Iran playing games

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo


Of course that's what I meant. Since those are clearly the most important parts of the resolution.

Those are important parts of the resolution. Im glad the guys in the previous incident were let go unharmed, but the implication that "alls well that ends well" is the last word is mistaken IMHO.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

US vs Iran - this will be a good one. I give Iran 4 days before they roll over and beg. which is better than most others could do. I could be wrong... they might not last that long.

MWHC says - it's on within 2 months.

[Dinner]

What the Captured Sailors Mean for Iran's Nuclear Standoff

Looking for clues as to whether the standoff over Iran's nuclear program will lead to a military confrontation? You'll probably find more in how the case of the 15 British Navy personnel seized by Iran last Friday plays out than in the diplomatic process that on Saturday resulted in a mild increase in sanctions against Tehran.

Iran justified its capture of the 15 Brits by claiming they had been in Iranian territorial waters — a claim hotly disputed by Britain. Although boundaries are somewhat contested in the Shatt al-Arab waterway, and British officials had initially said the Iranian action may simply have been based on a misunderstanding, the British position hardened over the weekend, with Prime Minister Tony Blair denouncing the Iranian action as "unjustified and wrong," and warning that Britain viewed it in a serious light. On Monday Iraq backed London's claim that the incident had occurred inside Iraqi waters, which Britain patrols under U.N. mandate.

If the incident had been based on a misunderstanding over where Iran's waters begin and end, it might be expected to follow the trajectory of a similar episode in 2004, in which eight British personnel were released by Iran on the fourth day of their captivity. But on Day 4 of this particular crisis, it's far from clear that a similar course will be followed: Iranian officials have even floated the possibility of putting the captive Brits on trial for illegally entering Iranian territory. At the same time, Tehran is leaving itself room to back down by announcing that the Brits are currently being interrogated to determine whether, as the Iranians put it, their entry into Iranian waters was intentional or unintentional.

The relatively low-key British response thus far resonates with the fact that London, unlike Washington, has ruled out the option of military action for dealing with Iran's nuclear program. By contrast, if the Iranians had captured U.S. personnel, it's not hard to imagine (particularly given the legacy of the 1979 hostage crisis) that the crisis would have an altogether more cataclysmic ring; indeed, a senior U.S. commander working alongside the British forces in the region told a British newspaper that U.S. troops caught in a similar situation would not have surrendered to the Iranians without a fight.

But the outcome of the standoff may well depend on the strategic calculations of the Iranian leadership. Seizing the British troops a day before the U.N. Security Council voted on sanctions against Iran over the nuclear standoff was widely interpreted as Iran sending a none-too-subtle reminder of its capacity for disruption at the epicenter for the global oil economy. Oil markets certainly took the hint, with prices scooting up to their highest this year on Friday following news of the Iranian action.

But a number of Middle East analysts have also suggested that Iran may be intending to use the British personnel as a bargaining chip to seek the release of a number of Iranian officials currently being held by the U.S. inside Iraq. If so, that might prove to be a reckless gamble, precisely because the Bush Administration has demonstrated a far greater appetite for confrontation with Iran — as suggested by the capture of Iranian operatives in Iraq in the first place.

Those within the Iranian leadership advocating caution and pragmatism would point not only to the dangers of provoking the West, but also to a relatively positive diplomatic outlook: The new U.N. sanctions are only a mild intensification of those previously adopted, and the debate over them revealed important rifts — not only are key players such as Russia, China and the EU reluctant to dramatically increase sanctions and eager to return to negotiations with Iran, but key players in the developing world such as South Africa and India have more aggressively stressed Iran's right to nuclear energy. So even as Russia reportedly squeezes the Iranians by delaying the delivery of fuel to the Bushehr nuclear reactor — although both sides insist this is simply a dispute over payment — Moscow seeks a diplomatic compromise rather than a gradual escalation of sanctions.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the national security council on whose counsel he relies on such issues, face an important judgment call. The outcome of the standoff over the British marines may be largely determined by whether the voices of pragmatic accommodation prevail over those of confrontation in Iran's chambers of power. And that, in turn, may well determine whether the nuclear standoff is to be resolved without confrontation.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1602945,00.html

[Solly]

Tehran should have reached 10000c in 3 seconds. The world sees Britain as a soft touch.

[Drake Tungsten]

The U.S. Navy is offering a huge show of military might near the location where Iran seized 15 British sailors and marines five days ago, in what is seen as a clear effort to send a message to Iran, a senior military official told ABC News' Martha Raddatz in Bahrain.

Twelve ships, 100 aircraft and 12,000 sailors are taking part in the war games designed to get the attention of Iran.

The naval exercise went on all day today and will continue Wednesday, with F-18 fighter jets roaring from the deck of both aircraft carriers in the first appearance of two U.S. carriers in the Gulf simultaneously since 2003.

U.S. naval officials in Bahrain told ABC News that the operation was hastily planned after the 15 Britons were seized Friday, yet the Bush administration would not say publicly that this is the case.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2986643&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

Looks like the Yanks have the Brits' back...

[SlowwHand]

I'm sure you all realize how much this isn't going to happen.

Iran: Britain must admit navy trespassed

[Drake Tungsten]

The Brits have already shown proof that the ships were in Iraqi waters. They can't admit otherwise now...

[Barnabas]

Shouldnt the iranians have brought those machines which show where on earth you are (I can remember their name) to the british boat they captured, and take some pictures?

Otherwise how do we know if what they say is right or bs?

[Drake Tungsten]

Shouldnt the iranians have brought those machines which show where on earth you are (I can remember their name) to the british boat they captured, and take some pictures?

Because they knowingly entered Iraqi waters to kidnap the British sailors?

[Gibsie]

And indeed, when Iran helpfully decided to tell us where the British had been apprehended, they provided a location in Iraqi waters. And then amended it two days later when they realised what a bunch of idiots they were.

[Patroklos]

I recall that around a year back the Iranians tried to do this to Americans only the US forces opened fire and killed a few Iranians.

That was me doing exactly what those Brits were doing a year ago, at the oil platforms, and I didn't hear of this.

This is all crap anyways. The Iranians enter Iraqi waters every day, I watched them do it from my bridge or from various sources in combat. And it is always the IRCGN, never the IRN which is very professional. The Guards are a bunch of thugs, they just cross into Iraqi waters and pirate the Iraqi fishing dhows and then rush back to their side of the line before anything can be done.

Which isn't there worst part. There is a sunken crane barge just inside Iraqi waters near KAAOT that is always manned by the IRCGN, covered in machine guns and what not. They use it a s a "prestige" point.

To their credit the Iraqi patrol boats were always trying to break the security formations around the terminals to go help out, but we kept them there because they would never get there in time. It sucks becayse those Iraqis are dirt poor, but for some reason some refuse to cross to the fishing grounds on our side of the terminals.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
Shouldnt the iranians have brought those machines which show where on earth you are (I can remember their name) to the british boat they captured, and take some pictures?

Otherwise how do we know if what they say is right or bs?

I doubt this was ever about where the ship was, meaning Iraq, but instead it was entirely about the UN sanctions which were being voted on the day after this kidnapping.

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Don't blockade Iran

I would prefer something more ballistic than a mere blockade.

[Jaakko]

Originally posted by Doddler
Tehran should have reached 10000c in 3 seconds. The world sees Britain as a soft touch.

Mass murder in a scale greater than the Holocaust. How nice of you.

[MOBIUS]

This is good...

The more Ahmedinejad and his cronies insist on looking like a bunch of clowns to the rest of the world, the more it will alienate the general populace of Iran...

We should continue being polite, whilst drawing up a further list of sanctions as punishment for this clear violation by Iran...