15 Brits arrested by Iran

[MrBishop]

God save our gracious Queen
Long live our noble Queen,
God save the Queen:
Send her victorious,
Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us:
God save the Queen.

O Lord, our God, arise,
Scatter thine enemies,
And make them fall:
Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks,
On thee our hopes we fix:
God save us all.

Thy choicest gifts in store,
On her be pleased to pour;
Long may she reign:
May she defend our laws,
And ever give us cause
To sing with heart and voice
God save the Queen.

 

[catocom]

I've talked my way out of a lot more fights than I've been in myself.

I have too, but that ain't the USA, and they don't think like we do, so
I doubt I could talk my way out there.

Iran found out what they needed to know......

IMO it looks like Briton is thinking now that the war can''t be won, so they
are make deals.....I don't care what Blair said, I think he lied, I think there
was a trade.

So I see it as good for now, bad for later.

 

[BB]

looked in ya crystal ball?

Who knows - yet? ...but there was a lot more behind this than was made public by all accounts seemingly.

Blair just called out Iran (or factions within) as supporting terrorism. he also advocated both opening lines of dialouge and maintaining coercion ...

... heh CHCR - that's nothing - i am multi-talented - i can talk my way INTO fights as well!

stuff that up your pipe and smoke it!

best, BB

 

[catocom]

looked in ya crystal ball?

Who knows - yet? ...but there was a lot more behind this than was made public by all accounts seemingly.

Blair just called out Iran (or factions within) as supporting terrorism. he also advocated both opening lines of dialouge and maintaining coercion ...

Eh from what I see, Blair wants to try to go out as quietly as possible.
Talking is one thing, physical situations are different.

 

[chcr]

... heh CHCR - that's nothing - i am multi-talented - i can talk my way INTO fights as well!

Typically, I do that with other guys' women.

 

[BB]

... you persuade them into naked mud wrestling?

 

[Gato_Solo]

Back on topic...I found this little story. Its not wise to throw things at the British. The only ones who ever got away with it relatively intact were the colonial American's...

 

[chcr]

Back on topic...I found this little story. Its not wise to throw things at the British. The only ones who ever got away with it relatively intact were the colonial American's...

Gonz will take exception to this but the only reason we got away with it was because they had what they considered a more important war already going on in Europe. They weren't willing to risk their position as the premiere world power over a colonial backwater like us. The War of 1812 was more important to our independence than the revolution despite what the history books say.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Gonz will take exception to this but the only reason we got away with it was because they had what they considered a more important war already going on in Europe. They weren't willing to risk their position as the premiere world power over a colonial backwater like us. The War of 1812 was more important to our independence than the revolution despite what the history books say.

Which war? I never cared that much for European wars in Western Civ...Too much 'diplomacy'.

 

[Gato_Solo]

 

[Gonz]

Gonz will take exception to this but the only reason we got away with it was because they had what they considered a more important war already going on in Europe. They weren't willing to risk their position as the premiere world power over a colonial backwater like us. The War of 1812 was more important to our independence than the revolution despite what the history books say.

WTF are you talking about?

Glad to see you're back in form...giving me shit instead of discussing the thread, or at least going off topic.

 

[chcr]

Gonz will take exception to this

WTF are you talking about?

Glad to see you're back in form...giving me shit instead of discussing the thread, or at least going off topic.

England had just ended the Seven Years War (the European version of the French and Indian War) and was not in the best economical and political shape for a war (if you can believe such a thing, what your citizenry thinks of a war has a lot to do with whether or not it can be successfully waged). They were also worried about what was going on in France at the time and how best to take advantage of it. Nothing happens in a vaccuum. England could have (and probably should have from an economic point of view) crushed the revolution but were distracted by these and other factors. This is clear even if all you ever read is American history. We were outgunned and outmanned in overwhelming fashion. They lacked the will. A few years later, they decided to take us back. We call that the war of 1812. The British call it the American War of 1812 to separate it from the little contretemps with that Napolean guy which was, to their mind, the real war. They thought they could take us at anytime but they had to keep pulling troops back to fight in Europe. Sorry Gato, for some reason I flipped the two in my head. In any case, the Revolution was carefully planned to take advantage of the political climate both here and abroad. The War of 1812 was really a continuance of the Revolution and if the British hadn't been so arrogant we'd probably be southern Canada today. Our leaders were smart, but we were also lucky. The British burned Washington and repulsed our attempts to invade Canada several times.

See, I can't believe anyone with even a pedestrian understanding of US history doesn't know this stuff sideways. I of course understand that you think we simply kicked their ass but that doesn't hold up to close scrutiny.

 

[Gato_Solo]

England had just ended the Seven Years War (the European version of the French and Indian War) and was not in the best economical and political shape for a war (if you can believe such a thing, what your citizenry thinks of a war has a lot to do with whether or not it can be successfully waged). They were also worried about what was going on in France at the time and how best to take advantage of it. Nothing happens in a vaccuum. England could have (and probably should have from an economic point of view) crushed the revolution but were distracted by these and other factors. This is clear even if all you ever read is American history. We were outgunned and outmanned in overwhelming fashion. They lacked the will. A few years later, they decided to take us back. We call that the war of 1812. The British call it the American War of 1812 to separate it from the little contretemps with that Napolean guy which was, to their mind, the real war. They thought they could take us at anytime but they had to keep pulling troops back to fight in Europe. Sorry Gato, for some reason I flipped the two in my head. In any case, the Revolution was carefully planned to take advantage of the political climate both here and abroad. The War of 1812 was really a continuance of the Revolution and if the British hadn't been so arrogant we'd probably be southern Canada today. Our leaders were smart, but we were also lucky. The British burned Washington and repulsed our attempts to invade Canada several times.

