British sailors captured by Iranians at gunpoint

[The Man From G.O.P.]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6484279.stm


I hope they know this is a VERY bad idea to hold them for any period of time.

Watch this one closely.

[??????????]

I suggest the use of diplomacy for this matter and this is about how it should work :

"You have 24 hours to release our sailors or we will recover them through whatever means necessary."

That's the only real way you can deal with these animals.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

I suggest the use of diplomacy for this matter and this is about how it should work :

"You have 24 hours to release our sailors or we will recover them through whatever means necessary."

That's the only real way you can deal with these animals.

I have little doubt they will be returned with a sorry note before that, I don't think Iran is looking for a fight.

If I'm wrong, oh boy.

[??????????]

I suggest the use of diplomacy for this matter and this is about how it should work :

"You have 24 hours to release our sailors or we will recover them through whatever means necessary."

That's the only real way you can deal with these animals.

I have little doubt they will be returned with a sorry note before that, I don't think Iran is looking for a fight.

If I'm wrong, oh boy.

Um, they have been sending terrorists into Iraq to kill our troops for years now, what else do you think they are looking for, earl grey and scones?

[opebo]

The most likely explanation is that these British were in Iranian waters.   

Why would a weak country like Iran want to precipitate an attack by the Empire or its minions before they have an effective nuclear deterrent?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The problem here is that the definition of what are Iraqi and what are Irani waters is not agreed upon.  Indeed, IIRC, that was a casus belli of the Iran-Iraq War.  I doubt that either the UK or Iran has engaged in a deliberate provocation.  This will likely blow over in few days like a similar incident in 2004 did.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The most likely explanation is that these British were in Iranian waters.   

Why would a weak country like Iran want to precipitate an attack by the Empire or its minions before they have an effective nuclear deterrent?

I'm sure they were in Iraqi waters - even if they weren't there is no reason Iran had to go and do this.  Britain had better retaliate and raise some hell over this one.

[opebo]

The most likely explanation is that these British were in Iranian waters.   

Why would a weak country like Iran want to precipitate an attack by the Empire or its minions before they have an effective nuclear deterrent?

I'm sure they were in Iraqi waters - even if they weren't there is no reason Iran had to go and do this.  Britain had better retaliate and raise some hell over this one.

Perhaps they were in Iranian waters.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

The most likely explanation is that these British were in Iranian waters.   

Why would a weak country like Iran want to precipitate an attack by the Empire or its minions before they have an effective nuclear deterrent?

I'm sure they were in Iraqi waters - even if they weren't there is no reason Iran had to go and do this.  Britain had better retaliate and raise some hell over this one.

Perhaps they were in Iranian waters.

A valid point really. They may have been.

[Nation]

This will more than likely blow over, but a scary prospect if Iran does anything stupid.

[kashifsakhan]

This will more than likely blow over, but a scary prospect if Iran does anything stupid.

I dont think people really give Iran alot of credit. They are actually alot smarter than they come off.

I'm quite certain that the soldiers must have been in Iranian waters. There's no reason for Iran to go into Iraqi waters to do something like this.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

This will more than likely blow over, but a scary prospect if Iran does anything stupid.

I dont think people really give Iran alot of credit. They are actually alot smarter than they come off.

I'm quite certain that the soldiers must have been in Iranian waters. There's no reason for Iran to go into Iraqi waters to do something like this.

Say "the holocaust didn't happen"
Build nuclear reactors when the world tells you not to.

No reason to do those things either - plain and simple - they're crazy nutjob terrorists like Kim Jong Il.

[opebo]

This will more than likely blow over, but a scary prospect if Iran does anything stupid.

I dont think people really give Iran alot of credit. They are actually alot smarter than they come off.

I'm quite certain that the soldiers must have been in Iranian waters. There's no reason for Iran to go into Iraqi waters to do something like this.

Say "the holocaust didn't happen"
Build nuclear reactors when the world tells you not to.

