Iranians Seize 15 British Sailors/Marines

Mikey

Half-way Through My Half-life
Orderite
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6491577.stm

Royal Navy personnel seized at gunpoint by Iran in the Gulf have admitted being in the country's waters, an Iranian general has claimed.

Gen Ali Reza Afshar told Iranian media the 15 personnel were being interrogated, but were in good health.

The Foreign Office could not say where the group was being held. It insists they had not been in Iranian waters.

Earlier, minister Lord Triesman met with the Iranian ambassador in London to demand their immediate release.

In the hour-long meeting, Lord Triesman also sought assurances about the group's welfare and asked that they are seen by consular staff.

Iran's Fars news agency earlier said the group, which includes one woman, was flown to Tehran, arriving in the capital at 1200 local time (0830 GMT).

But that report was later withdrawn from the agency's website.

Meanwhile, the German presidency of the European Union has demanded the immediate release of the personnel.

The 15 were seized on Friday after boarding a boat in the Gulf.

They were from HMS Cornwall, based in Plymouth - the flagship of the coalition-Iraqi force which patrols Iraqi territorial waters in the northern Gulf to combat smuggling.

They had inspected an Iraqi boat before returning to their two small boats where they were seized before being moved along the Shatt al-Arab waterway to Iranian bases.

The British task force commander, Commodore Nick Lambert, said there had been no evidence of fighting.

Lord Triesman's meeting with ambassador Rasoul Movahedian followed a meeting on Friday between Ibrahim Rahimpour, Iran's director general for Western European affairs, and the UK's charge d'affaires, Kate Smith, in Tehran.


Former Royal Navy head Admiral Sir Alan West dismissed suggestions the British boats had strayed into Iranian waters.

Sir Alan was first sea lord in 2004 when Iran detained eight British servicemen for three days after they allegedly strayed over the maritime border.

The men were paraded blindfolded and made to apologise on Iranian TV before their release was agreed.

Sir Alan told BBC News that tracking systems then had proven that the servicemen had been in Iraqi waters.

"They can do lots of smokescreens and things like that but I am absolutely clear in my mind it would have been in our waters," he said.

The Ministry of Defence has been in contact with relatives of the group.


The BBC's Bridget Kendall said the big question was whether the capture was part of a bigger political game, ahead of a UN Security Council vote in New York over further sanctions against Iran's nuclear programme.

But Sadegh Ziba Kalam, professor of politics at Tehran University, dismissed the idea that the seizure was a political move ahead of the vote.

"Everyone knows that would not change anything," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

The seizure also follows claims that much of the violence against UK forces in Basra is being engineered by Iranian elements, which Tehran denies.

Okay, so the British government say that they were in Iraqi waters. The Iranians say that they weren't, and claim that the personnel have admitted to being in Iranian waters, but can we trust that? On the BBC News last night they said that the Americans also said we were in Iraqi waters, so it would seem to be a moot point.

More to the point, is it not somewhat serious that Iran has forcibly taken fifteen British service personnel prisoner? What's going to happen now?

So, uhm, discuss.
 
Possibly a special forces raid but before that there will be political maneuvering OR there will be all out war there is no rely sure way to tell what's going to happen at this point. I am watching this story for any development's. Fuck IRAN!!!
 
I am guessing they were in Iranian waters, i doubt Iran would risk such a action in Iraqi waters, what with uncle Sam and the holyland already breathing down their necks, why bother? I can however imagine marines entering Iranian waters.

I think they will be released after some political babbling, if not an SAS
or SBS operation depending on where they are held.
 
the 'allies' grabbed an Iranian Revolutionary Guard general in northern Iraq. the Iranian Revolutionary Navy grabs 15 british navy dudes.

anyway, the Iranians cant keep the british dudes for long. either they will release the navy boys in exchange for the general, or eventually for nothing. (last time they released the navy dudes after 3 days btw)
 
You guys are over-reacting.

This has happened many times. And Iran always gives them back.... after making a big deal about it.

The question is why they were in iran in the first place.

If you found 15 iranian military servicemen in British waters, the shit would hit the fan..

IRAN has the right to question this...
That article is so biased and another example of how warped the media is... when reporting.

The last time I remember American forces in iranian waters, was when the Vincennes battleship blew an iranian passenger 747 out of the sky and killed around 350 people. The fault... they were in iranian waters.

Did that make this article... hell no.

This will blow over regardless.
 
It's not certain that they were in Iranian waters, though. Surely the fact that the Iranians have taken British Naval personnel hostage is fairly serious? I mean, it's not like it's common practice for the British to round up French troops and take them off to London for a spot of interrogation, is it?

Oh and of course the article is biased, it's the BBC, innit?
 
One of the Iraqi commanders said that they were in Iranian waters. British were at fault, and Britain shouldn't expect their troops back until they explain satisfactorially why they were in their waters.
 
meh, those waters have been disputed for years now. Iran said it was theirs, Iraq said it was theirs. who's right? but more importantly: who cares?

it's just a diplomatic game.

either Iran gives them back eventually, or they'll get a nice lil' bombing campaign on their ass. Israel is itching, the USA is overstretched but looking for a fight & the UK just wants their boys back.
 
Specialist said:
One of the Iraqi commanders said that they were in Iranian waters. British were at fault, and Britain shouldn't expect their troops back until they explain satisfactorially why they were in their waters.

lol wtf didnt the fact that he was a Iraqi commander make u think. there incompitent what they say really dont matter. he most prolly cant tell his head from his arse. plus he is most likly in the pay of iran to turn a blind eye to all the smugling going on.
 
Frankly I don't understand why our politicians are being such nancies. Why let Iran walk over us completely? We need to threaten them a bit, then demand our sailors' release. Saying "Give them back." doesn't work as well as parking HMS Ark Royal off Iran and then saying "24 hours.".
 
This is a test by the Iranians of the resolve of the British. How far are the Brits going to go?
 
Mikey said:
. Saying "Give them back." doesn't work as well as parking HMS Ark Royal off Iran and then saying "24 hours.".

Wouldn't parking capital ships in the Persian Gulf be silly? I mean, I'd wager they'd be pretty vulnerable there.
 
Ehe, I'm not exactly an expert on naval know-how, but I dare say we could protect it.
 
just like the begingin of world war 2. say iran was germany now germany pushed britain 1 time britain let them get away with it they done it a second time again britain let them get away wit it then the invasion of poland britain let them get away with it then they pused us again and bam WW2 broke out. im not say WW3 is gona break out im just saying for some reason britain let themslefs get walked over a bit bofore getting there arses into gear and reacting.
 
Mikey said:
Ehe, I'm not exactly an expert on naval know-how, but I dare say we could protect it.

Meh, "the bomber always gets though".
Actually, you could prolly even do it with a long-range Howitzer from land. It'd be impossible to sink the bugger, obviously, but it would cause a lot of damage and embarrassment.

Also, Metzer, buy a fucking brain. And punctuation.
 
We could not park the ark of the coast of Iran unless we had a strike force ready and able to take on Iran in a head to head conflict.

Iran would not last long in a fire fight with the UK and if the US got involved it would be game over. Allowing a extremest state like Iran to have a nuclear program was a big mistake on our part and is reason enough to attack them, The second reason we would be well within the law to attack them is providing training and supplies to the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This little escapade of Iran's has just put the icing on the cake and it wont be long till we see Iran get it's ass kicked.
 
Muff said:
We could not park the ark of the coast of Iran unless we had a strike force ready and able to take on Iran in a head to head conflict.

Iran would not last long in a fire fight with the UK and if the US got involved it would be game over. Allowing a extremest state like Iran to have a nuclear program was a big mistake on our part and is reason enough to attack them, The second reason we would be well within the law to attack them is providing training and supplies to the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This little escapade of Iran's has just put the icing on the cake and it wont be long till we see Iran get it's ass kicked.
Just as thoroughly as we saw Iraq's ass kicked, I presume? Only with overstretched troops fighting a much better enemy when it comes to equipment and training. Oh, and probably more insurgents.

Yep, totally kick their asses.
 
well if you think back when we first invaded iraq and afgan we did totally wipe the floor with them both but the problem is its very like vietnam, in the fact that they no longer fight like a army there fighting a gurrila warfare which is very hard to defend against as it is fast attacks then retreat into dense cover and dissintergrate away.
 
Sander the British army is not over stretched if we had to we could take on another war we could, As for the Iranian army being better equipped they are not most of there equipment is Soviet era, Most of there army is just conscripts who are under trained, The insurgents that are currently in Iran are mostly in training camp's.

And most of the insurgent problem we faced in Iraq was down to being light handed, we will not make that mistake again and with Iran out of the picture most of the problem would disappear.
 
Back
Top