15 Brits arrested by Iran

[BB]

... you want the serious answer or the current mood (* warning - answers may go up as well as down**) BB answer?


(i know, heh! - sometimes you ask a simple question )

- just been working too hard!



Best, BB

 

[BB]

DCFC.

'Nough said!

 

[SouthernN'Proud]

DCFC = Danish Cheerleaders For Christ?

Hep a brother out here.

 

[BB]

Close!

they tend to bounce up and down a lot -

(... though i don't happen to speak Danish, - so I am unsure of 'hep' )

-think it might mean 'confuse' ???

- seriously though -

Derby County FC (Football club)

Best, BB

 

[Gonz]

I think he means soccer

 

[BB]

I think he means 'Football'

- care to take the original meaning of the word back historically Gonz, old boy?

 

[Gonz]

Sure. Americans have been playing football since the 20's I believe. Brazilians, Chileans & Europeans were playing some girlie game with a checkered ball

I have to wonder why they called it football (our version) when that's the least desireable part to touch it.

 

[BB]

oh well - south americans, as i am sure Luis will agree all playing girlie sports - with the exception, perhaps of footie!

But the English - aaaahh!

Care to go back to the 1800's and argue this?

(we ain't talking Rugby by this time, neither- Rugby's a true man's game btw compared with armoured up NFL or AFL)



- heh, Let's not beat about the bush

Hah!

best, BB

 

[Gonz]

1800s was our football too. A little different than today but pricipally the same. Honestly, I don't know or care enough to look it up either.

You win. We'll change the name to oblongbrown ball.

 

[BB]

Glad to hear it!



(course, that'll probably confuse the Canadians - but that ain't hard! )

j/k

 

[Gonz]

Back to the seriousness...

Britain’s crisis with Iran deepened last night after Tehran justified seizing 15 British servicemen by claiming that they had strayed into Iranian territorial waters “illegally”.

The announcement appeared to rule out any hope that the incident was a simple mistake that could be quickly rectified.

Timesonline

followed by

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has canceled his trip to New York to address the U.N. Security Council before a vote on whether to impose further sanctions against his country for refusing to stop enriching uranium, the Foreign Ministry spokesman said Friday.

Mohammed Ali Hosseini, the spokesman, told Iranian state television that the trip was scrapped because of "America's obstruction in issuing visas" to the Iranian delegation that was to travel to New York.

source

Maybe he knows he's bitten off more than he can chew?

 

[BB]

or is deliberately 'chewing the cud'?

chicken or egg, perhaps?

 

[chcr]

Maybe he knows he's bitten off more than he can chew?

Or maybe he's just pissed because we're dragging our feet about issuing a visa we will eventually issue anyway out of pique. Ahmadinejad clearly doesn't hold a monopoly on childish arrogance now, does he?

 

[MrBishop]

Seems that the 15 are being 'interrogated' now.

*cue filter - they're being held until Iran proves their point. Then they'll be released..in the meanwhile, the eyes of the world are off Iran's nuclear desires.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Seems that the 15 are being 'interrogated' now.

*cue filter - they're being held until Iran proves their point. Then they'll be released..in the meanwhile, the eyes of the world are off Iran's nuclear desires.

Now the Brits are at the bargaining table. The more the merrier, eh?

 

[MrBishop]

Nobody ever accused Iran of intelligent posing, eh

 

[Cerise]

It is day 10 of the recent Iranian hostage crisis. The British sailors and marines have been displayed on Iranian tv, coerced into signing admissions of guilt, Faye Turney wears a habib....

"The legal phase concerning these British soldiers has started and if charges against them are proven, they will be punished," said Ansari.http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1258488,00.html

Ministers are preparing a compromise deal to allow Iran to save face and release its 15 British military captives by promising that the Royal Navy will never knowingly enter Iranian waters without permission.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...FGGAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/04/01/wiran01.xml

The protesters chanted "Death to Britain" and "Death to America" as they hurled stones into the courtyard of the embassy. They also demanded that the Iranian government expel the British ambassador and close down the embassy, calling it a "den of spies.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/british_seized_iran

The 9/11 attacks should have been a wake-up call to our allies — but they seem to have had a tranquilizing effect instead. Despite a series of both successful and thwarted attacks since then, Britain, France, Italy, Poland, Spain, Germany, and Canada have actually cut their active-duty forces. And the percentage of those countries’ economies spent on defense was reduced over ten percent by 2005. Many are still falling.

Let’s be clear. Iran’s kidnappings are part of a plan to see that nothing interferes with its quest for nuclear weapons. If successful, other dictatorships will follow suit. This is not the time for the free world to neglect its own defense.http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTk0Yzk2YTEwZmFhY2ViNDI5MWE3NzRmYjRiNDg5OTQ

Patrolling the Shatt al-Arab at a time of war, the Royal Navy operates under rules of engagement designed by distant fainthearts with an eye to the polite fictions of "international law": If you're in a ''warship,'' you can't wage war. If you're in a ''destroyer,'' don't destroy anything. If you're in a "frigate," you're frigging done for.http://www.suntimes.com/news/steyn/321825,CST-EDT-steyn01.article

Brits give their opinions of the hostage crisis:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...g=yourview&xml=/news/2007/03/28/ublview28.xml

 

[BB]

aye Cerisse, it seems to be being made into a Political game of chess -

but the rules seem hazy ...

In a funny old way it'll be interesting to see how this is played here in the current vacuum - but i can tell you now (without any rancour or intent ) - this is not helping Anglo-american relationships - only today or was it?- or yesterday did any offical public comment come from the US -

and that was weak-

I fear that it comes to a position that becomes uni-lateral - the mood here is ripe for it and the 'friends and allies' are proving spineless... even given our 'diplomatic' approach -

That is not a personal statement as such but the genuine zeitgeist here - and this in a Political vacuum ... hence it is all to play for - and the big gun media here are unsure - (highly vested interest)

ask yourselves - are you guys there Allies or weak wristed collaboraters???

Either come to the table or be jugded by your lack of support.

If you have vested interests, as we, in the bi-lateral support - then either be strong or seriously risk losing it.


Whatever your interests - if you don't fully support our servicemen and women you risk the support of the UK - and this is from the ground up - forget the Goverment or "media"... except - it is so in a flux here - the potential for a serious backlash on this cannot be under-estimated.

BB

 

[Gonz]

Some of us are ready willing & able to stand by our allies.

The Democrats are in charge though. Just ask 'em.

 

[MrBishop]

The Democrats aren't the ones who decide what kind of reaction the USA has to this situation. Last I checked...the President was still in change of the military..and he's Republican.