Iran - How Far Will they Push?

[Royd 0]

I think its totally in control. Imagine if...

Quote

The UK boat was deliberately in Iranian waters. The number of incedence of this type had increased lately and it is getting too dificult to ignore. Iran had to deal with it this time.

So you're saying that the UK put two boats full of underarmed sailors into Iranian waters as a fishing expedition with no intention of being able to cover them from a larger boat?

That makes sense to me!

[Royd 0]

Quote

edit: Regarding what I've experienced and what I've not, I was probably in Bahgdad when you were in your Dad's bag.

Geez, why don't you two just PM each other with your ages and get this arguement over with, or better yet, let all of us in on the secret?

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

I would like to know why no one has mentioned NATO in all this. This is clearly an attack on one of the keystones of NATO and personally, I think Iran would react differently if everyone put together a unified front.

This is the same shit that Hamas pulled with kidnapping Israeli troops. Iran has been getting away with this shit for 30 years and it's an affront to the world.

This is a crisis.

"Iran 's been getting away w/ this shit for 30 yrs". The US govt. indoctrinated you well grasshopper> a little history> Who the fuck you think installed the Shah into power. >http://www.iranchamber.com/history/oil_nationalization/oil_nationalization.php More>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi

I know all about the Shah, that still didn't answer my question though, and it still doesn't change the reality of what has been going on in Iran for the past 3 decades.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Darius11 12]

You just chose to belive what you want. I remember when I used to say the Iraq war is for money and there is no WMD. People who are blind didn't get it and it was the same type of people. You so sure of what your told, and so blinded that you can not see the most obvios. We travled how miles so Iran could push for a war thatbthey will lose? I mean come on who is stupid enogh to belive that shit? I guess the same people who were 100 percent sure Iraq had WMD and a link to 911. Some never learn.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[akarunway 1]

SO. Why is it OUR, THE USA BUSINESS, other than oil. Getting you ( how do I say it, indoctrinated kids, maimed and killed) I don't know what to say anymore. You kids have to wake up and see the BIG PICTURE!

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

SO. Why is it OUR, THE USA BUSINESS, other than oil. Getting you ( how do I say it, indoctrinated kids, maimed and killed) I don't know what to say anymore. You kids have to wake up and see the BIG PICTURE!

That didn't exactly make sense to me, but I'll continue the discussion.

It was not the US that led the effort to keep the Shah in power in the 1950s. This was because the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company was being nationalized.

The big picture is two-fold. Iran sees this as their change to replay the hostage card, again, this time against a major political power in the world.

Any military officer can gauge a threat in their area of operations. Two "rubber rafts" that may be skirting a territorial line, conducting operations that have been under observation for months....years, present a tactical situation to a commander in the field. This was a planned, political execution of policy.

It has nothing to do with what the US and UK did in the 1950s, and even if it did, risking war serves no one.

The US was left licking its wounds in 1979-80. We did nothing to put the new fundamental regime in check. Political isolation did not help the situation. Iran reaped a great benefit from the first Gulf War in 1991. They reaped it again in 2003. Even quiet olive branches extended by the US to Iran during earthquake relief efforts were snubbed.

Iran is not interested in its past to determine a future for itself. The UK is seeing a shadowy image of the US 30 years ago in its first encounter with extreme islamo-facism.

This is a crisis. This was an assault on a lynch-pin within NATO, and I'm curious why NATO as a body has not responded.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Amazon 7]

Quote

The US was left licking its wounds in 1979-80. We did nothing to put the new fundamental regime in check. Political isolation did not help the situation

But it did give Ronnie and Rummy a chance to snuggle up with Saddaam.....for a bit of payback to the Iranians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_iraq_war

Lots of interesting bacgroud there.

[mpohl 1]

No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch

Terry Jones
Saturday March 31, 2007
The Guardian


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.

Quote

It seems odd to me that the outcry hasn't been more pronounced over Iran capturing UK marines. Why didn't the British frigate roll in and take out the Iranian boats?

I am all for pulling out of Iraq (or at least pulling back) but the Iran situation has me a bit conflicted. They seemed dead set on provocation, and they seem to have the green light to continue it.

If they go after more UK troops, will they shoot back next time?

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

SO. Why is it OUR, THE USA BUSINESS, other than oil. Getting you ( how do I say it, indoctrinated kids, maimed and killed) I don't know what to say anymore. You kids have to wake up and see the BIG PICTURE!

That didn't exactly make sense to me, but I'll continue the discussion.

It was not the US that led the effort to keep the Shah in power in the 1950s. This was because the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company was being nationalized.

The big picture is two-fold. Iran sees this as their change to replay the hostage card, again, this time against a major political power in the world.

Any military officer can gauge a threat in their area of operations. Two "rubber rafts" that may be skirting a territorial line, conducting operations that have been under observation for months....years, present a tactical situation to a commander in the field. This was a planned, political execution of policy.

It has nothing to do with what the US and UK did in the 1950s, and even if it did, risking war serves no one.

The US was left licking its wounds in 1979-80. We did nothing to put the new fundamental regime in check. Political isolation did not help the situation. Iran reaped a great benefit from the first Gulf War in 1991. They reaped it again in 2003. Even quiet olive branches extended by the US to Iran during earthquake relief efforts were snubbed.

Iran is not interested in its past to determine a future for itself. The UK is seeing a shadowy image of the US 30 years ago in its first encounter with extreme islamo-facism.

This is a crisis. This was an assault on a lynch-pin within NATO, and I'm curious why NATO as a body has not responded.

Godamn man. Why the fuck are we there in the first place? THAT

Quote

IS THE BIG PICTURE. IS IT THAT HARD TO COMPERHEND? No disrespect intended. I did boot camp in 78 and told em to kiss my ass. Donno what else to say. I ain't going to INVADE A SOVERIEGN NATION FOR FUKIN OIL TO BENIFIT MY FRIENDS

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

• Quote

[dorbie 0]

Quote

You just chose to belive what you want.

You choose to invent what you find convenient.

Like when you posted that Iran had released the hostages.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Godamn man. Why the fuck are we there in the first place? THAT IS THE BIG PICTURE. IS IT THAT HARD TO COMPERHEND? No disrespect intended. I did boot camp in 78 and told em to kiss my ass. Donno what else to say. I ain't going to INVADE A SOVERIEGN NATION FOR FUKIN OIL TO BENIFIT MY FRIENDS

No, the big picture is not the question, "Why are we there?"

The big picture question is not what you did in '78.

The big picture isn't a question at all. Chew on these facts and place them in proper context, not the enraged-barely-able-to-type-frenzy:

FACT: The world's economy, from China to Japan to France to Brazil to Mexico to the UK to Russia to the US, is on a foundation of energy generated from fossil fuels.

The world's main source of the cornerstone of our stability is located in the middle-east.

Whether by design, consequence or both, the middle-east is no longer able to play a self-sustaining role in the world. It is being over-run by elements that are appealing to the lowest common denominator of suffering to advance an agenda that bodes ill will for the rest of the world.

Is it about oil? Yes.
Is it that simple? No.
Does this mean it's about the whole world? Yes.

Right here and now though, these questions don't matter. The time to ask them is when the tap is turned off or shut-off and people around the world can't heat their homes, drive their cars or light their rooms. Ask them then, and find out what the answer may be...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[shropshire 0]

I concur. nice balanced post.

There are some great questions that need to be resolved tho... like how do we convince people (primarily in the West) that driving a big fuel hungry car and very cheap prices is not a right?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[dorbie 0]

Quote

It is being over-run by elements that are appealing to the lowest common denominator of suffering to advance an agenda that bodes ill will for the rest of the world.

I'm not convinced this isn't universal. Part of me thinks as a race we're incapable of handling the communication technology available without a new level of education. And I'm not just talking about the political zoo. I see people promulgating everything from pseudoscience crap to 9-11 conspiracy theories, and I think we are intellectually screwed as a race. Can we collectively be this dumb?

[vortexring 0]

Wouldn't call it being dumb. More a case of a collective selfish idleness.

Although as Gwain said; 'Is it about oil? Yes.
Is it that simple? No.
Does this mean it's about the whole world? Yes.

Right here and now though, these questions don't matter. The time to ask them is when the tap is turned off or shut-off and people around the world can't heat their homes, drive their cars or light their rooms. Ask them then, and find out what the answer may be... '

I think there might be a surprising amount who would prefer to do without, considering the means to do with. But unfortunately not enough to be a majority.

So perhaps this mentality is where the real problem lies.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[crozby 0]

Quote

Your willingness to fabricate any old shit about the UK and excuse manifest, obvious abuses by Iran reveals your bias.

I qualified it with "It's a possibility". Your willingness to believe any old shit our government comes out with despite its proven track record for making stuff up reveals your bias.

The facts divulged to the general public by governments are regularly different to the reality. Its called spin and TB is renowned for it. The fact that you take it for face value just shows what a great job he does.

[crozby 0]

Quote

So you're saying that the UK put two boats full of underarmed sailors into Iranian waters as a fishing expedition with no intention of being able to cover them from a larger boat?

I'm saying that it could easily be policy to harass the Iranians by straying into their territory.

[SkyDekker 1,150]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Godamn man. Why the fuck are we there in the first place? THAT IS THE BIG PICTURE. IS IT THAT HARD TO COMPERHEND? No disrespect intended. I did boot camp in 78 and told em to kiss my ass. Donno what else to say. I ain't going to INVADE A SOVERIEGN NATION FOR FUKIN OIL TO BENIFIT MY FRIENDS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


No, the big picture is not the question, "Why are we there?"

The big picture question is not what you did in '78.

The big picture isn't a question at all. Chew on these facts and place them in proper context, not the enraged-barely-able-to-type-frenzy:

FACT: The world's economy, from China to Japan to France to Brazil to Mexico to the UK to Russia to the US, is on a foundation of energy generated from fossil fuels.

The world's main source of the cornerstone of our stability is located in the middle-east.

Whether by design, consequence or both, the middle-east is no longer able to play a self-sustaining role in the world. It is being over-run by elements that are appealing to the lowest common denominator of suffering to advance an agenda that bodes ill will for the rest of the world.

Is it about oil? Yes.
Is it that simple? No.
Does this mean it's about the whole world? Yes.

Right here and now though, these questions don't matter. The time to ask them is when the tap is turned off or shut-off and people around the world can't heat their homes, drive their cars or light their rooms. Ask them then, and find out what the answer may be...

Well said and deserves repeating!!!!

[DZJ 0]

Quote

Quote

So you're saying that the UK put two boats full of underarmed sailors into Iranian waters as a fishing expedition with no intention of being able to cover them from a larger boat?

I'm saying that it could easily be policy to harass the Iranians by straying into their territory.

What possible benefit could there be from such a policy? And just what sort of 'harassment' can be achieved by a dozen or so sailors and marines, lightly armed, in rubber boats?

If it was the frigate in question that was close to the Iranian border, then you might have a point. As it is, however, this just reads like grasping at straws.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Can we collectively be this dumb?

Obviously some are.

To being stupid please add selfish, and incapable of viewing anything with common sense. Like the fact that if we traveled thousands of miles with are guns to sit on Iran’s border as we have done befor they are not the ones pushing for war maybe we are?

But whats the point. Unfortunately a big part of ignorance is not being able to admit you were wrong or to allow another point of view to intrude in to there dim little minds.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch

Yeah, well had the Brits flown Iranian airliners into a few skyscrapers in Tehran, my bet is they would be dealing with much worse than hoods and shocks.

And to those who would profess to know what these sailors are enduring - YOU KNOW NOTHING - SO SHUT THE FUCK UP.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Quote

No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch

Yeah, well had the Brits flown Iranian airliners into a few skyscrapers in Tehran, my bet is they would be dealing with much worse than hoods and shocks.

And to those who would profess to know what these sailors are enduring - YOU KNOW NOTHING - SO SHUT THE FUCK UP.

This is what I mean about ignorance.

What the fuck does Iran have to do with 9-11?

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians clearly are a very uncivilised bunch

Yeah, well had the Brits flown Iranian airliners into a few skyscrapers in Tehran, my bet is they would be dealing with much worse than hoods and shocks.

And to those who would profess to know what these sailors are enduring - YOU KNOW NOTHING - SO SHUT THE FUCK UP.

This is what I mean about ignorance.

What the fuck does Iran have to do with 9-11?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I am saying that what the Brits stand accused of is quite different than what many terrorist detainees stand accused of. I am saying that they would be treated much more harshly had they actually DONE SOMETHING TO IRAN.
I am staying that the treatment of a prisoner is often commensurate with the seriosuness of the crime.

A thief gets a weekend in minimum security, and a murderer gets life in SuperMax.

So, what I said was not ignorant at all.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

What the fuck does Iran have to do with 9-11?

Their revolution and the formation of the Islamic Republic was the seminal event that set off the current spate of ISLAMO-FASCISM throughout the middle and near east. They are the ones who have decided to support surrogate groups like Hezzbollah that HAVE killed hundreds of YOUR new countrymen....They are the ones currently helping the insurgents to kill YOUR new countrymen with the Shaped IED's.....perhaps you should think about where YOUR loyalties truely are with.

So even though they were not flying the planes on 9/11 they certainly celebrated in the streets when it occured. They would do ANYTHING they can to hurt ANY non Islamic country or group in the world.. and since THEY LABLE us as the great SATAN... they have declared us to be EVIL and worthy of DEATH...
I can see all too well that they are an enemy to be dealt with..... are you having difficulty defining who is your enemy..... do you think they will give a damn at all if a few thousands of their fellow muslims will die along with all the other americans IF they get a nuclear weapon and can deliver it here???

[shropshire 0]

<>

probably not, but it does not address that there are people detained 'around the world' that have not been found guilty of anything or passed throgh any kind of due process etc..

It's a complicated world and 'we' tend to over simplify on this forum.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Darius11 12]

I think everyone is losing me on this.

We are talking about British sailors who are in the Persian Gulf. Right on the out side of the shorelines of Iran. If they were in Iranian waters Iran has every right to detain them and questions them. We would have done the same.
I am sick of hearing my self say it but it is a big point that needs to be said until people get it.
WE ARE IN THERE Territory right now, they are no where near us.
We are threatening them with aggressions and violence.
Honestly what would we do if we found Iranian sailors in our territory waters? Even better what would we do if there were Iranian solders 100 yard from entering our territory waters how about one mile what would we do?

How can people think that we are allowed to invade a country, defy the UN, torture prisoners, hold people captive, topple governments, shoot down civilian air planes, support terrorist when it is convenient, and on and on and on but Iran is way out of place for capturing British sailors that they claim were inside their waters? And even if they are not in there waters they are close less then a mile.

That is what I don’t get. How some can simply turn a blind eyeto all the shady shit we do and at the same time be pissed at Iran for what would be viewed as standard percidure

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain