Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
If someone told you that the deal to send you home was done and all you had to do was spout some rubbish on TV would you?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Blair ought to tell those camel-humpers he'll drop a nuke on their ass TONITE..,.if those folks aren't out by 5PM today!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Blair ought to tell those camel-humpers he'll drop a nuke on their ass TONITE..,.if those folks aren't out by 5PM today!

Spoken like a true reactionary simpleton. I share your anger at Iran's government, but not your need for innocent blood spilled.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShinyEd:
You don't deal with the devil...you don't back down to savages...that is UNLESS YOU WANT endless bloodshed forever. These neaderthals see any hesitation as weakness...weakness breeds confidence which breeds agression...learn some history before calling me or anyone else a simpleton...although I do appreciate your obvious restraint from calling me worse.

---

Quote:

---

This is Great Britain for god's sake!.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Oh please!

1) Iran has no refineries, they have to import petrol. So whose refinery's should we bomb?
2) As far as i know they own no tankers, so whose tankers would we sink? American tankers?
3) We would actually like to have our people back, that is the objective not starting a war. Mrs T would not have started a war over this, Churchill would not have started a war over this, no British politician would nuke them over this. The reason you have a foreign office is to allow you to apply none military presure to get what you want.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Jongsstraw, unfortunatly, this ain't Maggie Thatcher's Great Britain. Seems their finest hour has already chimed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Few things that have to be mentioned.

1) this was a UN mission so UN rules of enguagement apply. UN troops do not fire unless fired on, and yes that means they get captured all the time --- remember Kosovo. In the Balkans in the early days UN troops were seen as an easy place to get arms.

2) I seem to remember a 100 or so Americans being held for 444 days why didn't you rescue them... oh wait, I remember how well that worked.

3)The tube bombers killed fewer people than Tim McVeigh. So we have fewer problems with Muslims than you have with rednecks.

As to admissions. Iran did this before in 2004 and let everybody go after they "appologised." Since these folks haven't been allowed to see embassy staff who knows what they have been told? If someone told you that the deal to send you home was done and all you had to do was spout some rubbish on TV would you?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Jongsstraw, unfortunatly, this ain't Maggie Thatcher's Great Britain. Seems their finest hour has already chimed.

---

The term is FORTUNATLY this is not Maggie 'the crazed bitch' Thatchers Britain.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Causal:
I wonder why that's not being talked about? I mean, two miles might be a touch close, but hey: that's how the game is played. If the Iranians siezed the boat crew in international waters, that seems to change the dynamic somewhat (to me, leastways). If it's verifiable that they were in international waters, then the Iranians are guilty of kidnapping, essentially (maybe piracy?).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Causal:
I wonder why that's not being talked about? I mean, two miles might be a touch close, but hey: that's how the game is played. If the Iranians siezed the boat crew in international waters, that seems to change the dynamic somewhat (to me, leastways). If it's verifiable that they were in international waters, then the Iranians are guilty of kidnapping, essentially (maybe piracy?).

---

It is being talked about, at least over here.

Though they weren't seized in international waters, they were seized in Iraqi Waters, which means the Iranians invaded Iraqi territory inorder to illegally abduct British Service personnel.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Nothing against Tony Blair, he's shown himself to be a fine enough fellow. But Maggie is a truly magnificent lady and a top notch P.M. Right up there w/ Winston Churuchill.

Pity you don't recognize.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Causal:
Well, there you have it! I am completely confounded as to why this isn't being talked up on this side of the pond. So not only do they abduct British military personnel, but they do it by violating the national sovereignty of Iraq. I'm not one to advocate wars, and I deeply hope that we don't go to war with Iran, but man have those buggers got some nerve. They meddle with Iraqi internal politics, pour fuel on the sectarian violence in the same, violate the sovereignty of the same, and abduct foriegn nationals in another country's territory. It seems like Iran's making a bid to be a regional power; please, oh, please God, let that not happen.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Causal:
Well, there you have it! I am completely confounded as to why this isn't being talked up on this side of the pond. So not only do they abduct British military personnel, but they do it by violating the national sovereignty of Iraq. I'm not one to advocate wars, and I deeply hope that we don't go to war with Iran, but man have those buggers got some nerve. They meddle with Iraqi internal politics, pour fuel on the sectarian violence in the same, violate the sovereignty of the same, and abduct foriegn nationals in another country's territory. It seems like Iran's making a bid to be a regional power; please, oh, please God, let that not happen.

---

I agree entirely, I'd go so far to say that a case for war with Iran is by far more secure right now than it ever was with Iraq. Though I want and wanted neither.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:
...I'd go so far to say that a case for war with Iran is by far more secure right now than it ever was with Iraq. Though I want and wanted neither.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

A fine lady that near crippled British industry, whose social and economic policies near brought Britain to it's knees economically, whose utter disregard for public opinion kept her from seeing the very real harm she was causing and whose cabinet's ineptitude allowed a war that could have been stopped before it started.

---

Hey, she sounds a lot like GW Bush. No wonder these folks love her.

Quote:

---

A failed American attempt to abduct two senior Iranian security officers on an official visit to northern Iraq was the starting pistol for a crisis that 10 weeks later led to Iranians seizing 15 British sailors and Marines.

Early on the morning of 11 January, helicopter-born US forces launched a surprise raid on a long-established Iranian liaison office in the city of Arbil in Iraqi Kurdistan. They captured five relatively junior Iranian officials whom the US accuses of being intelligence agents and still holds.

In reality the US attack had a far more ambitious objective, The Independent has learned. The aim of the raid, launched without informing the Kurdish authorities, was to seize two men at the very heart of the Iranian security establishment.

Better understanding of the seriousness of the US action in Arbil - and the angry Iranian response to it - should have led Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence to realise that Iran was likely to retaliate against American or British forces such as highly vulnerable Navy search parties in the Gulf. The two senior Iranian officers the US sought to capture were Mohammed Jafari, the powerful deputy head of the Iranian National Security Council, and General Minojahar Frouzanda, the chief of intelligence of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, according to Kurdish officials.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShinyEd:

Blair ought to tell those camel-humpers he'll drop a nuke on their ass TONITE..,.if those folks aren't out by 5PM today!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ShinyEd:

Blair ought to tell those camel-humpers he'll drop a nuke on their ass TONITE..,.if those folks aren't out by 5PM today!

---

Do you see now that that would have been a mistake?
I understand the anger, but our response must not always be a forceful one.

Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

He certainly made himself look like the man who stood up to Bush and Blair.... And also made Bush and Blair look like warmongering fools in the bargain.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:

He certainly made himself look like the man who stood up to Bush and Blair.... And also made Bush and Blair look like warmongering fools in the bargain.

---

Gino, you realize this is Hero/AURaptor/ShinyEd bait, don't you?

Chrisisall

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Whether or not this patrol strayed into Iranian waters ( they may have, neither side has any credibility to say otherwise )

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
.... And also made Bush and Blair look like warmongering fools in the bargain. Most in the US and UK likely would disagree, but remember this plays very differently in the rest of the planet, and that was the intended audience anyway.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by citizen:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Whether or not this patrol strayed into Iranian waters ( they may have, neither side has any credibility to say otherwise )

---

How do you figure? There's irrefutable evidence that has been released proving they were in Iraqi waters. Iran originally said they were picked up in Iraqi waters, they changed their story days after. How do you figure that actual evidence doesn't trump rhetoric because you want the UK to be in the wrong on this one?

---

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!


No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
]


There was irrefutable evidence that Saddam had WMD...

That issue could only be decided by an uninvolved third party.



" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Khyron:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
.... And also made Bush and Blair look like warmongering fools in the bargain. Most in the US and UK likely would disagree, but remember this plays very differently in the rest of the planet, and that was the intended audience anyway.

---

I tend to have Canadian (CBC), South African (iAfrica) and German (Spiegel, n-tv) news sources in addition to British and American ones, and I haven't seen any of those take Iran's side. In fact, BBC was one of the more neutral ones, what Spiegel has to say about Ahmadinejad, both during the crisis and now, is scathing.

In addition, Blair and his cabinet have stressed a diplomatic resolution to this issue, and I haven't read anything to the contrary anywhere. The only warmongering came from the Iranian side, and the only one to look like a fool is Ahmadinejad for seemingly giving up in the face of international pressure (at least that's what it looks like on the outside).

---

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
There was irrefutable evidence that Saddam had WMD...

---