http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/29/iran.uk.sailors/index.html

The dispute has sparked anti-British protests in Iran, raised Middle East tensions, already high over concerns about Iran's nuclear ambitions, and sent shockwaves through the oil market.

In Tehran, Iranian protesters in front of the Foreign Ministry chanted and held banners demanding the British sailors and marines be put on trial, AP reported. One banner called for the Britons to be executed.

wtf?

3/29/2007 5:30:29 PM

Quote :

"I'd like to see Iran become free and democratic. Hell there has got to be quite a few hot bitches over there covered from head to toe that nobody has ever discovered like Bell. "

then you don't know much about iran.

iran has some of the most beautiful women in the world.

if you walk down a busy street in tehran, you would swear you were walking through an open-air fashion show, with model-like young fashionable chicks wearing the latest fashion.

and that worries the authorities in iran. see this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6213854.stm

****************************************

anyway, did anybody see on the news footage of the capture of the sailors?

and some general from the revolutionary guards came on a local television channel with all sort of data, including a hand-held GPS device, and detailed maps, showing that the sailors were 0.5 km into the iranian side of the shatt-al-arab, the narrow waterway shared by iraq and iran.

here is what i think:

it is highly likely that they strayed into the wrong side while thinking they were on the correct side, but without any malice or intent. and IF THAT IS THE CASE, the iranians have full rights to pick them up. heck, fishermen get picked up in various seas/oceans all over the world when they stray into the waters of another country, and it takes weeks sometimes to get them back.

but even if it is the case that they had strayed, the iranians should release them after interrogating and making sure that it was an unintentional mistake.

the chick was promised to be freed, but then they changed their mind.

she has written her second letter (don't know if intended for her folks back home, or for world media), but the letter was shown on the iranian channel, and she says in it that they were on the wrong side when they were picked up.

now, maybe she was forced to say that, but it is not like the sailors are being tortured or anything, so why say that if it is not true.

anyway, nothing is clear, and nothing will be clear till they are released.

most probably, it will never be clear and the truth may never came out vis-a-vis what side they were on when they were picked up, as it is a case of "he said, she said".

3/29/2007 5:42:55 PM

Dude, wtf?

When Iran first intercepted the British and scooped them up, Iran reported their coordinates. Those coordinates were on the Iraqi side. A day later, they changed the coordinates to make it look like the British were inside the Iranian border. Of course they are lying now to try to justify capturing the British.

Try to stay up with the news.

3/29/2007 5:55:03 PM

the British coordinates for both their vessel and the vessel they were boarding but them outside of iranian water

3/29/2007 5:57:40 PM

Quote :

"if you walk down a busy street in tehran, you would swear you were walking through an open-air fashion show, with model-like young fashionable chicks wearing the latest fashion."

Who are you, the minister of Tourism?

3/29/2007 10:01:12 PM

ahahaha

the daily show was fuckin' hilarious tonight, talking about this situation

good stuff

3/29/2007 10:11:13 PM

^.

3/29/2007 10:24:51 PM

Prime Minister Earthdogg:

"Our sailors know the dangers they face when serving their country. While we want our sailors returned unharmed, we cannot be held hostage against action for fear of losing troops.

When a country kidnaps our troops and then parades them before the world, it cannot be regarded as anything but an act of war. We are a peaceful nation, but this kidnapping of one country's troops will not be tolerated.

I have ordered a complete blockade of all shipping in and out of Iranian ports. If our troops are not released, continued to be displayed or they are killed..I will order immediate action against the leaders of Iran. "

3/30/2007 11:31:03 AM

getting into the business of killing off leaders is not a road we (or the uk) should go down.

3/30/2007 11:37:49 AM

not overtly, but it wouldn't be too difficult to have khamenei and ahmadenijad die of some mystery illness pretty quickly

it's called plausible deniability

3/30/2007 11:41:02 AM

Given how much detailed evidence that the British have been providing thus far, it makes it hard for me to believe that the British were fabricating their numbers. When you go into that much detail, giving exact coordinates and satellite photos to the public, a fabrication would be very hard to pull off.

