LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksThis could turn nasty....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6484279.stm
This could turn nasty....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6484279.stm
sig removed by Zak33
Yeah, I hope this gets sorted quickly, otherwise we could have a mess on our hands.
It's a fairly obvious attempt to put pressure on the UK to distract attention from the reports that Iranian agents are paying Iraqi militants to attack British troops. Of course it's also a casus belli; invasion of Iraqi waters, unlawful use of force against our personnel etc. Yes, it has the potential to turn very nasty.
Serious case of deja vu here.
Me thinks Iran got caught red handed helping insurgents and would rather kidnap the brits than let the proof get out.
If they were taken from Iraqi waters like it says, it could quite easily be classed as an act of war. If any are harmed it definitely would be.
Not smart on Iran's part as an attack on allied soldiers would give those itching to attack Iran all the excuse they need.
Regardless, I hope they all get home safe.
although thankfully we've acted with restraint part of me wishes that we had responded with more force - things like this should not be tolerated - however the situation is very delicate
just glad its happened to us and not the Americans - by now the bombs would be dropping
Should go park the parts of the royal navy in the middle east in iranian waters and give them a nudge...
Lets push Invincible and Ocean out to the Persian Gulf and start polishing those Sea Darts.
Yeah I have to say there's a big part of me that would like to see every British warship in the area open up with everything it has. We could level your entire country, don't play stupid games with us kind of statement, but of course then my mind gets dragged back to the real world.Originally Posted by YorkieBen
Where such an action would be childish and most likely descend into another long drawn out war and send world oil prices sky rocketing.
Well 'vinci is mothballed and would take months to work up, Ocean is in a refit, Ark Royal is taking ocean's place as a commando carrier (i.e. no harriers) - lusty (illustrious) is the only aircraft carrier active - however we have bugger all harriers available as they are all in afganistan.
Plus the Govt got rid of the Sea Harrier a couple of years ago so we have no harriers with air to air radar anymore...
If we sailed a carrier task force into the Persian Gulf without US support it would be in big trouble.
But its okay, we don't need to spend money on a decent navy - I would blame the MoD but as the Treasury decide force levels (not the MoD - Des Browne admitted this in Parliament when he admitted that the Govt's Strategic Defence review has no effect on defence procurement) we dont have anything to look forward to with Gordon being in power.
its partly childish, its just that our response with this always seems rather too skewed to diplomacy rather than mixing in the threat of force - it gives the impression that we won't do anything which is dangerous, such an imnpression was given to Argentina in 1982 (a big shock they got)
Ocean in refit already>????? Bloody hellWell 'vinci is mothballed and would take months to work up, Ocean is in a refit, Ark Royal is taking ocean's place as a commando carrier (i.e. no harriers) - lusty (illustrious
Plus the Govt got rid of the Sea Harrier a couple of years ago so we have no harriers with air to air radar anymore...
If we sailed a carrier task force into the Persian Gulf without US support it would be in big trouble.
But its okay, we don't need to spend money on a decent navy - I would blame the MoD but as the Treasury decide force levels (not the MoD - Des Browne admitted this in Parliament when he admitted that the Govt's Strategic Defence review has no effect on defence procurement) we dont have anything to look forward to with Gordon being in power.
She was commissioned in 1997 and i was on he first Sea trial
Ark Royal had nearly 4 years in Pompey for her last refit.
Modern military strategy doesn't really rely on traditional air superiority anymore as we can just have the fleet sitting 50miles off shore dropping missiles in. I few volleys of cruise missiles and most of the planes are destroyed on the ground and the rest, cant take off or land and have no ground radar support if they do manage it.
Plus America would find it very hard to say no if we asked for their support, and I suspect would be itching to have a go at Iran.
As much as democracy is the way to go, force should almost always be met with force. If for no other reason than to show our sailors we wont leave them to rot in an Iranian jail, just for doing their job.its partly childish, its just that our response with this always seems rather too skewed to diplomacy rather than mixing in the threat of force - it gives the impression that we won't do anything which is dangerous, such an imnpression was given to Argentina in 1982 (a big shock they got)
Last edited by chuckskull; 23-03-2007 at 03:13 PM.
not that i didnt belive you wanted to see what hms Ocean wasOcean in refit already>????? Bloody hell
She was commissioned in 1997 and i was on he first Sea trial
Ark Royal had nearly 4 years in Pompey for her last refit.
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/...0h001001005001
Sorry Chuck but that is a bit off imo - for a start none of our ships carry land attack missiles, only our subs (plus we dont even have that many tomahawks available) and if we were sat 50 miles off the coast the Iranian's asnti ship missiles would be in range, and we would get blown out of the water by the iranian's aircraft. The idea that a cruise missile strike would knock out the majoprity of Iran's airforce in one go is wishful thinking. Tbh the Persian Gulf is the worst place for a carrier to be - it is too small. Air superiority is still a major part modern military thinking - why do you think the US Navy refuse to send a carrier into the gulf without guarantees of US air force cover?
Blitzen - afaik Ocean is going through a shorter refit, not a full blown think like Ark, although I may be wrong - she's been worked hard being the only one of her class and is built to a lesser standard than a standard warship (she only cost £150 million to build which in warship terms is piss all)
That worried me a LOT when it happened, actually; and we won't have any organic air-to-air capability with the fleet until the new carriers with JSF come into service (JSF is intended as a strike aircraft, but has the following:
Joint Strike Fighter ProgramMulti-Mission Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar
Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems is developing the Multi-Mission Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) Radar for the F-35. This advanced multi-function radar has gone through extensive flight demonstrations during the Concept Demonstration Phase (CDP). The radar will enable the F-35 JSF pilot to effectively engage air and ground targets at long range, while also providing outstanding situational awareness for enhanced survivability.
So it should be pretty capable.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
