Iranians hold Brit service men

[Guest Brumagem Phil]

phil if you dont think iran will use nukes then im afraid you will oneday be eating your words.

 

apart from the fact they will have to get closer to the uk to launch them it will be more distructive than a couple of planes into big ben.

 

i have no evidence etc to back myself up,but i do believe that they are not planning on using nuclear power for just housing power etc.

 

its like putting a shotgun in a chav`s hand and saying "don`t shot anyone ok",the same could be said about the US but thankfully they have some brain cells and i think they go by the same meaning of piece as we do.

 

unlike iran/iraq they mean piece by hating us all and generally being narrowminded.

 

i admit the uk/US has wierd ways of keeping the piece and we have gotten allot of backs up but i would put all my cards in thier hands rather than iran/iraq.

 

i maybe insecure but i will not feel unsafe to go to any big areas like london(just incase of bombs etc)i will go anywhere i like and i will not have some two bit pig fearing terrorist change my plans.

 

nukeclear power was the worlds biggest mistake but so was letting blair into power and yet i hav`nt seen anyone who actually cares for this country.(just his/her own pockets

 

i dont need evidence to back myself up as i dont care what people think as most of the country has pretty much the same views toward the middleast.

 

if you dont `thats your opinion and your welcome to it.

 

1. you are right, you have no evidence to back up your statement, but consider this......your suggestion that we nuke the area will result in hundreds of thousands of deaths, many of those women and children. Are you happy for such a scenario just so YOU feel a little more safe?

 

2. Did you call for Ireland to be nuked during the troubles? Do you feel any less safe going into a city centre now than you did back then?

 

3. I disagree that the majority of the country feels as you do about the middle east too. I think the country as a whole is becoming more thoughtful, intelligent and questioning regarding some of the rubbish our governments feed us. Lets be frank, after all most of the problems in the middle east are due to OUR meddling in the first place. Suggesting the best way to clean up our mess is by turning the area into a wilderness of glowing glass is frankly laughable.

 

John S..........sorry, did I miss something? I've not read each post again individually but just skipped through and didnt see that you had edited anyone posting? What was the offending racist remark?

[Newt]

Displaying info about edits is optional for mods Phil. We usually make some note of it but not always.

[Paul_D]

I think delicate rather than gun boat diplomacy is needed over this one other wise it will all kick off. Lets just hope and pray the men are all returned safely and we beef up our patrols with a bit of air power in the future; I mean why did we buy those Apaches?

 

We bought them to do exactly what they were designed for and are doing very efficiently - Ground attack and support, inland.

[billy50000]

Suggesting the best way to clean up our mess is by turning the area into a wilderness of glowing glass is frankly laughable.

 

trust me phil if it wern`t for my respect for the feelings of others(well actually, avoiding being modded out)id explain what id really do,but this would only clarify why im mentally ill.

 

and tbh it may sound callous but the idea of a dust bath still amuzes me (the kids will only grow to hate us anyway)might as well get in there first!!

 

its probably a good thing im not over there trying to help,for thier sakes.

 

i grew up fighting and i will happily die fighting.

 

im a nice guy 99% of the time and id do anything to live in piece, ANYTHING!!

but i suppose having a split persona`s doesnt help,but ive learned to live with him and his insesant nattering:)

 

if only that was a joke too.

have a good day

[Tony U]

We bought them to do exactly what they were designed for and are doing very efficiently - Ground attack and support, inland.

Err no we didn't; our Apaches' have been optimised for seaborn and littoral operation, unlike the US version, they have folding rotors for ship board operation and have already been deployed from HMS Ocean.

 

"The UK's Strategic Defence Review called for Apaches to undertake amphibious attack missions, operating from the helicopter carrier HMS Ocean, the Invincible class aircraft carriers and their successors, the (Royal Navy CVF programme), and possibly the amphibious assault vessels HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion. As such, one of the major differences between the WAH-64 and AH-64 Apache variants is the folding blade mechanism, required to stow the helicopters in the confined space onboard ships.

 

The Apache will serve aboard Royal Navy ships having achieved maritime certification in December 2005 aboard HMS Ocean. Then on November 17th, 2006, HMS Ark Royal became the first RN aircraft carrier to land a WAH-64D Apache AH1 at Portsmouth Naval Base."

 

 

Tony

Edited March 26, 2007 by Tony U

[Paul_D]

Yes, very good Tony. What I meant though, given the numbers the UK bought (in whatever 'multi' role variant), they are, quite rightly, utilised supporting land based troops. Escorting maritime boarding parties, if and when required, is up to the Task Groups own air cover.

[Paul_D]

An interesting discussion taking place here.

[Tony U]

Paul

Interesting link one ppint wouldnt the GPS sytems of the boarding party establish whether they were in Iranian or Iraqi terratorial waters and could this not be verified by satellite?

 

Tony

Edited March 26, 2007 by Tony U

[gozzer]

An interesting discussion taking place here.

 

It is interesting Paul, but it's also nice to know that it's not just AN that attracts the, gung ho, "they don't like it up 'em, Mr Mainwaring" type of poster.

 

This is disputed border, with no definitive 'line'. From what I've read, it seems that we may have drifted over, and the support ship didn't want an incident, to escalate into something more serious.

 

This was to be expected really. We are in the 4th year of this, (IMO) illegal war. That's near enough the length of the 'Great War', WW1, the "War to end all Wars", call it what you will. I wouldn't be surprised to be saying a similar thing in another 3 years, about the comparison with WW2. We are not much nearer finding a solution to this one, and some are advocating extending it to include neighbouring countries. We haven't the power to take on Iran as well, so the only sensible solution is to negotiate.

 

 

John.

[UK-Fishing-Tackle.co.uk]

OK - regardless of what happened at the time (did they or didn't they cross the border), clear our inaction at preventing the incident at the time indicates that we were probably in the wrong. The obvious worry from a battleship/carrier captains point of view is that an immediate reaction could trigger nuclear war if indeed Iran have that capability (or indeed sympathetic allies that do).

 

One thing is clear is that the way the incident is being handled is very useful propaganda for our government. Basically 'our lads were doing nothing wrong and arrested at gunpoint' - if an Iranian group of solidiers washed up in the North Sea I am sure we'd not be equally as honest. If we were in Iranian waters then an admission and an apology should have been forthcoming immediately to secure their release (which no doubt would have been swift). The delay, denial and hard lining is all well and good (looks great in the media) BUT may well cause these guys further hardship (I suspect they aint in any Ramada Jarvis Suite).

 

In response to some anti-soldier comments, we've had this before (with similar characters involved including myself). If anyone wishes to criticise a war then criticise the government, not the soldiers. Simply put these guys are doing a job, a job that 90% of the nation is grateful they do, and the other 10% are frankly blinkered as to the realities of the modern world. We need armed forces on standby in general because occasionally a Nazi F***head (to quote the infamous eddie Izzard) will rise up and try and take over the world. Now, without armed forces, we'd all be goose-stepping home to our blonde/blue eyed wives, and buying our frankfurters in deutsch markes - perhaps sarcasm doesn't go down too well at times, but honestly the need for soldiers and an army is bloody obvious. Without straying from the debate - the argument for trident is broadly the same - you might never need it, but you'd certainly miss the bloody thing if we ever did...

 

Now, the fact that someone has chosen that job (and it is just a job) and they have been told to do something like go to war, doesn't make the consequences of war their fault - in fact - you could rightly argue that as a nation we are all equally responsibile, since it is the people of this nation that have kept halfwits running it for the last twelve years (I don't vote for labour, but accept that the social reasons why people do are our own fault as a collective).

 

Ian