You have commented 338 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran says sailor will not be freed if Britain creates a 'fuss'
2007-03-29
Iran dramatically raised the stakes today in its stand-off with the UK over the seizure of 15 Royal Navy personnel in the Gulf, saying that it had no intention of releasing a female sailor if Britain created a "fuss".

The hardline rhetoric from Iran came as Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary-General, joined the diplomatic drive to win the release of the eight sailors and seven Royal Marines taken prisoner in the Shatt al-Arab waterway last Friday.

Britain yesterday froze all bilateral ties with Iran except for contacts directly related to the hostage crisis and has appealed for support to its allies and international partners. It insists that the group were conducting routine shipping in Iraqi territorial waters when they were seized and had not, as Tehran says, strayed out of them.

After Iran's promise yesterday that the female sailor would soon be released, a senior Iranian official said today that she would remain in captivity if Britain went ahead with its threat to freeze relations.

“We said that the grounds were ready for the release of a woman among the British sailors, but if we are faced with a fuss and wrong behaviour then this would be suspended and it would not take place,” Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and his country's top negotiator, told state television.

Increasing the tension, the Iranian consul in Bassra charged that British soldiers had surrounded his office in the southern Iraqi city this morning and fired shorts into the air in a "provocative act" that "could worsen the situation of the British sailors".

"British forces should rely on wisdom and not react because of the British forcesÂ’ detention. This reflects negatively on bilateral relations," said Consul-General Mohammed Ridha Nasir Baghban.

Britain denied the allegation. The Ministry of Defence said that the was an exchange of gunfire after UK troops on a foot patrol near the consulate building were ambushed.
Posted by:mrp

#33  Who knows what was being done off-camera. Perhaps they had one of her co-hostages with a gun to his head.

Perhaps they threatened her with rape or worse. Islam does use rape as a tool of war.

Personally I think we should remove their only refinery (not take it out -- remove it entirely). To them we (Britain and US) are weak and a paper tiger. We need to show them we have a few teeth.

But then I'm not any sort of am expert like others here :)
Posted by: CrazyFool   2007-03-29 22:53  

#32  Faye's eyes and general facial expression leave doubts as to Iran's claims.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2007-03-29 22:35  

#31  Dealing with Iran is like dealing with a bunch of unfiltered adolescents.

Dealing with Iran Islamic-Governments is like dealing with a bunch of unfiltered adolescents.

(Fixed that for ya.)
Posted by: Crusader   2007-03-29 19:03  

#30  They won't free her if Britain makes a fuss. What kind of responsible government makes statements like that? Dealing with Iran is like dealing with a bunch of unfiltered adolescents.
Posted by: gorb   2007-03-29 17:53  

#29  We should deal with this via diplomacy. We should offer to exchange the British hostages for an American VIP. Perhaps Jimmy Carter could be of service to the country in this role.
Posted by: DMFD   2007-03-29 17:36  

#28  How the hell would any sailor know where they are at any given moment ?

GPS receiver. Apparently they had one that transmitted back to their ship (useful in a combat zone), and it stopped the moment they were captured. I've read speculation it was intentionally dropped into the water to keep the Iranians from getting hold of it -AND- the GPS keys in it.

And, yeah, she was almost certainly acting under duress. We're talking Iran; it should be obvious what she was threatened with.
Posted by: Rob Crawford   2007-03-29 17:21  

#27  How the hell would any sailor know where they are at any given moment ? The Stooges put an 'X' on the side of the boat. But that still doesn't give exact coordinates, and even so, what coordinates are where ? Only navigators and such know such things, and they work on the bridge, not in boarding parties.
Posted by: wxjames   2007-03-29 16:44  

#26  Sorry guys, some of you are right. My point was regardless of their lack of training why would she make such a ridiculous statement? She sure as heck didn't look scared. Maybe they were intimidating her. How knows.

Depot I can understand your outrage and I'm guess you have never been in a similar situation. In mid-March, 89 I was grabbed by several Pakistani military plain clothes dweebs.

