British Hostages Going Free

[Brandon Rhea]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070404/ap_on_...ea/iran_britain

I'm really suprised. Ahmadinejad is the 21st Century equivilant of Adolph Hitler, so giving "gifts" strikes me as very odd.

 

[Matt]

About fucking time.

Tresspass in there waters my ass.

Who the fuck would want to go to iran!?

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Seriously. And obviously they were coerced into saying all those nice things about Iran. We all know that they're the most evil people on the planet.

 

[Ser Gregor]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonathan Bac @ Apr 4 2007, 05:44 PM) [snapback]157524[/snapback]</div>

Seriously. And obviously they were coerced into saying all those nice things about Iran. We all know that they're the most evil people on the planet.[/b]

Bigitry at it's finest. :dry:

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I'm talking about the government, dude. By the way, next time you want to insult me, do me a favor and spell the insult correctly.

 

[Ser Gregor]

Your post leads nothing to hint that you were talking about the government.

 

[Inferno]

Well i think Iran gave up the hostage to stop any violence on their own people from British Soldiers or US soldiers in tow(British Special Force or US Special Forces not an Invasion Army). Would have it come to this idk or would Britain let such acts even happen.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Yet I would never say anything like that about the people of another nation, something I have said time and time again. When people say "America sucks", do you really think they're talking about the people? No, most people would assume that they are referring to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. However, because there is a double standard, if I say "Iran sucks" or "Iran is evil" then OBVIOUSLY I'm talking shit about the people.

 

[Empress]

never dis Cheney. He may mistake you for a quail. >.>


anyhow, I'm not utterly surprised to see Iran cave in on this. They realized that they are already in very hot water with the world over much of what the president of loon land said, and how he acts, the nuclear issues etc... Britain releasing the actual GPS pings of where the troops were, the US backed it with their own pings on them proving that they were never in Iranian waters, Iran just started sounding dumber and dumber every time they came out with excuses why they were " right"

 

[Hassan]

/Enters the thread.

Disclaimer*
Warning, if your under 16, or cant handle images, please GTFO of this thread now.

I'm really suprised. Ahmadinejad is the 21st Century equivilant of Adolph Hitler, so giving "gifts" strikes me as very odd.[/b]

I challenge this point. What has this guy actually done that is so bad?

Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe is a better example of a modern day Hitler.
Your president is even a better example of a Modern day hitler.

Your a victim of your own media.

About fucking time.

Tresspass in there waters my ass.

Who the fuck would want to go to iran!?[/b]

Since the war between Iraq and Iran, theres always been a dispute for the Sea surrounding the two nations. there actually isnt a "defining marker" to actually dictate what part of the sea belongs to who. There are already talks between Iran and the UK to set down beacons to actually tell people where they are, to avoid a future incident.

Seriously. And obviously they were coerced into saying all those nice things about Iran. We all know that they're the most evil people on the planet.[/b]

Iran treatment of prisoners:

Right....

Americans

And yes you even take the piss on the dead
Picture will not be posted on this forum due to its graphic... ah fuck it... it destroys your point:

Ill be blunt: I BEG TO FUCKING DIFFER

Well i think Iran gave up the hostage to stop any violence on their own people from British Soldiers or US soldiers in tow(British Special Force or US Special Forces not an Invasion Army). Would have it come to this idk or would Britain let such acts even happen.[/b]

Wouldnt Happen. Possible Reasons:

A) America has its hands full on iraq. Hasnt got the man power or resources to go into both countries. Keep in mind that "Special forces" involvement would just give iran the excuse it needs to retaliate. And knowing the President, he would prob order a full out offensive aswell as striking all the oil platforms in the middle east = Lose lose situation for america. If the Military attack doesnt hurt, im pretty sure the oil attack would.

B) Britain doesnt have the resources in the region to do what your stating. Also doesnt have the balls.

If you really need more reasons then this, then tbh =/ i feel sorry for you.

anyhow, I'm not utterly surprised to see Iran cave in on this. They realized that they are already in very hot water with the world over much of what the president of loon land said, and how he acts, the nuclear issues etc... Britain releasing the actual GPS pings of where the troops were, the US backed it with their own pings on them proving that they were never in Iranian waters, Iran just started sounding dumber and dumber every time they came out with excuses why they were " right"[/b]

Iran gave up the sailors to make Britain look stupid in the Media. Plain and simple.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 09:54 PM) [snapback]157546[/snapback]</div>

Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe is a better example of a modern day Hitler.
Your president is even a better example of a Modern day hitler.[/b]

Just because someone hasn’t started killing people doesn’t mean that they’re not a modern day Hitler. Just listen to Ahmadinejad speak. He’s practically calling for a genocide of the Jewish people. No one took Hitler serious back in the 1930s when he was spouting off bullshit. If we’ve learned anything from history, because we all know that history repeats itself, then why aren’t we taking Ahmadinejad seriously?

