UK sailors captured at gunpoint

[Galrahn]

I would encourage patience regarding the conduct of the HMS Cornwall. As I understand it, and so far details are sketchy, a helicopter did escort the RHIBs until it made contact with the ship. The helicopter was given the all clear by the sailors and was sent to do recon elsewhere. Upon return to the ship a bit later it was the crew of the boarded ship that led the helicopter to see the captured crew.

People keep asking where the Frigate was. Well, keep in mind, a Type 22 is not a shallow draft ship, it may be that it is a lot harder to get from point A (the frigates location) to point B (the searched container ship) in those waters than people assume, thus why RHIBs would be used.

Littoral warfare is tough, this isn't some blue water op where the Royal Navy was standing by while events were happening. Small craft, particularly stealthy models, can move around easier in littorals than at sea. It isn't unreasonable to assume Iranians have stealth FACs able to sneak up on ships in the littoral, particularly if the radar systems in the area are kit helo and Type 22, neither of which are optimized for littorals.

While the facts may not be fully released, there are a lot of lessons to be learned from this incident, whether it is policy like Rules of Engagement to force support models. I hope the USN takes the time to evaluate how such an action would have materialized with the LCS.

As for the response so far, I think the UK needs to get ready for long term manipulation and humiliation. No one has put Iran in check for thier piracy of 'rogue' revolutionary guards in Lebanon, Iraq, or in the Gulf, why would Iran expect anyone to do anything of serious consequences over this matter?

 

[Waylander]

BTW, do you all know were his avatar picture comes from?
Interesting choice for a chinese...

@rickusn
This sort of behaviour won't change anything. Talk per PM to the mods and than leave the problems you have with him to them.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

all iran did is to insure his interests ,why they do that? becoz they feel the threats from some powerful countries.they must
defend,nuclear weapons is ,of course, the best choice.

That's not a valid argument - the threats are being made because Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons (and other reasons). If it gave up on its dangerous mission to do that things would calm down.

Even China is opposed to what Iran is doing, otherwise it wouldn't have voted for the new sanctions yesterday.

 

[rickusn]

Waylander my "behavior"??

Your arrogance is way out of line.

BTW look at his location.

But of course to you anti-American diatribes are acceptable and to be encouraged.

Rampant, untruthful, unsubtantiated, undocumented commentary on the US is outrageous.

By most posters reckoning then gemany is "the root of the mess" in Europe.

But then your probably not German like the other p[erson isnt Chinese.

If thats the case both of you are nothing but Trolls.

And therfore I demand both of you be banned forwith.

 

[Waylander]

No, need for getting personal or offending.

My point is just that as justified as your opinion might be this is not the way to handle this situation.
If you think that he is behaving in a way that's against the rules report it to the mods and make your position clear to them.
This can be done by using PM without the need to destroy a thread. The mods are going to talk about the situation and I am sure they find a solution as they always do.

And to make one thing clear which should be obvious.
I am as German as someone can be!
I am not anti US!
I am not a troll!

I hope you calm down a bit before fire at every direction before thinking about it. It's not spray and pray time!

 

[rickusn]

"No, need for getting personal or offending."

No that was you.

I just stated the facts.

 

[Waylander]

Has there been a german US-bashing here on this board for some time which I didn't notice?
Or did I personally attacked the US here on this board like a personal vendetta?
I don't think so.

And counting the crimes every nation did in the past is useless. Nearly every nation (Especially the bigger ones) performed crimes in their past. Be it massacres committed by roman legionaires, slaughtering of people by Dshingis Kahn, mass murdering under Hitler/Stalin/Mao, the history of the american natives and how the US treated them,... the list is endless.

When did I said something offending or stated something personal?
The only thing I said is that you should take the usual and only way by talking to the mods instead of destroying this thread.

Your wish to get me banned for...what?....is laughable.

 

[eckherl]

"No, need for getting personal or offending."

No that was you.

I just stated the facts.

What does China have to do with this thread, and also Waylander hasn`t stated anything to get this type of broad side from you.
Please chill out before the mods decide to pull the plug.

 

[Rich]

That's not a valid argument - the threats are being made because Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons (and other reasons). If it gave up on its dangerous mission to do that things would calm down.

Even China is opposed to what Iran is doing, otherwise it wouldn't have voted for the new sanctions yesterday.

HaHaHa, yeah right. The Chinese and the Russians. You have to love the Russians. Putin comes out all tough after the Lions share of Iranian contracts have been paid for,And, in response for late Iranian payments for the remainder. They just about complete Bushehr, sell em the TOR missiles, Kilos,...ect Putins latest "getting tough on Iran" is actually Russianspeak for "pay your frigging bills". Russia/Iran business could possibly reach $10 B US a year.

China and Russia agreed with the U.S. and its European allies to pressure Iran to curb its nuclear program by freezing the assets of a state-owned Iranian bank and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and restricting travel by their officials.

Exactly what does that mean? How many foreign assets could the state run Iranian bank actually own in China or Russia? And "restricting travel"? So like its up to the individual country who it lets in or not right? Boy thats a toughie.

The text also bars Iran from exporting most weapons and asks nations to ``exercise vigilance and restraint'' in selling arms to Iran.

Name one system Iran exports to China or Russia? And I dont need to point out the hot air in "exercise vigilance and restraint'' in selling arms to Iran."

``We have done it,'' U.K. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry told reporters at the UN. ``It is a distinct ratcheting up of sanctions. It ups the pressure, but says this process is reversible if Iran accepts the conditions.''

Yeah, go ask the Brit. sailors and Marines in the urine filled dungeon about the pressure Iran is under.

The draft resolution asks all nations and international lenders such as the World Bank to stop giving any grants, loans and other financial aid to Iran, except for humanitarian or development purposes.

Just make sure you "ask them" firmly.

The U.S. Treasury on Jan. 9 blocked Bank Sepah, the state- owned Iranian bank, from accessing the American financial system, accusing it of aiding Iran's weapons programs.

Frozen since Nov. '79. I was there.

The Revolutionary Guard Corps, formed after the 1979 Islamic revolution, is Iran's largest military organization and operates in parallel to the national army. The Corps has control over Iran's missile program, which is also subject to UN sanctions. The new annex lists three branches of the Corps and seven ``key'' commanders.

``If Iran is engaged, as we all believe they are, in a nuclear weapons program that is by definition military, it is natural and fitting that you deal with entities involved with that program,'' Wolff said. ``Arms exports benefit and derive revenue for diversion to the nuclear and ballistic missile programs.''

The annex also lists companies involved in Iran's nuclear and missile programs, including Parchin Chemical Industries, Novin Energy Co. and Kavoshyar Co., which is described as having ``sought glass fibers, vacuum chamber furnaces and laboratory equipment for Iran's nuclear program.''

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=atXhHoXL9ln0&refer=home

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/pakistan/khan.htm Read it yourself. Or use a search engine if you dont believe Pike. Nuff said.

 

[Mikestro]

Sounds like an attempt by the Iranians to distract the media, world attention, and the local population from the UN vote and Ahmadinejad's failed UN visit/speech.

2nd time now for the Brits. It seems like everyone agrees that Iranian's would not try this against US sailors and Marines. What would the US response look like if the Iranian forces abducted, or attempted to, 15 US sailors and Marines (including 1 female)?

 

[eckherl]

Sounds like an attempt by the Iranians to distract the media, world attention, and the local population from the UN vote and Ahmadinejad's failed UN visit/speech.

2nd time now for the Brits. It seems like everyone agrees that Iranian's would not try this against US sailors and Marines. What would the US response look like if the Iranian forces abducted, or attempted to, US sailors and Marines (including 1 female)?

That would give the U.S the excuse to start going into Iran and conduct raids on suspected terrorist hideouts along the Iraqi and Irianian border.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

2nd time now for the Brits.

Well, sorry for not opening fire first and giving the Tehran all the propaganda needed and an excuse to do whatever they liked, due to lots of Iranian body-bags. :

 

[bonita.h]

"what's your definition of "anti-american"? Should eveybody say blessing words to your troops invading other countries?? all my posted are just my objective thoughts based on the situations,it's not nonsense,ok? "

None of your posts are "objective". You are nothing but a chinese troll.

Ok no moderation then the gloves are off.

Stand by further action.

Good morning,rickusn, have you had a good sleep? calm down pls now., I am indeed so surprised by your drastic response. what my words stand for?? i am not the president of China, what i said is just what i individually thought, it doesnot relate to China at all. are you clear?? pls don't connect everything to the country that has nothing to do with this issue.
keep your head to the topic..
enjoy

 

[bonita.h]

That's not a valid argument - the threats are being made because Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons (and other reasons). If it gave up on its dangerous mission to do that things would calm down.

yes,it could calme down instantly, but it just would be a temporary calmness.
US could wait for another excuse to do sth. such as the significantly destructive weapons, to pull down the Iranian government,just like it's neighbor.
nevertheless,it's still wise for Ahmadi nejad to pause now.

 

[webmaster]

Rick, calm the freak down man. What is wrong with you? If he is a "chinese troll" then what do you think your behaviour makes you look like? An American Troll? I hate to say this to someone who has served but grow up please. I deleted few of your OFF TOPIC replies in this thread.

Also, WHEN YOU QUOTE SOMEONE, PLEASE QUOTE It PROPERLY SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHO SAID WHAT AND WHAT ARE YOU REPLYING TO INSTEAD OF JUST PUTTING QUOTATION MARKS AROUND IT. This thread is 4 pages long and we don't have time to go through all that to look for small quote in "quote" marks rather than in

text [/ quote] bbcodes.

And if there is certain post that you don't like, report it. Not go on rampage to post anti-country, OFF TOPIC BS just because someone posted a comment which isn't fit with how you think or understand things.

Learn to RESPECT others so they will RESPECT YOU. IF you treat them like sh!t, chances are they will do the same and then you would be like "no moderation, gloves are off" the macho man attidude needs to end. Gives respect to get some otherwise don't whine. Freaking sick and tired of this bs... demanding respect when people don't have any to give back in return, no respect or tolerance for opposite oppinion... it all ends and starts at "anti-american" without looking at what the person is saying and if it is OUT OF THE LINE, you REPORT IT!!!


Folks, apologies but this was needed. Please continue with the discussion.

Thanks for understanding, enjoy.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

yes,it could calme down instantly, but it just would be a temporary calmness.

You don't know what. Paranoia is not a defence against breaking UN resolutions.

 

[Dave H]

From a military point of view there is not much us Brits can do, just take the humiliation for a while.

Politically, perhaps with results of satellite imagery and data from the naval vessels we could go to the UN with a cast iron case that the RIB's were in Iraqi waters then ask for support in getting the personnel released immediately.

The problem is that the world sympathy has somewhat changed recently. Although I saw a need for a guatanamo type facility post afghanistan I can appreciate that other nations (and plenty within the UK) take the view that if the US, with much UK support, does as it pleases with citizens of other countres then there is less sympathy when it happens to us.

Iran will annoy the western allies as it knows that it must use delaying tactics until it can make a workable nuke and it also knows that the US is hard pushed to solve Iraq. The US would look very bad if it suddenly diverted all its attention from Iraq to Iran. I suspect the US needs a few more years to restock and recover from the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq before it can bring "regime change" to iran. I think Bush might have been stupid enough to think He could have solved Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran within his presidency.

They wouldnt try it on with US sailors, because the US has the tools to hit back hard, we dont. Also the Basra area is where are troops are based, Im not sure if US troops are there?

There cant really be much criticism of the captured forces themselves. They were boarding ships and were lightly armed in two small boats. They were outnumbered. The Cornwalls lynx is not heavily armoured or armed (a door mounted GPMG?) to take on six boats with heavy machine guns, even if she had a couple of Sea Skuas on board (the Iranian vessels might be too small to engage) it would still leave a lightly armed boarding party to be shot to pieces by four boats. The same would be true if the Cornwall had tried to lob a few shells. Dead servicemen for no real gain.

I expect their return soon, in the meantime it might focus the politicians minds along the lines of boosting the UK's offensive punch...eg the two carriers. Perhaps a change in tactics will be required for similar operations, air support in the form of harriers and apaches might prevent hostile speed boats interfering, but again...resources...resources...resources....££££....£££££...££££.

 

[Brycec]

There cant really be much criticism of the captured forces themselves. They were boarding ships and were lightly armed in two small boats. They were outnumbered. The Cornwalls lynx is not heavily armoured or armed (a door mounted GPMG?) to take on six boats with heavy machine guns, even if she had a couple of Sea Skuas on board (the Iranian vessels might be too small to engage) it would still leave a lightly armed boarding party to be shot to pieces by four boats. The same would be true if the Cornwall had tried to lob a few shells. Dead servicemen for no real gain.

You gotta respect whoever was in command of those Brits. Knowing to stop from engaging a clearly hostile force and avoiding an international incident of epic proportions was a great move on his part. Dead marines and dead Iranians in not a good situation for either country to be in.
Maybe you're right; they were out gunned and in serious trouble. But if it was evenly matched and there was a serious firefight, god knows what would have happened.
Again, I hand it to the 1IC of those marines to keep it together.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

It would have been a pickle that one. Gulf of Tonkin ring any bells??? Allthough you have to wonder what exacly the Iranians objective was apart from manufacturing an international incident, one that could have quickly escelated.

 

[swerve]

It would have been a pickle that one. Gulf of Tonkin ring any bells??? Allthough you have to wonder what exacly the Iranians objective was apart from manufacturing an international incident, one that could have quickly escelated.

People keep talking about "the Iranians". Iran isn't governed anything like N. Vietnam was in the 1960s. N. Vietnam was very centralised, very top-down. Iran has a very decentralised power structure, with competing influence centres. That's partly deliberate, as is clear if you read their constitution (& most of it actually works as designed, i.e. a sort of "guided" or limited democracy), & partly because none of the various groups who took part in the 1979 revolution ever quite got to the top. Khomeini set it up so that power beneath him was divided, & it's stayed that way. His personal powers relied largely on prestige rather than formal legality, & his successors haven't had his prestige, so have lacked his power.

So we shouldn't really say "the Iranians", we should qualify it. Which Iranians? Who's trying to stir things up, who's trying to calm them down? When we consider how to react, we should endeavour to work that out, because otherwise we might find ourselves acting as the unwitting tools of one Iranian faction in one of their interminable internal power struggles.