Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United Kingdom Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Bunch of Pussies!!
NotUkOnly    4/7/2007 4:25:44 PM
Hey Im British and Im ashamed to admit that!! After this Iranian situation and the way the Rn & Marines admitted they were in Iranian waters even though we know they werent and the way the just gave in makes me feel that we have now have a bunch of Pussies in our Amed Forces The French would be proud!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT
Yimmy       4/7/2007 5:32:55 PM
Well then, just be glad that you are free to leave the country (to France perhaps?), I am sure there are many people who would be more than happy to take your place.

And just as a follow up, do we know that we weren't in Iranian waters?


 
Quote    Reply

Padfoot       4/7/2007 10:52:48 PM

Hey Im British and Im ashamed to admit that!!
After this Iranian situation and the way the Rn & Marines admitted they were in Iranian waters even though we know they werent and the way the just gave in makes me feel that we have now have a bunch of Pussies in our Amed Forces The French would be proud!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Hey Im British and Im ashamed to admit that!!"

Don't understand your logic, NotUkOnly. Britain gave Iran a 48 hr ultimatum - or things would... "enter a different phase..."

Iran backed down.

 Would you prefer that the sailors and marines had resisted and come home in body bags?
 
Quote    Reply

neutralizer       4/8/2007 4:34:19 AM
It is possible that the Iranians really did believe that they were in Iranian waters, there being two reasons, either navigation error or that they are working to a different border.  However, while not wanting to prempt the BoI, all the evidence points to the boarded ship being in Iraqi waters: RN would not have boarded if there was any doubt about it and between Cornwall's naviagations systems (which would have 'fixed' the ship before it was boarded) and the GPS carried by the boarding party with a data link back to Cornwall (they would have alerted the boarding party if they went into Iranian waters) plus the photo of GPS over the boarded ship.  Of course a copy of the boarded ship's log is also needed, while I'm not familiar with boarding procedures I suspect one of the first actions is to look at the ship's log and navigation to ensure that the record is correct.. 
 
 However, common sense suggests that the RN had every interest in avoiding Iranian waters and the means of doing so whereas the Iranians seem to have been operating to a different agenda.  The initial 'confusion' by the Iranians over the location of the boarded ship seems to bear this out.  Short of some convincing independent contrary evidence then I'd say the location in Iraqi waters is 'beyond reasonable doubt'.  And I've not come across anything to suggest that the border the RN were working to is not the agreed one, note the Iranians have not claimed it is wrong.
 
Quote    Reply

PlatypusMaximus       4/8/2007 10:49:24 AM
If being kidnapped by the IRG while doing your daily job of patrolling the waters between Iraq & Iran for terrorist cargo, and then admitting you were in Iranian waters (whether or not you actually were) makes you a pussy, then I'd sure hate to tangle with a brave Brit.
 
Quote    Reply

Rasputin       4/8/2007 12:30:20 PM
Well something must be clarified before cowardice is accused and slandered upon the sailors .

This is the second time that the incident of capturing sailors has occured, like a bad gimmick rewind.

1) So were not lessons from the first incidence of capture learned? Or nothing was done in the tactial operating procedures to prevent and provide a strong response.

2) Did the political or military leadership teach, lead or order the soldiers to surrender and not to fight?

3) Who is responsible for formulating the military / naval response to imminent danger and threats? Will that person or collective persons have their policies and actions review/judged in view of its failure the second time around???


 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       4/8/2007 1:39:46 PM
"After this Iranian situation and the way the Rn & Marines admitted they were in Iranian waters even though we know they werent"
--------------------------------------------
 
If you read the story of this crisis carefully then you would have known that the Iranians told the hostages that if they didn't admit they were in Iranian waters then they would be executed in 7 days.
 
I would also admit to anything if that situation happened to me.
 
But when I'm released I would tell the truth - just as the 15 sailors and marines did.
 
I'm sure you'd also do the same.  I doubt very much that you would refuse to admit to being in Iranian waters after being told you'd be beheaded if you did refuse.
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       4/8/2007 1:40:03 PM
THIS IS EVEN WORSE! WHERE IS THE GOOD OLD JOLLY ENGLAND WE USED TO KNOW?
 
 

Private Johnson Beharry's courage in rescuing an ambushed foot patrol then, in a second act, saving his vehicle's crew despite his own terrible injuries earned him a Victoria Cross.

For the BBC, however, his story is "too positive" about the conflict.

The corporation has cancelled the commission for a 90-minute drama about Britain's youngest surviving Victoria Cross hero because it feared it would alienate members of the audience opposed to the war in Iraq.

 
This is going too far and getting ridiculous! A soldier who has done his job and saved his fellow soldiers' live, so he's the hero, and it should be all about his brave and courage, not about the war. These people who feel that is "too positive" are either racists or plain against military personnel.
 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       4/8/2007 1:42:03 PM
"And just as a follow up, do we know that we weren't in Iranian waters?"
 
We DO know we were in Iranian waters.  We have the GPS measurements taken from the ship that the British boarded.
 
And if I had a choice between believing the British and believing the Iranians I would believe the British
 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       4/8/2007 2:05:14 PM
"It is possible that the Iranians really did believe that they were in Iranian waters"
 
No.  The Iranians did know the British were in Iraq waters. 
 
Why?  Because they gave two different co-ordinates as to where the British were.  First the Iranians said that the British were in Iraqi waters (the Iranians didn't know the area they pointed out was Iraqi waters) and then when the British looked at the GPS proving that they are in Iraqi waters the Iranians suddenly changed and said the British were somewhere else to where they said previously - this time in Iranian waters!
 
As this passage says -
 
"Iran, Style said, has offered British diplomats two different accounts of the seizure. On Saturday, he said, Iran provided a set of coordinates for the incident, which British diplomats pointed out were within IRAQI territorial waters. Two days later, he said, Iran gave out a second set of coordinates 1,800 yards away, inside IRANIAN waters, and more than two nautical miles from where Britain believes the incident occurred.

"As I made clear to Foreign Minister Mottaki when I spoke to him yesterday, we find it impossible to believe, given the seriousness of the incident, that the Iranians could have made such a mistake with the original coordinates, which, after all, they gave us over several days," Foreign Secretary Beckett said."
 
 
So the Iranians knew originally that the British were inside Iraqi waters.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       4/8/2007 2:06:57 PM


And if I had a choice between believing the British and believing the Iranians I would believe the British


Yes, well I am British, and a reserve soldier, and I would sooner believe my own eyes.

The Royal Marines once invaded Spain but a little while ago.  If they can miss Gibralter, they can miss an invisible sea boundary.  Not that I am saying I know where they were.

 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics