Reply With Quote
I didn't see that phrase used anywhere in the article.
What, did you think they were going to launch a full-scale invasion or something?
Get real.
What exactly would be the point of escalating anything at this moment?
Drudge headlines this article as an ominous warning from Blair. After reading it, however, it is OBVIOUS that England is far more worried about not escalating anything, and not offending anyone, to be issuing any type of warning that the Iranians give a damn about.
I am afraid that in this still young Islamic revolution to take over the world (that is their stated objective after-all), we (collectively the West) have brought turtle doves to a gun fight.
What part of "Act of War" am I missing here?
PM warns Iran over Navy captives
The 15 are based on HMS Cornwall, which patrols Iraqi territorial waters
Efforts to secure the release of 15 Royal Navy personnel held by Iran will enter a "different phase" if diplomatic moves fail, Tony Blair has said.
Downing Street said the UK could end up releasing evidence proving the group had not ventured into Iranian waters.
Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett has called for their "speedy return".
Meanwhile, the family of the only woman detained, Faye Turney from Shrewsbury, Shropshire, has said this is a "very distressing time" for them.
The BBC has been told the group are being held at an Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps base in Tehran.
Iran says they were trespassing in Iranian waters when they were seized on Friday - but the prime minister said the group were in Iraqi waters under a UN mandate.
Mr Blair was said the most important thing was the welfare of the eight sailors and seven marines from HMS Cornwall and securing their release.
The prime minister's official spokesman said Mr Blair's remarks about a "different phase" did not refer to any extreme diplomatic action, such as expelling Iranian diplomats from Britain or military action.
"We have been clearly stating that we are utterly certain that the personnel were in Iraqi waters.
"We so far have not made explicit why we know that, because we don't want to escalate this."
Britain's former ambassador to Iran, Sir Richard Dalton, said "different phase" could mean generating pressure on Iran from the international community.
"I expect he means that we shall have to step up criticism and generate additional international pressures on Iran," he said.
"It could be that they think that by dramatising the fact that these people were taken on an international mission while in Iraqi waters even further, will give Iran pause and give them a chance to rethink."
"These people have to be released," the prime minister told GMTV.
"What we are trying to do at the moment is to pursue this through the diplomatic channels and make the Iranian government understand these people have to be released and that there is absolutely no justification whatever for holding them.
"I hope we manage to get them to realise they have to release them. If not, then this will move into a different phase."
There is speculation that the capture was linked to the seizure of five Iranians by US forces in Iraq.
Mr Blair said the situations were "completely distinct" as any Iranian forces inside Iraq were breaching a UN mandate.
"In the end, it is a question really for the Iranian government as to whether they want to abide by international law or not," he said.
In a statement issued via the Ministry of Defence, sailor Ms Turney's family said they were grateful for the support they had received from everyone.
"While we understand the media interest in the ongoing incident involving Faye, this remains a very distressing time for us.
"We are grateful for the support shown to us by all personnel involved and appreciate it, but would request that our privacy is respected."
On Tuesday, an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman quoted by AP said those held were in good health, being treated in a humane fashion and Ms Turney had been given privacy.
The British foreign secretary said the UK was still pressing for consular access to the service personnel.
"If indeed they are being detained in reasonable cir stances then we can see no reason why they should not have contact with people from the British government," Mrs Beckett said.
An Iranian source has told BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner the Britons are being interrogated to find out if their mission was intelligence-gathering.
The source said the investigation involved examining tracking equipment to determine exactly where the crew was captured.
In order for the Britons to be released "every vested interest in Iran would need to be satisfied they had not deliberately entered Iranian waters, nor were they spying", the source added.
I didn't see that phrase used anywhere in the article.
What, did you think they were going to launch a full-scale invasion or something?
Get real.
What exactly would be the point of escalating anything at this moment?
Exactly my point. If you are completely incapable of recognizing when we need to appear strong, unequivocal, and willing to punish rogue regimes; and feel that a measured, prudent, non-threatening response is the only appropriate course of action....you've answered my question. Thanks.
You didn't answer my question.
What exactly would be the point of escalating anything at this moment?
What did you expect Britain to do?
i dont see how they can do anything but saber rattle, when their bigget ally is in the middle of a ing pointless surge in Iraq and unable to aid them whatsoever if WWIII breaks out.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2007/03/20/military_not_ready_for_other_wars/
its no secret that America has its pants around its ankles right now, with lube shoved up its ass ready to be ed
What is the point?
The Iranian Military took British sailors and Marines AT GUN-POINT - in waters that the British team were in ligitimately!
I would expect Britain to THREATEN to bomb the living out of Iran if their servicemen (and woman) were not returned IMMEDIATELY.
THE POINT is that a country needs to potray an at ude of "Don't with me"; otherwise that country is destined to get ed with.
what the let's just run into iran guns a blazing!!..YAHOO!!
And when they didn't return them? What would they do then?I would expect Britain to THREATEN to bomb the living out of Iran if their servicemen (and woman) were not returned IMMEDIATELY.
Start another war when they're already fighting two?
Invade Iran?
What would they bomb?
Do you think it may have a tiny effect on the situation in Iraq -- where the UK is doing its damndest to pull out as much as possible before the next elections?
If all the US military capability amounted to what is currently deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq, how the did we ever win the Cold War; or WWII???
If Britain started , we'd have their back; it might just mean (heaven forbid) the rest of us might have to be affected by the war our country is involved in.
Nukes. If you want to nuke Iran over 15 soldiers, you are clearly insane.If all the US military capability amounted to what is currently deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq, how the did we ever win the Cold War; or WWII???Britain is smarter than you, thank God.If Britain started , we'd have their back
We had allies during the cold war..
What would they do then? Do what they threatened to do. Idle threats would be worse than this pussying around, no doubt.
How many soldiers does Iran have to capture before any kind of serious response is justified, in your opinion?
obviously you are not from SA. Every few years people here fear BASE CLOSURES. its called demilitarization from the cold war. Its been going on for about twenty years.
And heaven forbid that someone reasonable try diplomacy before racing into a war. Even FDR didnt rush into WWII. He knew we had to build up our military first before going. He didnt go to war with the army he wished he had. He ing built one before our boys left shore.
Which would be what?What would they do then? Do what they threatened to do.You are aware this isn't the first time Iran has captured British troops, aren't you?How many soldiers does Iran have to capture before any kind of serious response is justified, in your opinion?
Apparently not.
I didn't say anything about Nukes. The US put over a million GI's on the ground in WWII, we currently have fewer than 200K in Afghanistan and Iraq; with a much larger population now than 70 years ago; we, as a nation, are not stretched thin AT ALL; which was the argument posed.
Again, how many soldiers should Iran be able to capture before it's enough?
WTF?
12/7/1941 - Pearl Harbor
12/7/1941 - Declaration of War.
Have you seen the defense budget?
So you're calling for a draft now.I didn't say anything about Nukes. The US put over a million GI's on the ground in WWII, we currently have fewer than 200K in Afghanistan and Iraq; with a much larger population now than 70 years ago; we, as a nation, are not stretched thin AT ALL; which was the argument posed.Again, it's happened before. Do you even know what happened then?Again, how many soldiers should Iran be able to capture before it's enough?
and you know the military's capabilities how? because you are a general? you work in the pentagon?
i would much rather take the opinion of a GENERAL over an armchair warrior such as yourself as to whether this nation can wage an effective war or not.
Invasion.
Exactly my point. Thank you.You are aware this isn't the first time Iran has captured British troops, aren't you?
this ain't rambo kid. this is real life.
With what?You obviously are completely ignorant of that incident, thank you for proving that.Exactly my point. Thank you.
I've posed the question twice.
Answer it.
8 taken
Released three days later, after being paraded blindfolded.
Answer the question
Many, many more than 15. And they would have to do something other than parade them around.
I've already said you are clearly insane.
you really are a George W. Bush realist.
And why are you living in the 1940s?
Perhaps, wars cost more now? Due to inflation, and technology?
And FDR wasnt stupid:World War II (abbreviated WWII), or the Second World War, was a worldwide conflict fought between the Allied Powers and the Axis Powers, from 1939 until 1945.
TWO years to build a strong military. TWO.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
