Iran claims that the British soldiers were in Iranian waters when they were seized, but everyone else claims?

Question

that they were in Iraqi waters. If they were in Iraqi waters, doesn't that mean that Iran was the one violating the territory of Iraq, and shouldn't they be dealt with accordingly?

Answer 1

Of course they should be dealt with. The Iranian government has been poking the West with a stick, and eventually they are going to get bitten.

Answer 2

The waters where they were captured are not that wide and there has been dispute over who's waters they are. I'm not sure just were the Brits were taken into custody. But consider this, if Iraq and Iran both claim x amount of distance from their shore and the distance between the shores is less than 2x then there is an overlap zone.

Now what the Brits should do is have their ambassador meet with the Iranian ambassador. He should whisper in his ear that unless the British personnel are not released in 24 hours something bad just might happen at one of the Iranian oil refineries, wells, or shipping ports. And if the Iranians say anything about what was just said, the British government will deny anything other than the two of them had lunch.

Answer 3

The Iranians are fully aware that the British Servicemen were in Iraqi waters, they escorted them out of Iraqi waters into Iranian by gun point. Yes Iran should be dealt with, but the British want the 15 back first. Why the 15 did not have back up from choppers to stop this happening in the first place is the question which should be asked especially as this is not the first time the Iranians have done this dirty little trick they did it in 2004 as well.

Answer 4

That is a good point. If the Brits were not in Iranian waters, and were in Iraqi waters, then the Iranians must have entered Iraqi waters to illegally seize British soldiers.

The fact that Britain is not making a big deal of that is a concern.

Answer 5

This isn't the first time Iran has done this to British soldiers or sailors. The reason Britain isn't making more of a fuss is to not start a war, which Iran is trying their best to provoke. This is also because British servicemen & women are nearer Iran than American, and because Iran has so many sanctions against it for nuclear violations.

Answer 6

The Iranians are the ones who have held a conference to try to prove the Holocaust didn't happen. So you want to start believing anything they say?

Answer 7

Yes it should but in the world of Political Correctness the Iranians are prefect, peaceful, and wonderful people the rest are scum and deserve what they get.

Answer 8

Well, there are two sides of every argument. Iran claims that the British sailors were in Iran's "half" of the waterway. Britain claims that its sailors were in Iraq's "half" of the waterway. Since Iran does not recognize the authority of the U.N., Iran would likely not recognize the authority of the international court in the Hague. So, it is almost a moot point.

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 USS 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 CVN-68 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 9

ever ask yourself what the brittish were doing even near the Iranian border.??

Answer 10

well, they were in our water( in Iraqi water) and we are very sad for that ,too, god pless them.