UK Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

SampanViking said:

Well the Labour Party might agree with you, but I doubt if the Prime Minister gives a proverbial Tinkers Cuss!

Click to expand...

If Tony Blair had not cared about the Labour Party, he would have joined the Conservatives and helped them win more elections after Thatcher left - can you imagine Kinnock or Smith beating him?

On the other hand, he knows a group of powerful US Oil Billionaires, who currently run that country and who in conjuction with certain "friends" would love an excuse to take a crack at a country....

Click to expand...

The Iraq war was winnable and indeed it was won - the peace proved far more elusive. On the other hand neither 10 Downing Street nor the White House believes a war with Iranian could be won, especially whilst Iraq is unstable. It would also lead to oil prices skyrocketing. Thus they do not seek to start such a conflict.

Some people might then be forgiven for speculating that Mr Blairs ungainly repsonse to the Hostage crisis

Click to expand...

What would you have advised? Silence? A giftbasket of fruit or fresh flowers?

the drawing of non-existent border lines

Click to expand...

So Iran claims all of the Persian Gulf as its own, does it? Most reasonable countries dispute a certain area - it is quite possible the line represented undisputed Iraqi waters. Given the Iranians conveniently revised the position of the merchantman after the Royal Navy released their GPS data I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case.

including today where his "next 48 hours" remark has been taken as an ultimatum by some Iranians

Click to expand...

I don't think people should avoid making comments because some paranoid individuals will take things the wrong way.

might actually be in response to a very generous cash enducement from the aforementioned very rich people, to precipitate a convenient crisis in which the very rich people could launch ,military action against a country that they do not like very much.

Click to expand...

Sampan, if that is what you really believe then you should say it through a megaphone on the street corner. Then again you might want to hire a good solicitor first, as I feel the courts might take your lack of evidence to back up such allegations to be evidence of slander.

I am sure that there a plenty of American members here, who believe that the events which have already happened are sufficient for such action to be taken.

Click to expand...

Those American members may well believe that such action is necessary due to Iran's actions over the past years (the recent capture of the RN personnel just being the icing on the cake), not because of the needs of any powerful business concerns. They may also be surprised at your "insightful expose" of this grand global conspiracy (are the Jews still behind it these days?), as well as the lack of belief you have in your own servicemen and women.

But, hey, who knows......

Fu, calm down boy and stop with the Straw man arguements. I am sorry if my contempt for Mr Blair is something you find difficult to accept, but I have no intention of letting a man I consider to a be a cheap, lying, little crook off the hook.

I do not try and misrepresent your position (or indeed present your position) and strongly resent your attempts to misrepresent mine. I would also remind you that your interpretations can indeed be shaky as we saw with your attempt to interpret BD Popeys ruling on discussing UN related matters in this thread. I would put to you that your attempts to understand the motivations and characters of senior UK/US leaders demonstrate equal "inexperience".

Now instead of playing parlour debating tricks, why do you not try some serious analysis for once?

Thank you and take Popeys advice, have a drink and clam down before going on.

SampanViking said:

I am sorry if my contempt for Mr Blair is something you find difficult to accept, but I have no intention of letting a man I consider to a be a cheap, lying, little crook off the hook.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, I know you don't like him - in fact I dislike him as much as you do. That doesn't mean I feel the need to invent grand conspiracy theories of which he is a part of. What he did to the UK before 2003 (and even has done subsequently) through his domestic policies is bad enough for me. Anyone who really cares about the UK focuses their attention on that, rather than get distracted about the views of the tin-foil hat brigade in reference to his foreign policy.

I do not try and misrepresent your position (or indeed present your position) and strongly resent your attempts to misrepresent mine.

Click to expand...

Sampan when you try to address my points honestly and thoughtfully, rather than poo-poo them because they do not fit in with your view of the world, I will take your objections seriously. If you are unhappy with the manner in which I engage with you on these forums, maybe you could reflect upon the way you deal with me.

Now instead of playing parlour debating tricks, why do you not try some serious analysis for once?

Click to expand...

I've been trying to make serious analysis, but your "feelings" about Tony Blair cause you to ignore them quite frequently. Every time you have something to say about the Iranian situation, the core of your argument seems to be "Tony Blair is lying" or "Tony Blair is trying to start a war". You'll have to forgive me, but I would hope you could do a bit more than trot the same tired soapbox statement out every time.

Sampan when you try to address my points honestly and thoughtfully, rather than poo-poo them because they do not fit in with your view of the world, I will take your objections seriously.

Click to expand...

Sorry Fu, I was not aware you had made any, all I remember reading, sounded like a Parroting of No:10's position "they were in Iraqi waters and seizing them was wrong".

What we have learned over the last few days is that there is no recognised International Sea Border in that area and that in the first days of the incident, many thought that quiet diplomacy could quickly bring the matter to a close. The situation was instead exaccerbated by the Prime Minister playing to the Gallery and trying to unilaterally impose a Sea Border of his own liking. Well of course that got up the Iranians nose. This resulted in 10 days of tit for tat posturings and theatrics, which now seem to have calmed down to the point where quiet diplomacy is again looking to resolve the issue of the sailors and the line of demarcation in order to avoid future problems.

As to Blair and conspiracy theories??? with that guys form???? I find a refusal to give credence quite disingenuous.

I've been trying to make serious analysis

Click to expand...

Such as.....

So Iran claims all of the Persian Gulf as its own, does it?

Click to expand...

What would you have advised? Silence? A giftbasket of fruit or fresh flowers?

Click to expand...

I don't think people should avoid making comments because some paranoid individuals will take things the wrong way.

Click to expand...

They may also be surprised at your "insightful expose" of this grand global conspiracy (are the Jews still behind it these days?), as well as the lack of belief you have in your own servicemen and women.

Click to expand...

Some very sad, jaded people quite possibly.

Click to expand...

To me it sounds pretty close to active Trolling if not over the line already. If you have a point of view, present it, if however you continue with the kind of techniques you have used over the last few days, it will become a moderation issue.

Lets hope it does not have to ,,,OK?

SampanViking said:

Sorry Fu, I was not aware you had made any, all I remember reading, sounded like a Parroting of No:10's position "they were in Iraqi waters and seizing them was wrong".

Click to expand...

That's funny, because all I remember reading from you is "Blair lies" and "Blair wants a war".

Such as.....

Click to expand...

You're still deliberately trying to trivialise what I say. In some cases you snipped off all but the jokey-point. For example:

"So Iran claims all of the Persian Gulf as its own, does it? Most reasonable countries dispute a certain area - it is quite possible the line represented undisputed Iraqi waters. Given the Iranians conveniently revised the position of the merchantman after the Royal Navy released their GPS data I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case."

You were accusing me of using straw-man arguments, and you're doing the same thing yourself now.

There are plenty of other decent comments out there you have also ignored or failed to discuss, like:

"The demonstration of their location at the time the incident took place was a reaction to the disgraceful behaviour of the Iranians. As to the denunciations, I am surprised you see something like that as provocation. It is natural comments like that would be made after a country's military personnnel, out on UN-sanctioned operations, are illegally snatched by another country. To not do so would be unquestionably a sign of weakness that would make it much more difficult to get them home, whilst also encouraging others to do the same thing."

and

"[Blair] was rather looking forward, by all accounts, to announcing the CVF contract in order to boost the Party's chances in Scotland. This crisis means any such announcement would be overshadowed or seen as a cynical ploy to go after votes when British personnel are being held captive overseas. There is nothing more Blair, the government and the Labour Party wants than for this situation to be resolved as fast as possible."

What would you have advised? Silence? A giftbasket of fruit or fresh flowers?

Click to expand...

So Sampan, what would you have advised rather than criticising the illegal seizure of British personnel?

I don't think people should avoid making comments because some paranoid individuals will take things the wrong way.

Click to expand...

You said Blair's comments on the next 48 hours have been taken the wrong way by some Iranians. That's their problem, not his - there's nothing especially provocative in what he said. So my comment was perfectly reasonable.

I don't think anyone expected this to happen so fast, and we will doubtless wait until the personnel are freed. But it sounds to be just the breakthrough everyone hoped for.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says 15 British naval personnel captured in the Gulf will be freed. He repeated allegations that the British sailors and marines "invaded" Iranian waters, but said they would be freed as a "gift" to Britain.

He made the announcement at a news conference, in which he also awarded medals to the commanders who captured the British personnel in the Gulf. He said the Britons would be released immediately and taken to an airport.

Click to expand...

Hopefully the diplomatic discussions that will doubtlessly follow will help patch up relations between the UK and Iran.

The analysis in the newspapers as to why Ahmadinejad did this will be interesting. The fact the Americans have started providing access to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard detained in Iraq could be an important reason as to why this announcement was made - plus a diplomat who disappeared was released.

The BBC reporter at the news conference also suggested the awarding of medals to the Iranian naval personnel that took part in the original seizure was part of a face-saving resolution.

It's being discussed over at Military.com also. I am wondering what happened, although I think it is mote of an Iranian internal power issue. Some analysis I read last night suggested that hard liners within the Revolutiuonary guard wanted a kangaroo trial, while other elements argued that it had become a potential disastor and that "events were spiraling out of control". Apparantly, the cautious faction won. I wonder if some especially nasty threats from us were part of that.

celtic-dragon said:

Some analysis I read last night suggested that hard liners within the Revolutiuonary guard wanted a kangaroo trial, while other elements argued that it had become a potential disastor and that "events were spiraling out of control". Apparantly, the cautious faction won.

Click to expand...

There were indeed serious demands to put them on trial (and then probably have them shot, given there would only be a guilty verdict) from various groups and Iranian media outlets. Fortunately cooler heads prevailed.

I wonder if some especially nasty threats from us were part of that.

Click to expand...

Possibly, but similarly one could say the fact the Americans are allowing access to their people in Iraq was just as important - if not more so.

Good I am very glad the matter has been settled and that it seems to have spurred movement on other related issues as well.

Fu, I have no problem with any view you hold or support, it is simply that some of the methods you use to argue them are detrimental to keeping a well tempered discussion on the forums. Of course you are entitiled to defend your own position, but when you attack the positions of others you would be well advised to use more care in choosing the words and methods you use.

This is moderation and I do expect it to be taken on board - Thank you

The central point of my arguement throughout is that I distrusted Blair as he is a known and serial Liar. I would say that my Cynicism has been justified as he very clearly lied about an International boundary - that does not exist! and at that point derailed any chance of an early settlement, which had up untill that point seemed likely according to some of the OTR briefings that have been published recently.

Does it matter?

Yes it does, as it means that our forces cannot be confident that the orders they are receiving are legal and that they may face uneccessary active peril or even legal action against them, despite acting in good faith.

He sent British Forces into a disputed region after telling them (we presume) that it was within Iraqi territorial waters. We can also assume that this was not a simple or routine search mission due to the lack of detailsl given about detainee no:11 which is usually indiciative of Special Forces or Intelligence Officers. You can easily imagine if these had been Indian or Pakistani servicemen moving into a disputed area in Kashmir.

It is by happy coincidence that this is also the 25th Anniversary of the Falklands War. Simply contrast the plain and unembelleshed reports by Ian MacDonald to the amount of spin put on MOD reports today and you see how far standards have fallen. We believed every word that Mr MacDonald told us in 82 and history has shown that our confidence in his word was justified.

As for Mr Blair, is there still anyone left who believes a word he says?

Finally good news! Personally I think the Iranians had decided that they rubbed Blair's nose in it enough and continuing to hold the captives would start to be counter-productive. Ahmadinejad's press conference was transmitted live around the world, so he spent an hour reeling off a list of Iran's greivances and then at the end he basically says "OK we've been wronged here, but to show that we're not the raving madmen that people portray us as, we're going to let them go unconditionally." He must have loved every second of that press conference!

There's 2 wider issues for Britain here, first it's worrying that many people and nations are not prepared to accept Britain's word against Iran's. The reason for this is almost certainly Blair's deceit over Iraq. If Blair really wants to serve Britain then he should stop clinging on like a malignant limpet and just resign now and hopefully take a lot of the Iraq ill will with him. Secondly, there needs to be some hard questions asked about how they came to be captured. Irrespective of where exactly they were, what we had was 2 motorised, lightly armed dinghies operating in most of the most contentious and volatile waters in the world with the nearest support some 10 miles away. That cannot be right. Someone screwed up big time here, either Cornwall's skipper didn't follow proceedures, in which case he should be court-martialled, or, and probably more likely, there was a deliberate decision taken not to appear too provocative. Yes there is a careful balance that needs to be struck, but does not mean you leave your people as sitting ducks. If that was a decision taken either by the RN or by politicians, then whoever made it needs to be brought to account. :nono: