Fifteen RN Sailors captured by Iranian forces

[Blitzen]

Nerve touched there i think.

I'm very aware of the price that can be paid for military action; my wife's grandfather was shot down by a night fighter en route to Dusseldorf

Do you SERIOUSLY think that statement makes you aware of what conflict is like? Have a word with yourself please, that was nearly 70 years ago. Things have moved on a little in the real world now.

Im sorry your GrandParents were hurt/killed in WW2 but come on for Gods Sake...What has that got to do with it?
Nothing!

Its not that 'opposers' need silencing.
Its that the opposers know nothing about whats going on there accept what they see on the news so form opinions that, although expressed well, are a very long way off the truth.
There are very few people with run of the mill jobs that could possibly know what the truth is. Therefore, the opinions on the conflict are more guesswork than fact.
You must realise that you are drip fed these facts from the news and nothing else surely.

To make some feeble attempt to bring Grand Parents in to this (i had a Grandfather killed in Arnhem in 1944) is a very poor comparison and shameful tbh.

[nichomach]

Nerve touched there i think.

You're touching the one at the back of my throat that makes me vomit.

Do you SERIOUSLY think that statement makes you aware of what conflict is like? Havfe a word with yourslef please.

No, but as I mentioned I ALSO saw the extensive scarring from my grandfather's wounds, and I read a fair amount of military history.

Im sorry your GrandParents were hurt/killed in WW2 but come on for Gods Sake...What has that got to do with it?
Nothing!

Then prehaps you should STFU about whether they'd be proud or not.

Its that the opposers know nothing about whats going on there accept what they see on the news. (You included).

Irrelevant; there shouldn't be a "there" to start with. See above.

To make some feeble attempt to bring Grand Parents in to this (i had a Grandfather killed in Arnhem in 1944) is a very poor comparison and shameful tbh.

And as I note, perhaps you could bear to keep your trap shut about whether they'd be proud or otherwise, then. And it most certainly IS a shameful comparison; our forebears fought to defend our country from a genuine threat, not a mirage.

[Blitzen]

Listen..........its a forum and you feel the need to resort to flame (says it all about you really doesnt it).

Up until recently i was a serving member of our armed forces and the i KNOW, unlike yourslef, what conflict is like, what it does to people, and the effects once home.

I dont really appreciate you telling ME what its like when i doubt you have ever even stepped out from behind a desk.

Just look at your statements above.....you quote me with no idea what your arguments actually are.

Now, you sit down, have a nice cup of tea behind your desk and think of all the things you would want to be but never be confident to be or brave enough to try.

[nichomach]

I have no intention of telling you what conflict is like; likewise, however, your apparent assertion that anyone who is not serving in or has not served in Iraq is completely unaware of the effects of warfare is ludicrous and naive.

Flame? You call anyone who points out the disagreeable truth a coward, and have no substantive answer to any point raised - aside from your usual "you're not in/have not been in Iraq, so your opinion doesn't count". It's a bull**** argument. As opposed to a substantive one, such as the ones I outlined above.

You want to believe that you're braver than me, go ahead; you may well be right. It's not relevant, however, to the question; it's simple ad hominem name-calling. What was that you were complaining about? Flaming...?

[directhex]

I'm finding this thread confusing, off-topic and insulting - all at the same time.

On the ORIGINAL topic, I'm firmly of the "act of war" opinion. That's fairly clear. There's no hidden, reported, veiled, or theoretical issue here - there's state-funded kidnapping of 15 British citizens. For which there mush be consequences (however those consequences take shape, I'm in no position to say).

On the Iraq topic, anyone who couldn't see the publicly stated motives for war were lies is either deeply stupid or deeply deluded. Or possibly just itching for a chance to fight for'ners as some of the more xenophobic posters in this thread seem to be giving the impression.

Under no circumstances would any sane person who was opposed to Blair's bull**** war wish harm upon our armed forces - and it's precisely because they should NOT have been in that situation in the first place that some of us protested against the war. Our soldiers should not be asked to risk their lives for lies.

[nichomach]

^^What directhex said - absolutely^^

[TiG]

Blitzen the point you make is that everyone has a point of view and that unless you are a mod don't tell you to shut up. I quite agree, this is what free speech truely is.

That means you have to listen to people who in your opinion could be spouting nonsense. However most people on here aren't you typical uneducated masses. We look at what is presented to us and judge for ourselves what we view to be true.

As for brave, going into the army doesn't directly equate to being brave. And honestly i would of thought anyone in the army would be saying bravery gets you killed.

Bravery isn't about the greater ideals, its about saving your mate, a friendly unit etc etc, surely once you get involved a conflict the goals and objectives make you so far removed from the actual political goal is, that it makes you wonder what you are fighting for?.

Has anyone really validated the positions of the captured soliders?, i mean if it is so clear cut we're in the clear put the data out there.

The general populace never has all the information give to us. You can tell the political machine is kicking into gear with the "BLAIR:- If politics isnt' going to work we'll step up a phase". Iran:- So what... bring it on...

Are we prepared to go to war over 15 service men/women?. Who makes that judgement call?. Is it morally right to risk many more lives over 15?.

TiG

[J4MES]

Wars have been fought over less

[chuckskull]

Are we prepared to go to war over 15 service men/women?. Who makes that judgement call?. Is it morally right to risk many more lives over 15?.

Iran have done this before and will do it again most likely.

You make it sound like Soldiers are somehow not as valuable or worthy of saving as any other citizen.

Am I prepared to go to war when another country openly attacks, kidnaps and probably much worse to even one of our citizens. Damn right I am.

or should we allow a quota of British citizens that can be captured and interrogated by Iran each year? or shall we just wait until it's someone important?

Attacking our citizens directly is one of the few times I will wholeheartedly back a war.

[No.72]

Why can't some people just support their country and their governments choices, just be great full for what they have? and if some group threatens our way of life then eliminate it if possible. If you don't like it then move to France.

[MadduckUK]

Are we prepared to go to war over 15 service men/women?. Who makes that judgement call?. Is it morally right to risk many more lives over 15?.

bloody hell how can you ask that

[nichomach]

You make it sound like Soldiers are somehow not as valuable or worthy of saving as any other citizen....

Agreed. I don't think they should have been sent into harms way in this case, but they're there, and if we weren't prepared to act with resolution in their defence, we shouldn't have sent them.

Wars have been fought over less

The War of Jenkins' Ear, perhaps?
Seriously, though, in this case I agree in principle with the use of force to secure our personnel and actually to deter harm coming to them, but what force can we realistically use to recover them? We can't just bomb random targets in Iran - they'd kill the captives. According to HMG, we don't know where they're being held - and even if we did, say it's deep in Iran - what options for recovery in the face of opposition do we actually have?

[GeorgeTuk]

I think everyone here needs to take a step back, TiG has started it but we need to look at the whole picture.

I don't think any military action is in the picture, and in fact there is so many more steps before we reach that point. Even Britain's top diplomat has said that we are not even at the stage of recalling diplomats and expelling theirs.

It is important though and those sailors and marines should be returned immediately but you should also see it from Iran's point of view, there are 20,000 foreign troops, planes and ships in the country next to you, you're going to be jumpy. Especially since Bush has stated that military action is not off the agenda to resolve the nuclear situation with Iran.

And Israel went to war over just 2 troops and look where it got them.

[directhex]

Why can't some people just support their country and their governments choices, just be great full for what they have? and if some group threatens our way of life then eliminate it if possible. If you don't like it then move to France.

iraq wasn't the choice of this country, it was the choice of this country's leader's friends.

and at what point during the iraq debacle was hussein's government threatening us?

[Mossy]

Are we prepared to go to war over 15 service men/women?. Who makes that judgement call?. Is it morally right to risk many more lives over 15?.

TiG

Its morally right to risk more lives over 1 Life never mind 15 no matter what circumstance.

Our emergency services at home do this everyday they just don't have to dodge bullets!

[TiG]

Iran have done this before and will do it again most likely.

You make it sound like Soldiers are somehow not as valuable or worthy of saving as any other citizen.

Am I prepared to go to war when another country openly attacks, kidnaps and probably much worse to even one of our citizens. Damn right I am.

or should we allow a quota of British citizens that can be captured and interrogated by Iran each year? or shall we just wait until it's someone important?

Attacking our citizens directly is one of the few times I will wholeheartedly back a war.

Thats the whole point of my post mate. I'm asking the question of people making them think.

Does losing 200, 20000 lives justify being right?. Are you certain we are right, are we 100% crystal clear of our position?.

Could you ask 200 people to die to rescue 15?. I don't think i could. (and just in case people are thinking i'm saying leave them to rot in iran i'm not. I'm trying to make people think of the cost of any actions we take)

TiG