| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| ''We want them back'', Beckett tells Iran |
| 2007-03-24 |
| (KUNA) -- British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett tonight demanded Iran provide a "full explanation" for the detention of 15 British servicemen seized in Iraqi waters. The Foreign Secretary said in a statement "We are disturbed to learn that some 15 Royal Navy and Royal Marines personnel and their equipment have been detained by the Iranians today. We understand that they were in two boats that were operating in Iraqi waters in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1723 in support of the government of Iraq to stop smuggling. So the Iranian Ambassador was summoned to the (British) Foreign Office this afternoon and seen by our Permanent Secretary Sir Peter Ricketts. And we also raised the incident in Tehran through our ambassador there." "We have asked for a full explanation on what has happened and we are leaving them in no doubt that we want the immediate and safe return of our personnel and their equipment. I understand that the meeting with the Iranian Ambassador was brisk but polite. But he was left in no doubt that we want them back", Beckett concluded. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #30 mmm no. Aegis is not the call. B-1B's, B-2's at Diego Garcia (whoops! A British island!) would likely be the infrastructure-destroying fleet |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-03-24 19:20 |
| #29 Maybe not, but long range standoff capability suits current requirements to a tee. Not something the Iowas (even when in Commssion) ever had. A few (16? )Tomahawks are not all that impressive. Perhaps you are thinking of an Aegis. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-03-24 19:14 |
| #28 I think a principle concern is the survivability of the Green Zone in the face of a massive Persian missile barrage. |
| Posted by: mrp 2007-03-24 17:43 |
| #27 The Bucket woman was so concerned but saw no need to return immediately to her office. And sure, Kofi Assnan was monitering that Asian Tsunami while holidaying in the Switzerland too. |
| Posted by: Duh! 2007-03-24 17:00 |
| #26 So Tony, aren't you sorry now over pressuring George, to pressure Israel, to let Hizbollah off? |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-03-24 16:32 |
| #25 a war with Iran means Iran shutting down the straight of Hormuz. UK cant stop that, theyd need the US to even have a chance. Think the Bush admin wants a war with Iran NOW, with the military scraping every ready unit in the (worthy) attempt to win in Iraq? And no, you cant win this without ground pounders, cause they will be the most effective force against the surface to ship missiles and other assets the Iranians have along the coast. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2007-03-24 16:02 |
| #24 Maybe not, but long range standoff capability suits current requirements to a tee. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-03-24 15:36 |
| #23 Isn't this why Iowa class boats were built in the first place? No. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-03-24 15:33 |
| #22 Now we have iron ships and wooden men. Looks as though these Brit sailors couldn't even get up a little wood. I'll have to go with tu3031 and post # 16. Isn't this why Iowa class boats were built in the first place? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-03-24 15:28 |
| #21 HMS Cornwall, Ship's Motto: Unus et Omnes - One and All The task force commander, Commodore Nick Lambert, "that is the motto unless Mecca Sea Monsters come then we simply sit down on our asses and drink tea. Sometimes we wave goodbye". Nice back up dickweed. In 2004, eight British servicemen were taken hostage by Iran and held for three days in a similar dispute. The blindfolded men were forced to apologise on Iranian television for their actions before their ordeal was ended by diplomatic efforts. |
| Posted by: Icerigger 2007-03-24 13:23 |
| #20 You do notice they will not do this to American Navy I wonder why? :) |
| Posted by: djohn66 2007-03-24 13:13 |
| #19 JaneÂ’s Navy The four sailors and 11 marines attached to the Type 22 Batch 3 frigate HMS Cornwall, flagship of Combined Task Force 158, were engaged in routine boarding operations when the incident occurred, according to the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD). The boarding party had completed a successful inspection of an unflagged dhow when "Iranian gunboats came over and seized them", said MoD spokesperson Captain Mike Davis-Marks. |
| Posted by: Icerigger 2007-03-24 13:11 |
| #18 Somebody remind the Honorable Gentleman to look up the Oxford Dictionary. U for ultimatum |
| Posted by: Victor Emmanuel Flenter1810 2007-03-24 13:07 |
| #17 Will Britain remember Pacifico and gunboat diplomacy? 15 of its own sailors would seem to warrant extreme military threats against Iran. |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2007-03-24 13:03 |
| #16 There was also a time when shit like this happened and a gunboat showed up just offshore soon after and started leisurely lobbing in rounds. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2007-03-24 11:51 |
| #15 There was a time when a captain who allowed his men to be taken because he was following orders would have been cashiered from the Navy. Byngo! |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-03-24 11:21 |
| #14 Didn't they threaten to do just this about a week ago? I'd take this as confirmation that we've found Iranians operating inside Iraq. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2007-03-24 09:23 |
| #13 E: There was a time when a captain who allowed his men to be taken because he was following orders would have been cashiered from the Navy. I think today's RN is one where not following softly-softly ROE's will not only result in dishonorable discharge, it might even lead to a prison term. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2007-03-24 09:14 |
| #12 Excalibur - that was back in the days of wooden ships and iron men. Now we have iron ships and wooden men. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-03-24 09:05 |
| #11 There was a time when a captain who allowed his men to be taken because he was following orders would have been cashiered from the Navy. |
| Posted by: Excalibur 2007-03-24 08:52 |
| #10 Another 15 victims of tranzi ROE. And before anybody asks, I've served in Intifada-I, I know exactly what I'm talking about. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-03-24 08:36 |
| #9 Why did the English decide to just watch the Iranians take their sailors and run them back to Iran on the end of a stick? What's the upside? |
| Posted by: gorb 2007-03-24 03:13 |
| #8 What she really said was probably along the lines of, "OK, keep them for long enough to make some political capital out of it, then it's back to business as usual. Deal?" |
| Posted by: Sonar 2007-03-24 02:34 |
| #7 Joe, the Backfire story sounds interesting. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2007-03-24 01:53 |
| #6 Beckett wants a full explanation from a lying nation?! Were she to wear her holed bucket, it would go right through her pin head. |
| Posted by: Duh! 2007-03-24 01:33 |
| #5 IONews, WAFF.com > BLOOMBERG > US NAVY LACKS EFFECTIVE ANTI-CARRIER DEFENSE, vv SM-2 "SIZZLER" dual use anti-carrier cruise missle, which CHINA has purchased + IRAN WANTS TO PURCHASE. In addition, CHINESE MIL FORUM > Unconfirmed > Chin Sales source told US officios China's PLAAF [may] had purchased 12 TU-22 BACKFIRE bombers. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-03-24 01:25 |
| #4 My British friends, prepare for yet another round of humiliation and embarrassment at the hands of the nutbags. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2007-03-24 01:04 |
| #3 I think you just might be on to something there, Joe. Also, AhmaNutjob could use the soldiers as pawns in Iran's game of geopolitical chess. He probably figured it never hurts to have a little leverage when intimidating Europeans out of tightening sanctions. |
| Posted by: Grumenk Philalzabod0723 2007-03-24 00:37 |
| #2 Another "incident" where Saddam = Moud-Mullahs affirm, ergo deny, that Iraq is [future]Iranian territory??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-03-24 00:09 |
| #1 "My fellow Britons, I am pleased to tell you Parliament just passed legislation which outlaws Iran forever. The bombing begins in five minutes," she forgot to add. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2007-03-24 00:04 |