LaxTV Forums | A Forum About The MCLA

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/28/iran.uk.sailors/index.html

This situation could get ugly, hopefully not.

Interesting that the female brit says they're sorry for entering Iranian waters...whereas Britain claims via GPS that they did not. Hmm...

I highly doubt she wrote that letter, and if she did, it was most likely under duress. I worry about this whole incident, especially with all the media banter about us going to war with Iran anyway. I don't think America can stand to fight a war against Iran at this point. I think Iran knows this and is using it to posture itself with regard to its nuclear program. I hope this is resolved diplomatically and quickly, but I wouldn't have a problem with Britain dropping a bunch of commandos in there to get them out.

I absolutely believe that the sailor did not write the letter.

This is an interesting time for Iran to be rattling sabers..

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8914938&fsrc=nwl

And, oh yeah - did you see the size of the US Naval presence there? And the fact that the Iranian Navy was peforming exercises around the Straights of Hormuz (sp?)

Seems pretty clear that she has been coerced into saying that they were in Iranian waters.

What is scary to me is that the public's opinions of the Iraq War are influencing decisions regarding Iran. Here we have in Iran a nation that is defying UN Resolutions, openly calling for the destruction of a sovereign nation, and now illegally taking foreign sailors hostage. Used to be that was grounds for military action but apparently not anymore. Iran's government is going to keep pushing the Western powers until we do something about it. Unfortunately, I don't envision either the US or UK doing anything as those that prefer appeasement gain more power and influence.

In the end, it will be Israeli and Iranian citizens that pay the price when we are forced to war following the inevitable Iranian attack on Israel. Somewhere, Neville Chamberlain is having a serious case of deja vu.

StrykerFSU wrote:Seems pretty clear that she has been coerced into saying that they were in Iranian waters.

What is scary to me is that the public's opinions of the Iraq War are influencing decisions regarding Iran. Here we have in Iran a nation that is defying UN Resolutions, openly calling for the destruction of a sovereign nation, and now illegally taking foreign sailors hostage. Used to be that was grounds for military action but apparently not anymore. Iran's government is going to keep pushing the Western powers until we do something about it. Unfortunately, I don't envision either the US or UK doing anything as those that prefer appeasement gain more power and influence.

In the end, it will be Israeli and Iranian citizens that pay the price when we are forced to war following the inevitable Iranian attack on Israel. Somewhere, Neville Chamberlain is having a serious case of deja vu.

yep. well said Stryker.

The Iranian tactic is almost similar to what Hizobullah and Hamas did when they captured several Israeli soldiers and held them hostage. It has been almost a year that the fate of those soldiers remain unknown.

I agree with others that the female British soldier had to read the script to "claim" that they were in Iranian waters.

Let's go back to 1979 when our American hostages were taken and were captive for 444 days. Didn't the Iranians release the women first back then?

When o' when will nations in the middle east learn to stop messing with Israel?

i'm sure she chose to wear the burka like she chose to write the letter.

StrykerFSU wrote:Seems pretty clear that she has been coerced into saying that they were in Iranian waters.

What is scary to me is that the public's opinions of the Iraq War are influencing decisions regarding Iran. Here we have in Iran a nation that is defying UN Resolutions, openly calling for the destruction of a sovereign nation, and now illegally taking foreign sailors hostage. Used to be that was grounds for military action but apparently not anymore. Iran's government is going to keep pushing the Western powers until we do something about it. Unfortunately, I don't envision either the US or UK doing anything as those that prefer appeasement gain more power and influence.

In the end, it will be Israeli and Iranian citizens that pay the price when we are forced to war following the inevitable Iranian attack on Israel. Somewhere, Neville Chamberlain is having a serious case of deja vu.

I agree in principal that we should press any UN resolutions against Iran even if that means military force. The problem is that this country is on the verge of ending a 4 year war/occupation of Iraq. Regardless of where people sit on the merits of this war, and regardless of the partisan banter in Washington, I think most Americans are tired of it. The army is facing recruiting lows, soldiers are serving multiple tours of duty, and we have soldiers in Afghanistan; all of this with a volunteer military. Add to that the attitude many middle eastern countries have towards us. An invasion of Iran could push many middle eastern countries farther away from us and view us as cultural imperialists. We have also faced criticism from some of our allies through the course of this war.

