Brit's Home Free!
- Thread starter amicus
- Start date
Alessia Brio
Eroticist
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2005
- Posts
- 1,364
Troublemaker.
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
I don't think we will ever know the full circumstances of this event.
We should just be pleased that the troops are home and that the situation has been defused.
Our thanks should go to all those involved who helped to resolve the issue - including the government and people of Iran, our allies and the UN.
Og
We should just be pleased that the troops are home and that the situation has been defused.
Our thanks should go to all those involved who helped to resolve the issue - including the government and people of Iran, our allies and the UN.
Og
R. Richard
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2003
- Posts
- 10,382
It is well that the troops are home and safe.
It is not well that the situation is not understood fully. When you don't understand a situation fully, trouble lies ahead.
It is not well that the situation is not understood fully. When you don't understand a situation fully, trouble lies ahead.
RedHairedandFriendly
Too much red on Red?
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2005
- Posts
- 112,724
I am glad they are home. 
*hugs* 
es <<< to all of them and their families. 
*hugs* es <<< to all of them and their families. 
Jenny_Jackson
Psycho Bitch
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2006
- Posts
- 10,872
Did anyone notice if Tony Blair was wearing knee pads? 
R. Richard
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2003
- Posts
- 10,382
Og:oggbashan said:
I agree that the troops probably don't understand the situation. And, that is probably not important.
There was a British gunship in the area when the Iranians committed piracy. Why did the British gunship not defend the British sailors? Once the British gunship failed to defend the sailors, it became a diplomatic problem. If the diplomats don't really understand the problem, I would think it is time to set up a British Embassy at the South Pole. Said embassy to be staffed by those diplomats who don't understand the problem. JMNTHO.
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
R. Richard said:
The ship's rules of engagement were probably at fault - and the rules of engagement are set by politicians, not diplomats or the armed forces. If the ship had opened fire the UK would have been de facto at war with Iran. That the sailors were 1.7 nautical miles outside of Iranian waters would then be academic.
Judging what Iranian forces did and why is probably beyond the comprehension not only of UK diplomats but possibly the Iranian government. I think that how Iranian internal politics and actual power work in practice is a mystery to Iranians. Starting a war because of the actions of a small group who were probably acting to pressurise their own government would have been an over-reaction and would probably have cost many lives including all the sailors involved.
Og
Jenny_Jackson
Psycho Bitch
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2006
- Posts
- 10,872
Ogg,
The whole mess was complicated by two factors.
Iran has two opposing governments. The president is in charge of foreign affairs, economy and so on, but the Mullahs are in charge of the armed forces. The Mullahs are very friendly with Hesbulah and other terrorist groups. The president is very limited in his power.
Then the U.S. had to get involved and flex their AirCraft Carrier muscles in the Persian Gulf. Thanks, George. All that did was inflame an already tense situation.
The president of Iran should be congradulated for freeing the hostages in the face of the Mullah's and growing tensions in the middle east caused by U.S. meddling.
Were the sailors inside Iranian waters, or outside? It doesn't matter. Iran really isn't interested in a war that would disrupt the flow of petro dollars and the U.S. Doesn't have the military to commit. Personally, I believe this was a ploy by the Mullahs to incide public opinion in the middle east and that's all.
The whole mess was complicated by two factors.
Iran has two opposing governments. The president is in charge of foreign affairs, economy and so on, but the Mullahs are in charge of the armed forces. The Mullahs are very friendly with Hesbulah and other terrorist groups. The president is very limited in his power.
Then the U.S. had to get involved and flex their AirCraft Carrier muscles in the Persian Gulf. Thanks, George. All that did was inflame an already tense situation.
The president of Iran should be congradulated for freeing the hostages in the face of the Mullah's and growing tensions in the middle east caused by U.S. meddling.
Were the sailors inside Iranian waters, or outside? It doesn't matter. Iran really isn't interested in a war that would disrupt the flow of petro dollars and the U.S. Doesn't have the military to commit. Personally, I believe this was a ploy by the Mullahs to incide public opinion in the middle east and that's all.
R. Richard
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2003
- Posts
- 10,382
The ship's rules of engagement were undoubtedly at fault.oggbashan said:
As to the destruction of a few Iranian boats inside Iraqi waters starting a war, maybe. The Iranian boats were manned by the Revolutionary Guard, not the Iranian Navy. The intent was to provoke some sort of political crisis. Of course, the action did provoke a political crisis.
The point is that the politicians [diplomats are politicians] put British lives at risk and apparently without a clear understanding of the political dynamics inside Iranian politics. This last is equivalent to letting a bunch of young children play with matches inside a fuel storage dump. If England still allows drawing and quartering, now is the time!
JMNTHO.
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
R. Richard said:
Almost all UK diplomats are NOT politicians. Usually they are career Civil Servants who have progressed up the system by demonstrating competence in their work. UK diplomats do not set rules of engagement for our armed forces - that is done by the Ministry of Defence under direction from their minister and ultimately the Cabinet of politicians, advised by the military.
The situation was probably created by people who knew exactly what the ship's rules of engagement were. What they didn't know was how others would react inside and outside Iran.
Og
elsol
I'm still sleeepy!
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2005
- Posts
- 3,964
*yawn*
Personally, as a warmonger, a great opportunity was lost.
Dear Iran: You have twenty-fours to turn them over.
24 Hours Later --> Oooops! Was that all your nuclear reactors? You know... you're absolutely right, we should probably pursue this diplomatically.
But then again... I'm perfectly willing to see humanity come to an end. Let's give cockroaches their shot at being the rules of the earth.
Personally, as a warmonger, a great opportunity was lost.
Dear Iran: You have twenty-fours to turn them over.
24 Hours Later --> Oooops! Was that all your nuclear reactors? You know... you're absolutely right, we should probably pursue this diplomatically.
But then again... I'm perfectly willing to see humanity come to an end. Let's give cockroaches their shot at being the rules of the earth.
G
Guest
Guest
oggbashan said:
Indeed.
elsol
I'm still sleeepy!
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2005
- Posts
- 3,964
sethp said:
*LAUGH*
So you're the type who when they're on fire yells "No! Not the water! The gasoline! Quick, the gasoline!"
The Iranians might know whatever you want, but you're facing probably a young man in an extremely male, religious hiearchial society and as woman you're balking him.
The best thing that is going to happen is you're going to get buttstroked.
The worst thing is that the politicians lose control of the situation because the military is the one holding the guns.
Liar
now with 17% more class
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2003
- Posts
- 43,715
sethp said:
In the picture in today's paper I see them waving happily to the press after being freed.
And she was still wearing the thing.
So now I'm confused. I heard the "OMFGWTF she's forced to wear a veil!!!" outcrys then the captive pics were aired. But now I wonder... is she perhaps a muslim?