He agreed with the Ayatollah when he said that the “regime” that was “occupying” Palestine was a “disgraceful stain on the Islamic world”. He also said that it would be “wiped off the map”. This was disputed at first, yes, because they said that it may have been an error in translation, yet it was later confirmed that he did indeed say that. Yet, he continues to claim that the nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. That would be like Hitler saying that the gas chambers were simply for fueling his Mercedes Benz. Ahmadinejad is basically calling for a second Holocaust, which is ironic considering he says the first didn’t happen, all while saying that the nuclear program is “peaceful” and “for fuel”.

During the Israel-Lebanon War over the summer, Ahmadinejad said that “like Hitler, the Zionist regime is just looking for a pretext for launching military attacks”. Now, that could very well be true, but simply by saying that he too seems to be looking for a pretext for SOMEONE to launch a military attack against Israel.

Even more disturbing, Ahmadinejad said at the International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust, which ironically did not include anyone who believes the Holocaust did occur, that “everyone must know that just as the USSR disappeared, this will also be the fate of the Zionist regime and humanity will be free.”

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 09:54 PM) [snapback]157546[/snapback]</div>

Your a victim of your own media.[/b]

Now that’s the funniest assumption about me I’ve ever heard, as I’ve always been one to say “believe half of what you read and none of what you hear”. The American media is so biased that when I watch it blood pours out of my ears.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 09:54 PM) [snapback]157546[/snapback]</div>

Since the war between Iraq and Iran, theres always been a dispute for the Sea surrounding the two nations. there actually isnt a "defining marker" to actually dictate what part of the sea belongs to who. There are already talks between Iran and the UK to set down beacons to actually tell people where they are, to avoid a future incident.[/b]

Well, I’m glad to hear that the steps are being taken to make sure an incident such as this does not happen in the future. However, if there is no defining marker, what right did Iran have to capture the British sailors and say that they were in Iranian territorial water? If there was no defining marker, how could the British have known? Perhaps the maps they were using said it was Iraqi territorial water. A reasonable person would have said “just don’t let it happen again”, but no. The Revolutionary Guard captures them and then Ahmadinejad gives the soldiers who captured them a Medal of Honor. Yeah, okay, that’s reasonable, especially considering that the sailors were doing nothing but inspecting a merchant ship under the mandate of the United Nations Security Council.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 09:54 PM) [snapback]157546[/snapback]</div>

Iran treatment of prisoners:

Right....

Americans

And yes you even take the piss on the dead
Picture will not be posted on this forum due to its graphic... ah fuck it... it destroys your point:

[/b]

Let the record show that I find what happened at Abu Ghraib to be absolutely dispicable and I feel that those who carried out those horrendous acts should be sent to prison for the rest of their natural lives. However, who’s to say that behind the cameras there weren’t fifty guys holding guns at the soldiers who were apologizing? Who’s to say that there weren’t fifty guys holding guns at the soldiers who said that they were being treated kindly? Now, we will never know, but I really can’t see the Revolutionary Guard treating the enemy very well behind the scenes.

Now, here is what also leads me to believe that they were coerced into doing it. If a civilian is taken hostage, obviously they’re going to do what their captors tell them because they fear for their lives. However, when you a member of the Royal Navy or any other branch of any other military in the world then you know you’re not supposed to comply with the demands of your captors. The fifteen sailors should, in my opinion, be court marshaled. You don’t apologize for something when you know damn well that your government is attempting to solve the situation. Anyone in the military would tell you that if you’re captured then you had better shut up. However, what will happen to the sailors once they return to Great Britain is another discussion for another time.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 09:54 PM) [snapback]157546[/snapback]</div>

Ill be blunt: I BEG TO FUCKING DIFFER
Wouldnt Happen. Possible Reasons:

A) America has its hands full on iraq. Hasnt got the man power or resources to go into both countries. Keep in mind that "Special forces" involvement would just give iran the excuse it needs to retaliate. And knowing the President, he would prob order a full out offensive aswell as striking all the oil platforms in the middle east = Lose lose situation for america. If the Military attack doesnt hurt, im pretty sure the oil attack would.

B) Britain doesnt have the resources in the region to do what your stating. Also doesnt have the balls.[/b]

I agree 100%. In terms of the nuclear program, a non-military solution is needed. The best thing to do would be to somehow set the oil prices lower and lower, therefore crippling 40% of the Iranian economy until they realize that they need to stop what they’re doing and listen to the wishes of the international community and the United Nations. Granted, they could get pissed and simply bomb someone, but that would not be justified and it would give other nations justification to knock out Iranian nuclear sites and military sites. However, I do hope it does not come to that. I would much rather just see a diplomatic solution to all of this which is exactly what happened here, without and quid pro quo.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 09:54 PM) [snapback]157546[/snapback]</div>

Iran gave up the sailors to make Britain look stupid in the Media. Plain and simple.[/b]

It's possible, but I truly feel that it was diplomacy that one the day here. I still find it amazing, though, that they would simply abandon their hard-line stance so quickly, because really all they did was make themselves look bad in the media.

 

[JKey2003]

Well I have to agree with much of what has been posted by Brandon. I think aowc02 brought a different perspective to the situation. I had a problem with a couple things he posted tho:

First of all, I have to take issue with anyone trying to display the actions of the US Military as cruel or torturous. There have been a couple events in Iraq that have made the military look badly, simular to Abu Gharib. Some reference Guantanamo Bay ...

But to look at these rare instances and generalize that American military men and women treat Iraqi's that way. They don't! They are risking their lives to make sure Iraqi's can go on about their lives. But at the same time, you cannot forget that it is a WAR out there and war ain't fuckin pretty. This is why no government should go to war without a clear plan and goal, because it cause all kinds of hell for all involved. We are at war in Iraq and Afghanistan so that we are no longer at War in NY, DC and other American cities.

A) America has its hands full on iraq. Hasnt got the man power or resources to go into both countries. Keep in mind that "Special forces" involvement would just give iran the excuse it needs to retaliate. And knowing the President, he would prob order a full out offensive aswell as striking all the oil platforms in the middle east = Lose lose situation for america. If the Military attack doesnt hurt, im pretty sure the oil attack would.[/b]

Trust me, buddy! America has plenty of military to go around. We have soldiers all around the world and navies all around the world. Keep in mind that now wars are faught from the air via missiles. America's got plenty of missles. We even got some that fly by themselves. Aint even gotta fly em over their house. Just watch it go BOOM!.

Besides, Iran is just seeing how far it can go. Eventually it will have to change it's policies or it will become deeper and deeper in isolation from the international community. It's only wealth really, is from it's oil, and it would never risk losing it's costumers over some bullshit like holding western hostages. Sadly, the Chinese would probably buy all their fuckin oil, despite any problems with the WEST.

B) Britain doesnt have the resources in the region to do what your stating. Also doesnt have the balls.[/b]

BULLSHIT! I assure you, if Iran would have held those hostages, it would not have lasted 444 days like the last Iran hostage crisis. Britain used to own all of Iran and Iraq and you are naive to say the previous statement. They have the balls too. Remember, they are having terrorist attacks in England, due to Islamic radicals, and they know what they are dealing with.

If it weren't for the oil, the Middle East would still be a vast wasteland...

 

[Hassan]

Before i begin, i would just like to point out that the time is 4 am, so this will be my last reply for the night. If my post seems a lil incomplete... its due to the fact that i CANT BE ARSED to make it connect :p

Just because someone hasn’t started killing people doesn’t mean that they’re not a modern day Hitler. Just listen to Ahmadinejad speak. He’s practically calling for a genocide of the Jewish people. No one took Hitler serious back in the 1930s when he was spouting off bullshit. If we’ve learned anything from history, because we all know that history repeats itself, then why aren’t we taking Ahmadinejad seriously?

He agreed with the Ayatollah when he said that the “regime†that was “occupying†Palestine was a “disgraceful stain on the Islamic worldâ€. He also said that it would be “wiped off the mapâ€. This was disputed at first, yes, because they said that it may have been an error in translation, yet it was later confirmed that he did indeed say that. Yet, he continues to claim that the nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. That would be like Hitler saying that the gas chambers were simply for fueling his Mercedes Benz. Ahmadinejad is basically calling for a second Holocaust, which is ironic considering he says the first didn’t happen, all while saying that the nuclear program is “peaceful†and “for fuelâ€.

During the Israel-Lebanon War over the summer, Ahmadinejad said that “like Hitler, the Zionist regime is just looking for a pretext for launching military attacksâ€. Now, that could very well be true, but simply by saying that he too seems to be looking for a pretext for SOMEONE to launch a military attack against Israel.

Even more disturbing, Ahmadinejad said at the International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust, which ironically did not include anyone who believes the Holocaust did occur, that “everyone must know that just as the USSR disappeared, this will also be the fate of the Zionist regime and humanity will be free.â€[/b]

You have to keep in mind, that this is a real sensitive issue. you have to go and look back at all the events between the Islamic world and America / Israel. Theres been a hatred growing in the islamic world of The Jews and Israelis for quite some time. Since the shambles of the first war (and second) between the Jews and muslims, theres been a bitter taste left in the mouth of all Muslims.

Also you have to take a look about how Muslims were portrayed in the american / israeli media pre 9/11. i could name atleast 20-30 different movies where the main villains were muslims (terrorists). This may seem minor, but it adds to the hate of the Jews and of Israel. You Also have to look at Occupations of Lebanon where a large number of Shia's (Iran's muslim majority) lived and what they had to go through..

Add it all up and it leads to a very large, generic hatred for all things Jewish, and all things American (Goes Hand in hand. The biggest supporter of Israel is America)

This President is simply... oh how can i say expressing the views of the more hard lined persian people. They hate israel. Thats obvious. What is the majority religion in Israel??? Ze Jews. What is the best way to take a dig at the jews... Easy. Take the piss out the hollocaust. He is simply taiming the hatred. It generates support for the iranian goverment and for him, since hes telling the persian people what they want to here (anything anti israeli/america)

However on the whole matter of the "Israel should be wiped off the map"

I will go out of my way and say this: Israel should be wiped off the map. It should. So should phalestine. Throw everything out and build a new Nation where Jews and Muslims can live together lol. or.... if that Fails, Partition the country Equally with a shared Capital of Jerusalem, straight down the middle.

I would just like to point out that i still think this president isnt as bad as Bush or Robert Meg. Bush has been responsible for the deaths of nearly 1 million people. Meggy boy prob has a similer number. This guy has 0. Zilch. Nadda. Hes No hitler, untill proven otherwise.

Now that’s the funniest assumption about me I’ve ever heard, as I’ve always been one to say “believe half of what you read and none of what you hearâ€. The American media is so biased that when I watch it blood pours out of my ears.[/b]

:p Still looks like you have been poisened with American / Israeli propaganda :) its like you have ignored the flip side of the coin. You havnt explored the foundations of why there is a hatred for israel. and of america (but i guess the latter isnt as relevent as the first)

Well, I’m glad to hear that the steps are being taken to make sure an incident such as this does not happen in the future. However, if there is no defining marker, what right did Iran have to capture the British sailors and say that they were in Iranian territorial water? If there was no defining marker, how could the British have known? Perhaps the maps they were using said it was Iraqi territorial water. A reasonable person would have said “just don’t let it happen againâ€, but no. The Revolutionary Guard captures them and then Ahmadinejad gives the soldiers who captured them a Medal of Honor. Yeah, okay, that’s reasonable, especially considering that the sailors were doing nothing but inspecting a merchant ship under the mandate of the United Nations Security Council.[/b]

Any Excuse for a medal eh? :). The solider must of been really happy =P. with regards to doing the reasonable thing... it gave the Iranian media a chance to parada the soldiers, a way of intimidating / humilating the british navy.

Keep in mind also that the way the President released the Sailors, was a way in which that it made the iranian people look better. Meh its hard to explain, but basically it made the president look like a merciful, forgiving person. " A Gift to the british people ".

However, who’s to say that behind the cameras there weren’t fifty guys holding guns at the soldiers who were apologizing? Who’s to say that there weren’t fifty guys holding guns at the soldiers who said that they were being treated kindly? Now, we will never know, but I really can’t see the Revolutionary Guard treating the enemy very well behind the scenes.[/b]

Did they look in distress? Im pretty certain if there was a few men pointing guns at you, you would look remotley in distress.

Look at the pictures, They looked fine. No bruises, didnt look beaten up, malnurished, Looked fed well. Ive even seen them eating Special Iranian food, (deliciates? sp?). Not eating basic rashions, or force fed pork or anything. Or forced to watch a bible getting destroyed.. None of that. (Hint: Much better then American Military Jails. Much) :p

And if they were treated badly, im pretty certain it will be in the news in the next few days. Britain / american Media would have a field day about it. If you hear nothing, it means they were treated well.

I agree 100%. In terms of the nuclear program, a non-military solution is needed. The best thing to do would be to somehow set the oil prices lower and lower, therefore crippling 40% of the Iranian economy until they realize that they need to stop what they’re doing and listen to the wishes of the international community and the United Nations. Granted, they could get pissed and simply bomb someone, but that would not be justified and it would give other nations justification to knock out Iranian nuclear sites and military sites. However, I do hope it does not come to that. I would much rather just see a diplomatic solution to all of this which is exactly what happened here, without and quid pro quo.[/b]

Thats actually the best solution ive seen to containing iran. Bac 4 President lol. However it would never work. Bush is in bed with the oil industry. They would literally kill him if he got the UN to do that.

It's possible, but I truly feel that it was diplomacy that one the day here. I still find it amazing, though, that they would simply abandon their hard-line stance so quickly, because really all they did was make themselves look bad in the media.[/b]

In what sense? He made it look like he was being merciful, forgiving, and that he was giving a gift to the british people.

i would just like to quote the following from a BBC news article that classed as non biased:

"He said he was willing to forgive the sailors, even though Britain was not "brave enough" to admit it had made a mistake and strayed into Iran's territory.".

An Example of the stuff being shown to the public. Wouldnt those words make you think about why britain didnt do more in an effort to get our sailors back quicker? doesnt it raise questions? (and it will). i rest my case

Keep in mind there was no diplomacy between britain and iran. britain basically adopted the "Give us our sailors back Or we will make noise" approach. Nothing more. Never threatend military action, economic sanctions etc. Nadda, zipp.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Feris Kai @ Apr 4 2007, 11:17 PM) [snapback]157551[/snapback]</div>

First of all, I have to take issue with anyone trying to display the actions of the US Military as cruel or torturous. There have been a couple events in Iraq that have made the military look badly, simular to Abu Gharib. Some reference Guantanamo Bay ...

But to look at these rare instances and generalize that American military men and women treat Iraqi's that way. They don't! They are risking their lives to make sure Iraqi's can go on about their lives. But at the same time, you cannot forget that it is a WAR out there and war ain't fuckin pretty.[/b]

Hassan was not generalizing the American Military. He was pointing out that all of the evidence points to the fact that higher ups in the White House and the Department of Defense, namely President Bush and former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, knew that the abuse was happening and allowed it to happen. The American Civil Liberties Union, which I despise by the way, obtained a memo from a Commander in Baghdad that referred to an Executive Order that allowed for the use of extraordinary interrogation tactics by the United States Military. The sanctioned methods were sleep deprivation, hooding prisoners, playing loud music, remove all detainees’ clothing, forcing them to stand in so-called stress positions and the use of dogs. Well, what do you know? That’s exactly what happened!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Feris Kai @ Apr 4 2007, 11:17 PM) [snapback]157551[/snapback]</div>

This is why no government should go to war without a clear plan and goal[/b]

....which is what the United States did.....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Feris Kai @ Apr 4 2007, 11:17 PM) [snapback]157551[/snapback]</div>

because it cause all kinds of hell for all involved.[/b]

.....which is what happened when we didn’t have a plan.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Feris Kai @ Apr 4 2007, 11:17 PM) [snapback]157551[/snapback]</div>

We are at war in Iraq and Afghanistan so that we are no longer at War in NY, DC and other American cities.[/b]

Somehow I doubt Iraq would have been fighting us in the streets of New York City, considering that they posed no real threat when we went to war with them.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Feris Kai @ Apr 4 2007, 11:17 PM) [snapback]157551[/snapback]</div>

Trust me, buddy! America has plenty of military to go around. We have soldiers all around the world and navies all around the world. Keep in mind that now wars are faught from the air via missiles. America's got plenty of missles. We even got some that fly by themselves. Aint even gotta fly em over their house. Just watch it go BOOM![/b]

WOW! Dude, I’m so glad I was able to meet you because from what you’re saying you know more than Secretary of Defense Gates who has said that the military is stretched too thin and that we would NEVER EVER be able to go to war with Iran!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Feris Kai @ Apr 4 2007, 11:17 PM) [snapback]157551[/snapback]</div>

Besides, Iran is just seeing how far it can go. Eventually it will have to change it's policies or it will become deeper and deeper in isolation from the international community. It's only wealth really, is from it's oil, and it would never risk losing it's costumers over some bullshit like holding western hostages. Sadly, the Chinese would probably buy all their fuckin oil, despite any problems with the WEST.[/b]

Iran may or may not change it’s policies, but generally people who are attempting to get things done and are DETERMINED to get things do not simply say “oh well, I got this far. I might as well turn back now.” No, they will go until they are beaten.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Feris Kai @ Apr 4 2007, 11:17 PM) [snapback]157551[/snapback]</div>

BULLSHIT! I assure you, if Iran would have held those hostages, it would not have lasted 444 days like the last Iran hostage crisis. Britain used to own all of Iran and Iraq and you are naive to say the previous statement. They have the balls too. Remember, they are having terrorist attacks in England, due to Islamic radicals, and they know what they are dealing with.[/b]

WRONG! Great Britain does not have the balls to do anything without Tony boys best buddy George holding his hand the entire way. Also, take a look at these statistics:

TOTAL BRITISH MILITARY PERSONNEL: 250,000
TOTAL BRITISH ACTIVE FRONTLINE PERSONNEL: 190,000

Now compare that to Iran:

TOTAL IRANIAN MILITARY PERSONNEL: 11,770,000
TOTAL IRANIAN FRONTLINE PERSONNEL: 420,000

SOURCE: http://www.globalfirepower.com

Do you really think the British would stand a chance against that?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Feris Kai @ Apr 4 2007, 11:17 PM) [snapback]157551[/snapback]</div>

If it weren't for the oil, the Middle East would still be a vast wasteland...[/b]

Wrong again. Saudi Arabia has vast quantities of gold and silver, as do many other nations in the Middle East. Lebanon used to be a paradise before it was war torn with Hezbollah and many other conflicts. And, as Hassan reminded me earlier, Dubai is an amazing place to go.

 

[Hassan]

First of all, I have to take issue with anyone trying to display the actions of the US Military as cruel or torturous. There have been a couple events in Iraq that have made the military look badly, simular to Abu Gharib. Some reference Guantanamo Bay ...

But to look at these rare instances and generalize that American military men and women treat Iraqi's that way. They don't! They are risking their lives to make sure Iraqi's can go on about their lives. But at the same time, you cannot forget that it is a WAR out there and war ain't fuckin pretty. This is why no government should go to war without a clear plan and goal, because it cause all kinds of hell for all involved. We are at war in Iraq and Afghanistan so that we are no longer at War in NY, DC and other American cities.[/b]

*ill leave this point to baccy boy*

Trust me, buddy! America has plenty of military to go around. We have soldiers all around the world and navies all around the world. Keep in mind that now wars are faught from the air via missiles. America's got plenty of missles. We even got some that fly by themselves. Aint even gotta fly em over their house. Just watch it go BOOM!.[/b]

The day America uses a Nuke on iran (or anyone for that matter), is the day america ends as a super power. Missles dont win conflict kid. Air doesnt either. Look at the war between Israel vs Hezbollah. its a perfect example..

Besides, Iran is just seeing how far it can go. Eventually it will have to change it's policies or it will become deeper and deeper in isolation from the international community. It's only wealth really, is from it's oil, and it would never risk losing it's costumers over some bullshit like holding western hostages. Sadly, the Chinese would probably buy all their fuckin oil, despite any problems with the WEST.[/b]

Hmmm. Meh If there was an economic sanction. it would hurt the west more then it hurts iran. Prices would spike past the £1.5 a litre mark in britain due to the cut in supply. (would be what? 140 $ a barral instead of the 60-70 it is now)

BULLSHIT! I assure you, if Iran would have held those hostages, it would not have lasted 444 days like the last Iran hostage crisis. Britain used to own all of Iran and Iraq and you are naive to say the previous statement. They have the balls too. Remember, they are having terrorist attacks in England, due to Islamic radicals, and they know what they are dealing with.[/b]

Right tell me.. What would of britain done? Send their 11,000 troops into iran? to do what exactly except to get utterly decimated. Iran has an army that goes into the million mark, all armed and trained.

Britain used to own Iran and Iraq true.. but back then, Britain had the best (and biggest) navy in the world, has an army ranging in the millions. Now however, britain has an army thats no bigger then 50k and a navy that is weak. I dont care how good of a general you are, 50k can not beat 1 million in equal strength.

Remember, if anyone assaults iran, it will not be iraq. they have not been sanctioned like iraq has. They have been constently modernizing their military since the last war between Iraq and Iran.

Look at hezbollah for example: Iranian Trained soldiers, and iranian equipped. 1000 Soldiers held the whole of the Israeli military at bay for 2 weeks. Thats without Air support. Thats without Panzer (tank) support. Israel had everything that America has and then some more. Didnt mean squat. They lost all the tanks that entered lebanon (that tried to attack hezbollah positions), they even lost ships.

Do the maths kid. Britain would get schooled.

If it weren't for the oil, the Middle East would still be a vast wasteland...[/b]

This point just shows how ignorant you truely are...

Lebanon used to be a paradise. Saudi arabia has Gold and silver (amongst their oil). Countries would love to have a capital like dubai....
And we have some of the best exotic fruits in the world, aswell as food.
But Hey.. keep inmind if there was no oil, America and britain wouldnt be superpowers (since you guys rely on oil so much)


Damn bac to beating me :( Edit #2 : Thanks for stealing all my points bac... >:(

 

[Hassan]

Before any wise ass comments. No there is no way in hell the battle of Thermopolye would apply here.

There would be no "THIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!" cry to rally the troops.

There wouldnt be 1 single defensibale pass. where the brits are only exposed at the front, not the sides or rear.

There wouldnt be an incompetent general on the persian side

There wouldnt be a poorly equipped persian army.

it wouldnt happen.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

You have to keep in mind, that this is a real sensitive issue. you have to go and look back at all the events between the Islamic world and America / Israel. Theres been a hatred growing in the islamic world of The Jews and Israelis for quite some time. Since the shambles of the first war (and second) between the Jews and muslims, theres been a bitter taste left in the mouth of all Muslims.[/b]

Which is pathetic, really. It’s not like the United States holds a grudge against Great Britain, Mexico, Spain, Japan, Italy, Germany or most other countries we’ve been at war with. It’s called “get a grip”.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

Also you have to take a look about how Muslims were portrayed in the american / israeli media pre 9/11. i could name atleast 20-30 different movies where the main villains were muslims (terrorists). This may seem minor, but it adds to the hate of the Jews and of Israel.[/b]

Fiction:

1. The class of literature comprising works of imaginative narration, esp. in prose form.
2. Works of this class, as novels or short stories: detective fiction.
3. Something feigned, invited or imagined; a made-up story.
4. The act of feigning, inventing or imagining.
5. An imaginary thing or event, postulated for the purposes of argument or explanation.

SOURCE: Dictionary.Com

I’m sure there’s a word in Arabic and Persian for “fiction”.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

You Also have to look at Occupations of Lebanon where a large number of Shia's (Iran's muslim majority) lived and what they had to go through.[/b]

This much is true.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

Add it all up and it leads to a very large, generic hatred for all things Jewish, and all things American (Goes Hand in hand. The biggest supporter of Israel is America)[/b]

Yes, but as I said “get a grip”. Holding grudges is childish, at best.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

This President is simply... oh how can i say expressing the views of the more hard lined persian people. They hate israel. Thats obvious. What is the majority religion in Israel??? Ze Jews. What is the best way to take a dig at the jews... Easy. Take the piss out the hollocaust. He is simply taiming the hatred. It generates support for the iranian goverment and for him, since hes telling the persian people what they want to here (anything anti israeli/america)[/b]

Yeah, but come on. There are better ways to do it then to cry about things that happened (or didn’t happen, in the President’s opinion) sixty years ago.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

However on the whole matter of the "Israel should be wiped off the map"

I will go out of my way and say this: Israel should be wiped off the map. It should. So should phalestine. Throw everything out and build a new Nation where Jews and Muslims can live together lol. or.... if that Fails, Partition the country Equally with a shared Capital of Jerusalem, straight down the middle.[/b]

I completely agree, but you know that’s not what he was saying. He was angling for either the forced relocation or the extermination of the Israeli people.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

I would just like to point out that i still think this president isnt as bad as Bush or Robert Meg. Bush has been responsible for the deaths of nearly 1 million people. Meggy boy prob has a similer number. This guy has 0. Zilch. Nadda. Hes No hitler, untill proven otherwise.[/b]

Bush has not caused the deaths of nearly one million people. It’s more like half of that, though that is still an incredibly large number. However, you have to remember something: Bush means well. He’s just incredibly arrogant and has the IQ of a grapefruit and is being controlled by the bureaucrats and bootlickers that he has surrounded himself with.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

:p Still looks like you have been poisened with American / Israeli propaganda :) its like you have ignored the flip side of the coin. You havnt explored the foundations of why there is a hatred for israel. and of america (but i guess the latter isnt as relevent as the first)[/b]

I have explored it. I just didn’t mention it in my earlier post as I saw no need to.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

Any Excuse for a medal eh? :). The solider must of been really happy =P. with regards to doing the reasonable thing... it gave the Iranian media a chance to parada the soldiers, a way of intimidating / humilating the british navy.[/b]

Indeed, but you know that people in the west are simply saying “now that’s stupid” and are thinking how pompous and arrogant Ahmadinejad is for doing that.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

Keep in mind also that the way the President released the Sailors, was a way in which that it made the iranian people look better. Meh its hard to explain, but basically it made the president look like a merciful, forgiving person. " A Gift to the british people ".
Did they look in distress? Im pretty certain if there was a few men pointing guns at you, you would look remotley in distress.[/b]

First of all, no one buys the whole “gift” thing. Why would anyone buy that a fanatical Muslim would give a gift to someone in the name of a day that signifies the resurrection of the Son of God, aka. a Christian belief? Second of all, soldiers are trained not to be distressed when a gun is pointed at them, at least in the United States. I doubt that Great Britain expects their men and women in uniform to cower when a gun is pointed at them while trying to defend Queen and Country.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

Look at the pictures, They looked fine. No bruises, didnt look beaten up, malnurished, Looked fed well. Ive even seen them eating Special Iranian food, (deliciates? sp?). Not eating basic rashions, or force fed pork or anything. Or forced to watch a bible getting destroyed.. None of that. (Hint: Much better then American Military Jails. Much) :p[/b]

I never said that there was any torture involved.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

And if they were treated badly, im pretty certain it will be in the news in the next few days. Britain / american Media would have a field day about it. If you hear nothing, it means they were treated well.[/b]

Actually, no. The sailors will be ordered not to say anything damning about Iran, because if they do it will simply spark more outbursts from the Islamic Republic. That’s the way it works in the military: don’t do anything to piss of the bad guys when you’re trying to be nice to them.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

Thats actually the best solution ive seen to containing iran. Bac 4 President lol. However it would never work. Bush is in bed with the oil industry. They would literally kill him if he got the UN to do that.[/b]

Here’s my bumper sticker: http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7812/dbapresidentsl9.jpg

Use it! :D

Anyway, I agree that Bush would start freaking out if that were to happen. Anything for a dollar.....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(aowc02 @ Apr 4 2007, 11:22 PM) [snapback]157552[/snapback]</div>

In what sense? He made it look like he was being merciful, forgiving, and that he was giving a gift to the british people.

i would just like to quote the following from a BBC news article that classed as non biased:

"He said he was willing to forgive the sailors, even though Britain was not "brave enough" to admit it had made a mistake and strayed into Iran's territory.".

An Example of the stuff being shown to the public. Wouldnt those words make you think about why britain didnt do more in an effort to get our sailors back quicker? doesnt it raise questions? (and it will). i rest my case

Keep in mind there was no diplomacy between britain and iran. britain basically adopted the "Give us our sailors back Or we will make noise" approach. Nothing more. Never threatend military action, economic sanctions etc. Nadda, zipp.[/b]

Actually, according to published reports there was a great deal of diplomacy between Great Britain and Iran. Supposedly, Syria was in on it too, helping to act as a sort of “mediator” between the two countries.

Now, I have to ask you this: why should Britain admit it made a mistake and strayed into Iran’s waters? You yourself said that the region is in dispute, so how were the British to know whether or not it was Iran’s territorial water. Furthermore, why should Britain admit it was a mistake when they were simply inspecting a ship that was under the mandate of the United Nations Security Council?

 

[Adamis]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Brandon Rhea @ Apr 5 2007, 02:26 PM) [snapback]157549[/snapback]</div>

Well, I’m glad to hear that the steps are being taken to make sure an incident such as this does not happen in the future. However, if there is no defining marker, what right did Iran have to capture the British sailors and say that they were in Iranian territorial water? If there was no defining marker, how could the British have known? Perhaps the maps they were using said it was Iraqi territorial water. A reasonable person would have said “just don’t let it happen againâ€￾, but no. The Revolutionary Guard captures them and then Ahmadinejad gives the soldiers who captured them a Medal of Honor. Yeah, okay, that’s reasonable, especially considering that the sailors were doing nothing but inspecting a merchant ship under the mandate of the United Nations Security Council.[/b]

Well what would you do if you found a group of a foreign miltary force in you what you thought were your waters that had helpped invade one of your neighbouring countries for little or no reason, which had very close ties to a country that said you couldn't put into action a power option that you saw as your right and who used to control your entire country?

 

[Brandon Rhea]

As I said, I would have simply just said "just don’t let it happen again" rather than being an attention whore by holding them hostage for fifteen days while the entire world is watching and thinking I'm an asshole. I would have said "just don't let it happen again" because I would have asked what they were doing there, found they were on a mission mandated by the United Nations Security Council and then I would have let them go, thereby issuing an apology to the sailors, their country and the United Nations Security Council.

 

[Ser Gregor]

Yes, but as I said “get a grip”. Holding grudges is childish, at best.[/b]

Bac, the Jewish hate among Iran and many other countries has been around for over one thousand years. It's not as easy as just "getting a grip" when hate has been in your culture for that long.