FAO: teh Throd (or anyone else)

[TdC]

I noticed a line from you in the Election poll thread:

Labour appear to have abandoned the Marines in Iran

Not living in the UK I am quite out of the loop regarding this, and so have no idea what is going on or what the feeling is in the country about the marines being captured by Iranian forces.

What I have heard, is that Iranian forces captured some British marines "in Iranian waters / on Iranian land" or words to that effect. I have heard that Iran has been blowing their trumpets quite loudly about this, and that the marines have been on (Iranian) telly to "apologize" for trespassing or what ever that may mean. Iow I know next to nothing.

But what would you rather the government had done? Gone in and got them? By force? Diplomatically? What have they been telling you through the media? You understand that I live in Holland and that they don't really give us much about that stuff over here. In fact, Snoop Doggy Dogg sitting on a bicycle in Amsterdam (for all of three seconds before he got into his luxury tour bus) made front page news in certain papers while Brit Marines in Iran were somewhere in the middle of the paper.

 

[Raven]

you have a week to return them or we come and get them, or words to that effect is what they should have said. no backbone though.

 

[throdgrain]

(I borrowed this)


Strikes me that there's a simple (ish) solution. We don't bargain with highjackers so we tell them this..

1. There's a dummy cruise missile going to hit an important building at 2400 tonight unless our people are released and you apologise and pay them compensation

2. This oilfield will cease to exist 24 hours later - little dose of liquid sunshine. Just a small one mind.

3. 24 hours later say goodbye to a small city - we'll give you time to evacuate and let all Arab TV know first.

4. 24 hours later Tehran becomes known as the Glass City

5. Our US allies get to see if their good sh11t works. You won't worry too much about it though because you'll be shaggin 77 virgins.

Allah Akhbar


(fairly succint though ay ? And Ive not even been drinking yet )

 

[TdC]

you mean demand them back, and if Iran fails to comply promptly, go and get them and/or force Iran to give the Marines back by any means. Get the people back first, discover if/how a balls-up occurred second. Is that the general though in the UK?

Holland likes to send bits of their army where ever their nice friend America tells them to, but tends to get a bit flighty when the soldiers have to do any actual erm, soldiering. You know, with guns and things, like shooting. Dutch soldiers actually shooting at (or shooting back at) people tends to get the army slaughtered in the media / political stuff.

I'm guessing that the UK media are now somewhat engaged in a war of their own with about half going "they've got our boys wtfpwn!!" and the other half going "what were our lads doing there in the first place??" Is that the case atm?

 

[throdgrain]

I think that is more or less the case. I confess Ive actually avoided the news a bit, I find it almost embarrassing that something like this can happen.
I really think we should be more forcefull.
An aircraft carrier at least I actually wonder at the end of the day, after all our very proud and successful military history, if we're not punching above our weight a bit these days. Its all show. The government doesnt deserve the troops it has in my opinion.

 

[dysfunction]

According to the UK the marines were not in Iran's water.

I think the UK should be a lot more threatening. The UN is now involved and making any official statements sound a lot more "diplomatic". ie softening the language used.

I think the UK should start making heads roll in Iran. they are just so full of shite!

 

[Calaen]

Had my say in the topic in the DAOC ot thread, I personally think we should crush them to the ground. I could understand if the people they captured were randomly killing shit in there waters, but that is not the case. No proof that they were even there.

One thing I do know, the leader of Iran is a scum bag who wants to be seen as sticking one over western civilisation. So I say we should crush him, his family and his country into a small paper bag and bury it. Enough of the fucking around and parading shit on tv, no one believes what they are saying is true even if it is because of the moronic attitude of the iranians.

Capturing these soldiers is an act of war as far as I am concerned and I will back the decision to go and kick arse 100%.

 

[TdC]

I actually wonder at the end of the day, after all our very proud and successful military history, if we're not punching above our weight a bit these days. Its all show.

I suppose it is all show, until someone calls your bluff ofc. Then you have to act or you look like a heel. I guess matters have progressed beyond the question of the marines being or not being in Iranian territory and that Iran is going to give them back after a suitable period of posturing and strutting and holding out for whatever they will want from the UK, and the longer the UK takes to give in / reach agreement the more posturing and strutting will occur.

I'm not particularly aware of the state of international relations between the UK and Iran, but I suppose that unless the UK go to war both sides are going to grumble and mutter and pretend to have "won" and whatever they've agreed on will be hushed up as much as can be in case any of the big boys in the school yard see.

 

[throdgrain]

I suppose it is all show, until someone calls your bluff ofc. Then you have to act or you look like a heel. I guess matters have progressed beyond the question of the marines being or not being in Iranian territory and that Iran is going to give them back after a suitable period of posturing and strutting and holding out for whatever they will want from the UK, and the longer the UK takes to give in / reach agreement the more posturing and strutting will occur.

I'm not particularly aware of the state of international relations between the UK and Iran, but I suppose that unless the UK go to war both sides are going to grumble and mutter and pretend to have "won" and whatever they've agreed on will be hushed up as much as can be in case any of the big boys in the school yard see.

Im afraid you are correct mate

 

[TdC]

I was trying very hard to not judge the UK or Iran because nobody at our level knows what really happened, and regardless of what really happened to cause the situation, the resolving of it may have nothing at all to do with anything (that we can see). I dislike giant grey areas where political people strive to work towards who loses the least, and if we lose less than the other guy then we're the "winner".

It makes me feel a bit paranoid when I don't trust my government to tell me the truth, I don't trust the media at all, I don't trust the other guy's government or media and I don't know what really happened because I wasn't there

 

[Athan]

Well here's news.bbc.co.uk's take on the thing. Note the publication of 'GPS evidence' on 28th March showing they were clearly in Iraqi waters at the time.

And of course Iran has been under all sorts of pressure over nuclear tech. lately, so not too surprising that they'd pull something like this in an attempt to leverage it against sanctions.

-Ath

 

[Chilly]

that evidence is irrelivant. It's completely impossible to tell if its real or not. Personally, I have no idea who is telling the truth. What I *do* know is that Iran must have a fucking good reason for doing this. Either they want a war or they want to cause some serious tension.

My stance is: iran has apparently wrongfully kidnapped some of our service men and women out in the Gulf on a UN mission. Either they give them back or we go and get them. Obviously I'd rather not be in the middle of world war 3, but the Iranian leadership atm seem like a bunch of fucking schoolchildren, even more so than the UK/Us leadership often is.

I cant advocate bombing innocents, but theres nothing stopping us sending in 20 SAS boys to quietly blow the fucking tits out of a few military buildings and evac our marines.

 

[nath]

Regardless of what you feel about the current UK government I think it's got more credibility than Irans. Especially since when we told them that the coordinates they CLAIMED the boat was in turned out to STILL be in Iraqi waters they said "oops, no we meant THESE coordinates instead!". Much like a 12 yr old being caught out in a lie but refusing to admit it.

 

[throdgrain]

that evidence is irrelivant. It's completely impossible to tell if its real or not. Personally, I have no idea who is telling the truth. What I *do* know is that Iran must have a fucking good reason for doing this. Either they want a war or they want to cause some serious tension.

My stance is: iran has apparently wrongfully kidnapped some of our service men and women out in the Gulf on a UN mission. Either they give them back or we go and get them. Obviously I'd rather not be in the middle of world war 3, but the Iranian leadership atm seem like a bunch of fucking schoolchildren, even more so than the UK/Us leadership often is.

I cant advocate bombing innocents, but theres nothing stopping us sending in 20 SAS boys to quietly blow the fucking tits out of a few military buildings and evac our marines.

Spot on mate.

 

[leggy]

Well here's news.bbc.co.uk's take on the thing. Note the publication of 'GPS evidence' on 28th March showing they were clearly in Iraqi waters at the time.

And of course Iran has been under all sorts of pressure over nuclear tech. lately, so not too surprising that they'd pull something like this in an attempt to leverage it against sanctions.

-Ath

I laugh at people believing our 'evidence'. I don't thing anything published in our national news can be considered as credible evidence.

 

[Tom]

^this^

As for 'going to get them' - where do you go then? Iran is a big place.

 

[Thadius]

^this^

As for 'going to get them' - where do you go then? Iran is a big place.

I bet we already know where they are, SAS probably got sent in on day 1 and been "investigating"

 

[Saggy]

I bet we already know where they are, SAS probably got sent in on day 1 and been "investigating"

And sending the double 0 agents there shortly?

Wether those soldiers were in Iraq or Iran they were still too far away from home - has Iraq blamed Iran for crossing their border or have they thanked Iran for removing intruders from their land btw? Or does Iraq have any control at all for their territory?

 

[Calaen]

And sending the double 0 agents there shortly?

Wether those soldiers were in Iraq or Iran they were still too far away from home - has Iraq blamed Iran for crossing their border or have they thanked Iran for removing intruders from their land btw? Or does Iraq have any control at all for their territory?

I wish you would fuck off to Iraq. They will treat you like the bitch you are.

If our soldiers were out there causing trouble fair enough but I sincerely doubt the were killing randoms and blowing shit up.

Iraq has alot to thank us for, it may look bleak but in 20 years or so they will look back and think thank god someone made a stand. So dont go making out as if we are some evil country running around killing people for the sake of it.

 

[Saggy]

I wish you would fuck off to Iraq. They will treat you like the bitch you are.

Such an nice attitude you have Besides, getting into Iraq aint all that easy nowadays Unless you get a boat ride from Iranians that is ;p And yes, US collation is good at treating people like bitches...

If our soldiers were out there causing trouble fair enough but I sincerely doubt the were killing randoms and blowing shit up.

No, they are not there causing trouble at the moment, they just cant handle the shit they made up - US collation, however, went there to cause trouble and yes, they did kill randoms and blew shit up.

Iraq has alot to thank us for, it may look bleak but in 20 years or so they will look back and think thank god someone made a stand. So dont go making out as if we are some evil country running around killing people for the sake of it.

Currently Iraq has nothing to thank US collation for (it was, what, ~60% of Iraqies who were happy Saddam was taken down and that's pretty much the one and only "good" thing US collation have managed to do so far) and please, share the chrystal ball so rest of us can see the future* too and no, you are not running around killing people for the sake of it - oil and flexing the "superior nation" muscles are the main reasons I suppose.

I'm not saying Iran did the right thing by capturing those soldiers, I think they are fucking idiots for doing it - same goes to UK for sending those troops in Iraq in the first place so I dont see UK can really bitch about it :S

Bush's words "If you are not with us, you are against us" says it all really - US collation gives a flying fuck about what others think, they just stare at their own belly and think what to have for next breakfast and order the same shit for everyone else

.
*we have no fucking idea what Iraq will look like in 20 years after Iraqies been told how to live by US collation nor do we know what it would look like without the war. Could you take a deep look into that chrystal ball of yours and tell us what Iraq looks like and for what will they thank UK for?

 

[TdC]

now then now then keep the early morning swearing to a minimum would you?

I know this is a strong subject, and actually had a moment of deliberation (not debilitation Trem) before posting this thread, so do try to keep the nastiness to a reasonable 20% if you will.

 

[yaruar]

Iraq has alot to thank us for, it may look bleak but in 20 years or so they will look back and think thank god someone made a stand. So dont go making out as if we are some evil country running around killing people for the sake of it.

Well, i don't share your optimism, i suspect there will be civil war in iraq for the next few hundred years and daily bombings. The only solution would be to split the country up along ethnic lines, north, middle and south, but the 'Merkins would never allow that as it would endanger the oil supply again. And even then there would be tensions and bombings and heartache. Saddam was a c\/nt of the highest order, but he artifically kept the country together through his reign of terror. It will be a similar situation to post Tito yugoslavia, apart from the fact there will be no end to it.

