UK: 15 Marines seized by Iran

[Ellyllions]

Iran wants control of Iraq. They have for centuries, and they've been trying to get in on this war since it started.

[spitfire ace]

Originally posted by Ellyllions
Iran wants control of Iraq. They have for centuries, and they've been trying to get in on this war since it started.

Is this a theory of yours or from the media in the states?
Theres no talk of this in the uk and the first I've heard of it.

[Ellyllions]

Iran and Iraq were at war for 10 years.
When we went into Iraq, shortly thereafter, Iran began this nuclear crap. Pushing a little here, pushing a little there. But trying to keep attention turned towards it all the time.

Iran wants control of Iraq. They were and have been bitter enemies and its all over territorial control. We could never understand that because we're quite comfortable in our divided states and provinces. Well, that's just not the case in the Middle East. There's still a "conquer" mentality.

I'm sorry, but I don't subscribe to the facts that give Blair or Bush more power than they actually hold. In my mind, each person should be held responsible for their own actions and a lot of the rhetoric really sounds like the people in the whole of the Middle East can do no wrong because it's all someone else's doing.

Iran has done what it's done and should be held accountable. Do I think military action is the way? No. I think ignoring and cutting their stupid asses off would do more good. BUT, I do think their ultimate goal is to test out one of their new nuclear toys on Israel. And I DO think they will do it.

Although it'll all be some conspiracy from Blair or Bush who's actually at fault if Iran does push the red button.....no way the Iranian administration could think of something so sinister....

[Nickdfresh]

What an incredibly stupid and provocative act by Iran...

After about four or five US troops were captured and summarily executed in Iraq in what was obviously an inside job many feel was carried out by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards special operations detachment, bombs started going off, and firefights erupted, in southern Iran, killing 11 Revolutionary Guards...

Iran is actually volatile country with many feuding ethnicities that have their own resistance groups.

Obviously, we are arming them now, and will be arming more shortly I believe...

[Seshmeister]

The place seems to be pretty anarchic.

There are all sorts of factions with their own power bases.

[WACF]

The British have said that their rules of engagment prevented them from attacking the Iranian boats.

I take it too that there must of been a high risk of friendly fire incidents or loss of life among the civiallian ship's crew.

[Ellyllions]

It's getting to the point where neither the Brits or the US can fire against anyone. So many Watchdog organizations just waiting to crucify them for using any amount of force.

How many days did Iran hold those US citizens back in the '80's?....

[WACF]

On another note about where this happened.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6501555.stm

UK reveals Iran dispute evidence

Satellite data proves 15 navy personnel being held in Iran were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when they were seized, UK defence officials say.
Vice Admiral Charles Style said the sailors had been "ambushed" in the Gulf after searching a vessel and their detention was "unjustified and wrong".

Tony Blair said it was time to "ratchet up" pressure on Iran, with whom the UK has now suspended bilateral contacts.

Reports suggest the only woman among the group will be freed shortly.

An Iranian foreign ministry spokesman is quoted as saying Faye Turney, 26, would be released either later on Wednesday or on Thursday.

Iran has insisted the group were in its waters when they were taken last Friday.

The eight sailors and seven marines, based on HMS Cornwall, which has its home port in Plymouth, were taken at gunpoint by Iranian Revolutionary Guards after they had searched a merchant vessel.

Its foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki told Turkey's CNN-Turk television the 15 were in "completely good health".

Iran's embassy in London also issued a statement in response to the UK data, in which it said the sailors and marines had been 0.5 km inside Iranian waters at the time they were seized.

The statement, quoted by the official IRNA news agency, said "the governments of Iran and Britain have the ability to solve the incident through contacts and close co-operation".

At a briefing in London, the Ministry of Defence said it "unambiguously contested" Iran's claims that the Royal Navy personnel had strayed into Iranian waters.

Speaking later, Mr Blair told MPs it was time to increase pressure on Iran "in order to make sure the Iranian government understands their total isolation on this issue".

The seizure of the personnel was "unacceptable, wrong and illegal" and the UK was now in talks with all its key allies and partners, he said.

Mr Blair added: "Our thoughts are with the servicemen and the servicewoman and their families, and their safe return is our paramount concern."


The prime minister said: "These personnel were patrolling in Iraqi waters under a United Nations mandate. Their boarding and checking of the Indian merchant vessel was routine - there was no justification therefore for their detention."

Mr Blair said the personnel had been "doing their job" and the government would be talking to international partners in Nato and the UN to reach a "sensible" solution.

The UK government said the Iranians initially said the merchant vessel searched by the navy personnel had been at a point within Iraqi waters, before later providing a second, alternative position, within Iranian waters.

In a statement to the Commons, Mrs Beckett said: "We find it impossible to believe, given the seriousness of the incident, that the Iranians could have made such a mistake with the original coordinates."

She told MPs that Britain were suspending bilateral contacts with Iran until the navy personnel were released.

Shadow foreign secretary William Hague said: "The seizure of our personnel was clearly unjustified and the evidence the foreign secretary and the MoD has presented shatters the credibility of any claim they were operating in Iranian waters."

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner said the freeze on ties between the two countries meant that until the Britons were returned there would be "no inward or outward visits to Iran" and no UK visas would be granted to Iranian officials.

Earlier, Turkey's prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quoted as saying his diplomats may be allowed to meet the group, taken in the Gulf.

The BBC has been told the group are being held at an Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps base in Tehran, where they are said to be being treated "humanely".

[spitfire ace]

If you know anything about the military and how things are done, there is absolutely no way that these poor sailors and marines were accidentally allowed to be captured - this could be a carefully planned 'psych op' to escalate British and overseas public opinion into accepting military action against Iran.

Poor Faye Turney - interviewed by the BBC just moments before she went out on this 'routine' search of a 'smuggling' ship. . Well how about this......there are currently thousands of British service men and women operating in Iraq and the Gulf and, guess what, not only does the BBC embed itself with the actual ship that was going to be involved with this major news story (along with selected newspaper journalists), but they also just happen to interview the young woman a couple of hours before she goes out on patrol. The 'hidden hand' needs a human face to get the most from this sort of operation - if it were just fifteen hunky males in trouble, we would be concerned but now a young mother with a three year old waiting back home for Mummy to come back, that's something to really get people animated about.

Now to the actual capture itself. The military always, when they put their people into harms way, ensure that close support is available in the form of immediate firepower and reinforcements. The only exception to this are Special Forces who are trained to operate independently of other friendly units and to be able to operate behind enemy lines without immediate backup. A boarding party from a Royal Navy ship are not Special Forces, even though half of them in this particular case were Royal Marine commandos. The normal procedure for a Royal Navy boarding party is for their ship to place itself in a position were it can give covering or warning fire from its most appropriate weaponry, which in this case would have been shipboard mounted GPMGs (General Purpose Machine Guns) and the ship's helicopter. In other words, the boarding party's ship would be no more than a 1800 metres (effective range of a mounted GPMG) away from the designated ship to be searched. So what happened in this particular case - how far away was HMS Cornwall from this freighter. If it was further than 2 kilometres then that boarding party was deliberately sent out to be captured.....and if Cornwall was within 2 kilometres then why no support given with warning shots.

HMS Cornwall is bristling with radar and high tech surveillance devices - how come they did not pick up the Iranian Revolutionary Guards patrol boats as they were approaching the RN boarding party? And what about the helicopter - one report says it was sent away when it was seen that the boarding party had received a friendly welcome from the suspected freighter. If that's true, then this is a break with normal SOPs (standing operational procedures).

It is also reported that the Cornwall had communication problems with the boarding party - now problems with radios do occur but the ship should have been close enough for other forms of communications to be used (light, rockets and signal flags) in order to alert the boarding party as to the Iranian patrol boats movements. We also learn from other sources that Commodore Nick Lambert, senior naval officer in the area, was desperately trying to sort out Rules of Engagement with the Ministry of Defence in London and that hesitation here prevented any action from being taken to save the boarding party from capture. Excuse me! Rules of Engagement are decided on before deployment and are constantly reviewed and at no time would you put your people into harms way without knowing your latest Rules of Engagement.

One final thing - the Rigid Inflatable Boats (RIBs) used by the boarding party are capable of over 30 knots and, as we have seen from when Greenpeace use them effectively, are extremely manoeuvrable. I just find it very strange that skilful avoiding tactics using excellent boatmanship (which you would expect from the Royal Navy), but not firing any shots to exacerbate the situation, were not used by the boarding party to get back to the Cornwall - assuming of course the Cornwall was at a distance offering 'close support'.

The MOD should give us an accurate, minute by minute, account of what happened but my belief is that we will never know the full truth. Let's hope that some of the navy personnel involved will start to speak out.

Sorry for such a long post, but you know, when you look further than the end of your nose sort of thing!

[FORD]

Excellent points, Spitfire. I heard many of the same things being discussed on the radio yesterday, and it seems the more we know about the incident, the more obvious it is that it was a setup, most likely intended as an excuse for war with Iran.

[Ellyllions]

Oy, vey....

[WACF]

Originally posted by spitfire ace
If you know anything about the military and how things are done, there is absolutely no way that these poor sailors and marines were accidentally allowed to be captured - this could be a carefully planned 'psych op' to escalate British and overseas public opinion into accepting military action against Iran.

You make some interesting points...right or wrong time may tell.

BUT....the statement I quoted....I think if you know anything about the military and how things are done you would know this could very well happen.

The Brits are not as quick to fire as the US is...The Brits are known for that...they give you many chances to pull back before pulling the trigger.
I would think that following the UN mandate as they are that the rules of engagement are much strickter. Civillian casualties would be avoided...and I do not care how fast your boat is you are not faster than a bullet.
For Iran they may consider this a freebie...if it was the USN they tried this with they would be more unsure of the results.

[hideyoursheep]

Brian, you ignorant slut! Why would Usama Bin-Laden want me to vote Democratic?

It's not as if the Republi-Cons give a shit about terrists, especialy Bin-Laden...

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by hideyoursheep
Brian, you ignorant slut! Why would Usama Bin-Laden want me to vote Democratic?

It's not as if the Republi-Cons give a shit about terrists, especialy Bin-Laden...

Shaddap, boy.

[Nickdfresh]

Yeah, I mean, his 'best' attacks happened during a Republican administration...