Who else thinks this could jeopardize future operational decisions?
2007-04-08 07:51:17 · 16 answers · asked by bobfleming25 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
It's the "Sell" aspect which concerns me most.
2007-04-08 07:59:20 · update #1
I think because Iran used the press & the media to its advantage so much while it had the hostages that the UK government hope that a full expose of what really happened might redress the balance, its a way of using the press back against them, personally i thinks its daft - its a bit like two five year old squaring off against each other and I cant see it doing anything to really help.
2007-04-08 07:57:18 · answer #1 · answered by Lady Hazy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The UK.military want UK.gov to supply them with the weapons they need/want to carry out their role in winning the war on terror.
Most of us are now fully aware just how poorly equipped our forces are. The Royal Navy are still using Sea King helicopters which are now thirty [30] years old.
Imagine fighting the Battle of Britain with 30 year old biplanes! The Luftwaffe would have had a field-day.
UK.military are using far too much out dated equipment which results in failure in a lot of cases.
Also, UK.military, esp the RN are putting the pressure on UK.gov to supply them with more ships. The RN thinks 'big fleet', UK.gov thinks 'no fleet'. And, so it goes.
Yesterday I passed by the life size staute of Admiral Lord Nelson overlooking the River Thames outside the Trafalgar Tavern at Greenwich. I wondered what he would make of all this 'mess'. I also have a copy of a WW-One propoganda pamphlet which shows the very same Lord Nelson standing on the White Cliffs of Dover urging on the Royal Navy.
When the stories of the UK15 are published, we will probably read a great deal about the inadequcies of the equipment supplied to the RN and the military beyond.
2007-04-08 21:35:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
At the moment the Iranians have won the PR race with this story. The MOD have been told from the prime minister to allow these 15 to sell there stories as a way to generate positive PR for the British Government.
If we continue down this line the war in Iraq/Afghanistan will become the next reality show.
2007-04-08 09:01:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The sums being mentioned are enough to make it worthwhile for these sailors to buy their way out of the services, then tell all.
By allowing them to sell the story while still serving, the MOD retains full control over what is said. If they sold the story as civilians the MOD would not have this control and might have to resort to the Official Secrets Act - which wouldn't be a politically astute move.
2007-04-08 08:29:44 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
the reason the media offered money for their thoughts is via the fact there replaced right into a woman interior the group. in the event that they have been all men the tale could have run that's direction interior of a week. The editors knew because of the fact there replaced right into a woman on board the deliver and captured by potential of the Iranians the well-known public could be interested in what occurred to her throughout the time of interrogation. merely seem on the headlines." i replaced into stripped to my knickers". that's what sells papers and the editors comprehend it. regrettably we've sunk to a clean low. Excuse the pun. They (the papers) have belittled the lives of those adult women and men who've lost their lives in wrestle an employing the group on H.M.S. Cornwall as pawns to line their very own wallet.
2016-10-21 08:54:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is unbelievable. Under any other circumstance they would be court martialed, but the worldwide publicity of the event prevents that from occurring. Instead Blair treats the matter as if they were college students innocently kidnapped rather than the fact of them being soldiers, in hostile territory , that permitted, without a fight, a possession of Her Majesty's Royal Navy to be seized.
It is politically correct, at the moment, to assauge - by spinning what the sailors were, being soldiers.
But fate is sometimes fickle, and it may be they are unknowingly giving permission to be caricatured in a movie as being traitors to their uniform.
2007-04-08 08:07:26 · answer #6 · answered by Raymond 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It all relates to propaganda. In the same way Iran used these individuals for propaganda purposes the decision to allow the sale of the stories is for the same purpose.
The stories sold will probably be government pre-approved versions anyway.
2007-04-08 08:01:27 · answer #7 · answered by sanchia 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The MOD is now completely under Labour's thumb and has absorbed all of the Governments crazy and disreputable attitudes towards anything remotely ethical.
2007-04-09 05:37:37 · answer #8 · answered by Beau Brummell 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Difficult one. The stories would have got out anyway, but whether it is morally right to sell their stories is questionable.
If they have any decency they will donate any money they make to charity.
And, if the public are so offended by the stories being sold, don't buy the papers that bought them!
2007-04-08 08:32:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why are military persons 'silenced' every time, why cant they put their side of events, and why can they not profit from the experiences they had endured???
Or would you rather they stayed quiet and the truth never outed in the first place?
2007-04-08 10:42:53 · answer #10 · answered by confused 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