Are we hours away from war with Iran??

Originally posted by Neon Haze

They are soldiers... If they had made a run for it and had been fired upon then the course of action would have been clear.

Even if they were out numbered and out gunned, the fact they didn't fight when they were obviously within their rights was a fatal error on their part.

And ch1466 is right about non co-operation. All the captives should have said was name and rank. Nothing more nothing less.

NeoN.

They followed the ROE's to the letter. They acted, exactly as they were trained to. How did they even know they would be taken away? They might have thought they would be asked a few questions there and be on there way.

I think I will put the following in my sig - They have no training in what to do when captured. Only air crews, rescue teams and special forces receive such training. Do you not think that if they refused to write letters and answer questions, the Iranians would wonder what secrets they have? They don't have any, but Iran would be very interested to know why they won't talk about them.

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
They followed the ROE's to the letter.

Where in the rules of engagement does it state that a foreign force unprovoked can come into your territory and cease your men and equipment and the response is No Resistance??

What is the definition of Defence for Christ sake!!

All the best people,

NeoN HaZe.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by Neon Haze]

Originally posted by Neon Haze

Where in the rules of engagement does it state that a foreign force unprovoked can come into your terror and cease your men and equipment and the response is No Resistance??

What is the definition of Defence for Christ sake!!

All the best people,

NeoN HaZe.


[edit on 30-3-2007 by Neon Haze]

You would need to ask the Royal Navy about this, and why those who serve on these ships, in harms way, have not called for the ROE's to be changed, which is what they tend to do when they feel change is needed

Originally posted by DenyAllKnowledge
Erm, in relation to the British Sailors and Marines being "paraded" on TV I get the feeling that it's all being taken in a fairly hysterical manner. I hardly consider people sitting, eating and smoking to be considered "parading".

Iran airs second sailor 'apology'

The crewman says he has been well treated by the Iranians.
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."

Tony Blair said "parading" crew in this way would only "enhance people's sense of disgust with Iran".

Just what exactly is Iran trying to do here??

Do they think these actions have no consequences???

All the best,

NeoN HaZe.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by Neon Haze]

Originally posted by Neon Haze
Just what exactly is Iran trying to do here??

Political jockeying. Typical of them ofcourse.. Wouldn't have expected anything else.

Do they think these actions have no consequences???

Yep..Not severe ones atleast!
And I share the same opinion as a matter of fact.

Originally posted by Neon Haze
Where in the rules of engagement does it state that a foreign force unprovoked can come into your territory and cease your men and equipment and the response is No Resistance??

What is the definition of Defence for Christ sake!!

If British troops were to have fought back then we would currently be seeing a huge war in the Middle East involving Israel, Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, EU, UK, US and maybe Russia/China.

Iran is like an attention seeking child, just like North Korea.

BREAKING NEWS!!

EU Statement is to call for immediate release of sailors

(This is backed by all 27 members)

Originally posted by infinite

If British troops were to have fought back then we would currently be seeing a huge war in the Middle East involving Israel, Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, EU, UK, US and maybe Russia/China.

Actually thats a tough call to make.
Depends on whether this kidnap Op was a local initiative(base commanders etc) or a one borne right out of Tehran.

If it was local, then the HMS Cornwall had a good chance of rescuing their own while they were at sea itself and getting deeper into Iraqi waters while calling in for CAS(air cover) to dissuade retailiation or something.
That would leave the Iranians w/o many cards to play with.

Of course this would entirely depend on if the 15 could be extracted w/o harming the Iranians. A very BIG 'if'. Injuring or killing anybody here would just make it worse.

On the other hand, if the op was choreographed from Tehran, then you can bet they had other 'assets' inland waiting to scramble just in case things went wrong.
Actually it all depends on how much importance each side would be willing to give to a 'mission success'.

Its like a poker game where you've got to second-guess the opponent and decide whether you're feeling brave or you're wanting to play it safe.

The Iranians were in the mood to gamble while the Brits quite correctly wanted to play it safe.

Originally posted by Daedalus3
The Iranians were in the mood to gamble while the Brits quite correctly wanted to play it safe.

It is ashame that Blair is being attacked by some elements of the media for not taking a tough line, I reckon he is keeping it calm, but the more this goes on some sort of military action is going to be taken.

We are on Day 8

EU ministers put pressure on Iran

EU foreign ministers have demanded the immediate release of 15 British navy personnel seized by Iran a week ago.
The 27 ministers voiced "unconditional support" for Britain in the dispute, in a statement agreed at a meeting in the north German port city of Bremen.

They urged "the immediate and unconditional release" of the crew.

The EU said it reserved the right to take "appropriate measures" if Iran did not comply - though the measures were not spelled out.
Source: - BBC News

Now I wonder what "appropriate measures" actually means???

Is that calm talk for military operations?? or maybe just another hand slapping resolution that Iran seem to love to Ignore so much.

I am totally amazed that this has gone on so long.

All the best,

NeoN HaZe

Originally posted by Neon Haze

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
They followed the ROE's to the letter.

Where in the rules of engagement does it state that a foreign force unprovoked can come into your territory and cease your men and equipment and the response is No Resistance??

What is the definition of Defence for Christ sake!!

All the best people,

NeoN HaZe.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by Neon Haze]

The position they were in while being stopped makes iot impossible to fight. If they had so much as raised their weapon they would all have been mown down.

The Iranians waited until they were on their way down the rope ladders to stop them. The Iranians were armed with heavy caibre machine guns and even RPG's. The Brits (who are stuck on some ropel remember) were carrying nothing but pistols.

Does anyone honestly think they should have tried to fight their way out after hearing this and everything else people have said? Don't forget they were also heavily outmanned.

Originally posted by triplesod

Originally posted by Neon Haze

Originally posted by Muppetus Galacticus
They followed the ROE's to the letter.

Where in the rules of engagement does it state that a foreign force unprovoked can come into your territory and cease your men and equipment and the response is No Resistance??

What is the definition of Defence for Christ sake!!

All the best people,

NeoN HaZe.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by Neon Haze]

The position they were in while being stopped makes iot impossible to fight. If they had so much as raised their weapon they would all have been mown down.

The Iranians waited until they were on their way down the rope ladders to stop them. The Iranians were armed with heavy caibre machine guns and even RPG's. The Brits (who are stuck on some ropel remember) were carrying nothing but pistols.

Does anyone honestly think they should have tried to fight their way out after hearing this and everything else people have said? Don't forget they were also heavily outmanned.

I think he means what he expected of the UK government to do after the incident took place.

You may be right but I don't think so mate. He replied to the post directly above him which was itself a reply to his previous post.

I think the UK has shown exemplary restraint...we have to remember that this isn't a soccer match...more like a chess game.

I realize that it's easy for me to take this position, I'm not British, and those sailors aren't my children. Still, I hope cool heads continue to prevail...and my heart goes out to their loved ones.

Peace &
Good Fortune
OBE1

Now I wonder what "appropriate measures" actually means???

Is that calm talk for military operations?? or maybe just another hand slapping resolution that Iran seem to love to Ignore so much.

I am totally amazed that this has gone on so long.

All the best,

NeoN HaZe

I think the British response has been the right response, going in gung ho is not going to get them back. The first sign of an attack they will more than likely kill the British navy soldiers.

Also you have to understand the political structure of the country. There is not just one man incharge. Many hold the position of leader, some for the revolutionary guard, some as cabinet ministers and others in religion. This is probably why progress seems slow. But i have faith in our diplomats, isolating Iran is the best strategy.

Originally posted by triplesod
You may be right but I don't think so mate. He replied to the post directly above him which was itself a reply to his previous post.

You are both right.

I personally believe we should have resisted even if they were out gunned and out numbered. Death before dishonour...

I also think it very strange our response directly preceding the incident. Apparently there was no attempt to give chase or any kind of resistance to the event at all.

Someone earlier mentioned that the HMS Cornwall must have seen on their radar and sonar a large number of vessels approaching.... They should have been in direct contact with the crew or the boarding party...

Something is certainly not right about this...

All the best,

NeoN HaZe.

That is also something i did not understand either. How can they have not known that those vessels were approaching the 15 British navy soldiers. They were supposidly in contact with them up until they were surrounded by the Iranians. They must have had radar data from the area they were in.

Originally posted by Pendu
Also you have to understand the political structure of the country. There is not just one man incharge. Many hold the position of leader, some for the revolutionary guard, some as cabinet ministers and others in religion. This is probably why progress seems slow.

Understanding the Iranian political structure is not as easy or as straight forward as most would believe...

Iran: Who holds the power?

Iran's complex and unusual political system combines elements of a modern Islamic theocracy with democracy. A network of unelected institutions controlled by the highly powerful conservative Supreme Leader is countered by a president and parliament elected by the people.

For much of the last decade, Iranian politics has been characterised by continued wrangling between these elected and unelected institutions as a reformist president - and, at times, parliament - struggled against the conservative establishment.

But with hardliners' regaining control of the parliament in 2004 and the presidency in 2005, all the organs of government are now dominated by conservatives.
Source: BBC News

All the best people,

NeoN HaZe.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by Neon Haze]

I thought i understood it yesterday, now looking at your post i am confused again lol.

Not surprised it's taking so long for things to happen.

[edit on 30-3-2007 by Pendu]

Originally posted by Neon Haze
I personally believe we should have resisted even if they were out gunned and out numbered. Death before dishonour...

What good would that have done? All you end up with is 15 dead British servicemen and quite possibly thousands more dead people everywhere as a result of the ensuing war.

Let's say these servicemen are released unharmed after they have served their propaganda purposes, do you still believe they should have shot at those Iranian boats even though they had not been shot at themselves?

We have Rules of Engagement for a reason and it is a very good reason. They are there to prevent a tricky situation turning out worse than it needs to and to keep you safe. There is absolutely no dishonour in sticking to those rules and frankly I find it somewhat insulting to suggest those marines and navy personnel acted with dishonour. They acted exactly as they should have done in that situation and that was confirmed by Commodore Nick Lambert on board HMS Cornwall right after it happened.

I also think it very strange our response directly preceding the incident. Apparently there was no attempt to give chase or any kind of resistance to the event at all.

No doubt drawing on the experience of the similar events as happened in 2004. An event that ended peacefully after 3 days.

Something is certainly not right about this...

Exactly, the Iranians entered Iraqi waters to detain British personnel because they knew they would be able to get away with it. Change those ROE's and I guartantee you it won't happen again because the Iranians wouldn't take the risk of escalation.

Cheers,
Zep