Enough of their BS

strandinthewind · #1 03-28-2007, 07:57 AM

If I were TB - I'd go in to Iran with guns a blazin and get my people. Iran needs to be spanked but hard - they need to learn that their actions have consequences.

__________________________________________________________

Blair: It's Time to Press Iran to Free 15 British Troops
Wednesday, March 28, 2007

LONDON —

Prime Minister Tony Blair said Wednesday it was time to increase the pressure on Iran to release 15 Royal Navy personnel who were detained last week.

"There was no justification whatever ... for their detention, it was completely unacceptable, wrong and illegal," Blair told the House of Commons, shortly after the Ministry of Defense released satellite data that it said proved the crew was in Iraqi waters.

Meanwhile, Britain's Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said Wednesday she had frozen bilateral talks with Iran on all other issues until Tehran returns 15 British sailors and marines seized on Friday.

"No one should be in any doubt about the seriousness with which we regard these events," Beckett told the House of Commons. Earlier, defense officials produced what they said was proof that British boarding vessels were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi territorial waters when the Royal Navy crew was captured. Iran's embassy in London said the two governments are capable of resolving the incident.

• Monitor the nuclear showdown in FOXNews.com's Iran Center.

"We had hoped to see their immediate release; this has not happened. It is now time to ratchet up the diplomatic and international pressure in order to make sure the Iranian government understands its total isolation on this issue," Blair said.

He said he believed the crew acted sensibly in not putting up fight after being confronted by six Iranian vessels.

"If they had engaged in military combat at that stage, there would have undoubtedly been severe loss of life. I think they took the right decision and did what was entirely sensible," Blair said.

Earlier Wednesday, Britain's military said its vessels were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when Iran seized the sailors and marines.

Vice Adm. Charles Style told reporters that the Iranians had provided a position on Sunday — a location that he said was in Iraqi waters.

By Tuesday, Iranian officials had given a revised position 2 miles east, placing the British inside Iranian waters — a claim he said was not verified by global positioning system coordinates.

"It is hard to understand a legitimate reason for this change of coordinates," Style said.

Britain and the United States have said the crew was intercepted Friday after they completed a search of a civilian vessel in the Iraqi part of the Shatt al-Arab waterway, where the border between Iran and Iraq has been disputed for centuries.

Iran has said the 15 were being treated well, but refused to say where they were being held, or rule out the possibility that they could be brought to trial for allegedly entering Iranian waters.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said the case was following normal procedures, holding out the possibility that the Britons could be brought to trial.

He said the Britons were being treated well and that the only woman among the sailors, 26-year-old Faye Turney, had been given privacy.

"They are in completely good health. Rest assured that they have been treated with humanitarian and moral behavior," Hosseini told The Associated Press.

In talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett demanded that British diplomats be allowed to meet with the crew to make their own assessment.

www.foxnews.com

irishgrl · #2 03-28-2007, 08:05 AM

yeah, nothing like biting the hand that feeds ya, right? I mean, what are they thinking?

markolas · #3 03-28-2007, 08:12 AM

It's not very PC of me to say this, but I think the Muslim worldview in general is very dangerous (and so is the Christian one, in its own way - I'm biased against monotheism in general, not just Islam

). Sure, the Brits could go in there and get their troops, but...it won't solve the bigger problem, and could just make it worse. Of course, leaving them there could make it worse, too. I don't think it's possible to achieve peace with them, and any lessons we try to teach them are not going to take. Maybe we do need to just go into all of these countries, completely gut them, and replace them, if not with a totally secular culture, at least with a more moderate religious one. But it would require the support of every other country in the world, which will never happen. Also, no one wants to admit that Islam is not really a religion of peace (neither are Christianity and Judaism, but they have been more or less tamed over the centuries; the same is not generally true of Islam).

strandinthewind · #4 03-28-2007, 08:21 AM

As I have said before, no religion I know is 100% peaceful. All have killed to further their own goals, which usually is money or power related. So, you'll get no argument from me. I will say, though, that the Catholic Church has in recent years not been about killing in Christ's name and may be the most forward thinkers in peace, which is ironic considering the RCC's past and how slow it is to act. Remember, the Pope was against the invasion of Iraq, etc.

Having said that, I do think the majority of people in religions are peaceful.

Also - Iran's foreign minister says the female British detainee seized by Iran last week will be freed Wednesday or Thursday.

irishgrl · #5 03-28-2007, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Also, no one wants to admit that Islam is not really a religion of peace

Well, Ive commented on it

Mohammed was known to have killed and plundered when it suited him. Quite different from the example Jesus gave us yes?

Im afraid of where I see this all going. I firmly believe there will be an eventual, all-consuming clash between the culture of the Middle East and the West. I dont see how it can be avoided really....

also, Jason: many Far Eastern religions are based on Karma which dictates right behavior to others. I would also point out that Wicca is peaceful. There is no violent history that I know of associated with either the Wiccan or the Buddhist or Shinto religions

A bit more progessive than your much vaunted Catholic Church I'd say...

Serrart · #6 03-28-2007, 08:29 AM

No.No.No.No.

Bush & Blair stay out of Iran, please.

If they attack Iran there could be the biggest crisis with the rest of Europe and the rest of the world in the last 60 years.

Iran is a Country that has a strong and very important cultural community (obviously in opposition to Ahmadinejad) that has deep links with many countries, including mine.

If US and Great Britain feel isolated in their choices now they haven't seen anything yet.

