2007-03-30 06:50:00 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
i don't think so. bush would probably do the same as Blair, try to do it diplomatically. reading answers to another Q about our sailors a lot of the Americans feel the same we do and state they would support us if we went to war over it. don't know about the governments though. lets hope it doesn't come to a war and they all get home safely
2007-03-30 06:54:58 · answer #1 · answered by val f1 nutter 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great question, I have a friend in Iran an she paints a very different picture. She says the public are enjoying the whole saga and the press is dwelling of how hospitible the Iranian people are to their 'guests'. The Iranians see themselves as the victims who should get apology. If the British government gave an official apology the situation would be over and the world would be a safer place, but this will not happen war is a good career move. Apology is a career finisher. Margarat Thatcher will be known for her war, so will Tony Blair for his war.
I imagine American would cose down Iran and the situation would be quickly resolved.
2007-03-30 14:04:50 · answer #2 · answered by j_emmans 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the position of the countries in question, another war would be too expensive to start, and that is why this situation would be treated as a hostage situation, since the american soldiers are there just to maintain peace and actually at US's own will, the situation would be thought about twice. You can't declare war, to a country that applies its laws. Just juridic s****. The answer would be 'No', but if there is a hint that I miss in declaration of war from the USA to the Iran, then the goals are more important than the means. Cheers!
2007-03-30 14:03:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First things first: it was 15 British soldiers, not americans that were captured in Iran. I doubt the will be war with Iran because of the 15 captured soldiers, however, war is possible if Iran doesn't stop it's Nuclear production. American and Britian doesn't want Iran to grow as powerful.
2007-03-30 14:02:28 · answer #4 · answered by L. 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on your definition of war. I would say we are already engaging Iranian operatives who are arming and advising Shittite militias (no I did not misspell that, lol) in Iraq.
So if that's war, then sure, but we're already in it with them.
Iran knows very well that even though the Democrats have the bit between their teeth and are trying to cut off funding for operations, Bush still has a very deep pocket for this year, and would love any excuse they give him to target Iran openly.
The Iranians are very clever people, and cunningly picked on a smaller power with similar problems of fading national will: Britain.
The U.S. has done nothing and rattled no cages, because Blair asked them not to. This is a problem of national sovereignty and the British want to solve it themselves as a sovereign power. When they desire American help, they will get it. Until then, good for the Brits for trying to stand firm and salvage some of their shattered national dignity.
Unfortunately, this is just a taste of the global bullying that will haunt Britain if she tries to save her sailors by falsely apologizing. There is far more at stake her than 15 innocent lives.
2007-03-30 14:19:11 · answer #5 · answered by around_the_world_jenny 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No...that would would already be over. Iran wanted to make a statement, but they are smart enough to know better than grab American soldiers. Great Britain will struggle with this a bit before they are humbled by the Iranians.
2007-03-30 13:55:17 · answer #6 · answered by united9198 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There probley would be a military response to rescue them once we realized that they were not going to release them. I do not think it would be a full on invasion.They definately would change the rules of engagement so that US forces could attack Iranian forces who strayed into Iraqi waters so that this thing didnt happen again.
I think Iran planned this to happen this way. They probley know that Bush is a little trigger happy and that scares them, so instead of trying for US forces they went with British. They wanted something to use as a bargaining chip against the UN for their nuclear program. Its obvious to anyone who looks at the facts.
2007-03-30 14:05:58 · answer #7 · answered by h h 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Would you want a war over the arrest of 15 Americans?
I think the US would negotiate the same way as the Brits, IF you want them back alive.
Any offencive action would see them blindfolded back to a wall and shot.
Use some common sense
2007-03-30 17:10:48 · answer #8 · answered by Murray H 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably, also the Iranians know that American captives wouldn't have appeased their captors in the way that the Brits have done.
2007-03-30 13:59:31 · answer #9 · answered by frank S 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We better be thinking about it if they did since that is an act of war by Iran.
2007-03-30 13:52:30 · answer #10 · answered by ALASPADA 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