UK Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

SampanViking · Mar 28, 2007

And so are we convinced by todays news?

Well no, not really. Mr Blair managed to show us all sort of Iraqi WMD nasty's in various satellite shots 5 years ago and so a picture of a boat floating on the water is hardly going to challange his abilities.

We know Mr Blair can deploy misinformation in 45 minutes of a story breaking and use it to target citizens not only in any location in the UK, but the residents of other countries with near global reach:rofl:

We have to choose I suppose between two alternative realities.

1 - That in a highly sensitive region of the world bristling with coalition warships, combat aircraft and comprehensive survellence, that a large Iranian force can approach in an aggresive manner towards a border location close to where Royal Marines are conducting a search of a "highly suspicious" craft of a type likely to arouse the passions of the Iranians if detected or intercepted.

Such aforesaid Iranian force is able to approach, cross and penetrate the border by 2 nautical miles without detection, surprise and over power the Royal Marines and abduct them, under the nose of a major Royal Navy warship, but not a single shot is fired, or rapid reaction airstrike called in.

2 - It was a black op across the border in Iranian waters and they were caught banged to rights - something that a former UK ambassador to Iran has said he strongly suspects.

There is something of a sting operation in this and it looks as though we fell for it hook line and sinker or we deliberatly wanted to cause an incident to serve as a justification for something later.

So ask yourself, if you are the Captian of an Iranian ship carying a "sensitive" cargo destined for Iraq, which side of the border would you be steaming on?

Also, is the Royal Navy, now so emasculated that it is incapable of attempting a vigourous and deadly defence of its crew members in peril?

Further could a large Iranian navel force approach the zone of a ongoing coalition operation without generating a security response?

Personally I think you have to be mad to put a punt on any option other than No:2 - still you can always disagree, although as they say in the US "never give a sucker an even break"!

Deleted member 675 · Mar 28, 2007

SampanViking said:
And so are we convinced by todays news?

Well no, not really. Mr Blair managed to show us all sort of Iraqi WMD nasty's in various satellite shots 5 years ago and so a picture of a boat floating on the water is hardly going to challange his abilities.

Sampan, I'm getting rather tired of your prejudice. If you have forgotten, it was not the British Armed Forces that lied as to whether there was WMD in Iraq - it was the political office.

Or do you think everyone in the UK other than yourself is a liar?

2 - It was a black op across the border in Iranian waters and they were caught banged to rights - something that a former UK ambassador to Iran has said he strongly suspects.

A black op.
In broad daylight.
In two small boats.
With a helicopter buzzing around.
Having just publicly searched a merchantman.

Sampan, you have no credibility if you really think that.

So ask yourself, if you are the Captian of an Iranian ship carying a "sensitive" cargo destined for Iraq, which side of the border would you be steaming on?

Why would he try to draw attention to himself by doing something like that?

Also, is the Royal Navy, now so emasculated that it is incapable of attempting a vigourous and deadly defence of its crew members in peril?

So, Sampan, what would your gameplan have been? Fired a Harpoon into a clustered group of small boats and kill our people at the same time? Marines with SA-80s taking on Iranian heavy weapons?

Further could a large Iranian navel force approach the zone of a ongoing coalition operation without generating a security response?

You're talking about a group of boats moving in an area where there were lots of other boats - how do you distinguish between military and civilian craft if they are acting in the same way (until they're close enough to strike)? Or do you fire first and ask questions later? If that had happened I'm sure you'd be decrying the RN for "murdering innocent Iranians going about their legal business" and "launching an unprovoked attack".

Personally I think you have to be mad to put a punt on any option other than No:2

Not mad - just having an opinion of the services of any level above "scum".

SampanViking · Mar 28, 2007

Sampan, I'm getting rather tired of your prejudice. If you have forgotten, it was not the British Armed Forces that lied as to whether there was WMD in Iraq - it was the political office.

Or do you think everyone in the UK other than yourself is a liar?

Ohhh!!! Fu Man Chu!!!! that sounds rather close to a personal attack to me and one against a Moderator - so be careful BD Popeye has already put this thread and its more agitated participants on notice!!,

the answer to that question though, is that the Military are the servants and the Politicans the Masters. Thus the military will say anything that they are ordered to say.

A black op.
In broad daylight.
In two small boats.
With a helicopter buzzing around.
Having just publicly searched a merchantman.

Sampan, you have no credibility if you really think that.

Oh I did not realise that you were there and able to witness the actual proceedings at first hand.

So, Sampan, what would your gameplan have been? Fired a Harpoon into a clustered group of small boats and kill our people at the same time? Marines with SA-80s taking on Iranian heavy weapons?
You're talking about a group of boats moving in an area where there were lots of other boats - how do you distinguish between military and civilian craft

How about by looking at all these mounted heavy weapons you mention, sounds like a dead give a way to me.

Not mad - just having an opinion of the services of any level above "scum".

Lions led by Donkeys and when have I said anything disparaging about our armed forces? my critiscem has been exclusively of Mr Tony Brayer (eh orh!!)

If that had happened I'm sure you'd be decrying the RN for "murdering innocent Iranians going about their legal business" and "launching an unprovoked attack".

More personal attacks and putting words in my mouth!! - I think you might benefit from a short holiday

Deleted member 675 · Mar 28, 2007

SampanViking said:
the answer to that question though, is that the Military are the servants and the Politicans the Masters. Thus the military will say anything that they are ordered to say.

So you're saying the British military has no honour - ok, just checking.

Oh I did not realise that you were there and able to witness the actual proceedings at first hand.

Well geeez, last time I looked those were public facts. Or did it actually happen at night-time, the marines were part of a large, armed assault-force, there was no merchantman and there was no helicopter?

How about by looking at all these mounted heavy weapons you mention, sounds like a dead give a way to me.

Since when did heavy machineguns and cannon appear on radar?

Lions led by Donkeys and when have I said anything disparaging about our armed forces?

When have you ever said anything positive of them, or offered any sympathy for the captured personnel and their families?

More personal attacks and putting words in my mouth!! - I think you might benefit from a short holiday

How is suggesting you would have condemned firing without provocation a personal attack? Or do you think the RN should start blowing up Iranian patrols as soon as they appear?

BLUEJACKET · Mar 28, 2007

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That was to be expected.

Deleted member 675 · Mar 28, 2007

BLUEJACKET said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That was to be expected.

Lol, I should have bloody hoped so!!!! We've been backing them up for over half a decade - it's the least they could have done.

SampanViking · Mar 28, 2007

So you're saying the British military has no honour

No I am saying that the British Military follows its orders from its Political Masters or are you saying that the Military should pick and choose which orders they would like to obey? Sadly if your leaders are without honour, that will be reflected in the orders the military receives.

Well geeez, last time I looked those were public facts. Or did it actually happen at night-time, the marines were part of a large, armed assault-force, there was no merchantman and there was no helicopter?

Public Facts as in the dodgy dossier?! Neither of us were there, so neither of us know exactly what happened or where.

When have you ever said anything positive of them

,

On such occasions as that a discussion of the merits of HMAF has come up. they are on this forum sprinkled here and there. My ire is reserved for our Leaders who deserve very little positive comment.

or offered any sympathy for the captured personnel and their families?

They are not dead are they. They are military personnel on active service, currently detained from by another country with whom we are not at war. Incidently, the reports about the families I heard today, they were asking questions similar to my own.

How is suggesting you would have condemned firing without provocation a personal attack? Or do you think the RN should start blowing up Iranian patrols as soon as they appear?

If you cross into the territory of another country and attempt to abduct members of the legitimate armed forces of that country, then yes they are entitled and indeed expected to open fire on you. Likewise if you cross illegally, they are entitled to detain you. Is any part of this in any way unclear

All in all, the boldness and affrontary of the Iranians and the tardyness and reticence of coalition forces only really makes sense if - the Marines were the Iranian side of the border.

Deleted member 675 · Mar 28, 2007

SampanViking said:
No I am saying that the British Military follows its orders from its Political Masters or are you saying that the Military should pick and choose which orders they would like to obey?

Military personnel are not just the government's puppets, as can be seen by the internal criticism made in the past. I trust the RN in this case, you obviously don't - we will have to agree to disagree.

As to orders, I believe they should not follow illegal ones unless there is an exceptionally good reason.

Public Facts as in the dodgy dossier?! Neither of us were there, so neither of us know exactly what happened or where.

I'm sorry, but it is ridiculous to dispute the very, very basic facts that I have outlined. Stop going on about the "dodgy dossier", it really is not sensible.

They are not dead are they. They are military personnel on active service, currently detained from by another country with whom we are not at war.

And they are being used as propaganda pieces on Iranian TV. That is demeaning, as is forcing Leading Seaman Turney to make that sham of an interview - I can't remember the last time I saw someone in a TV studio having to drag on a cigarette because she was so stressed. Disgraceful!

Incidently, the reports about the families I heard today, they were asking questions similar to my own.

Unfortunately I think most people that made such comments don't know much about the armed forces. One guy thought we could "just send the SAS in" to bring them back.

If you cross into the territory of another country and attempt to abduct members of the legitimate armed forces of that country, then yes they are entitled and indeed expected to open fire on you.

You yourself said above that we're not at war with the Iranians - so why would the RN have assumed they were going to capture them? Simply approaching someone isn't grounds to shoot first and ask questions later. And as I have said more than once, the boats were outgunned - the only solution was to try to defuse the situation. Unfortunately the Iranians were obviously under orders to take them in.

Likewise if you cross illegally, they are entitled to detain you. Is any part of this in any way unclear

You're clear, but you're wrong. I've already said according to UNCLOS you can't detain people simply for crossing into your territorial waters. In a circumstance like this at the very least you need to ask them to leave first - the Iranians would have said they did if that was the case.

I did explain this to you when you posted previously.

All in all, the boldness and affrontary of the Iranians and the tardyness and reticence of coalition forces only really makes sense if - the Marines were the Iranian side of the border.

The Iranians' actions makes perfect sense if they were on the Iraqi side for the reasons put forward previously - bargaining chips. As to the RN, it has been explained that the helo had been redeployed and Cornwall was out of range. Negligence or overstretch? Maybe, but not a sign of duplicitous intentions.

Schumacher · Mar 28, 2007

FuManChu said:
Schu, please refer to me as FuManChu or simply Fu. Thank you.

Smart? It's moronic, given it's just going to make Iran even more isolated in the international community.

It has nothing to do with gauging anyone's willingness to do anything. It's either a vain attempt to get the Revolutionary Guard detained in Iraq back, or a silly propaganda stunt to divert the criticism the Iranian President is getting from his own people.

Why should u be defensive or evasive about me calling u Masushi ?

U do use that name in DefenceTalk right ?
Regardless of your reason for doing so & the fact that it would be considered spamming if u do it in the same forum, it sure sounds a lot more like a real name than FuManchu. Really puzzles me why u would be offended I called u a name u choose yourself.

Iran is no more 'isolated' now than before the incident. UK seems to be the one somewhat isolated. I'm also surprised by the low key response from US so far given how UK had always supported them.
The Iranian decision makers run a country & they've been decades of war & tensions, they know a thing or two abt these 'games'. Sometimes, when they do something that doesn't seem to make sense in the first place, it pays to look a little bit deeper into the issue.
Calling it stupid or moronic only shows how liitle one knows & frankly doesn't add much to the discussion.

Schumacher · Mar 28, 2007

UK sailors shown on TV. Remember the time Saddam visited the UK family in Baghdad before the first war ? Thatcher went ballistic in the parliament, now that's what going to war is like.
Compare that to the current reaction from UK & US, that's why I say war, if any, is a long time away. And I think Iran gets this message as well.

CNN.com
Powered by

Click Here to Print
SAVE THIS | EMAIL THIS | Close

British captives shown on Iranian TV
Story Highlights
• NEW: Female sailor says she and crew entered Iranian waters
• NEW: Captive says Iranians were kind, compassionate, "nice people"
• NEW: Bush talks with Blair, offers support; EU also backs Britain
• UK foreign secretary says Britain will freeze bilateral business with Iran

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- The female British sailor detained by Iran along with 14 male sailors and marines in the Persian Gulf last week said her crew "trespassed" in Iranian waters, in comments broadcast Wednesday on Iranian television.

"Obviously we trespassed into their waters," detainee Faye Turney said in video broadcast by Alalam, an Iranian Arabic language network. (Watch Turney detail her arrest for Iranian televisionVideo)

"They were very friendly, very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we'd been arrested. There was no aggression, no hurt, no harm. They were very, very compassionate," Turney said.

It was not known when the videotape was shot, or whether Turney, 26, was able to speak freely, since she is being held against her will.

Turney -- who holds the rank of leading seaman, roughly equivalent to a petty officer first class in the U.S. Navy -- appeared to be in good physical condition and wore a black scarf to cover her hair. (Read a profile of Faye Turney)

In other scenes, she was shown smoking a cigarette as she spoke with someone off camera.

A spokesman for Britain's Foreign Office said it was "completely unacceptable for these pictures to be shown on television, given the potential distress to their [the sailors'] families."

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said she was "very concerned about these pictures and any indication of pressure on or coercion of our personnel who were carrying out a routine operation in accordance with international law and under a United Nations resolution in support of the Iraqi government."

Alalam also broadcast video showing some of the other British detainees eating with Turney. All appeared healthy and unharmed. It was not known when that video was taken, either. (Watch Iranian video of other British captivesVideo)

Earlier Wednesday, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told CNN that Turney would be released soon, possibly Wednesday or Thursday. (Watch as Iran says it's prepared to free womanVideo)
Letter also released

Iran also released a letter it said was written by Turney to her parents. The state-run news agency reported the letter was handed to the British ambassador to Iran in Tehran on Wednesday.

"We were out in the boats when we were arrested by Iranian forces as we had apparently gone into Iranian waters. I wish we hadn't because then I'd be home with you all right now. I am so sorry we did, because I know we wouldn't be here now if we hadn't," the letter said. (Read letter)

CNN cannot confirm that Turney wrote the letter or, if she did, whether she was forced to write it under duress.

The television station broadcast video of what appeared to be a handwritten letter, signed "Faye."

"I want you all to know that I am well and safe. I am being well looked after. I am fed 3 meals a day and have a constant supply of fluids," the letter said.

The 15 British service members were seized March 23 in the Persian Gulf by Iranian forces who claimed the British patrol boats had ventured into Iranian territorial waters.

Britain has said the sailors and marines were operating patrols in Iraqi waters.

Earlier Wednesday, Beckett announced that Britain would cut off all bilateral diplomatic business with Tehran -- excluding discussions about the detainees -- until they were released.

Alaedin Boroujerdi, a member of the Iranian parliament and head of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, warned Britain that "the days of bullying are over."

"Threats of disrupting trade and economic relations will only make matters worse and more complicated," he told the Fars News Agency.

Beckett also said the Iranian government was still refusing to give British officials information on exactly where the Britons were being held and was denying consular access to them.

Iranian officials said they will allow British diplomats to see the detainees once an investigation into the matter is completed.
Coordinates show boat in Iraqi waters

Earlier, the British Ministry of Defense gave what it said was proof that the British ship carrying the sailors and marines never strayed into Iranian waters.

British Vice Adm. Charles Style said the global positioning system on the ship proves the vessel was "clearly" 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters and that the boat was "ambushed" by the Iranian forces.

Iran insists the ship was inside its territorial waters and, according to Style, provided a map with coordinates on Saturday in attempts to prove the point.

Blair said those coordinates actually "turned out to confirm they were in Iraqi waters," and Iraq has supported that position.

Iran on Wednesday provided different coordinates that placed the vessel inside Iranian waters.

The "change of coordinates," Style said, "is hard to legitimate."

Even if the ship had somehow strayed into Iranian waters, Beckett said, "under international law, warships have sovereign immunity in the territorial sea of other states."

"The very most Iran would've been entitled to do if they considered our boats were breaching the rules on innocent passage would've been to require the ship to leave their territorial waters immediately," the foreign secretary explained.
Diplomatic efforts under way

President Bush, in a previously scheduled video teleconference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, said he fully supports Blair and Britain in the matter, according to deputy White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Blair said his country is in contact with "everyone in Europe, NATO, the United Nations and the allies out in the Gulf region" to increase pressure on the Iranian government.

The European Union backed Britain. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose country is the bloc's president, said the EU extended its "absolute support and solidarity."

Blair said he had been in talks with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who said Wednesday Iran may allow Turkish diplomats access to the 15 Britons, according to CNN Turk.

Erdogan is attending a meeting of the Arab League in the Saudi capital, Riyadh.

"Expect development anytime soon," Erdogan said after meeting with Iran's foreign minister.

Copyright 2007 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.

Find this article at:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click Here to Print
SAVE THIS | EMAIL THIS | Close
Check the box to include the list of links referenced in the article.

© 2007 Cable News Network.

UK Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

SampanViking

The Capitalist

Deleted member 675

Guest

SampanViking

The Capitalist

Deleted member 675

Guest

BLUEJACKET

Banned Idiot

Deleted member 675

Guest

SampanViking

The Capitalist

Deleted member 675

Guest

Schumacher

Senior Member

Schumacher

Senior Member