Romy

markolas · #7 03-28-2007, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

As I have said before, no religion I know is 100% peaceful. All have killed to further their own goals, which usually is money or power related. So, you'll get no argument from me. I will say, though, that the Catholic Church has in recent years not been about killing in Christ's name and may be the most forward thinkers in peace, which is ironic considering the RCC's past and how slow it is to act. Remember, the Pope was against the invasion of Iraq, etc.

Like I said, it has been more or less tamed, although Christians in Korea routinely assault Buddhists in the streets and burn down their temples, and over here, of course, you have the wingnuts who bomb gay bars and abortion clinics. I mean, you have your nutty factions, and they can totally justify it in the Bible, just like the Muslims justify flying planes into buildings and blowing themselves up in public squares in the Koran. The difference is, there doesn't seem to be a trend towards moderation in Islam, and I'm afraid it's starting to rub off on others, which is why I don't think humanity has a snowball's chance in hell of surviving another 200 years.

Quote:

Having said that, I do think the majority of people in religions are peaceful.

I'd like to believe that, but I'd have to see the hard numbers first.

Quote:

Also - Iran's foreign minister says the female British detainee seized by Iran last week will be freed Wednesday or Thursday.

Angel of mercy.

markolas · #8 03-28-2007, 08:31 AM

You guys are killing me! I want to stay and discuss, but I have to be at work in 30 minutes and I haven't even taken a shower.

strandinthewind · #9 03-28-2007, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl

. . . A bit more progessive than your much vaunted Catholic Church I'd say...

if you had bothered to read what I said - I said:

Quote:

the Catholic Church has in recent years not been about killing in Christ's name and may be the most forward thinkers in peace, which is ironic considering the RCC's past and how slow it is to act. Remember, the Pope was against the invasion of Iraq, etc.

So, I was congratulating the RCC for it's relatively recent movement toward peace.

As for the others, no, they have not killed nearly as much, but a goole search or two will reveal some killing.

strandinthewind · #10 03-28-2007, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serrart

No.No.No.No.

Bush & Blair stay out of Iran, please.

If they attack Iran there could be the biggest crisis with the rest of Europe and the rest of the world in the last 60 years.

Iran is a Country that has a strong and very important cultural community (obviously in opposition to Ahmadinejad) that has deep links with many countries, including mine.

If US and Great Britain feel isolated in their choices now they haven't seen anything yet.

Romy

But, at what point do we draw the line? Do we allow Iran to keep hostages again? So, I draw the line here and now. If Iran is not kept in check, the results will be far more disaterous than what you describe, esp. if the world allows Iran to make a nuclear weapon.

strandinthewind · #11 03-28-2007, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by markolas

You guys are killing me! I want to stay and discuss, but I have to be at work in 30 minutes and I haven't even taken a shower.

Killing you - I have even fattened you up

Serrart · #12 03-28-2007, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

But, at what point do we draw the line? Do we allow Iran to keep hostages again? So, I draw the line here and now. If Iran is not kept in check, the results will be far more disaterous than what you describe, esp. if the world allows Iran to make a nuclear weapon.

Jason, don't you feel a huge media manipulation in all this matter? This incident is the product of a big mess from British government, hopefully accidental, and not the result of some badly handled operation.

Anyway, the attempt to transform it in an excuse to attack Iran is ludicrous.

The way to deal with Iran's nuclear program is Onu. It's a hard and long way but there aren't any other acceptable options, IMO.

Romy

strandinthewind · #13 03-28-2007, 08:54 AM

^^^

I think Iran has a history of not cooperating and wanting power. Sadly, I fear the only they will listen to is power.

I mean look at Iraq. That is all it would listen to. Prior to the current invasion, Iraq was a nightmare, albeit US made, that the UN tried to control, but SH would have none of it and SH failed to cooperate and live up to the peace agreement in the early 90's, which gave W the excuse he needed to scheme to invade.

Note -- I am not justifying the invasion of Iraq. I am just using it as an example of what I see to be the mindset of that part of the world.

On edit - I think this is why the West has a hard time having any patience with the Middle East.

madformac · #14 03-28-2007, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serrart

No.No.No.No.

Bush & Blair stay out of Iran, please.

If they attack Iran there could be the biggest crisis with the rest of Europe and the rest of the world in the last 60 years.

Iran is a Country that has a strong and very important cultural community (obviously in opposition to Ahmadinejad) that has deep links with many countries, including mine.

If US and Great Britain feel isolated in their choices now they haven't seen anything yet.

Romy

I totally agree. Its unfortunate for our Navy and Marines that this has happened but if you look at the mess in Iraq then any attack on Iran would be a thousand times worse. The population is huge in comparision with even Iraq. Plus of course any justification to go in is bordering on anorexic.

Britain and the US should not even be there in the first place, which is the point Iran are making with the posturing going on right now. The UK need to pull out and take their toys home before they lose them all. Britain has a small armed forces now and are not equipped for war in the traditional sense. If Iran does want to start any heavy stuff it would have happened by now. Britain has a nuclear submarine fleet that is far more effective than troops and aircraft. The mere threat alone would be quite sufficient to keep order in the gulf. No need to parade warships around.

strandinthewind · #15 03-28-2007, 09:06 AM

^^^

I was talking about going in, getting the prisoners, and leaving. I was not saying an all out invasion a la Iraq should occur.

As for the US and the UK not being there. If they were not there, who would police Iran. Who would stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, which is their goal. Surely you do not think the UN will have any effect standing on its own.

on edit - and, i believe it has been proven that Iran is supplying the Iraqi militants with weapons and Iran funds terrorist groups in the Middle East. So, what they are not doing with their own army, they do in effect by paying someone else to do it