I certainly think we are able to fight a war against Iran at this point, but in my opinion we really need to exhaust every possible diplomatic option first.

StrykerFSU wrote:Seems pretty clear that she has been coerced into saying that they were in Iranian waters.

What is scary to me is that the public's opinions of the Iraq War are influencing decisions regarding Iran. Here we have in Iran a nation that is defying UN Resolutions, openly calling for the destruction of a sovereign nation, and now illegally taking foreign sailors hostage. Used to be that was grounds for military action but apparently not anymore. Iran's government is going to keep pushing the Western powers until we do something about it. Unfortunately, I don't envision either the US or UK doing anything as those that prefer appeasement gain more power and influence.

In the end, it will be Israeli and Iranian citizens that pay the price when we are forced to war following the inevitable Iranian attack on Israel. Somewhere, Neville Chamberlain is having a serious case of deja vu.

I don't think public opinion has anything to do with it. I think someone needs to look no further than the fact that the military is already stretched too thin. With the troops in Iraq and Afgahnistan (not to mention the resources tied up in those locations), who do we plan to send to Iran? And with what money? And with what vehicles, armor, weapons, etc.?

Or perhaps a missle strike would suffice? God knows that countries love it when we lob a few rockets over their borders and blow up a city block of two (see Bill Clinton v. Iraq 1998).

Logistically, we are not in a position to escalate (or put ourselves in a position where we might escalate) with any country.

I completely agree that the US is incapable of mounting military action against Iran independently. Isn't this just the type of situation that the UN is meant to handle? How does this not warrant UN intervention? This kind of saber rattling from Tehran will only serve to heighten tensions with Israel and even should the US and UK choose not to take military action, a pre-emptive strike from Israel is a real possibility.

But no one should assume that Pres. Bush will become dovish in terms of Iran. To paraphrase an article from The Economist (Feb 10, 2007), there are four factors intensifying US/Iranian friction:

1) Iran's determination to build nuclear weapons
2) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, "a populist president who denies the Holocaust and calls openly for Israel's destruction: his apocalyptic speeches have convinced many poeple in Israel and American that the world is facing a new Hitler with genocidal intent."
3) A recent tendency with the Bush Administration to blame IRan for many of America's troubles in Iraq and the Middle East
4) Bush put at the center of his foreign policy the task of bringing democracy to the Middle East and preventing rogue regmies from acquiring nuclear weapons. He may feel that a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear program could redeem his mission and his presidency.

And now another letter from the female sailor asks for the British withdrawl from Iraq. How stupid are the Iranian Military Officials that told her to write that???

Im sure at the bottom of the letter it reads, "PS Also please send eleventy gazillion British pounds, 1,000 nuclear warheads for our own non-military-use and the lochness monster in a giant aquarium".


Judging by the signs...looks like a very peaceful gathering.

Beta wrote:Judging by the signs...looks like a very peaceful gathering.

It would not be a surprise that the "peaceful gathering" was orchesterated.

Im actually surprised Iran hasn't tried to blame Israel for this yet. Im truly not even kidding.

StrykerFSU wrote:What is scary to me is that the public's opinions of the Iraq War are influencing decisions regarding Iran. Here we have in Iran a nation that is defying UN Resolutions, openly calling for the destruction of a sovereign nation, and now illegally taking foreign sailors hostage. Used to be that was grounds for military action but apparently not anymore. Iran's government is going to keep pushing the Western powers until we do something about it. Unfortunately, I don't envision either the US or UK doing anything as those that prefer appeasement gain more power and influence.

In the end, it will be Israeli and Iranian citizens that pay the price when we are forced to war following the inevitable Iranian attack on Israel. Somewhere, Neville Chamberlain is having a serious case of deja vu.

We cannot allow a nuclear-armed country to preemptively invade a middle eastern country*.

* - Offer not valid in Iraq or Lebanon.