What business is it of the world whether Iran builds nuclear reactors? 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hah, so you think States controllnig whole enormous nations of tens of millions of people  are apt to do things for no reason at all - just because they're 'crazy'.  I fear it is you who are the nutjob when it comes to international relations, Inks.

By the way, well said kashifsakan.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

This will more than likely blow over, but a scary prospect if Iran does anything stupid.

I dont think people really give Iran alot of credit. They are actually alot smarter than they come off.

I'm quite certain that the soldiers must have been in Iranian waters. There's no reason for Iran to go into Iraqi waters to do something like this.

Say "the holocaust didn't happen"
Build nuclear reactors when the world tells you not to.

What business is it of the world whether Iran builds nuclear reactors? 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hah, so you think States controllnig whole enormous nations of tens of millions of people  are apt to do things for no reason at all - just because they're 'crazy'.  I fear it is you who are the nutjob when it comes to international relations, Inks.

By the way, well said kashifsakan.

So you're just going to accept whatever somebody who can deny the death of 6 million people says?

That's what I don't get about you liberals - if somebody says something totally against what you say - they're a nutjob - like global warming.  The FREAKING NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE doesn't acknowledge it - they're head of the NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER!  But if some wacko says the holocaust didnt happen and then goes and abducts some brits - it's ok b/c the Brits were violating there space - and the gov't should never intrude into your privacy (unless they'r handing out checks to bums who dont work and depend on welfare to get them by instead of getting a job like the rest of the freaking world).

[Gabu]

That's what I don't get about you liberals - if somebody says something totally against what you say - they're a nutjob - like global warming.  The FREAKING NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE doesn't acknowledge it - they're head of the NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER!  But if some wacko says the holocaust didnt happen and then goes and abducts some brits - it's ok b/c the Brits were violating there space - and the gov't should never intrude into your privacy (unless they'r handing out checks to bums who dont work and depend on welfare to get them by instead of getting a job like the rest of the freaking world).

You're talking to opebo, not a liberal.  Just ignore him and he'll go away.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

That's what I don't get about you liberals - if somebody says something totally against what you say - they're a nutjob - like global warming.  The FREAKING NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE doesn't acknowledge it - they're head of the NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER!  But if some wacko says the holocaust didnt happen and then goes and abducts some brits - it's ok b/c the Brits were violating there space - and the gov't should never intrude into your privacy (unless they'r handing out checks to bums who dont work and depend on welfare to get them by instead of getting a job like the rest of the freaking world).

You're talking to opebo, not a liberal.  Just ignore him and he'll go away.

My appologies for the rant - sometimes I just have to go off - and like we've said before - opebo is like my grandma - there's no arguing w/ him - so I take out my rage on him b/c I love my grandma and wouldn't say all that to her.

[opebo]

That's what I don't get about you liberals - if somebody says something totally against what you say - they're a nutjob - like global warming.  The FREAKING NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE doesn't acknowledge it - they're head of the NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER!  But if some wacko says the holocaust didnt happen and then goes and abducts some brits - it's ok b/c the Brits were violating there space - and the gov't should never intrude into your privacy (unless they'r handing out checks to bums who dont work and depend on welfare to get them by instead of getting a job like the rest of the freaking world).

You're talking to opebo, not a liberal.  Just ignore him and he'll go away.

My appologies for the rant - sometimes I just have to go off - and like we've said before - opebo is like my grandma - there's no arguing w/ him - so I take out my rage on him b/c I love my grandma and wouldn't say all that to her.

Gabu, your attitude towards me seems unfair, particularly in the present case.  My position is the reasonable one, while Inks is quite emotional. 

Inks, look at it this way - nation-states have interests, and it is in the interest of the Iranian state to avoid being destroyed and usurped by the Empire as it was in 1954-1979, or as its neighbor Iraq was very recently.   Their wisest course of action is to get nuclear weapons and delivery systems as soon as possible - their survival and sovereignty depend upon it.  In light of this I can't see any benefit gained from pretending British are invading their waters.