| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| EU Refuses To Back Britain |
| 2007-04-01 |
| Blair is left to make a statement of disgust after the airing of another video from captured British troops European foreign ministers failed last night to back Britain in a threat to freeze the €14 billion trade in exports to Iran, as the hostage crisis descended into a propaganda circus. Tony Blair could only issue a new statement of disgust as Iran tormented him with another sailor’s video confession and a fresh letter from the young mother detainee. A first written message from the Tehran Government offered some hope of a deal, but time is running out before the Iranian new year holiday ends and militant students and politicians return to business. EU foreign ministers meeting in Germany called for the sailors to be freed but ruled out any tightening of lucrative export credit rules. The EU is Iran’s biggest trading partner. British officials are understood to have taken soundings on economic sanctions before the meeting but found few takers. France, Iran’s second-largest EU trading partner, cautioned that further confrontation should be avoided. The Dutch said it was important not to risk a breakdown in dialogue. ...Britain’s response to the seizure of its sailors and Marines has been branded weak by Republicans in Washington. John Bolton, until recently the US Ambassador to the United Nations, described the Government’s incremental approach as “pathetic”. He said that Mr Blair should be threatening “real pain, real economic sanctions” unless Iran released the sailors immediately. “Britain has got to be tougher here,” he said. Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, urged Britain to threaten military force to destroy Iran’s petroleum industry. more at link... if you can bear to read it. |
| Posted by:Dave D. |
| #32 Sadly, things will have to get a lot worse before they get better. America can not fight Europe's battles for them, and the tendency now for Europe is to apply a diplomatic approach which hardly masks their weakness. England and the rest of the EU have a long, long way to go before they are pushed too far and the political calculus favors a firmer approach. |
| Posted by: Grumenk Philalzabod0723 2007-04-01 22:45 |
| #31 The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy nor Roman for most of its existence. As for the EU, The UK needs to withdraw and point to the knife in their back as the reason. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2007-04-01 21:09 |
| #30 BTW, why wasn't the crew of that cargo dhow scooped up along with the British sailors? |
| Posted by: gorb 2007-04-01 19:55 |
| #29 We are obviously going to have to come up with a term that fits better than "moral relativism". How about "moral blindness", as in immune from any and all moral compulsion? It couldn't be that bad, could it? Is part or all of the problem that they are so easily baited by money right now? Evidently, it is. The EU is so concerned over economically keeping up with the This is as close to a no-brainer as it gets. In the land of the brainless, the single-synapse man is king. What would happen if some French sailors were to intrude into Iranian waters for real on a similiar non-aggressive mission? Limitless Islamic ingratitude dictates that even the ass-kissing French would be made to kiss yet more tracts of Islamic ass. Nothing less would satisfy the voracious Muslim desire to subjugate and humiliate the West, even lapdog France. France's own Islamic population certainly doesn't cut them any slack at home, why would Muslims abroad do any different? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-04-01 19:25 |
| #28 We are obviously going to have to come up with a term that fits better than "moral relativism". Any way you cut it, this Islam thing doesn't hold a candle to western culture. I can't imagine what "relative" point of view would justify the European governments or people siding with terrorists, except for money. It couldn't be that bad, could it? Is part or all of the problem that they are so easily baited by money right now? Are jealousy or pride wrt England blinding the governments to what they are asking for? Are the people truly being represented by the government? Certainly England is very close to France, how's that for relative? Did you see the thread yesterday that dealt with moonbat POVs? This whole thing is doomed if they don't get a handle on what they are thinking right now. This is as close to a no-brainer as it gets. What would happen if some French sailors were to intrude into Iranian waters for real on a similiar non-aggressive mission? If they were let go quickly, it would speak volumes . . . . |
| Posted by: gorb 2007-04-01 18:05 |
| #27 Hey what does this mean? A first written message from the Tehran Government offered some hope of a deal, but time is running out before the Iranian new year holiday ends and militant students and politicians return to business. Unique Battle asked this earlier as well. |
| Posted by: Jan from work 2007-04-01 17:56 |
| #26 Do they think that if they are nice that everything will be OK when the devil comes to get what's due to him? In light of the EU's moral relativism, this certainly seems to be the case. These morons simply cannot bring themselves to think that one day they will have to pay the Iranian or Islamic pipers. What continues to be less than amusing is their ability to decry American culture while turning a blind eye to the most barbaric Islamic behavior. This is where their moral relativism becomes sheer hypocrisy. Otherwise they would be just as accepting of America as they are of Islam. It only be an intense jealousy that explains Europe's willingness to triangulate against those who have repeatedly |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-04-01 17:43 |
| #25 The EU doesn't get it. They are supposed to stick together to increase their clout. Instead, they are running in the direction of lower personal short-term profit instead of greater collective long-term profit. They have a mentality that ensures a tragedy of the commons on its way. And why would they pick supporting a rogue nation that will certainly cause them problems in the future at almost any cost? Do they think that if they are nice that everything will be OK when the devil comes to get what's due to him? And someone commented that the prop has a tendency to fall off that French aircraft carrier? I was wondering if is because it was designed to be operated in the opposite direction . . . . |
| Posted by: gorb 2007-04-01 16:14 |
| #24 It's time to leave NATO and the WTO, offer the UK and Denmark and Poland and who ever wants to join it the same trade deal Canada and Mexico have and mutual defence treaties on the condition they leave the EU. The time for something like this is long past. We need to form a Union of Democratic Nations that will begin sanctioning all rogue regimes and tyrannies. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-04-01 14:02 |
| #23 "Is it time to stick a fork in the UK? (meant as a real question, and said with great sadness and frustration)" Not yet. We'll know in another couple of days, though; if by next weekend those hostages aren't home and the Iranians aren't licking some serious wounds and wondering what the fuck hit them, then the answer will be "yes". And frankly, you could probably stick a fork in us, too; if we can't cover the Brits' backs well enough to give them a good shot at kicking the snot out of the Iranians, then we're not good for much, either. Or at least, our national leadership isn't. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2007-04-01 13:56 |
| #22 well the french ships have prob already ran like hell |
| Posted by: sinse 2007-04-01 13:41 |
| #21 If we are doomed to pay $5 a gallon for gas this summer, then I certainly desire the Iranians to be paying $5, instead of their subsidied .35/gallon. That will have to piss off Iranian soccer moms. Calling Iranian disidents...it's go time. |
| Posted by: Capsu 78 2007-04-01 13:26 |
| #20 If the British just took Newt's suggestion of threating a cruise missile strike on Iranian Gas Refinery, this would be ended in short order. Iran would be stuck with three options 1) bow to the British and give the Brits back 2) accept the destruction of thier only gas refinery and the domestic consequences 3) go offensive against the British and see the US gladly come to our allies aid in a widespread bombing campain directed at the Iranian WMD, leadership, Military, and central government control ability. Will Britian have the kind of balls to try it. Doubtfull The odd part is that even with Britians weakness Iran is very likely to take the weakness as a sign to make a play for all and overreach, forcing the reaction the west still has in itself but lacks the political leadership to use short forced. Once the Iranians overreach and open Pandora's Box it falls the generals who do have the sack and will. |
| Posted by: C-Low 2007-04-01 13:20 |
| #19 They won't take it, they've chosen the gigolo and the ovenmaker. So let it be written, so let it be done. |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2007-04-01 13:19 |
| #18 It's time to leave NATO and the WTO, offer the UK and Denmark and Poland and who ever wants to join it the same trade deal Canada and Mexico have and mutual defence treaties on the condition they leave the EU. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-04-01 13:05 |
| #17 Is it time to stick a fork in the UK? (meant as a real question, and said with great sadness and frustration) |
| Posted by: Verlaine 2007-04-01 12:57 |
| #16 ...but time is running out before the Iranian new year holiday ends and militant students and politicians return to business. Does anyone know what the hell this is supposed to mean? |
| Posted by: Unique Battle 2007-04-01 12:51 |
| #15 wxjames: That is the current EU flag, but integrating the "roadkill crow" symbol of the old Holy Roman Empire, which lasted a thousand years and accomplished almost nothing, was pretty well ignored and powerless, and was just generally ineffectual. Its only effective leader was its founder, Charlemagne, and it was all downhill for 975 years after his death. Which seems to be much the same course the EU is following. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-04-01 12:47 |
| #14 And what if they do? We hit back. And we can hit back a *LOT* harder than they can hit us; it's merely a matter of will. At some point you have to stop the hand-wringing and fretting over what the enemy might do, and just STOMP on the sonofabitch. Will we take hits? Of course we will. That's war. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2007-04-01 12:38 |
| #13 I'm not up on the all latest details of ship defence, it was some time ago that I read about the Sunburns. But it seems likely that if the British go for a blockade, the Iranians will try to hit any Western target they can. |
| Posted by: Sonar 2007-04-01 12:29 |
| #12 Let me guess, a raven clock face ? |
| Posted by: wxjames 2007-04-01 12:17 |
| #11 |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-04-01 12:03 |
| #10 Yes but what about the US and French ships in the area? Oh, don't worry about the French. They have had their white-flag alertness level at its highest level since the sailors were taken hostage. Once the order comes in from Paris, the flags will be deployed and the French ships and sailors will be surrendered to the Iranians within literally minutes. |
| Posted by: garbagecowboy 2007-04-01 12:03 |
| #9 Why am I not surprised... |
| Posted by: Tony (UK) 2007-04-01 12:02 |
| #8 I suspect the U.S. ships can defend themselves adequately. They can also retaliate, massively. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2007-04-01 11:51 |
| #7 Yes but what about the US and French ships in the area? |
| Posted by: Sonar 2007-04-01 11:43 |
| #6 Sonar, last I heard Sunburns aren't much of a threat to submarines. |
| Posted by: RWV 2007-04-01 11:18 |
| #5 Although having said that, there is the question of Sunburn anti-ship missiles... |
| Posted by: Sonar 2007-04-01 11:08 |
| #4 Pretty ironic that Blair wants to scuttle half the Royal Navy. I say we blockade these fucktards while we still have the capability. |
| Posted by: Sonar 2007-04-01 11:07 |
| #3 Use of the term "balls" in describing any EU member is an oxymoron. |
| Posted by: ΛΕΟΝΙΔΑΣ 2007-04-01 11:06 |
| #2 That is, if they have the balls to use them. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2007-04-01 10:33 |
| #1 Bastards. Folks look, if it comes down to hammer time the Royal Navy can by itself blockade the Persian entity. It would take less effort than the Falklands reclamation, no ground would be required. 2 SSN and 3 or 4 SS would cut off Iran from the world. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-04-01 10:27 |