They are playing with some serious fire here: UK says 15 soldiers detained by Iranian navy Ministry summons Iranian ambassador, seeks immediate return of troops. LONDON - Iranian naval vessels seized 15 British sailors who had boarded a ship suspected of smuggling cars in the Persian Gulf off the Iraqi coast on Friday, officials said. The British government demanded “the immediate and safe return of our people and equipment.” The British Navy personnel were “engaged in routine boarding operations of merchant shipping in Iraqi territorial waters,” and had completed a ship inspection when they were accosted by Iranian vessels, Britain’s Defense Ministry said. “We are urgently pursuing this matter with the Iranian authorities at the highest level and ... the Iranian ambassador has been summoned to the Foreign Office,” the ministry said. The seizure comes at a time of rising tensions between Iran and the West, which accuses the Islamic republic of violating a U.N. calls for it to halt uranium enrichment and open its nuclear program for inspection. It also comes amid U.S. accusations that Iran is funding and arming Shiite militias in Iraq, worsening sectarian tensions there. U.S. fleet strengthened in area The United States, Britain’s chief ally, has built up its naval forces in the Gulf in a show of strength directed at Iran. Two American carriers, including the USS John C. Stennis — backed by a strike group with more than 6,500 sailors and Marines and with additional minesweeping ships — arrived in the region in recent months, ratcheting up tensions with Iran. A Pentagon official said the Britons were in two inflatable boats from the frigate H.M.S. Cornwall during a routine smuggling investigation, said the official, who spoke on condition on anonymity because he was not authorized to speak about the incident. He said the confrontation happened as the British contingent was traveling along the boundary of territorial waters between Iran and Iraq. They were detained by the Revolutionary Guard’s navy after inspecting a merchant ship believed to be smuggling cars, he said. A fisherman who said he was with a group of Iraqis from the southern city of Basra fishing in Iraqi waters in the northern area of the Gulf said he saw the Iranian seizure. The fisherman declined to be identified because of security concerns. “Two boats, each with a crew of six to eight multinational forces, were searching Iraqi and Iranian boats Friday morning in Ras al-Beesha area in the northern entrance of the Arab Gulf, but big Iranian boats came and took the two boats with their crews to the Iranian waters.” In June 2004, six British marines and two sailors were seized by Iran in the Shatt al-Arab between Iran and Iraq. They were presented blindfolded on Iranian television and admitted entering Iranian waters illegally, then released unharmed after three days.
Eh...they will return them eventually. According to the Iranians, they ventured into Iranian waters, although the British claim otherwise. I don't think the British or the Iranians are looking to declare war over this. Cooler heads will prevail...
Usually that is what happens, and for Iran's sake that is what BETTER happen. I don't think holding hostages at this point is a smart move on their part. DD
These are British Soldiers though not US ones. And Britain is ready to bail on Iraq...not smart...not smart at all to galvanize the British people. DD
this won't make an iota of difference in british public policy concerning iraq or supporting a potential US attack on iran. its not a big enough issue. when was the last time a country admitted to crossing another country's territorial waters?
If I were those one of those abducted persons, there is no way I would offer any kind of apology like the ones in 2004 did while being paraded around town blindfolded. My apology would be akin to the middle finger. This was a calculated move...make no doubt about it. This was no accident.
I would trust that the British people are smart enough to tell the difference between Iraq and Iran. As opposed to all those Americans who couldn't tell the difference between Afghnanistan and Iraq.
I don't want to go digging to the ends of the earth to find the story, but I do remember that essentially the same thing happened a couple of years ago (after the start of the war in Iraq) and the Iranians and the British blustered for several days but the Royal Navy men were released with no major issues or concessions.
Except that they were paraded in blindfolds and made to apologize for violating their international waters. DD
My reading earlier revealed that they also kept their boat(s). I guess they want to revel in their victory.
They should have just gased it, and gotten out of there, I guess we need to put some big ole REAL navy boats in that area, you know the kind with missiles. Well done Iran ! My guess is they are afraid of the UN security measures they are about to face, and may be trying to change the topic of the security council. DD
How does that song go?..."I watch CNN, but I'm not sure I can tell you the differance between Iraq and Iran"... See there is the problem! You need some fair and balanced to understand!
While Iran may not be in a position to defeat or hurt britian.. .. we all need to know that WE WANT NO MORE WARS esp in that region right about now Let's say something sparks off and fight ensures could this be the sparking a big ole powder keg? Rocket River
The problem with the whole WW3 scenario is that unless China gets involved, none of these puny middle Eastern countries can really do any harm. And, if the US or other western powers decided to, they could simply wipe those countries off the map with a push of a button. I don't think WW3 is going to happen, at least I hope not. DD
To answer your question: Very doubtful something like that happens. Iran is actually in position to hurt a lot of nations because they can disrupt the world economy. They also realize there would severe consequences to doing so. Iran will grandstand for a period of time and let them go. How long is anyone's guess.
What you worry about though is if the UK decides to retaliate. The fisherman even said that they were in Iraqi waters when taken.....which is an act of war. Edit: Now some fisherman are saying otherwise. This has got to make Bush happy, he is just looking for a reason to slap Iran back to the stone age. DD
Are you kidding? Iran isn't a puny country and you seriously underestimate their ability to create havoc. All they need to do is hit Israel to provoke retaliation and things could spin way out of control. For that matter, there are several "WW3" scenarios that don't need China's action to proceed. The British will consult with us and their allies on retaliation. Everything will be coordinated. Only the U.S. has carte blanch to play the "Lone Ranger" cowboy role. As facts trickle out, we will be able to see how this incident will play. I'll say this now, if the term "outrage" is used by Germany and France, then Iran really shot themselves here. Watch Russia also. I expect China to stay neutral no matter what. Almost under any circumstances, they are determined to reduce U.S. influence in the region and increase their own. This is quite understandable. Bush will not attack Iran on this. Lot's of reasons why.
Iran could not win a war, that is my point...and their hold on their people is completely tenous. I am surprised that the USA has not put up a Free Middle Eastern TV station that blasts it's broadcast out to Iran and other Middle eastern country with counter programming to what the people are getting at home with state controlled stuff. DD
