Would we be conducting negotiations peacefully.
2007-03-24 05:55:10 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
U.S. Navy Sailors.
2007-03-24 06:02:52 · update #1
Yeah...The US would act in very much the same way as us Brits if faced with similar circumstances. In any event, it's not simply a case that Royal Navy personnel are being held illegally by the Iranians. As a matter of fact it is Allied military personnel. This means that the US is very much involved in any negotiations which take place. They and the Brits have a lot of expertise in this.
2007-03-25 07:46:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not!!!!
We would sink Iran's entire "navy" if they did something like this to us. And we would be well within our rights to do it.
I hope the Brits don't allow this to pass. My God, they paraded the Royal Navy sailors in blind folds on national television. THIS IS AN ACT OF WAR!
2007-03-24 07:23:10 · answer #2 · answered by quarterback 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course you would. You negotiated with Afghanistan for weeks before you attacked; Iraq was persuaded to let in the UN inspectors again after W warned about the likelihood of going to war over WMD, then went to war because the Gov't disbelieved Saddam (and who can blame W?); and you negotiated with China over the return of USAF aircrew after they landed in China following a collision with a Chinese fighter (2001).
Then again, Clinton did precisely:
NOTHING following the car bomb attacks that killed 200+ at the WTC;
NOTHING following attacks on USN ships, including fatalities: and
NOTHING following attacks on US Embassies, Consulates, and their personnel over most of his watch, until he was discovered to have given "cigar lessons" to interns. Then:
POW!! He fired missiles from planes at dead of night into some camps: more to move the media spotlight off his misdemeanours and his CRIMES than to actually fight terrorism.
On balance, give me George W "cojones" Bush than Bungalow Bill Clinton any day of any century. And there are people who actually WANT the Clintons back in the Whitehouse!?
2007-03-24 12:32:44 · answer #3 · answered by Already Saved 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Simple answer is yes but it would have to be through a third party as Iran ans US dont have diplomatic relations.
2007-03-24 06:25:20 · answer #4 · answered by frankturk50 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I get the impression that US forces would be more likely to go in all guns blazing.
However, this is not always the best solution. Sometimes diplomacy and tact can be just as, if not more, effective than violent action.
The door must be left open for the Iranians to resolve this without loss of face.
2007-03-24 06:05:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
if it had been US sailors - the democrats would be claiming that President Bush created a 'false flag' incident.
Remember that the Democrat response to any problem or crisis is: "It is all Bush's fault."
2007-03-24 07:13:59 · answer #6 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
George Bush would have reduced Iran into a nuclear wasteland. The exceptions would be their oil fields and refineries.
W has an itchy trigger finger and is looking for an excuse to bomb Iran back into the stone age.
2007-03-24 06:18:36 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
It was British sailors.
2007-03-24 06:00:54 · answer #8 · answered by kobacker59 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No we don't give in to terrorism, and if we do it gives the terrorist more power and when you give more power to them then it goes to their head and they do more harm. We try to find out where they are and kill them so that they don't do this anymore. If a terrorist had your whole family and made you witness as he killed each one and let you go so you could tell the world would you want that terrorist to go free?
2007-03-24 06:06:26 · answer #9 · answered by Johnny 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I sure hope not. I say if that happened to our sailors we should nuke their oil fields. Once they lost their way to make money they'd stop being such a pain!
2007-03-24 06:27:24 · answer #10 · answered by mcc123 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