Why did the British sailors give up so easily?

Question

They did not even fire a shot and then they were on Iranian TV smiling and laughing with their captors...their not really heros right?

Markos, at the time they were approached by the Iranain gun boats they did not have swords over their heads, they were on the open water.

Answer 1

No they are not heros.

Answer 2

You obviously feel it would have been better for the Brits to have made a token defence of their invidious situation (using pistols and carbines - some of which were on personnel climbing down from the Indian cargo ship and therefore unavailable for use - versus 5 or 6 machine gun equipped Iranian boats!). All the Brits would have died in the slaughter that would have followed. And what would have been the point of that? None!

Britain is not at war with Iran; furthermore, the Iranians had acted in a non aggressive manner towards the Brits over the past 4 years of similar inspection operations - so why be suspicious of the Iranians on that particular day?

As far as I can make out, the Brits followed the same sensible policy as shown by US Marines when the American Embassy in Tehran was attacked back in late 70's - namely, when you are outnumbered and facing superior weaponry and numbers what's the point in fruitlessly throwing away your life?

And if being pleasant towards one's captors (kidnappers?) results in your being released early, well, why not? In any case, a lot of the words spoken, and letters written by the sailors used non standard British English, hence it was obvious to viewers/readers that the whole TV thing was scripted by the Iranians. No one yet knows what coercion was being used on the captives, either. (NB at least two of the Brits were held in solitary during the two weeks in Iran, which implies something).

Legitimate questions will be asked why sufficient cover was not supplied during the inspection procedure, and why the British inflatables were so poorly armed - but as for why the personnel did not play at 'gung-ho' heroes the question is simply not worth asking, since the answer is obvious.

And by not stupidly giving away their lives, the 15 released captives are still available to 'fight another day'. Maybe even against Iran....

PS [Written after the UK personnel's first public appearance. Statement by the senior officer captured.]

Royal Marine Captain Chris Air said that " It became apparent that opposing their captors was not an option. If we had, some of us would not be here today, of that I am completely sure. We realised that had we resisted there would have been a major fight, one we could not have won and with consequences major strategic impacts. We made a conscious decision not to engage the Iranians and do as they asked."

The crew said they spent nights in stone cells, sleeping on piles of blankets and were kept in isolation until their last few nights.

They were also lined up against a wall while weapons were ******, making them "fear the worst".

So perhaps you'll now understand a little more, Huckleberry.

Answer 3

No, they aren't really heroes. Just ordinary sailors and marines put in an extraordinary situation and happened to live through it.

Why did they surrender so easily? I don't know how much you know about boarding operations, but I'll try and give you an overview without breaching security here. First, a boarding party is armed to the teeth. But only with small arms. They'd be considered very heavily armed if their boat was equipped with a machinegun of some sort. But short of that, their loadout is carbines, submachineguns, shotguns and pistols. And that's it for firearms. Not exactly enough to engage a couple Iranian gunboats. Or not even nearly enough to cover a retreat back to their mothership. They'd have been blown out of the water in no time, their ship would have had to return fire, and odds are she'd have been sunk. I don't care about how technologically inferior you state Iran is, but within gun range, a handful of gunboats can tear a frigate to scrap metal. That, combined with the decision from the Admiralty, prevented their mothership from acting.

As for visibility, sounds like they were in a shipping lane. That means lots of traffic to hide behind. And if they came from directly behind the ship the brits were boarding, they'd have never seen them by radar or Mark 1 eyeball.

Now, their conduct after capture. Name, Ranks, Sevice Number only go so far when you're under severe duress. Torture, both physical and mental, will wear on them. This isn't a Tom Berenger movie where the main character spouts out his name and rank while one of their fingers is being removed with a piano wire. A soldier who is captured has a primary duty to first survive, and then escape. And where escape from the middle of Iran is definitely not an option, this is a case where survival is the name of the game. Their cooperation was a requirement to stay alive.

Answer 4

It was a Public Relations coup for the Iranians, Look at all the free Press they received around the world and how many times the word "humanitarian" appeared in news articles and on TV. I don't think however, that we have heard the end of this story . In all probability, there will be a Board of Inquiry regarding the behavior of the sailors. .The British Navy has a long and honorable history, and they are going to inquire as to the conduct of its sailors.

Answer 5

You must be kidding huh ...

Fire a shot ? Britain isn't yet at war with Iran

And even if they were ... 15 brits a long way from home V a pissed off Iranian navy in it's own back yard - I think they took the smart option. I wouldn't think the odds of winning were all that good using small arms on a couple of iranian gunships

Maybe they don't look like the typical (and completely unrealistic) hollywood heroes that we are all brainwashed to believe exists but they did get themselves through a shitty situation as best they could - Laughing and smiling got them home ... spitting in iranian eyes might have cost them a few years in prison or worse

Those in the military deserve a little respect for the tough job they do ... do you think you would have handled the situation any better ?

Answer 6

the media does not determine who is a hero, never have, never will. stop getting your sources from info bites that are pointless from the media, any media. time will tell, as well as the real circumstances, if anyone is a hero. People are fickle, there is also no guide line for a hero, and these days it's handed out to single parents, people who do there job, school teachers, anyone in uniform or any kind etc. it's hype and over use. they got captured, there not wimps, not at all, but there not heroes, they didn't do anything outstanding either.

Answer 7

Yes this is very strange. Not a shot fired and they meekly surrendered. Nobody wounded and seemed quite content to go with the Iranians.
The only explanation apart from cowardice that I can think of is that they knew they were in Iranian waters and were under instructions not to fire if they were challenged

Answer 8

I guess I don't have a problem with them coming under arrest, but it sure looked like they were having a good time when they were in the presence of that former terrorist president/dictator of Iran. They need to be informed when they get back about they're behavior and how it appeared to the rest of the world.

Answer 9

Well, let's see....they were outnumbered, outgunned, and lighlty armed themselves.

I'd say they made the prudent choice NOT to get slaughtered.

You have obviously never served in the military, or you wouldn't have asked a question such as this.

Answer 10

The whole story hasn't come out yet with all the details. It's funny how the Iranians never show the other militants in the room at the time of the "confessions". How many weapons were pointed at the hostages? How many times were their lives threatened in 13 days? We don't know all the facts yet.

Answer 11

No, they are not worth to be called hero.

By confession, they merely hope to be released asap. They can laught in front of the camera, not even a sense of shame!