Forgot about the 7 years war. Sue me. As for being outmanned and outgunned, we were. The thing we had that the British didn't, however, was determination. AFAIK, there were very few troops removed from the colonies during our rebellion, and our attempts at Canada were only half-hearted at best. It was more to stir up the French loyalists, who were practically non-existant even then .

See, I can't believe anyone with even a pedestrian understanding of US history doesn't know this stuff sideways. I of course understand that you think we simply kicked their ass but that doesn't hold up to close scrutiny.

We squeaked by, which was enough.

 

[chcr]

We squeaked by, which was enough.

More than enough as it turned out.

 

[Cerise]

Blair at Downing street making a very 'careful Political statement' to the World's press -

"thanks to the EU, UN and (with diplomatic guardedness) to iran - "

NO MENTION OF THE US -

That was incredibly telling - i cannot under-estimate how that is going down and being agreed with.


what a total US fuck -up

This will not be forgotten - and with the best will in the World - SHAME ON YOU!


THERE IS A LOT BEHIND THE SCENES HERE - and the word is, i am hearing, potentially a serious breach of relationships.

Maybe more "behind the scenes" than you'd care to admit:

The quid pro quos were not terribly subtle. An Iranian "diplomat" who had been held for two months in Iraq is suddenly released. Equally suddenly, Iran is granted access to the five Iranian "consular officials" — Revolutionary Guards who had been training Shiite militias to kill Americans and others — the U.S. arrested in Irbil in January.

There may have been other concessions we will never hear about. But the salient point is that what got this unstuck was American action.

The capture and release of the 15 British hostages illustrate once again the fatuousness of the "international community" and its great institutions. You want your people back? Go to the EU and get stiffed. Go to the Security Council and get a statement that refuses even to "deplore" this act of piracy. (You settle for a humiliating expression of "grave concern"). Then turn to the despised Americans. They'll deal some cards and bail you out.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../04/05/AR2007040501796.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

But it's also totally possible that Mahmoud Whackjob had some "grave concerns" about his actions and that it was in his country's best interest to let the hostages go:

The aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) entered the Persian Gulf on March 27, escorted by the guided-missile cruiser USS Antietam (CG 54).

USS John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group (JCSSG) and its air wing, Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 9 is said to have conducted "a dual-carrier exercise" together with the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group (IKE CSG).

The war games were conducted at a time of diplomatic tension and confrontation following the arrest by Iran of 15 British Royal navy personnel, who were allegedly patrolling inside Iranian territorial waters. http://inteldaily.com/?c=126&a=1559

While they would not say when the war games were planned, U.S. commanders insisted the exercises were not a direct response to Friday's seizure of the 15 British sailors and marines, but they also made clear that the flexing of the Navy's military might was intended as a warning.

"If there is strong presence, then it sends a clear message that you better be careful about trying to intimidate others," said Capt. Bradley Johanson, commander of the Stennis.

"Iran has adopted a very escalatory posture with the things that they have done," he added. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8O4PGNO0&show_article=1

The John C. Stennis Strike Group includes John C. Stennis, Carrier Air Wing 9, Destroyer Squadron 21, USS Antietam, the guided-missile destroyers USS O’Kane and USS Preble, and the fast combat-support ship USNS Bridge. More than 6,500 sailors and Marines are assigned to the strike group.

 

[MrBishop]

Maybe more "behind the scenes" than you'd care to admit:



But it's also totally possible that Mahmoud Whackjob had some "grave concerns" about his actions and that it was in his country's best interest to let the hostages go:

The John C. Stennis Strike Group includes John C. Stennis, Carrier Air Wing 9, Destroyer Squadron 21, USS Antietam, the guided-missile destroyers USS O’Kane and USS Preble, and the fast combat-support ship USNS Bridge. More than 6,500 sailors and Marines are assigned to the strike group.

Sending a few big ships to patrol the border between Iran and Iraqi waters..with guns 'accidentally' aimed well into Iranian territory speaks volumes. Maybe a nice naval exercise.

Gee... d'ya think that some generals have been reading OTC recently?

 

[BB]

Absolutely!

if it weren't for me and Cerise - sod all would have been done.


looks a beauty of a ship (The aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis)

 

[spike]

Interesting.

Captives' media fees spark fury

Faye Turney is said to have a deal worth more than £100,000


Lt Carman speaks
The Ministry of Defence's decision to allow Royal Navy personnel held captive by Iran to sell their stories has sparked anger and unease.
Opposition MPs said the move was undignified while relatives of soldiers killed in Iraq have voiced opposition.

Leading Seaman Faye Turney is said to have been paid a six-figure sum for her story in Monday's Sun newspaper.

It came as Iran released more video of the sailors, showing them socialising and relaxing during their captivity.

Iran's state-run Arabic satellite TV channel Al-Alam showed several of the sailors and marines eating at a long dining table, watching football on television and playing table tennis and chess.


Iranian television released video showing the sailors relaxing

The images contrasted sharply with the crew's description of their ordeal, which they say included intimidation and isolation.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6537103.stm

 

[Gonz]

Yea, spike, keep defending 'em.

 

[spike]

Who is that article defending?