Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

15 captured British soldiers -- Iranian or Iraqi territory?

168 replies

Eleusis · 28/03/2007 12:44

The news coverage on the BBC presents this as they were in Iraqi water and the Iranians captured them at gun point. But, a colleague of mine has just told me that the borders are actually in dispute. Is this so? Does anyone know the story on the dispute?

BBC coverage

However, I must say though even if they did stray into Iranian waters, is that justification to capture them at gun point? I wouldn't think so!

OP posts:
suejonez · 28/03/2007 14:36

but weren't they aboard an IRAQI vessel checking out a suspicious cargo when they were taken - that can't be construed as spying surely?

OrvilleRedenbacher · 28/03/2007 14:36

go salty

suejonez · 28/03/2007 14:40

Eleusis didn't dispute your entitlement to say it Saltire, she was giving her own opinion on your comment.

Though in the same position I wouldn'tchoose to be on active service, I too don't like the attitude that women shouldn't to be parents and be on active service but its OK for men to be

Original poster
Eleusis · 28/03/2007 14:40

The iranians boarded their vessel while they were all checking out another vessel. And then when the british soldiers returned to the British vessel the Iranians toook them at gun point.

Saltire, you are criticising her for not limiting her career choices. She is a soldier. So, local office work would be a bit of a career change. And the 3 year old daughter is with her father (the captured soldier's husband).

OP posts:
tortoiseSHELL · 28/03/2007 14:40

Well the British released the co-ordinates, which say Iraqi waters. Iran then released THEIR co-ordinates, which also said Iraqi waters. British said to Iran, hang on, that's still Iraqi waters, Iran say, well actually it was THESE co-ordinates, which are Iranian waters.

If ever there was a need for this emoticon it's now....

Original poster
Eleusis · 28/03/2007 14:43

Oh look, salty and popcorn have joined together. How fitting.

OP posts:
saltire · 28/03/2007 14:46

"Oh look, salty and popcorn have joined together. How fitting."

Sorry, don't know what you're on about

Original poster
Eleusis · 28/03/2007 14:46

This is a chick who gets my admiration, and does not deserve condemnation for her choices:

*
In another recent interview, she said: "I absolutely love my job because we're all so close-knit. You can't sit back just because you're a girl.

"I love the satisfaction of being able to walk away from a job and know that I've coped and completed the task just as well as a man would have done it."
***

OP posts:
Original poster
Eleusis · 28/03/2007 14:47

Orvilleredenbacher is a brand of (American) popcorn. All you need now is the butter.

OP posts:
suejonez · 28/03/2007 14:48

OrvilleRedenbacher = popcorn
saltire = salty

Gess · 28/03/2007 14:54

Did they have any choice saltire. Usually people join up before children come along. I can still remember when the first Iraq War started i came home from university to find mum and dad turning the house upside down searching for their discharge papers. Both had been in the navy (dad had left when I was 14, mum before I was born- she was a naval nurse) and couldn't remember how long they were in the reserves for. The armed forces are very short of staff at the moment, so if you're in the reserves you're quyite likely to be called up- and I don't think you have much choice.

giddyfeet · 28/03/2007 15:05

The news reports are saying they were 1.5 miles within iraqi waters.

I dont know whats going on but all I do know is that news reports are very rarely the whole story.

littleEasterlapin · 28/03/2007 15:06

Depending on her branch, she may spend a lot of time away, or a little. I know a lot of serving females in the RAF and Navy, and yes, it is hard for them to leave their children, but no harder than the men, IMO.

If your question was "why would a person stay in the Forces after they become a parent", yes totally valid discussion. But singly out women, I feel, is wrong.

And no, they weren't spying.

suejonez · 28/03/2007 15:07

my ex was called up and served in Bosnia two years after being discharged. He shipped out with 400 other reserves and they had been shipping300-400 a WEEK for a while when he went. People have no idea how understaffed our armed services are.

Sorry bside the point I know...

Original poster
Eleusis · 28/03/2007 15:12

My brother was called up to go to Iraq (twice). Both times he left small children behind. Nobody questioned his dedication as a parent.

OP posts:
paulaplumpbottom · 28/03/2007 15:49

People who are Parents do dangerous jobs all the time. Firemen, policewomen, miners and so on. These people are doing their job and most are wonderful parents. This woman is just as entitled to do her job. I believe this little girl's father is at home so its not like she could potentialy be orphaned.

littlelapin · 28/03/2007 22:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
Eleusis · 29/03/2007 08:15

Today's news says they may be set free if Britain tells the world that they were tresspassing... so Iran wants to set the UK up to be the agressors here when in fact it was Iran who kidnapped our soldiers from IRAQI waters?

Perhaps we should say oh okay and tell the world we were trespassing and then after we have our soldiers back turn around and tell the truth to the world.

I think the people in charge in Iran are a bunch of nut jobs -- very difficult for the people of Iran and I do sympathise with them.

OP posts:
yellowrose · 29/03/2007 09:26

I do not support the capture of the navy of course unless they were on the wrong side of the water which is totally feasible. I don't know why people assume what OUR army or navy in this country says is always correct whereas what anyone else says must be a lie ? Have you not seen the lies perpetrated by our own army in Iraq and Afghanistan, the illigal capture and death of quite a few innocent people while is UK or US custody ? The US army has been particulary good at raping, killing, torturing and then trying to cover it up. Nice !

The Iranians have a right to be pissed off. They are surrounded by unfriendly US & UK forces on BOTH sides of their borders, US & UK navy patrolling their Persian Gulf borders (yes they are disputed, it was partly why the Iran-Iraq War was fought) and being forced to give up uranium enrichment although their no. one enemy in the region (Israel) has nuclear weapons.

Israel has NEVER allowed it's nuclear facilities to be inspected, denies it has nuclear weapons, is not a member of the NPT, is of course allowed to get away with it by the US, but Iran is a memeber and has allowed it's facilities to be inspected and has tried to co-operate with the EU and UN. I can see why it is being intransigent. It is surrounded by unfriendly fire.

yellowrose · 29/03/2007 09:33

Eleusis - with due respect, quite a few of us on MN and elsewhere believe that Blair, Bush, et al are a bunch of nut jobs. No one has done more to bring us closer to WWIII than these two governments.

What you describe about the 2 Iranians is very typical of that region. I have many friends from the ME, do they all have to agree with each other ? The reform and opposition push in Iran is very very active, esp. among the young and women. It is important because one day they will bring about change.

The Iranian intellectuals I have had the pleasure of knowing are very pro-democracy. What they do not wish to have is another Iraq scenario, an invasion of their country dressed up as "democracy" being pushed down their throats by the Blair/Bush duo.

littleEasterlapin · 29/03/2007 09:37

yellowrose - it is feasible that our Navy were on the wrong side of the water, yes. It is also feasible that the Iranians are lying. Given that they initially gave a GPS position of the ship, then rescinded and amended that when it was pointed out that the position was actually on the Iraqi side - does that make you think that possibly they weren't telling the truth?

There's a difference between supporting a country and being an apologist.

Original poster
Eleusis · 29/03/2007 09:42

You have strayed just a tad bt off course, yellow rose.

If you can demonstrate that the UK was in fact in Iranian waters and that the Uk is therefore lying, by all means that would shed some interesting light on the debate.

But, your posts are filled with anger which belongs on a different topic: Bush, Blair and their meddling in Iraq.

The key question here really is who is lying? Iranian or Iraqi waters?

OP posts:
yellowrose · 29/03/2007 09:44

I am not an apologist for Blair and Bush or any other Govt.

No, it is not absolutley CERTAIN who is telling the truth. I get pissed off by assumptions that other countries lie and we always tell the truth. Our own historical and political docs. tell us otherwise. We don't tell the truth when it is not in our political interest to tell it as it is.

If you believe as I do that we lied to get our end into Iraq, then you would be equally suspicious of Blair vis a vis Iran.

yellowrose · 29/03/2007 09:44

I can't demonstrate anything, can you ?

Original poster
Eleusis · 29/03/2007 09:46

Well, yeah. But, it's already been done in the linkI posted when I started this thread. As littleeasterlapin has already pointed out, the change in coordinates whe Iran relised their original coordinates were in fact in Iraqi waters does kind of blow a hole in their credibility. Don't you think?

OP posts: