U.S. war hero versus UK Navy capitulators by CrevanReaver

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

U.S. war hero versus UK Navy capitulators

POSTED BY: CREVANREAVER
UPDATED: Sunday, April 8, 2007 01:34
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2126
PAGE 1 of 1

Saturday, April 7, 2007 2:33 AM

Quote:
Medal of Honor recipient Army Colonel Jack Jacobs (Ret.) expresses his disgust at the capitulation of the British Navy and Marine personnel who were kidnapped by Iran.

Here's the video:

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 4:04 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

I don't know what to say, except that I'm glad all sailors are home, safe and that it didn't take 444 days.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 4:12 AM

CAUSAL

This man does not represent us.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 4:14 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
This man does not represent us.

He never claimed to, he's just stating his opinion.

Calling the Brit Marine a 'meathead' on national t.v. might have been a bit much.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 4:16 AM

CAUSAL

Perhaps I should have said "me." I just don't like the US versus UK thing that seems to have popped up recently.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 4:19 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:
Perhaps I should have said "me." I just don't like the US versus UK thing that seems to have popped up recently.

I don't think there IS a U.S. v UK issue here. From what I understand, there are many British folks who feel the same way as the retired Col. feels. I'm sure many don't take too kindly to seeing their men and women laughing it up w/ their captors either. There's just not much good that came from this if you're a fan of the British Navy.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 4:32 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Whatever ya wanta say, the Brits came out ahead on this one.
Some of their sailors spent 2 weeks in jail-- nothin' much worse than that. -- no torture, no executions, no trial. a little psychological pressure- less than the USA has regularly used on Arabs.
A few meaningless, coerced " confessions". A promise not to tresspass in Iranian waters in the future, whether they did this time or not.
And they didn't hafta invade anyplace, bomb anybody, or kill lots of folk.

Now, that ain't to say that the Iranians were " in the right ". They weren't. Shouldn'ta grabbed them as hostages in the first place. And the Brits didn't punish the bad guys. So what?

If the Iranians do it again, that will mean something. IF. If the Brits let happen a second time, that will mean something. IF. If not neither, then this was a meaningless sideshow.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 5:05 AM

KANEMAN

What about the little pink bags they got as take home gifts from the Iranians...hilarious. Our troops, like senator John McCain, spent years being tortured. They had bamboo stuck under there finger nails then lit on fire, shoulders broken, and all kinds of hellish things. They never broke. These sailors from the UK are a disgrace. Laughing and apologizing in front of propaganda cameras....WOW.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 5:46 AM

CAUSAL

Actually, if you talk with people who've been prisoners of war and have been subjected to that kind of torture, they all "break." At a certain point, you will say whatever you think you have to to get the pain to stop. That's what makes turture such a dicey way of extracting information: one can never tell if they're telling the truth or just saying what they think the torturere wants to hear.

________________________________________________________________________
- Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
- Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police

Vote for Firefly! http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 6:31 AM

FREDGIBLET

Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:
They never broke.

I think it's interesting that you mention McCain, because he freely admits that he did exactly that. As Causal said everyone breaks eventually.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 7:37 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

I'm unaware of any fighting conflict between Iran and England. So, saying they came out better than the terrorist which were fighting the Americans really is an apples to figs comparison. And we don't know to what extent they WERE pressured. They were blind folded and have 'admitted' to psychological pressure. There WERE talks by the Iranians of holding trials. So it's pretty silly to claim that no mind games were played here by the Iranians, which falls into the area of 'torture' that the Americans used against enemies in a open conflict.

Didn't have to invade any place ??? WTF ? They were taken from Iraqi waters! Held HOSTAGE! Those are the facts. Say what you want, but it does embolden the Iranians to do something like this again, or if not, it gives them more reason to defy the West over anything they want it to. Sure,it was a tactical move on the part of Iran, and it worked. To their benefit. How much it pays off, remains to be seen.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 8:39 AM

JONGSSTRAW

What ever happened to Name, Rank, and Serial Number? These were uniformed military personnel, not some religious thug murderers in robes and hoods, so Geneva & POW rules would have applied to them. But they caved in gleefully and confessed in the first few hours, and humiliated themselves. Sailors from a country with a proud tradition of strength, guts, and national pride...but alas, very little of that exists in the free world any more, so it is not un-expected that these captured Brits would sip tea and frolick with their vile captors. Too bad they probably never saw Bridge On The River Kwai...Alec Guiness's portrayal of British grit and honor was based on thousands of real war-time heroics by the British fighting in the Pacific
who become POW's, and languished with harsh cruelty and death in the Japanese jungle camp prisons.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 8:59 AM

CAVALIER

I can find similar comments in the Guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2051999,00.html

Deduce what you will.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 8, 2007 12:13 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Didn't have to invade any place ??? WTF ? They were taken from Iraqi waters! Held HOSTAGE! Those are the facts. Say what you want, but it does embolden the Iranians to do something like this again, or if not, it gives them more reason to defy the West over anything they want it to. Sure,it was a tactical move on the part of Iran, and it worked. To their benefit. How much it pays off, remains to be seen.

Actually no it doesn't. Iranians in Iran are saying that Ahmadinejad has lost face, one minute he's the hard-liner “We're going to try them for espionage” the next “Here's a gift” with a bunch of face saving. He's been made to look like a fool before his own people, partly because of pressure from elements of Iran. Believe it or not there's actually a more reasonable and more diplomatic side to Iran, it's just we don't get to see it very often because we're always pointing missiles at them.

The facts are that Tony Blair didn't cave to Iranian pressure, but Ahmadinejad did, a fact the War Hawks of both Britain and America are real upset about, because this 'emboldens' Iran and all. Not too mention the War Hawks of Iran, and a sizeable portion of it's population that has seen first hand their hard-liner conservative president break before British and international pressure.

As for the 'capitulation' comments they're being made by people who literally don't know what they're talking about. I've read and heard comments from many people who's closest personal experience of this sort of event seems to be turning on the TV to find coronation street has been moved to a new time for the football. As for Colonel Jack Jacobs I'm willing to bet he doesn't really know what he's talking about either. There's a huge difference between the present situation and Vietnam, and I rather suspect he didn't have the eyes of the world on him, nor the possibility of a war possibly hanging on his words. If they had come on Iranian TV and shouted down their captors does anyone really think this situation would have been resolved without bloodshed. The situation of captivity is also different, during torture the tortured can obtain strength from not wanting to let their comrades down, but when in a situation like that here it's a very useful tactic to make the subjects believe that if they don't say the right thing their comrades will bare the pain. People are much less inclined to allow others to bare the consequences of their actions than they are themselves, unless of course they're sociopaths, which goes some way to explaining perhaps why War Hawks don't understand that simple fact.

But in reference directly to Colonel Jack Jacobs, is this really the way a member of the Council on Foreign Relations should behave?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 8, 2007 1:34 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
These were uniformed military personnel, not some religious thug murderers in robes and hoods, so Geneva & POW rules would have applied to them.

No, the Geneva convention only applies while there is a state of war between the two nations. Iran and Britian weren't at war, hence the Geneva convention doesn't apply. What does apply are peace time international laws, which include the right to a consolute visit, a right denied.

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.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE