Originally posted by slimjimHe's referring to the ill-fated attempted rescue of our hostages in Iran.
Stuff like the Yanks did? I don't get it.
The SAS are as good as any, but its only left wing lust for special forces that thinks such an extraction is even possible. These sailors are far too important to Iran to be in a vulnerable location.
Carter made a big mistake when he tried it and I suspect Blair knows better than to repeat that mistake.
Originally posted by MerkWell he doesn't know what he is talking about if he is trying to compare the two. In 79 we had no friends in the area whereas if the SAS wanted to do it now they would have the support of the US and our bases in Iraq. Lot different scenario than landing three planes, eight helicopters, with the troops in an isolated part of Iran. The plan in 79 was feasable until they started putting all of the service's fingers in the pie. It shouild have been just a Delta force and Air Force operation.
He's referring to the ill-fated attempted rescue of our hostages in Iran.
The SAS are as good as any, but its only left wing lust for special forces that thinks such an extraction is even possible. These sailors are far too important to Iran to be in a vulnerable location.
Carter made a big mistake when he tried it and I suspect Blair knows better than to repeat that mistake.
Those Sailors/Marines have about a 1% chance of being rescued IMO.
They've already been written off most likely as it would be near impossible to mount a rescue operation with any chance of success.
That's why I said earlier that i'd rather die fighting than give myself up to the mercy of such as these.
They are pawns, plain and simply .. and they were put in a position to fail by their military commanders and government "decision makers"
They sent them out their .. and didn't back them up.
They served .. and were betrayed by poor leadership .. only pawns in the game.
Originally posted by jammerMister, when you serve outside our borders , you do so at your own risk! There is a 100% chance of returning the hostages......Dead or Alive!!! I'ts the failure to act that will stigmatize you for life! Grow a spine for gods sake.
Those Sailors/Marines have about a 1% chance of being rescued IMO.
They've already been written off most likely as it would be near impossible to mount a rescue operation with any chance of success.
That's why I said earlier that i'd rather die fighting than give myself up to the mercy of such as these.
They are pawns, plain and simply .. and they were ...[text shortened]... them up.
They served .. and were betrayed by poor leadership .. only pawns in the game.
Originally posted by jammerDon't be silly.
Those Sailors/Marines have about a 1% chance of being rescued IMO.
They've already been written off most likely as it would be near impossible to mount a rescue operation with any chance of success.
That's why I said earlier that i'd rather die fighting than give myself up to the mercy of such as these.
They are pawns, plain and simply .. and they were ...[text shortened]... them up.
They served .. and were betrayed by poor leadership .. only pawns in the game.
I mean, yes, obviously they're just pawns in other people's games; much like you and I, but they will be returned safely.
Probably within 2 weeks (taking into accounts the protests there at the moment).
Originally posted by slimjimLol.. In '79 ..Two of eight helicopters to lost their way. A third helicopter broke down. That left them unable to pick up everyone so they aborted, then one chopper crashed into a C-130, eight US servicemen were killed five USAF aircrew in the C-130, and three USMC aircrew. Six helicopters were left behind intact 5 of which now serve with the Iranian Navy. As if that wasn't a big enough stuff up... In their haste to run away, the aircrews left behind classified plans that identified CIA agents within Iran.
Well he doesn't know what he is talking about if he is trying to compare the two. In 79 we had no friends in the area whereas if the SAS wanted to do it now they would have the support of the US and our bases in Iraq. Lot different scenario than landing three planes, eight helicopters, with the troops in an isolated part of Iran. The plan in 79 was feasable ...[text shortened]... service's fingers in the pie. It shouild have been just a Delta force and Air Force operation.
Is that not a stuff up?
I have a little more faith in "Commonwealth" Special Services. Speculative scenarios aside if there is a window of opportunity for a rescue my guess would be they would already have had a go from Blair.
All this aside no one wishes that.. I'm sure this will come to a diplomatic conclusion soon. I sincerely hope so.
Originally posted by Tirau DanThe US also detains suspects in other people's countries.
