British sailors arrested at gunpoint by Iranian navy.

[FastEddy]

From Ralph Peters at the NY Post:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04032007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/wheres_winston__opedcolumnists_ralph_peters.htm?page=0

Good Read "muslrat89", but you can rest assured that all the Do-Gooders, Antiwar and PC are sharpening up their pencils in protest to it. Theres "geo", that probably going to say, "Well what can you expect those poor guys to do".

Not being a expert on Combat Strategies or Evasion Tactic's, I pose this question, what if they had resisted boarding and made a run for their Mother Ship. Would the Iranians have opened fire and pursued ?.

IMO, we're getting to be so AFRAID of loosing a drop of Oil and Offending the sensibilities of Islam, that we'll bend to anything.

As Ralph Peters points out, its not the BRITS we use to know.

Cheers.

 

[Kirkhill]

Allow me to jump in in geo's stead.

Have you been watching any of the man-in-the-street interviews from Iran? In addition to women in Chadors there are women just wearing scarves.  You also have people calling for an amicable resolution - they are not convinced these Brits are spies.  That, in conjunction with demonstrations against the regime before this incident and a grand total of 200 in the rent-a-crowd before the British Embassy on Sunday, all suggests that the locals are not all on board with this - unlike Carter's escapade. 

What we want is to separate leaders from followers.  Actions that punish the followers will only drive them into the arms of their more extreme leaders.  That becomes a win for the extremists.  It would also detract from activities in Iraq which in fact may have been the thought all along.  Perhaps the Iranians are concerned that the Petraeus surge is working.

There are internal divisions in Iran.  We need to exploit them - not bridge them.  Having said that, if their is intransigence on the part of the Iranians or they mistreat the Brits, there is ample time to take alternative actions. We are still only 11 days into this.  3 weeks for Sierra Leone.  7 weeks for the Falklands (where, by the way, the Marines also gave up - and no slag intended)

PS Tony has got 433 days to go to beat Jimmy Carter's record.

 

[Flip]

What we want is to separate leaders from followers.  Actions that punish the followers will only drive them into the arms of their more extreme leaders.  That becomes a win for the extremists.  It would also detract from activities in Iraq which in fact may have been the thought all along.  Perhaps the Iranians are concerned that the Petraeus surge is working.

Eggzackly!

The internal political struggles in Iran have everything to do with this.
This should be played as the "bad guys" stepping on their own collective naughty bits.
Can you say "schlong" on ARMY.ca?

In truth most Iranians don't even know why they're fighting against the Americans
It just seems like the right thing for them to do. ( I think )
With a bit of luck this could be the best thing to happen for the good guys in a long while.

I really don't see China getting involved in any serious way - It's American money
that fuels China's growth.  The Russians don't want to see their client's Capital
(Tehran) become a glazed parking lot.  Russian foreign policy has to have the most
abysmal track record of all time.  They supported Saddam(Illegally) right up to the end.

The western powers' biggest problem remains liberal elements within our own sphere.
A kidnapping looks bad to even them.

Just a few thoughts......... ;D

 

[FastEddy]

Allow me to jump in in geo's stead.

Have you been watching any of the man-in-the-street interviews from Iran? In addition to women in Chadors there are women just wearing scarves.  You also have people calling for an amicable resolution - they are not convinced these Brits are spies.  That, in conjunction with demonstrations against the regime before this incident and a grand total of 200 in the rent-a-crowd before the British Embassy on Sunday, all suggests that the locals are not all on board with this - unlike Carter's escapade. 

What we want is to separate leaders from followers.  Actions that punish the followers will only drive them into the arms of their more extreme leaders.  That becomes a win for the extremists.  It would also detract from activities in Iraq which in fact may have been the thought all along.  Perhaps the Iranians are concerned that the Petraeus surge is working.

There are internal divisions in Iran.  We need to exploit them - not bridge them.  Having said that, if their is intransigence on the part of the Iranians or they mistreat the Brits, there is ample time to take alternative actions. We are still only 11 days into this.  3 weeks for Sierra Leone.  7 weeks for the Falklands (where, by the way, the Marines also gave up - and no slag intended)

PS Tony has got 433 days to go to beat Jimmy Carter's record.

If some sort of retaliatory action was taken by the West, could not that have the same effect on the same group you have outlined, in that they would be very pissed off at their Leaders for the Tail pulling of the West, bringing more strife and sanctions.  (Like lets get these Idiots out of Office, before they get us all killed)

Do you subscribe to the behavior of the Marines and recommend that our Troops adopt this, "I'll say anything just don,t hurt me" ?.

Also, since you seem well versed on these situations, I would appreciate your views on my question, as to what would have happened if the Marines had refused to be arrested and attempted to flee to their Mother Ship.

cheers.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Good Read "muslrat89", but you can rest assured that all the Do-Gooders, Antiwar and PC are sharpening up their pencils in protest to it. Theres "geo", that probably going to say, "Well what can you expect those poor guys to do".

Not being a expert on Combat Strategies or Evasion Tactic's, I pose this question, what if they had resisted boarding and made a run for their Mother Ship. Would the Iranians have opened fire and pursued ?.

IMO, we're getting to be so AFRAID of loosing a drop of Oil and Offending the sensibilities of Islam, that we'll bend to anything.
As Ralph Peters points out, its not the BRITS we use to know.

Cheers.

                                                   MOD POST


Fast Eddy,
Geo asked you to drop the 'pink Geo" thing or take it off the board via PM's, and now I'm telling you to................this is your only warning.

 

[geo]

It just shows how much respect there is in the man..... doesn't it!

Meat"&/!

 

[GAP]

Iran president to free UK sailors
POSTED: 1322 GMT (2122 HKT), April 4, 2007
Article Link


TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says he will pardon and set free 15 British sailors and marines being held in Iranian custody.

Speaking at a news conference on the diplomatic crisis, Ahmadinejad said the 15 detainees had violated the country's territorial waters and praised the border guards who captured them, honoring three men with medals for bravery.

"I thank the border guards who bravely protect our borders and also arrested the violators, and I grant them the bravery medal to their commander," Ahmadinejad said.

Ahmadinejad was speaking after a senior Iranian official on Wednesday welcomed UK efforts to negotiate the release of the marines and sailors.

Iran's parliament speaker Gholamali Haddadadel told an Iranian state broadcaster's Web site that British efforts to negotiate the detainees' release were "appropriate."

"The British are trying to solve the issue of their arrested soldiers with negotiations and this is appropriate action," Haddadadel was quoted as saying.

But he added: "The British should agree to their mistake and change their behavior of before."

Haddadadel is considered an influential figure within Iran because of his connections with the country's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to whom he is related by marriage.
More on link

 

[tomahawk6]

Great news !!

 

[GAP]

I think you will find the US returned that diplomat they held in custody to facilitate this...maybe the other Iranians also, don't know....

 

[tomahawk6]

We are giving them access to the IRG senior personnel. Do not expect their release anytime soon unless Tehran agrees to stop meddling in Iraq.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

3 weeks for Sierra Leone.  7 weeks for the Falklands (where, by the way, the Marines also gave up - and no slag intended)

That's a very cheap shot - and not even very accurate: the RMs were outnumbered something like 50-1 (~3,000, plus naval support vs. 67) and yet still literally fought to the last building in Stanley (Government House), before the Governor surrendered.  The difference between the two actions is pretty stark.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/2/newsid_2520000/2520879.stm

http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Falklands/NP8901.html

 

[Kirkhill]

If some sort of retaliatory action was taken by the West, could not that have the same effect on the same group you have outlined, in that they would be very pissed off at their Leaders for the Tail pulling of the West, bringing more strife and sanctions.  (Like lets get these Idiots out of Office, before they get us all killed)

Do you subscribe to the behavior of the Marines and recommend that our Troops adopt this, "I'll say anything just don,t hurt me" ?.

Also, since you seem well versed on these situations, I would appreciate your views on my question, as to what would have happened if the Marines had refused to be arrested and attempted to flee to their Mother Ship.

cheers.

I'll start with the last first.  First of all I would expect ROEs to be followed.  Secondly, actions taken in the heat of the moment are seen very differently than actions taken after time has elapsed.  Personally I would have had no trouble with the Marines firing back and making a run for it back to the Cornwall (IIRC).  On the other hand 10 kms of open water in rubber boats probably would have taxed James Bond.  As to the "Mothership" taking action - I have no idea whether that was even possible.  Were there other vessels in the area?  Was there enough manoeuvring room in those channels to get into a good firing position with a free line of sight?  What was the attitude of the ship - bow on or stern on to the target vessel?  There is a whole bunch of stuff of which I am blissfully unaware.  Consequently I choose to give the folks on the scene the benefit of the doubt.  One thing that does stick out in my mind is the alleged withdrawl of the ship's helicopter, which was flying top-cover, before the RHIBs were safely recovered - but even there I don't know the reason for the recovery (Were they low on gas? If so why? Did the search take longer than anticipated.....) I wasn't there.  Neither were you.  I hold an opinion.

As to the attitude of the Marines - I think it would depend a lot on the nature of the people involved.  I am pretty sure that the Marines at Garmsir take a very different attitude when contemplating being taken by the Taliban.  As I noted earlier, even the Marines on the Falklands surrendered.  That indeed was part of what allowed the Maggie to get the Brits moving - pictures of Marines lying face down in the gutter with their hands behind their heads.  It added to the sense of national humiliation which drove the support for the war and allowed Maggie to recover from the disastrous policy decisions that allowed the Argentinians to think they could get away with it.

As to retaliatory action by the West is concerned - how much collateral damage are you contemplating? Or is it your opinion that inflicting pain on the general population will make them your friend?

Victor Suvorov in the Liberators described Russian training procedures for new recruits.  One technique was, IIRC, socialist competition - punish the whole group and then rely on the group to punish the offending individual - you see in a good socialist society there are no individuals therefore the group must be at fault.  Is that your position WRT the Iranians?

Or should we be targeting individuals?

John - it wasn't a cheap shot at all. I have the greatest respect for the Marines, unlike Ralph Peters it is still undiminished.  You are correct that they returned fire and that the Governor surrendered the islands.  However the fact remains that the Marines were captured en masse.  Just as other forces have been captured in the past and will be in the future.  And the troops rely on their government to get them out of there.

 

[observor 69]

In a tactical sense the naval personnel did the only sensible thing in surrendering vice a "fight to the death."

My question is what's the thinking on the Brits saying "yes we were in Iranian waters"  vice the old name, rank and serial number?

I might add the Marine Capt., who one expects to have had some exposure to interrogation training, also had no difficulty in admitting fault.

Thoughts ?

 

[Flip]

We can hope to get the story in a few days.

We can't count them as returned until they actually are of course.

Personally, I think the British government played it exactly right,
in a crisis the general population will side with their own government.

Now that it's likely over, the opposition can use this crisis as an example of recklessness
on the part of Ahmedinejad.

I am assuming of course that Iran got nothing out of the deal.
I am also assuming the sanctions can be ratcheted up now.

 

[Kirkhill]

In a tactical sense the naval personnel did the only sensible thing in surrendering vice a "fight to the death."

My question is what's the thinking on the Brits saying "yes we were in Iranian waters"  vice the old name, rank and serial number?

I might add the Marine Capt., who one expects to have had some exposure to interrogation training, also had no difficulty in admitting fault.

Thoughts ?

One set of reports I saw had the OIC agreeing that the co-ordinates supplied by Iranians, applied to an Iranian map, showed the Brits in the Iranian waters.  The issue of where the Brit's gear showed them to be on Brit charts was not addressed.  As to the apology................crickets.  Name, rank and serial number applies under the Geneva convention to PWs. Obviously the Iranians weren't working under those rules when they allowed cameras to record the troops eating.

On the other side ..... you might want to consider this.  How much sympathy did those images generate amongst the Iranian public?  The images that I saw were of a particularly "non-threatening" group of young sailors and marines - a woman and some young "baby-faced" types were front and centre in the scene with them eating with the boys sitting at the feet of a maternal figure.  Pretty hard to sell that image as representative of a group of evil British commandos.  I wonder who organized the "production".

 

[Gimpy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070404/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_britain_syria

DAMASCUS, Syria -
Syria played a key role in resolving the standoff over the 15 British sailors and marines held by
Iran, two government officials said Wednesday

"Syrian efforts and the Iranian willingness culminated with the release of the British sailors," said Information Minister Mohsen Bilal.

He said Syria had been asked "to help positively in the issue of British" crew members since their March 23 seizure by Iran in the Persian Gulf.

He did not elaborate.

Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem told reporters that "Syria exercised a sort of quiet diplomacy to solve this problem and encourage dialogue" between Britain and Iran.

Al-Moallem, who also did not give any details on the Syrian mediation, spoke at Damascus international airport before the departure of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) for Saudi Arabia.

A Foreign Ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media, said Iran's decision to release the Britons was "right," and that Syria "sees it as an example of the positive results for adopting dialogue and diplomacy among states."

Syria has long been the Arab country with the closest ties to Iran, a non-Arab state. The two have moved toward each other as they were shunned by the United States and the European Union for their alleged interference in Iraq and Lebanon, and their support of Palestinian militant groups regarded as terrorist in the West.

So it comes out that Syria helped with the release of the hostages during the visit of Nancy Pelosi. I think she most likely had a huge influence on the negotiations and with that in mind she has effectively done more than Bush or Blair during the entire hostage situation.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Yea, right.........the smell permenting from this scenario is quite overpowering.

 

[geo]

.... with all due respect to Mrs Pelosi, I figure that Iran came to the conclusion that they had milked this photo op as far as they could and ...Ohhh.... weren't those terrible British pirates scarry

If Iran acted on Syria's suggestion - it would most likely be to tweak Dubya's nose over his rhetoric.

As to the British political action OR inaction.... they aren't telling

 

[Gimpy]

.... with all due respect to Mrs Pelosi, I figure that Iran came to the conclusion that they had milked this photo op as far as they could and ...Ohhh.... weren't those terrible British pirates scary

If Iran acted on Syria's suggestion - it would most likely be to tweak Dubya's nose over his rhetoric.

As to the British political action OR inaction.... they aren't telling

Before Pelosi went to Syria did Bush or Blair have any discussions with countries that are close to Iran? No. Did they even attempt any kind of diplomacy? Not really. So I'd say that she must have had some influence if all of sudden Iran decided to release the hostages.

Either way this is a big PR coup for Iran.
-Got the soldiers to admit they were in Iranian waters.
-Didn't do anything insane throughout the situation.
-Releasing them on the birthday of Muhammed is a great political move in the Muslim world.

So even if Pelosi didn't have a hand in it, it still all ends up as a good PR move for Iran and makes the US and UK look weak diplomatically.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Only to those who are gullible or need to believe it,...see here.
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/21608.0.html