What do you think about Iran's capture of the 15 UK Naval officers?

Question

Iran has done it before in June 2004, 8 British sailors were blindfolded, paraded on television and subjected to mock executions before they were safely returned. Sounds a lot like the taliban huh?

Also, what do you think would have happened if those had been American sailors that were captured.

Answer 1

Iran is in a heap of trouble.....

Iran is dealing with two issues. First, Iran has captured 15 British sailors. Second, Iran has refused to cooperate with the U.N. regarding cessation of uranium enrichment.

Military confrontation may be on the horizon.
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=3961
In addition to the British naval vessels at the Diego Garcia atoll in the Indian ocean, there is a multi-national force in the Persian Gulf. The British HMS Cornwall aircraft carrier strike group, the American aircraft carrier strike group Bremerton-based aircraft carrier CVN-74 John C. Stennis, the American aircraft carrier strike group USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and the French nuclear carrier Charles de Gaulle and its task force are all in close appoximation in the Persian Gulf. The USS Nimitz may also be in the Persian Gulf as it was scheduled for its WESTPAC07 deployment to replace the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/batgru-68.htm

More details about military options can be found here:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iran-strikes.htm

Iran has elicited "confessions" from the 15 British sailors they captured and may put them on trial for espionage. The penalty for espionage in Iran is death.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article1563877.ece
“If it is proven that they deliberately entered Iranian territory, they will be charged with espionage. If that is proven, they can expect a very serious penalty since according to Iranian law, espionage is one of the most serious offences.” Espionage carries a death sentence.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6493391.stm
Iran's detention of 15 Royal Navy personnel is "unjustified and wrong", Prime Minister Tony Blair has said. UK officials are waiting to be granted access to the HMS Cornwall staff, who were seized on Friday, and have not been told where the group are held.

"It simply is not true that they went into Iranian territorial waters and I hope the Iranian government understands how fundamental an issue this is for us," Mr Blair said.

"We have certainly sent the message back to them very clearly indeed. They should not be under any doubt at all about how seriously we regard this act, which is unjustified and wrong."

On March 23, 2007, U.S. and British officials said a boarding party from the frigate HMS Cornwall was seized about during a routine inspection of a merchant ship inside Iraqi territorial waters near the disputed Shatt al-Arab waterway.

The seizure of two Royal Navy inflatable boats took place just outside the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab waterway, a 125-mile channel dividing Iraq from Iran. Its name means Arab Coastline in Arabic, and Iranians call it Arvandrud - Persian for Arvand River. A 1975 treaty recognized the middle of the waterway as the border.

Iranians send arms to Iraqi extremists, including sophisticated roadside bombs. This week, two commanders of an Iraqi Shiite militia told The Associated Press in Baghdad that hundreds of Iraqi Shiites had crossed into Iran for training by the elite Quds force, a branch of Iran's Revolutionary Guard thought to have trained Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon.

Regarding enrichment of uranium, Iranian President Mahmaoud Ahmadinejad abruptly cancelled his appearance before the U.N. security council and in his stead, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki Iran spoke. He indicated that Iran was willing to continue negotiations but without the precondition that uranium enrichment must be halted.

Mottaki said, "the world has two options to proceed on the nuclear issue: continued negotiations or confrontation. Choosing the path of confrontation ... will have its own consequences. "
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070325/D8O3E7J00.html

The U.N. security council unanimously voted to expand sanctions on March 24, 2007.

The new resolution 1747 calls on Iran to comply fully with all previous UN resolutions and join negotiations to reach agreement so as to restore international confidence in the peaceful nature of its nuclear program. Full transparency and cooperation with the IAEA are required. Suspension of Iran’s banned nuclear activities will elicit the parallel suspension of sanctions. The package of incentives offered Tehran last year for its cooperation remains on the table.

The full text of the draft of resolution 1747 appears at this website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6455853.stm
.
.

Answer 2

Iran's capture of the British military personnel was an act of war, and England should retaliate by destroying the Iranian navy. If the captives had been American sailors, the U.S.A. would do nothing as usual because of our politically correct, wimpy, corrupt and confused politicians in Washington. Iran knows that the U.S.A. does not have a sufficient conventional military force to do anything. The only weapon of power that the U.S.A. has is nuclear, and the wimps in charge don't have the guts or courage to use these awesome weapons. If President Ronald Reagan were in charge today, Iran would fully understand what would happen if they failed to release the captives.

Answer 3

Whenever something happens like this, whether it is officially announced or not, it is an act of war. I'm not sayign that we should or should not invade, but they have simply committed an act of war against the UK and its allies. I think the UK, the US, and other allies should try diplomacy first-by our standards, not the UN's. Then take the appropriate action. This is not a random act either, Iran is looking for an excuse. And yes, it sounds very much like a terrorist act, but that no different that Tehran supplying terrorists in Iraq. If those were American sailors, then everything will be the same and everything should end the same since the US and UK are such good allies.

Answer 4

unfortunately it's a game of he said she said right now iran say's they were in iranian water's british say they were in iraq waters it's a fine line and where they were captured is an area where the territorial waters are disputed iran is doing this to try to show power they could just as easily not captured them they were not attacking iran and they know that they were there for security for iraq now it's a very volatile and serious situation because if not released it could stir the melting pot which is iran and if britian were to declare war on iran us would be right next to them

Answer 5

I think it is bullshit! they are just patrolling for criminals, yet find a nation full of them! UK is under more peer pressure from the un (no offense to the UK, screw the UN) to be peace full. if it was American we would already be handing the president of Iran's head to the family of the captured sailors.

Answer 6

We and the British are pretty much helpless to do anything about Iran and they know it. If we retaliated they would cut off the flow of their oil and cause the US stock market to crash. Bye bye pensions, hello recession. It's the price we pay because the oil companies run our country and keep us dependent on oil and suppress alternative energy sources.

Answer 7

They will probably be returned within a month or two.

There is too much at stake.

It's also like the Chinese. Remember when our plane collided with one of their fighters?

Answer 8

A good start to Iran defending itself from the Zionists.

Answer 9

Tehran is going to make a great golf course!

Answer 10

The US and british are purposely probing/invading iran terrirtory to test the response.