I can't stand Bush Shav but it does appear the sailors were taken outside Iranian waters, they know it and refuse to give them back.. that's an act of international piracy.
If the US thinks it is entitled to do this for national security, it should respect other nations entitlement to do it.
If Iran suspects these sailors of spying in Iranian waters, it should detain them on grounds of national security. Where they were captured should be immaterial.
But lots of people complain about the prisoners held in Guantanamo, so it's only fair that GWB can complain about prisoners held in Iran.
Originally posted by aging blitzerIf the Iranians caught Bush and held him the whole world would breathe a huge sigh of relief.. ransom.. heck we'd pay them to keep him.
The US also detains suspects in other people's countries.
If the US thinks it is entitled to do this for national security, it should respect other nations entitlement to do it.
If Iran suspects these sailors of spying in Iranian waters, it should detain them on grounds of national security. Where they were captured should be immaterial.
But lo ...[text shortened]... ners held in Guantanamo, so it's only fair that GWB can complain about prisoners held in Iran.
Originally posted by aging blitzerPerfect.
The US also detains suspects in other people's countries.
If the US thinks it is entitled to do this for national security, it should respect other nations entitlement to do it.
If Iran suspects these sailors of spying in Iranian waters, it should detain them on grounds of national security. Where they were captured should be immaterial.
But lo ...[text shortened]... ners held in Guantanamo, so it's only fair that GWB can complain about prisoners held in Iran.
Two wrongs make a right.
I wonder if you Bush-hating scrotal parasites can veer this discussion any further off topic? The important thing is that Iran is wrongfully holding British military personnel, has lied about where they were seized, coerced confessions and apologies from them and forced them to appear on TV in uniform. Britain and the other civilized nations must not back down. I say continue ratcheting up the economic sanctions, freeze their assets and if that doesn't work, attack Iran's oil refineries.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterThese evildoers have been consigned to a military detention center to be questioned and also for their protection and the protection of Iranian citizens. These detainees do not have the right to a speedy trial or any other protection afforded citizens since they're being held by the military.
The important thing is that Iran is wrongfully holding British military personnel, has lied about where they were seized, coerced confessions and apologies from them and forced them to appear on TV in uniform.
Originally posted by aging blitzerThere is so much wrong with you quoting me from the Club Gitmo thread that you don't even deserve a response to dignify your remarks. However, just so no one else is as confused as you: The Brits were seized in Iraqi waters; they were wearing the uniforms of their homeland; they were not engaged in military actions against Iran. Therefore, this episode can only be considered an act of war or an act of piracy. To further compound Iran's poor judgment, they lied about where the British personnel were abducted, they coerced confessions and apologies from the British military personnel and paraded them on TV. In the case of the Gitmo detainees: they were out of uniform, they were actively engaged in terrorism, sabotage or hostilities with U.S. and/or allied troops; they been have not been coerced into writing confessions nor forced to appeared on TV for propaganda purposes. Your moral confusion is sad, perplexing and depressing.
These evildoers have been consigned to a military detention center to be questioned and also for their protection and the protection of Iranian citizens. These detainees do not have the right to a speedy trial or any other protection afforded citizens since they're being held by the military.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterYes, but you have to admit it is a SUPER come-back!
There is so much wrong with you quoting me from the Club Gitmo thread that you don't even deserve a response to dignify your remarks. However, just so no one else is as confused as you: The Brits were seized in Iraqi waters; they were wearing the uniforms of their homeland; they were not engaged in military actions against Iran. Therefore, this e ...[text shortened]... ppeared on TV for propaganda purposes. Your moral confusion is sad, perplexing and depressing.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterIt doesn't matter where they were seized.
The Brits were seized in Iraqi waters; they were wearing the uniforms of their homeland; they were not engaged in military actions against Iran. Therefore, this episode can only be considered an act of war or an act of piracy.
They are accused of acts against the nation.
That is enough for your government, and you it seems, to hold people indefinitely.
I believe the confessions as much as I do those that come out of your detention centre.