I was in Islamabad taking photos during a military parade. They did the old interrogate, threaten, detain and rip out the film routine and left me with with a group of 20 others while the bad guys were going to their superiors. Everyone was armed. Luckily the morons got so interested in the parade they stopped watching me and I back out of the crowd and made my withdrawal back to a hotel. The whole thing didn't last that long the violence was pretty mild.

I was particularly pissed because several days before I'd got a photo of one of their Migs on the ground. Be it an old one but I still thought it was interesting.

Depot the funny part was when they were asking where I was from I said Minnesota. None of them wanted to admit they didn't know where that was and they stopped talking to me. Gutless? I don't think so Scooter. They can only kill you once and I eat Lutefisk, out of season.

My point while decidedly overblown was that what she did was stupid and counter productive to their situation and ran sadly parallel to Rosie's comments the other day. Unless they actually were in Iranian waters she should have refused to talk. But I don't know her, only her actions.
Posted by: Icerigger   2007-03-29 15:59  

#25  "...if Britain creates a 'fuss'"

Ummm, and what else would they do? I certainly have no qualms (none) about the UK fighting man / woman, they can be as hardcore and courageous as anyone else, but their leadership, Sr officers all the way to PM, suck elephant turds through soda straws.

May these brave soldiers return safely - so they help can dish out unfathomable pain to the Iranian Mullahs and their insane minions when the shit hits the fan.
Posted by: Shoth the Obscure6464   2007-03-29 15:39  

#24  Personally I think the idiot just wants a date with Rosie's tuna carpet.

[homer]

Mmmmm! Tuna Carpet. Can I get that on Pumpernickel?

[/homer]
Posted by: Natural Law   2007-03-29 14:51  

#23  I was watching her eyes while she smoked, she blinked: T H I S W A L L P A P E R I S T O R T U R E
Posted by: Shipman   2007-03-29 14:24  

#22  The apporpriate response has been suggested here and elsewhere:

Blair discreetly gives Amadinejad 48 hours to return all 15 prisoners. Failing that, GB simultaneoulsy blockades Iran and destroys her oil refineries. With an assist, if needed, from the true guarantor of Her Majestey's continued security and freedom, i.e. a former colony.

Next move then belongs to Iran. Escalate as needed.
Posted by: Mark Z   2007-03-29 14:24  

#21  It also helps, once released, to vigorously insist that statements made while captive were made under duress. It would also help if the news media would add a little coda, everytime footage of captives making statements to the camera is used, along the lines of "Presumably, these statements are being made under duress, and are furthermore a pack of lies". You know, to remind the clueless that such statements are being made under duress. It might also help remind people that MSM are not the willing flunkies of a concerted anti-Western propaganda effort.
Oh. Sorry. Forgot - they are.
Posted by: Sgt. Mom   2007-03-29 14:23  

#20  Ice I wouldn't pay attention to anything they say while in Iran. In hostage training they taught us to do exactly what they are doing. Go on TV and be seen. One it tells your government that you are in fact alive and it may indicate where you are being held. If you have the chance to make the bad guys life difficult (walk slow, act stupid, give slurred speeches) all the better, but the important thing is to not lose faith in your country. Trust me nobody will be under the illusion that you are happy that the Iranians rescued and spirited you away to their paradise society.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge   2007-03-29 14:11  

#19  unguarded

.. except for that token called HMS Cornwall.
Posted by: gorb   2007-03-29 13:57  

#18  Since Britian appealed for support from its allies, isn't that enough to send the carrier jets inland?

and #5 KE: sometimes i get Islamic headgear and (soiled) panties confused. you mean they aren't the same???
Posted by: USN, Ret.   2007-03-29 13:55  

#17  Can we safely assume the British captives have had explicit orders about what to do and say if captured? If so, why criticize them? Particularly the only woman, who the Iranians have naturally focussed on.
Posted by: Grunter   2007-03-29 13:53  

