[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
I think the point is, Bush and Blair have used up ALL (and then some) of their credibility. Its not a matter of “supporting” Iran – its a matter of losing faith in OUR government because they have lied about or “bungled” EVERYTHING.
They very well could be telling the truth about this situation – if so, it would be the first time in six years they have told the truth about ANYTHING. That’s the ultimate dilemma, and the percentages say they are lying AGAIN to start a war.
Think about it for a moment. Even if I myself could be convinced Iran needed to be taken out – why in the living FUCK would ANYONE want the Bush/Blair/Olmert team to do it!!!
We already know it will be a disaster that costs 1000X more and lasts 1000X longer than anybody “could have predicted”. Recent history PROVES that we are much better off if Bush just doesn’t touch anything else for the next three years. [/quote]
Updated: 2 minutes ago
TEHRAN, Iran - About 200 students threw rocks and firecrackers at the British Embassy on Sunday, calling for the expulsion of the country?s ambassador because of the standoff over Iran?s capture of 15 British sailors and marines.
Several dozen policemen prevented the protesters from entering the embassy compound, although a few briefly scaled a fence outside the compound?s walls before being pushed back, according to an Associated Press reporter at the scene.
The protesters chanted ?Death to Britain? and ?Death to America? as they hurled stones into the courtyard of the embassy. They also demanded that the Iranian government expel the British ambassador and close down the embassy, calling it a ?den of spies.?
PLEASE, would someone just bomb these sons-o-bitches off the planet? The time has come…level this place…yesterday…PLEASE!!!
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Updated: 2 minutes ago
TEHRAN, Iran - About 200 students threw rocks and firecrackers at the British Embassy on Sunday, calling for the expulsion of the country?s ambassador because of the standoff over Iran?s capture of 15 British sailors and marines.
Several dozen policemen prevented the protesters from entering the embassy compound, although a few briefly scaled a fence outside the compound?s walls before being pushed back, according to an Associated Press reporter at the scene.
The protesters chanted ?Death to Britain? and ?Death to America? as they hurled stones into the courtyard of the embassy. They also demanded that the Iranian government expel the British ambassador and close down the embassy, calling it a ?den of spies.?
PLEASE, would someone just bomb these sons-o-bitches off the planet? The time has come…level this place…yesterday…PLEASE!!!
[/quote]
So the point of no return is here, at the moment when 200 protesters threw rocks and firecrackers at the British embassy? You sound stressed-out, forget the news for a while.
I wouldn’t take anyone’s word if facts were clearly available. GPS shows the Bits were in Iraqi waters. There’s no ‘word’ to take.[/quote]
Is that an April’s fool or are you seriously not following the story? Are you also under the impression that GPS data from every single transceiver are somehow stored in a public database? The UK ministry of defense released a set of coordinates. Iranians challenged it. Period.
Let me enlighten you with a random quote from the Wiki:
“On 24 March Brigadier General Hakim Jassim, Iraqi military commander of the country’s territorial waters, gave an interview with Associated Press. He reportedly doubted the British claims, saying: “We were informed by Iraqi fishermen after they had returned from sea that there were British gunboats in an area that is out of Iraqi control. We don’t know why they were there.””
If this ain’t enough, let me add that there’s no legal definition for the boundary between the two countries in Shatt-Al-Arab.
London, Mar. 31 ? Iran?s main opposition movement, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), said on Saturday that Iran?s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) had planned the recent capture of 15 British marines and naval personnel and are holding the group in an effort to gain concessions from the West.
A unit of the IRGC Navy?s 3rd regional command based in Khorramshahr Garrison executed the premeditated operation to capture the Britons on March 23, said Hossein Abedini, a member of the NCRI?s Foreign Affairs Committee, at a press conference in London. He said that the garrison was on a full state of alert.
?Rear Admiral Rashid Hosseini, the commander of the IRGC Navy?s third regional command, personally had command of the operation to arrest the British sailors?, he told reporters.
?A number of IRGC Navy commanders had previously been stationed in Khorramshahr. Colonel Badin was the operational commander based in Khorramshahr at the time of the arrests?.
