Bring the Brits Back Home

As I'm sure you all know, Iranian forces have captured 15 British military personnel in the Persian Gulf; 8 marines, and 7 sailors. The British Government claims they are being held illegally. The Iranian Government claims that they were in Iranian waters, and is further investigating the matter. Some experts believe that the British sailors are being held as bargaining chips, giving Iran some leverage to help them get back the group of five Iranian military personnel (including one Lieutenant General, according to US sources) captured in Iraq, and currently being held by US troops.
Tony Blair, PM of the UKGB, has been quoted as saying "I hope we manage to get them (the Iranian Government) to realize they have to release them. If not, then this will move into a different phase, but at the moment what we're trying to do is make sure that the diplomatic initiative works."
The British government is planning to go public with the GPS coordinates of the captured vessel at the time it, and the 15 sailors and marines, were seized by Iranian forces at gunpoint.
Mohammad Ali Husseini, Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, is quoted as saying, "Media-run propaganda, and indiscreet and sometimes provocative remarks will not resolve the issue of violation by British forces of Iran's territorial waters."
The region of the Gulf in which the incident took place occurred in contested waters, that have been claimed by both Iran and Iraq at various points.

What do people think about the matter?



Edited by Brian J Checco - 28-Mar-2007 at 10:37

Originally posted by Zagros I wonder why the British have not released the GPS position of the Indian merchant ship that they boarded.

See the above. They're already working on generating that information, and are planning on releasing it if Iran does not comply with British demands. I would expect that they haven't yet for diplomatic reasons; if they release those coordinates, and they prove that Iran is illegally holding the British sailors, it would be implying that Tehran is lying, which could make things ugly and endanger the hostages.

I think thats its interesting as an event that truly highlights the complete lack of power Britain has within the Modern world.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6501555.stm

the GPS evidence has been released.

I don't know exactly what Britain is going to do... Diplomatic power? pah, whatever. The only way these marines will be released is if someone takes them back, which will be a job probably for the Marines/SAS/SBS.

I really do not believe that there is any point negotiating on the matter. Although I'm one for peaceful answers to modern problems, the only answer here is force. It is getting ridiculous, British people are getting kidnapped frequently accross the World - from workers in Nigeria, to Journalists in Palletine, to Diplomats in Ethiopia and now MARINES WERE TAKEN FROM IRAQI WATERS BY IRAN??? This is just ridiculous. I hate to see such matters esculate, but there is no option but a show of force against Iran, which means airstrikes or some other form of action.

In other news, if this is resolved well, it can only bode well for hte Labour party which is already in crisis.




Edited by Ovidius - 28-Mar-2007 at 10:59

I agree, Ovidius. I personally believe this is yet another example of Iran's immature, bellicose foreign strategy. Apparently, they're worried that the rest of the world will forget about them if they don't initiate a new global foreign policy debacle every few weeks.

"The Holocaust didn't happen!"

"Give us nukes!"

"The US is the great Satan!"

"No, we won't give you back your Marines, Mr. Blair. You and the US are poopyheads! Pay attention to us! We're a legitimate power too!"

Obviously, I'm satirizing here, but the belligerent stance of Iran's foreign policy is causing a bit of unrest and resentment here in the West. I'm of the opinion that those Brits ought to be recovered by any means necessary, and if that means SAS and Delta Force going in, I'm for it. Sure, it will be a major diplomatic crisis afterwards, but those Brits seem pretty innocent to me, and I don't believe Iran has any rights to be holding them like that. The GPS coordiantes only strengthen my conviction that those Brits ought to be brought back home.
Cheers.

Edit- PS- It's easier to doctor the "eye-witness accounts" of a few fishermen than it is to falsify globally broadcast information from a National Government.


Edited by Brian J Checco - 28-Mar-2007 at 11:08

Now, something just occurred to me. If Iraqi fishermen provided the eye-witness accounts, then there are two possible rational conclusions that one can draw here...

a) The Iraqi fishermen were in Iranian waters, but weren't apprehended, for some odd reason, since Iran is so concerned with protecting its territorial waters, or

b) the Brits were apprehended illegally in Iraqi waters, thus enabling the fishermen to actually see the event which transpired.