#16  What is going on? The brits send an unguarded patrol in an area disputed by Iraq and Iran just before de UN is suppose to put the screws on the Iranians.................somebody has any ideas........Besides the Iranians specialize in this kind of rogue behaviour.......foreign-diplomatic property doesn't mean ANYTHING to the Iranians.......
Posted by: Spuse the Elder7296   2007-03-29 13:51  

#15  Ice you idiot, it has already been stated that these troops don't have counter-interrogation training as they were never expected to require it.
They were simply told to say anything the would be required to say.
You my friend, are an idiot!
Posted by: Nero   2007-03-29 13:47  

#14  Icerigger, you are certainly entitled to your opinions but crude remarks about how others react in captive situations in MY opinion are gutless. On the other hand maybe you have some stories of how brave you were in a similar situation where you didnÂ’t compromise your integrity.
Posted by: DepotGuy   2007-03-29 13:36  

#13  I reckon she was coerced.
Posted by: eLarson   2007-03-29 13:33  

#12  Ice

It does appear there may be only 14 hostages.
Posted by: BrerRabbit   2007-03-29 13:31  

#11  Brit female sailor goes Dhimmi, kissing camel butt.

The video showed Turney in a head scarf and her uniform eating with other sailors and marines. Later, wearing a white tunic and black head scarf, she sat in a room before floral curtains and smoked a cigarette.

"Obviously we trespassed into their waters," Turney said at one point. "They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people.


Personally I think the idiot just wants a date with Rosie's tuna carpet. Absolutely pathetic.
Posted by: Icerigger   2007-03-29 13:11  

#10  I'm getting more angry
Posted by: Crineter Peacock1392   2007-03-29 12:53  

#9  I'd puke, but it really wouldn't make me feel any better. Shades of 1979.
Posted by: Bobby   2007-03-29 11:14  

#8  Maybe they should have fired panties into the air instead of shorts.
Posted by: Threretch Shatch4832   2007-03-29 11:04  

#7  This part of the article grabbed my attention:

Increasing the tension, the Iranian consul in Bassra charged that British soldiers had surrounded his office in the southern Iraqi city this morning and fired shorts into the air in a "provocative act" that "could worsen the situation of the British sailors".

"British forces should rely on wisdom and not react because of the British forcesÂ’ detention. This reflects negatively on bilateral relations,"
said Consul-General Mohammed Ridha Nasir Baghban.

In other words, the Persians are demanding they be given uncontested control of southern Iraq, or else the British hostages each get a bullet in the head. They're betting that Blair's government is just craven enough to hand the oil terminals and more than half of Iraq's massive oil reserves over to the ayatollahs. Now that would increase the price of [North Sea - Scotland] oil.
Posted by: mrp   2007-03-29 10:17  

#6  I can see the Guardian headline already.

Be a man Tony and say you're sorry!
Posted by: danking_70   2007-03-29 10:13  

#5  If an Iraqi prisoner has women's panties put on his head and a picture taken by American soldiers, it is called torture by the MSM. How come the MSM is not crying torture when a British soldier is forced to wear an Islamic head covering on TV?
Posted by: Knuckles Ebberenter4649   2007-03-29 09:59  

#4  It's time to appropriate their oil rigs in the gulf. One per each sailor/marine.
Posted by: texhooey   2007-03-29 09:52  

#3  You know I have been all over the place on this issue and now I am not sure what to do. At first I thought that the Brits (or U.S.) should pick some naval port and just destroy it. Afterwards announce that if the Hostages are not released in 8 hours another facility will cease to exist. No I am of the thought that the Iranians aint winning any friends because clearly they are in the wrong. Expose them to the world and they will crumble from within.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge   2007-03-29 09:51  

#2  The Iranians are doing this to fluff oil prices.
Posted by: Penguin   2007-03-29 09:41  

#1  Bomb them. These two bit dictators are asking for it.
Posted by: DarthVader   2007-03-29 09:18  

00:00