He gave the names of three IRGC officers - Colonel Majidi, Colonel Abbas-Zadeh, and Colonel Isavi ? who were involved in the seizure
I wouldn’t take anyone’s word if facts were clearly available. GPS shows the Bits were in Iraqi waters. There’s no ‘word’ to take.
Is that an April’s fool or are you seriously not following the story? Are you also under the impression that GPS data from every single transceiver are somehow stored in a public database? The UK ministry of defense released a set of coordinates. Iranians challenged it. Period.
Let me enlighten you with a random quote from the Wiki:
“On 24 March Brigadier General Hakim Jassim, Iraqi military commander of the country’s territorial waters, gave an interview with Associated Press. He reportedly doubted the British claims, saying: “We were informed by Iraqi fishermen after they had returned from sea that there were British gunboats in an area that is out of Iraqi control. We don’t know why they were there.””
If this ain’t enough, let me add that there’s no legal definition for the boundary between the two countries in Shatt-Al-Arab.[/quote]
In lixy’s world, is it at all possible for Iran, or any predominately muslim country, to do anything wrong?
Do you honestly not see this seizure of British sailors for what it is?
Lixy, you are a one trick pony with no position other than “the U.S. is always wrong”.
How I know Blair faked Iran map
By CRAIG MURRAY, Former Ambassador to Uzbekistan and Head of the Foreign Office’s Maritime
…How can you be certain which side of a boundary you are when that boundary has never been drawn?
I am best known as the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, but from 1989 to 1992 I headed the Foreign Office’s maritime section. This included responsibility for territorial sea claims and for negotiating our own maritime boundaries. The expertise of the Royal Navy was invaluable.
For eight months I also worked with Royal Naval and Defence Intelligence Service personnel in the Embargo Surveillance Centre, a secret unit operating 24 hours a day from an underground command centre in Central London to prevent Iraqi attempts at weapons procurement.
We analysed information from intelligence and other sources, and could instruct Royal Naval craft in the Gulf to board and inspect individual ships. I was responsible for getting the political clearance for operations just like the one now in question, in this exact location. So I know what I’m talking about.
There is no agreed boundary in the Northern Gulf, either between Iran and Iraq or between Iraq and Kuwait. The Iran-Iraq border has been agreed inside the Shatt al-Arab waterway, because there it is also the land border. But that agreement does not extend beyond the low tide line of the coast.
Even that very limited agreement is arguably no longer in force. Since it was reached in 1975, a war has been fought over it, and ten-year reviews - necessary because waters and sandbanks in this region move about dramatically - have never been carried out.
But what about the map the Ministry of Defence produced on Tuesday, with territorial boundaries set out by a clear red line, and the co-ordinates of the incident marked in relation to it?
I have news for you. Those boundaries are fake. They were drawn up by the MoD. They are not agreed or recognised by any international authority.
To put it at its most charitable, they are a potential boundary. It is accepted practice, where no boundary exists, to work by a rule-of-thumb idea of where a boundary, based on a median line between the two coasts, might be.
But to elevate that to a hard and fast boundary, and then base a major international incident on being a few hundred yards one side or the other, is out of order…
Navy and Foreign Office experts were horrified at the notion of publishing that map…
Yes, Iran has a bad government that is behaving stupidly. But perhaps it is not alone. Both sides have to climb down. We have to state that no agreed border exists and that we had no intention of straying into Iranian waters.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Updated: 2 minutes ago
TEHRAN, Iran - About 200 students threw rocks and firecrackers at the British Embassy on Sunday, calling for the expulsion of the country?s ambassador because of the standoff over Iran?s capture of 15 British sailors and marines.
Several dozen policemen prevented the protesters from entering the embassy compound, although a few briefly scaled a fence outside the compound?s walls before being pushed back, according to an Associated Press reporter at the scene.
The protesters chanted ?Death to Britain? and ?Death to America? as they hurled stones into the courtyard of the embassy. They also demanded that the Iranian government expel the British ambassador and close down the embassy, calling it a ?den of spies.?
PLEASE, would someone just bomb these sons-o-bitches off the planet? The time has come…level this place…yesterday…PLEASE!!!