Besides, a heavily contested area like that is typically well marked, so its hard for me to believe they strayed over. Given how quickly the Iranians picked up the fifteen British servicemen, it's hard to believe that this was not a premeditated capture plan.

There was an interesting theory that was floated by David Ignatius in both a column in the Washington Post and on the Diana Rehm Show today. He believes that the Revolutionary Guard in Iran seized the British independently for several reasons. First, to give leverage in attempting to free the five Revolutionary Guard members who were picked up by the Americans. Second, to disrupt the attempts by more moderate factions in negotiation with the United States and the United Nations over Iraq and the nuclear issue. Third, as a sort of vengeance for the continuous stream of targeted sanctions coming out of the United Nations particularly the unanimous sanctions imposed recently that were targetting the Guard.

Finally, and apparently this is the big kicker, the Revolutionary Guard is extremely nervous about Brig. Gen. Ali Reza Asgari who mysteriously disappeared in Istanbul recently. Whether or not he defected or kidnapped is unknown, but it is believed that he is in the hands of some Western power. While he may not know anything about Iranian nuclear ambitions, he is supposedly the most well informed individual on just about everything else Iran is doing abroad.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/29/AR2007032901985.html

It's a believable theory.

[Edited on March 30, 2007 at 1:24 PM. Reason : Forgot the good General.]

3/30/2007 1:20:56 PM

the guy on the Diana Rehm Show said they boundary was marked with clearly visible bouys

3/30/2007 4:44:05 PM

I couldn't remember if he said that area specifically was or if in general, such areas are clearly marked.

3/30/2007 4:57:59 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6509813.stm

Quote :

"Iran airs second sailor 'apology' A second member of the Royal Navy crew captured in the Gulf has apologised for "trespassing" in Iranian waters, in a broadcast on Iranian television. The crewman, who introduces himself as Nathan Thomas Summers, says: "I would like to apologise for entering your waters without permission." "

3 letters by the chick apologizing for the same, and for invading iraq falling prey to blair's and bush's policies:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6509581.stm

3/30/2007 6:18:27 PM

yeah...saw that earlier today...cant wait til we fuck them up...
[Edited on March 30, 2007 at 6:26 PM. Reason : wording...they dont "deserve" to get fucked up i guess]

3/30/2007 6:20:14 PM

if there is a military response it will be by the british after consulting the un, not us

3/30/2007 7:05:49 PM

The fact that all the letters are written by the woman... seems like a slap in the face to the women in Iran who have been fighting for their personal freedoms so very recently.

3/30/2007 9:43:25 PM

i think the us media jumped on the reports that we might have been freeing her around day like 4 or so and made them want to keep her longer...but i also agree with ^ about the womans rights thing...didnt think about that til he said it but like 3 weeks ago there was some reports about that

i'll try to find a news article link

3/30/2007 9:46:37 PM

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8959110

3/30/2007 9:50:38 PM

Quote :

"The fact that all the letters are written by the woman... seems like a slap in the face to the women in Iran who have been fighting for their personal freedoms so very recently."

what do those 2 have to do with each other?

if anything, she says she has been treated kindly, and been given food and clothes, and has been looked after.

3/30/2007 9:51:57 PM

^ Do you believe the letters are genuine?

3/30/2007 9:54:16 PM

That's not what is being questioned or debated here; Honkeyball explicitly said that BECAUSE the letters are written by the female sailor, that is a aslap on the face of women fighting for women's rights in Iran.

I don't see how that is so, REGARDLESS of whether the letters are genuine, forced, or fabricated. Do you?

3/30/2007 9:56:48 PM

from what i heard its not very nice to put women in jail in iran

like EVERYONE in that country believes that...its one of those theocracy type things

am i right in that?- i heard that on cnn

[Edited on March 30, 2007 at 10:00 PM. Reason : its considered like not good by their religion or something ]

3/30/2007 10:00:05 PM

i'm curious, what happens if the sailors refuse to speak on television with all the bullshit apologies and stuff? i mean it just seems like they don't have to. it's not like iran will do anything to them, they aren't stupid. so what is convincing them to do that? and furthermore, why the hell is the woman wearing that stupid muslim hood shit???

3/30/2007 10:56:10 PM

dude if the country of iran was holding you and you knew you had not done anything wrong to get captured, you would probably do whatever they told you

3/30/2007 10:58:31 PM

see, i'm not saying i wouldn't. it's easy for me to sit here and say "man i wouldn't say shit" and "man i'd never wear that stupid shit"

but i still like to think my patriotism is so strong that i could withstand the pressures of it

3/30/2007 11:07:17 PM

^^^

that's exactly why i said this:

Quote :

"now, maybe she was forced to say that, but it is not like the sailors are being tortured or anything, so why say that if it is not true."

3/30/2007 11:14:10 PM

Quote :

"I don't see how that is so, REGARDLESS of whether the letters are genuine, forced, or fabricated. Do you?"

I think Honkeyball is simply pointing out the irony that the government of Iran has chosen this female sailor as a spokesperson, while Iranian women have little voice.

My question still stands, however: Do you believe the letters are genuine? My question is in direct response to

Quote :

"she says she has been treated kindly, and been given food and clothes, and has been looked after."

3/31/2007 8:12:20 AM

Quote :

"I think Honkeyball is simply pointing out the irony that the government of Iran has chosen this female sailor as a spokesperson, while Iranian women have little voice."

Perhaps, but the fact that you have a female prisoner adds to the emotional impact of the entire incident. As for whether or not the letters are genuine, it's hard to say. True, they may not have been tortured into writing them, but there are always other means for compelling others to do what you tell them to (threatening them with worse conditions and treatment). Given that they have no idea what the Iranians are going to do with them...

3/31/2007 3:13:58 PM

Iranian women are relatively more free than their Arab neighbors. The enforcement of rules is comparatively lax.

3/31/2007 3:17:34 PM

fuck Iran, lets stop playing paddy cake and rape them already.

4/1/2007 4:32:30 PM

^

4/1/2007 4:35:32 PM

this whole thing is outrageous

wtf does the Iranian government hope to accomplish with this?

4/1/2007 5:46:25 PM

i was kinda hoping they would keep pushing our buttons until we went over there and squashed them

4/1/2007 6:19:11 PM

Quote :

" Guards chief: US jets violated Iran airspace Agencies Tehran: US warplanes have violated Iranian airspace in the southwestern oil-rich province of Khuzestan, Al Alam Arabic language news satellite channel quoted a local military chief as saying yesterday."

http://www.gulfnews.com/region/Iran/10115427.html

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/070401/1/47k8w.html

4/1/2007 6:48:10 PM

like i implied before, if they don't get back in their place and release the Brits, we will violate much more than their airspace.

4/1/2007 8:10:58 PM

Quote :

"i was kinda hoping they would keep pushing our buttons until we went over there and squashed them"

I as well am looking forward to massive civilian casualties.

4/1/2007 8:15:08 PM

on previous page:

Crazywade:

Quote :

"I don't want any of the British sailors to die for that to happen..... [for iran to be destroyed] but watching Iran get obliterated would be priceless."

ME:

Quote :

"^ because you are a baby-killer. and you love seeing people die. you are just as bad as osama."

[Edited on April 1, 2007 at 8:29 PM. Reason : ]

4/1/2007 8:18:33 PM

when the us is playing u play by THEIR rules

4/1/2007 8:22:56 PM

I was about to argue against your moronic standpoint, but then I realized arguing with a tard would just be a waste of my time.

4/1/2007 8:29:20 PM

Quote :

"IRAN is gaining up to £5 million a day from detaining 15 British sailors and marines as the crisis causes the price of oil to rise dramatically. Since Iran's Revolutionary Guards seized the Britons 11 days ago, the price of oil has soared 10 per cent, reaching six-month highs of $66 per barrel in New York last week. According to OPEC figures, Iran exports 2.3 million barrels of oil per day, meaning Tehran has profited from the crisis by up to £5 million a day. By the end of today, the extra cash it has raked in could total £55 million. "

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=506142007

ahahaha

4/1/2007 8:30:52 PM

i think the UK ought to just start sinking one of their naval ships every few days until they start acting right and release the hostages.


and if they need some help to do it, well, what are friends for?

[Edited on April 1, 2007 at 8:32 PM. Reason : asdfasd]

4/1/2007 8:31:23 PM

Yeah, I mean we just brought a whole nuther aircraft carrier over there to provide outselves a greater presence over there.

