feel they can pull the British lion's tail with impunity.

If the hostages are finally released unharmed, it will have a lot more to do with the presence of two American carrier groups off the Iranian coast than anything Blair is doing - and the British will have learned that what they really lost when they gave up their fleet and abandoned the fight in Iraq is their own self-respect.

[Erik]

Btw, I was kidding.

[Hellfighter]

Mauser 98K
thats too much to read, god could you have break it down to the point! then going over broad making it into a long story out of your post.

[Terry]

not gonna give my views on this but what i will say is you're not all american on this forum twig.. if u were kidding, why ****ing say it?

[Hellfighter]

i really have a bad feeling they will be kill off! do to the Iran will show they was nice to them, but its like given the last meal before you kill the person.

gut feeling thats all.

[Mauser 98K]

Originally posted by Chief ADFP
Mauser 98K
thats too much to read, god could you have break it down to the point! then going over broad making it into a long story out of your post.

lol, sorry.

[Mauser 98K]

How Britons were conned by Iranian gunboat trick
The speed and cunning shown by the Revolutionary Guards suggests that their action was premeditated.

The British sailors and marines being held by Iran were ambushed at their most vulnerable moment, while climbing down the ladder of a merchant ship and trying to get into their bobbing inflatables.

Out of sight of their warship and without any helicopter cover, their only link to their commanders was a communications device beaming their position by satellite.

That went dead as they were captured. One theory is that it was thrown overboard to prevent the Iranians getting hold of the equipment and the information it contained.

The Ministry of Defence released the coordinates of the searched vessel yesterday to prove that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards made an unprovoked and improper attack in Iraqi waters.

The Iranians also blundered in diplomatic talks by giving the British their own compass reference for the place where they said the 14 men and one woman had been seized. When Britain plotted these on a map and pointed out that the spot was in Iraq’s maritime area, the Iranians came up with a new set of coordinates, putting the seizure in their own waters.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1582544.ece

[Chrispy]

I agree with the whole GPS thing, but why don't they show the proof to Iran? (I know it ain't that easy though...)

If both countries are going to argue for so long, they might as well just start a damn war.

Chris

[-Tigger-]

they have shown the proof chris.. but iran is showing its "proof"

that article is inaccurate masuer.. there was a lynx helicopter shadowing their search and is clearly visable in the video of the capture

[Lakie]

I think part of it is that the maritime borders were redrawn by the coalition of the willing with the Iraq War, If you accept those lines, which expanded iraqi waters, then it takes place in Iraq. But Iran dosent, as it was forced on them, so they're working on the principle it took place in Iranian Waters...

[DevilDog#1]

Damn! I leave for a few days and whole world is falling apart! Can't we all live together?!?!

[Chrispy]

Originally posted by DevilDog#1
Damn! I leave for a few days and whole world is falling apart! Can't we all live together?!?!

It just doesn't work that way.

Chris

[Mauser 98K]

SO NOW THEY'RE "DETAINEES"

Iran is announcing that all 15 British hostages have "confessed" to intruding into their waters. Yeah ... we're buying that.

Notice how the media is referring to the hostages as "detainees." The world merely serves to give Iran a pass on their actions. So what if Iran is violating the Geneva Convention by parading the hostages on TV. No wonder Iran kidnapped the soldiers...they knew the Euro-weasels would be weak and would continue to appease the Islamofascists. And that's exactly what is happening.

Make no mistake, the only reason Iran took these soldiers hostage is because they knew nothing bad would happen and they would be able to use them to garner publicity, divert attention from the United Nations and their nuclear program, and make the West look weak. They knew Britain would give up without a fight and that there would be no consequences and that is exactly what has happened. The policy of appeasement and coddling Islamofascism in Europe is now playing out in Iran. Will the United States join the rest of the world in making that mistake?

http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html