 

[pez]

I'm not particularly aware of the state of international relations between the UK and Iran, but I suppose that unless the UK go to war both sides are going to grumble and mutter and pretend to have "won" and whatever they've agreed on will be hushed up as much as can be in case any of the big boys in the school yard see.

The Iranians hate Britain, for fairly good reasons. For over a century Britain exploited Iranian rescources and used them strategically against Tzarist Russia during the imperial days. We occupied them militarily during World War 1 & 2 and finally, with the help of the Americans we organised a coup of their most democratically elected (i use the term relatively) leader ever when he threatened to nationalise the Iranian oil industry, which incidentally was like 90% owned by UK companies.

 

[Saggy]

Saddam was a c\/nt of the highest order, but he artifically kept the country together through his reign of terror.

Coming to think about it - how bad was he afterall? Now that Saddam is taken down CIA is accusing Iran for 1988 gassing instead of Saddam for example :S He changed lots of things to good (the best arabic wellfare system back in 1970) and kept some things bad (he kept on executing people like Iraq had always done and looks like they are still doing) - dont see him making Iraq worse place for Iraqies really.

 

[Dukat]

Coming to think about it - how bad was he afterall?

I dont know for sure as I never met the guy! but from what I've heard/read/seen, he was a fucking genocidal maniac.

If I remember right, he bombed and persecuted the kurds, used chemical weapons on his own people, he paid out money to the families of suicide bombers to try to encourage more of it, there is i believe proof that he was connected with various terrorist groups - providing both money and diplomatic assistance on several different occasions.

I think he killed something like 400,000 of his own people, although that figure is probably low, which doesnt count what else he was responsible for in terms of indirect damage from stuff like financing terrorists.

So yea, he was pretty bad from what I heard.

 

[Dukat]

with the help of the Americans we organised a coup of their most democratically elected (i use the term relatively) leader ever when he threatened to nationalise the Iranian oil industry, which incidentally was like 90% owned by UK companies.

Question:

Suppose you are the prime minister and some arab threatens to steal, mark that, steal the assets of UK owned companies in his country by nationalising them.

Do you:

A. roll over and play dead
or
B. try and do something about him

?

 

[Saggy]

I dont know for sure as I never met the guy! but from what I've heard/read/seen, he was a fucking genocidal maniac.

If I remember right, he bombed and persecuted the kurds, used chemical weapons on his own people, he paid out money to the families of suicide bombers to try to encourage more of it, there is i believe proof that he was connected with various terrorist groups - providing both money and diplomatic assistance on several different occasions.

1988 gassing, what I referred in my previous post, was that chemical weapons and kurd killing.

I think he killed something like 400,000 of his own people, although that figure is probably low, which doesnt count what else he was responsible for in terms of indirect damage from stuff like financing terrorists.

Those 400,000 people he "killed" died in wars fighting for Iraq if I'm not mistaken Will look into terrorist financing

Question:

Suppose you are the prime minister and some arab threatens to steal, mark that, steal the assets of UK owned companies in his country by nationalising them.

How do you think UK got that oil? Iran just handed it over? Nah, you probably marked the right word

 

[Calaen]

I'm not saying Iran did the right thing by capturing those soldiers, I think they are fucking idiots for doing it - same goes to UK for sending those troops in Iraq in the first place so I dont see UK can really bitch about it :S

You cannot compare the two at all.

 

[pez]

Question:

Suppose you are the prime minister and some arab threatens to steal, mark that, steal the assets of UK owned companies in his country by nationalising them.

Do you:

A. roll over and play dead
or
B. try and do something about him

?

Well considering those assets were bought for a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of their true worth from a previous corrupt regime over a hundred years ago because the Persians had no idea what oil was worth....

 

[Saggy]

You cannot compare the two at all.

True - invading Iraq was millions and millions times worse than capturing few soldiers. Take that into account and ask yourself this - if you are willing to go for a war because of some country kidnaps few of your soldiers what are you ready to do when some country bombs the shit out of your country and invades it? Bombing London and killing the Queen = ok but kidnapping few soldiers = bad?

CIA isn't changing their stance with "chemical Al" it seems so yeah, Saddam was a baaad boy.