Let's just hope we don't try some silly hostage rescue thing that ends up with no actual rescue and people getting killed.

4/1/2007 8:37:28 PM

i'm not saying to look for a war with them. I'm saying that if I were President and those fuckheads did that to 15 of MY sailors and Marines, I would've sent either a few Tomahawks or JDAMs into the Presidential palace or whatever they have, or I would've sunk one or two of their naval ships. I wouldn't even bother to warn them that they'd better return the hostages before something bad happened. I'd just carry out a limited strike to make that point that such tactics are not an option to ever be considered in the future.

then if they didn't give the hostages back after the first limited strike, I'd just start blowing up more and more stuff.

[Edited on April 1, 2007 at 8:44 PM. Reason : asfd]

4/1/2007 8:43:06 PM

LOL

[Edited on April 1, 2007 at 9:08 PM. Reason : .]

4/1/2007 9:02:36 PM

what will really happen is a prisoner exchange.

4/1/2007 10:52:47 PM

I second the Duke's sentiments.

4/1/2007 10:59:48 PM

thirded...i was hoping he'd post here

^^i hope not

fuck that

4/2/2007 12:04:15 AM

Quote :

"i'm not saying to look for a war with them. I'm saying that if I were President and those fuckheads did that to 15 of MY sailors and Marines, I would've sent either a few Tomahawks or JDAMs into the Presidential palace or whatever they have, or I would've sunk one or two of their naval ships. I wouldn't even bother to warn them that they'd better return the hostages before something bad happened. I'd just carry out a limited strike to make that point that such tactics are not an option to ever be considered in the future."

Tempting, but knowing them, they'd probably locate the hostages in strategic areas so that when the bombs drop, they can blame us for killing our own soldiers.

I'd advocate a rescue, but we know how the last major attempt to rescue hostages from Iran went...

4/2/2007 1:43:47 AM

Quote :

"I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God's sake, what's wrong with putting a bag over her head? That's what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it's hard to breathe. Then it's perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can't be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are. It is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our captives, they wouldn't be able to talk at all. Of course they'd probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over their head - but at least they wouldn't be humiliated. And what's all this about allowing the captives to write letters home saying they are all right? It's time the Iranians fell into line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That's one of the many privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay. The true mark of a civilised country is that it doesn't rush into charging people whom it has arbitrarily arrested in places it's just invaded. The inmates of Guantánamo, for example, have been enjoying all the privacy they want for almost five years, and the first inmate has only just been charged. What a contrast to the disgraceful Iranian rush to parade their captives before the cameras! What's more, it is clear that the Iranians are not giving their British prisoners any decent physical exercise. The US military make sure that their Iraqi captives enjoy PT. This takes the form of exciting "stress positions", which the captives are expected to hold for hours on end so as to improve their stomach and calf muscles. A common exercise is where they are made to stand on the balls of their feet and then squat so that their thighs are parallel to the ground. This creates intense pain and, finally, muscle failure. It's all good healthy fun and has the bonus that the captives will confess to anything to get out of it. And this brings me to my final point. It is clear from her TV appearance that servicewoman Turney has been put under pressure. The newspapers have persuaded behavioural psychologists to examine the footage and they all conclude that she is "unhappy and stressed". What is so appalling is the underhand way in which the Iranians have got her "unhappy and stressed". She shows no signs of electrocution or burn marks and there are no signs of beating on her face. This is unacceptable. If captives are to be put under duress, such as by forcing them into compromising sexual positions, or having electric shocks to their genitals, they should be photographed, as they were in Abu Ghraib. The photographs should then be circulated around the civilised world so that everyone can see exactly what has been going on. As Stephen Glover pointed out in the Daily Mail, perhaps it would not be right to bomb Iran in retaliation for the humiliation of our servicemen, but clearly the Iranian people must be made to suffer - whether by beefing up sanctions, as the Mail suggests, or simply by getting President Bush to hurry up and invade, as he intends to anyway, and bring democracy and western values to the country, as he has in Iraq. · Terry Jones"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2047128,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=1

4/2/2007 3:24:25 AM