[/quote]
Yep, their using their whole bag of tricks aren’t they. I’m sure that if they become a nuclear power that kind of behavior(which we’ve been watching for decades) will just stop, butt cold and they’ll start negotiating and holding open minded public discussions instead…
Kill or capture strategy refers to a strategy adopted in 2007 by the United States in Iraq to confront Iranian operatives in Iraq
In January 2007 the Bush administration authorized the U.S. military to kill or capture Iranian military and intelligence operatives inside Iraq as part of a strategy to weaken Iran’s influence in Iraq and compel the
government to end its nuclear program.
British Special Forces will participate in this program.
Possible consequences:
The possibility that the Iranians might seek to retaliate by kidnapping or killing U.S. personnel in Iraq has been raised
I wouldn’t take anyone’s word if facts were clearly available. GPS shows the Bits were in Iraqi waters. There’s no ‘word’ to take.
Is that an April’s fool or are you seriously not following the story? Are you also under the impression that GPS data from every single transceiver are somehow stored in a public database? The UK ministry of defense released a set of coordinates. Iranians challenged it. Period.
Let me enlighten you with a random quote from the Wiki:
“On 24 March Brigadier General Hakim Jassim, Iraqi military commander of the country’s territorial waters, gave an interview with Associated Press. He reportedly doubted the British claims, saying: “We were informed by Iraqi fishermen after they had returned from sea that there were British gunboats in an area that is out of Iraqi control. We don’t know why they were there.””
If this ain’t enough, let me add that there’s no legal definition for the boundary between the two countries in Shatt-Al-Arab.[/quote]
Okay, fair enough. But…if the boundary is not defined, what justification is there for seizing the Brits? No border, no foul…unless you have some other agenda.
Kill or capture strategy refers to a strategy adopted in 2007 by the United States in Iraq to confront Iranian operatives in Iraq
In January 2007 the Bush administration authorized the U.S. military to kill or capture Iranian military and intelligence operatives inside Iraq as part of a strategy to weaken Iran’s influence in Iraq and compel the
government to end its nuclear program.
British Special Forces will participate in this program.
Possible consequences:
The possibility that the Iranians might seek to retaliate by kidnapping or killing U.S. personnel in Iraq has been raised
[/quote]
If Iranians are trespassing in Iraq, and obviously there to incite violence, they should be held. How does this compare with capturing or assassinating allied troops?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Okay, fair enough. But…if the boundary is not defined, what justification is there for seizing the Brits? [/quote]
Hard to know why the Iranians felt compelled to seize the Brits. But the American raiding Iranian consulates might have something to do with it. The refusal to respect Iran’s right to enrich Uranium is also probably linked to the occurence of the incident.
Iran is defiant to assert its sovereignty and flex its muscles. Capturing those soldiers was uncalled for and is just a pretext to give the world a message: The middle-finger!
This makes me sick. England’s message to Iran, “Oh, do me harder, stick it in deeper.” What a bunch of fucking pussies.
They should have already laid to waste Iran’s “nuclear facilities” and started on strategic targets every hour until the soldiers are released. Everyday it makes me sicker.
Europe has learned nothing from it’s past. Laying down an appeasing their enemies only emboldens them, it does not bring peace, it brings oppression and slavery.
What’s next? The EU going to bring back the feudal system, with these clerics as the Lords? Why the hell not. If they are going to capitulate at every violence done to them, why not just give in all the way and accelerate the process.
No, wait it must be the jews! That’s it. They captured the soldiers and staged it so it looks Iran did it. Those are all actors!
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
If this ain’t enough, let me add that there’s no legal definition for the boundary between the two countries in Shatt-Al-Arab.
Okay, fair enough. But…if the boundary is not defined, what justification is there for seizing the Brits? No border, no foul…unless you have some other agenda.
[/quote]
I would like to see lixy’s response to this, good question.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
If this ain’t enough, let me add that there’s no legal definition for the boundary between the two countries in Shatt-Al-Arab.
Okay, fair enough. But…if the boundary is not defined, what justification is there for seizing the Brits? No border, no foul…unless you have some other agenda.
I would like to see lixy’s response to this, good question.
[/quote]
Comical Lixy already replied with an anti-american stance.