Personally, I am more prone to question the credibility of the Iraqi fishermen than I am the British government.

yes,It is an easy win. But, after they played with their toys, they will give them back.(do they have other chance? what will they do with marines?)

I'm confident they'll be brought home, Ovid. If diplomacy doesn't work, Britain still posseses the some of the best Special forces in the world...

Besides, if anything happens to those Sailors and Marines, world public opinion will turn dramatically against Iran. I don't see that as being the goal of this exercise on the part of Tehran; I think it's a show of force, and once they make their point, those Brits will be back home. It will be interesting to see how the Brits step up to the challenge, I think. Because that's what this is, really: Iran is challenging the West for control of the region.

Edit: Yes, I'm familiar with the vast visibility of open waters. I'm also aware that you have to be pretty up-close to see the uniforms being worn by people on decks, the nature of an arrest, and pin-pointing the exact location that an event took place at would be extremely difficult to determine by sight alone, given the lack of spatial landmarks to create the context in which distance can be measured. Thus, though it could happen 'on the horizon' doesn't mean the fishermen could very accurately pinpoint where (spatially) on the horizon it took place. Not only that, but unless conditions are favorable, visibility at sea is fairly limited. A slight cloud cover, or fog, could reduce visibility to a few hundred meters.



Edited by Brian J Checco - 28-Mar-2007 at 11:28

Originally posted by Zagros She is being released.   Umm, yea OK Brian.  Do you have any idea how far the horizon stretches at sea?  The Iraqi fishermen are well savvied up on where the borders are, and even at that, fishermen hardly amount to aggressive, armed foreign agents.

How are Marines Aggrissive Foreign Agents. HMS Cornwall is in Iraqi Waters as part of the British Operation in Iraq. It is there with the Iraqi Governments Approval. They are not Armed Foreign Agents. They are Servicemen.

Originally posted by Zagros She is being released.   Umm, yea OK Brian.  Do you have any idea how far the horizon stretches at sea?  The Iraqi fishermen are well savvied up on where the borders are, and even at that, fishermen hardly amount to aggressive, armed foreign agents.

Yes, I'm familiar with the vast visibility of open waters. I'm also aware that you have to be pretty up-close to see the uniforms being worn by people on decks, the nature of an arrest, and pin-pointing the exact location that an event took place at would be extremely difficult to determine by sight alone, given the lack of spatial landmarks to create the context in which distance can be measured. Thus, though it could happen 'on the horizon' doesn't mean the fishermen could very accurately pinpoint where (spatially) on the horizon it took place. Not only that, but unless conditions are favorable, visibility at sea is fairly limited. A slight cloud cover, or fog, could reduce visibility to a few hundred meters.

And, by the way "Colonial Delusions of Grandeur?" I'd liek to address that statement, piece-meal, if you don't mind.

Point A) "Colonial": Neither the United States or Britain has any intention of making Iraq either a "State in the Union," or a "Commonwealth Territory." Maybe we would liek to get in on some of the oil action, and had the intention of toppling Saadam to establish a more "customer friendly" regime in the region, but Colonial? Get real.

Point B) "Delusions of Grandeur": You're joking, right? Britain has never had "delusions of grandeur," but it has had the largest colonial empire ever seen in world history. There's a difference between "delusions of grandeur" and the "grandeur of empire." If anything, it's Iran with the delusions of grandeur. No one would care two figs about them if they didn't insist on bullying their way onto the world stage every couple of months with some belligerent action of anti-western intent.

That may be true, but many former British colonies such as, oh, I don't know, America, Australia, and Canada, occupy two whole continents and dictate world events, much in accordance with the desires of Britain, and for the mutual gain of all named parties. The British Empire may no longer exist in name, but trust me, the "Anglo Empire" still very much rules the world. Not quite the same can be said for the former Persian empire, now can it?