Iran, Bush, & British Sailors - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

seretogis · 06-22-2004, 08:15 AM

This is an interesting (though fairly tinfoil-hat) theory on why Iran would sieze British soldiers. It is a possible scenario, but I doubt that it is plausible since Iran has their own internal issues and I don't think they would be stupid enough to directly attack Iraq, and through them, the US.

LINK

Quote:

Ready for $60-a-Barrel Oil?
The Iranian election strategy at work.

So the Iranians seized some British "warships" yesterday, and arrested eight British naval officers. That's what the Iranians announced in the morning, and that's all we've heard. The chatterers were agog. Why would the Iranians do such a crazy thing? Do they really want war (If that isn't a good old-fashioned causus belli, what is?)? Etc.

Yes, they're crazy, no doubt. But they're not stupid. And if an Iranian action seems stupid, you're probably misinterpreting it. There's a perfectly straightforward explanation for the whole episode: The Brits were laying down a network of sensors to detect the movement of ships toward major Iraqi oil terminals. The Iranians considered that a bit of a threat. So they attacked.

And why, you might ask, did the Iranians feel threatened?

Because they were planning to attack (or have their surrogates attack) the oil terminals, silly.

And why attack the oil terminals?

Because they want to defeat President Bush in November, and they figure if they can get the price of oil up to around $60 a barrel, he'll lose to Kerry.

Not to mention a considerable side benefit: At $60 a barrel, they can buy whatever they may be lacking to get their atomic bombs up and running.

It's not that hard to understand the mullahs once you learn to think as they do, and understand their hopes and fears.

What do they hope? That Bush will lose; that the Coalition will collapse; that they can dominate Iraq and create an Islamic republic in the Iranian image. That will expand their power in the region, totally demoralize the internal democratic opposition, and drive America from the Middle East, thereby permitting them to complete their nuclear-weapons program at their leisure. A dream come true.

What do they fear? Above all, their own people. (And a free, relatively stable Iraq would inspire the Iranian people to demand the same freedom for themselves, meaning the end of the mullahcracy). An aggressive American policy in support of democratic revolution in Iran, for the same reason. A collapse in oil prices. The reelection of George W. Bush.

So you see at once the bases of Iranian policy: Drive oil prices up and the Americans out of Iraq, whatever the cost. The Brits were in the way, blocking easy access for saboteurs to the Iraqi oil facilities. Ergo the "crazy" action. Which turns out to be not so crazy at all.

And one other thing: The Iranians figure they've got the Brits under control, because the Brits have lots of contracts with them. Thus far, the Brits have behaved like good little boys, forestalling any effective steps to get in the way of the nuclear program, and lobbying the Bush administration to be "reasonable" and "patient." You can be sure that the British foreign office has every confidence that no harm will come to their officers, and that the incident will be resolved quickly and even amiably.

Not crazy at all. In fact, they're winning.

If anybody cares, it's a good bet that Iranian-sponsored hit squads will be going after lots of oil terminals and refineries in the next couple of months.

But it's hard to find anyone who cares. I guess we can afford $60 a barrel, and I suppose Foggy Bottom and the CIA will be able to manage a nuclear Iran. Right?

Rekna · 06-22-2004, 08:39 AM

this should be moved to the paranoia forum...

onetime2 · 06-22-2004, 09:16 AM

I think it was all Ralph Nader's doing.

apeman · 06-23-2004, 01:45 AM

1) I wouldn't be suprised if the British sailors were doing something a little bit iffy... we'd certainly get paranoid if we had Iranian boats inside our territorial limits.

2) "warships"? you can't seize a warship, you'd get your head blown off

Aborted · 06-23-2004, 02:37 AM

They actually seized three small dinghys, which somewhat lowers the drama factor in all this.

I'd be interested to know how the author of this article got hold of the information about sensor laying, as I was under the impression that patrols along that stretch of water were common to prevent militants crossing from Iran into Iraq.

I guess if the soldiers aren't released promptly it'll be SAS at the ready.

MSD · 06-23-2004, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aborted
[B] They actually seized three small dinghys, which somewhat lowers the drama factor in all this.

This should be somewhat evident, as eight soldiers would not be able to run much of anythign that could be called a "warship." This is where the article starts to lose credibility, over-exaggerating facts to make the message sound ominous.

Quote:

I'd be interested to know how the author of this article got hold of the information about sensor laying, as I was under the impression that patrols along that stretch of water were common to prevent militants crossing from Iran into Iraq.

It's the same place that 99% of these nuts get their information, pure speculation and fabricated facts. They were most likely on a routine patrol and went a bit too far in the wrong direction, a much more plausible theory.

So, Iran is conspiring to get Bush out of office? They also shot JFK ... And I thought I was paranoid.

apeman · 06-23-2004, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrSelfDestruct
They were most likely on a routine patrol and went a bit too far in the wrong direction, a much more plausible theory.

now that's crazy talk

and I don't think they'd send the SAS in, that would be pretty crazy too. They're good, but I don't think they're that good.

BigGov · 06-23-2004, 08:43 AM

Nah, an elite section of their fighting force, don't send them in

The SAS are trained to rescue hostages in small teams. They're some of the best in the world at doing so. If they're going to send in anyone, most likely it would be the SAS.

Pacifier · 06-23-2004, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy4
War, or SAS, which would you choose?

war or SAS?! Do you think sending in the SAS is a way to prevent a war?!

Zeld2.0 · 06-23-2004, 09:00 AM

Sounds more like the boats drifted into the wrong water...

I remember a few years back, the British were doing mock landings... only problem was, they landed in the wrong country (albeit a few miles off)... but this stuff has happened

BigGov · 06-23-2004, 09:07 AM

Pacifier, you mis-understood. If you'd like me to explain, we can talk in PM.

onetime2 · 06-23-2004, 09:15 AM

Just so everyone is up to date, the captured military men will be released...

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...ain_iran_dc_33

Quote:

Release of UK Detainees in Iran Likely Thursday-TV

Wed Jun 23, 8:49 AM ET Add Top Stories - Reuters to My Yahoo!

TEHRAN (Reuters) - The release of eight British military servicemen held in Iran after they entered Iranian waters is likely to be delayed until Thursday, Iran's Arabic-language Al-Alam satellite television said Wednesday.

"Taking decisions on releasing the detained (British) troops is likely to be delayed to Thursday as there is not enough time, because the delegation will arrive late tonight to the region," the channel said quoting one of its correspondents.

A delegation of British diplomats has already arrived in the area.

The report also said the three British boats and the equipment in them would stay in Iranian naval custody.

British diplomats landed in Khuzestan in southwest Iran for the handover Wednesday and were headed to Bandar Mahshahr, a petrochemical center.

"We have just landed in Ahvaz," a diplomat said, speaking from the provincial capital of Khuzestan, the oil-rich province on the Iraqi border. They were arriving from the Iranian capital Tehran.

Lebell · 06-23-2004, 09:39 AM

Iran is playing a dangerous game.

They are hoping to bloody the US when they may end up bloodied themselves.

seretogis · 06-23-2004, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aborted
They actually seized three small dinghys, which somewhat lowers the drama factor in all this.

You misread the article -- the quotes around the word "warships" was to indicate that the Iranians referred to them as warships, not that the author thought that they were in fact warships.

Zeld2.0 · 06-23-2004, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lebell
Iran is playing a dangerous game.

They are hoping to bloody the US when they may end up bloodied themselves.

Heh its the UK anyways

Iran will always try to play the U.S. along as long as it keeps saying its going to be a democracy when it still has little reason to en care about what the U.S. wants

apeman · 06-24-2004, 05:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy4
The SAS are trained to rescue hostages in small teams. They're some of the best in the world at doing so. If they're going to send in anyone, most likely it would be the SAS.

I know what the SAS are trained for, and they are probably the best in the world at that kind of stuff (well in the top 5 anyways).

If anyone could do it, the SAS could but I don't think even the SAS could do it.

but they've let em go now thankfully, so we won't find out

06-22-2004, 09:16 AM	#3 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	I think it was all Ralph Nader's doing. __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

06-23-2004, 01:45 AM	#4 (permalink)
apeman Wah Location: NZ	1) I wouldn't be suprised if the British sailors were doing something a little bit iffy... we'd certainly get paranoid if we had Iranian boats inside our territorial limits. 2) "warships"? you can't seize a warship, you'd get your head blown off __________________ pain is inevitable but misery is optional - stick a geranium in your hat and be happy

06-23-2004, 08:43 AM	#8 (permalink)
BigGov WoW or Class... Location: UWW	Nah, an elite section of their fighting force, don't send them in The SAS are trained to rescue hostages in small teams. They're some of the best in the world at doing so. If they're going to send in anyone, most likely it would be the SAS. __________________ One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!" Last edited by BigGov; 06-23-2004 at 09:13 AM..

06-23-2004, 09:07 AM	#11 (permalink)
BigGov WoW or Class... Location: UWW	Pacifier, you mis-understood. If you'd like me to explain, we can talk in PM. __________________ One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!" Last edited by BigGov; 06-23-2004 at 09:14 AM..

06-23-2004, 09:39 AM	#13 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Iran is playing a dangerous game. They are hoping to bloody the US when they may end up bloodied themselves. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

06-22-2004, 08:39 AM	#2 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	this should be moved to the paranoia forum...

06-23-2004, 02:37 AM	#5 (permalink)
Aborted Tilted Location: London	They actually seized three small dinghys, which somewhat lowers the drama factor in all this. I'd be interested to know how the author of this article got hold of the information about sensor laying, as I was under the impression that patrols along that stretch of water were common to prevent militants crossing from Iran into Iraq. I guess if the soldiers aren't released promptly it'll be SAS at the ready.

06-23-2004, 09:00 AM	#10 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Sounds more like the boats drifted into the wrong water... I remember a few years back, the British were doing mock landings... only problem was, they landed in the wrong country (albeit a few miles off)... but this stuff has happened