Lounge Daddy Posted April 2, 2007 Share Posted April 2, 2007 I just kidding. Naturally there is no outcry among the Libs. What about fair treatment? what about dignity? what about fair trial? what about Geneva Conventions? naw. I didn't expect to here such an outcry from our modern American Libs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Daddy Posted April 2, 2007 Author Share Posted April 2, 2007 excuse me... I meant to say: Amerikan Libs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RezaMikhaeil Posted April 2, 2007 Share Posted April 2, 2007 (edited) Why do you always have to turn it into an "us against them" situation? I highly doubt people are going to respond to your post [unless they agree with you] because you haven't learned to treat people like human beings, rather then opposing demographics [and I mean this in the most loving way, so that posetive discussions about politics can take place, as we used to have better discussions on this board]. Reza Edited April 2, 2007 by RezaLemmyng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Daddy Posted April 3, 2007 Author Share Posted April 3, 2007 (edited) oh I simply think that it is interesting that: - the UK sailors were on a UN mission - they are taken by Iran - marched in front of cameras every day - the noisy ACLU and other extremist libs in this country who compare Bush to Hitler and piss & whine about Club Gitmo and the treatment of captured terrorists there remain silent - the Israelis taken by Iran the have still been unreleased. Are they dead? forgotten? Where is the outcry? This issue simply seems mixed up to me. Edited April 3, 2007 by Lounge Daddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RezaMikhaeil Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 [quote]the UK sailors were on a UN mission[/quote] You dont know that, you havn't tracked their GPS for yourself, you're basing this upon false evidence, like your general hatred for Muslims as a whole. Reza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCid Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 (edited) [quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1228108' date='Apr 3 2007, 12:55 AM']You dont know that, you havn't tracked their GPS for yourself, you're basing this upon false evidence, like your general hatred for Muslims as a whole. Reza[/quote] Just out of wonder, what do you think they were doing? I was under the understanding that they were patrolling for smugglers under a U.N. mandate, but were taken hostage for possibly crossing the Iranian border (I never really understood the border on bodies of water, but that's just me) The good news is that the Iranians have agreed to stop parading them infront of cameras and releasing 'confessions' by them after Britians disapproval (I also believe that's not allowed under some universal rights acts, not sure though) and they are trying for a diplomatic solution. Edited April 3, 2007 by CatholicCid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest T-Bone Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 (edited) [quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1228108' date='Apr 2 2007, 11:55 PM']You don't know that, you haven't tracked their GPS for yourself, you're basing this upon false evidence, like your general hatred for Muslims as a whole. Reza[/quote] They were there on a UN mandate and the invitation of the Iraqi government. The pilot/captain of the Indian freighter they just searched attests that they were in Iraqi waters. The British government attests they were in Iraqi waters. If they were in Iranian waters, why wasn't the crew of the freighter detained? Edited April 3, 2007 by T-Bone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RezaMikhaeil Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 [quote name='CatholicCid' post='1228111' date='Apr 3 2007, 12:04 AM']Just out of wonder, what do you think they were doing? I was under the understanding that they were patrolling for smugglers under a U.N. mandate, but were taken hostage for possibly crossing the Iranian border (I never really understood the border on bodies of water, but that's just me) The good news is that the Iranians have agreed to stop parading them infront of cameras and releasing 'confessions' by them after Britians disapproval (I also believe that's not allowed under some universal rights acts, not sure though) and they are trying for a diplomatic solution.[/quote] That's a great question, I believe that the UK sailors were in the Persian Gulf but can't speculate the area because I don't have the means to track GPS. The Iranians have been paranoid about a UK/US invasion and so their security is elevated. The UK Sailors [who were in a very small boat] could have drifted off course [wouldn't be the first time] and crossed the boarder, in which the Iranians [for whatever reason] decided to take them. Miscommunication causes alot of problems too. Everyone likes to point fingers at each other but miscommunication adds to the situation too. The United States has arrested and help hundreds of thousands of Muslims [and other demographics] that they thought "could be" a potential terrorist, in which nearly everyone of those cases was just the fear of a terrorist attack but weren't terrorists themselves. I'd been searched as a terrorist before, famous commedian Ahmed Ahmed [who happens to have the same name as a famous terrorist] has to go through searches everytime he flies [and he flies alot] but does that mean that the state department is intentionally trying to descriminate against him because he's arab? No, it's the fear that when the name "ahmed ahmed" comes up on the "no fly list", people get scared. Iran is very scared of a US invasion. The chances that those UK sailors were picked up by low level Iranian military personel is more then likely, it wasn't like the President of Iran himself, went and plucked them out of the water. Reza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest T-Bone Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 It was not low level military personal that kidnapped them, but an elite squad, not under the command of the general military, but the religious leadership of Iran. As you said, it was 15 guys in a small boat. If the Iranians really thought these sailors where in the wrong place, they would have simply turned them back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RezaMikhaeil Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 [quote name='T-Bone' post='1228122' date='Apr 3 2007, 12:18 AM']It was not low level military personal that kidnapped them, but an elite squad, not under the command of the general military, but the religious leadership of Iran. [b]and tell me where you get that information please.[/b] As you said, it was 15 guys in a small boat. If the Iranians really thought these sailors where in the wrong place, they would have simply turned them back. [b]I never said that, what I said is that the Iranians were scared of an attack and probably arrested them for being in Iranian waters [if they drifted off course, which we don't know yet].[/b][/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest T-Bone Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 (edited) [quote]and tell me where you get that information please.[/quote]It was in the news. Perhaps you've heard of it? [quote]I never said that, what I said is that the Iranians were scared of an attack and probably arrested them for being in Iranian waters [if they drifted off course, which we don't know yet].[/quote] Um...yes you did. [quote]the UK Sailors [who were in a very small boat]could have drifted off course [wouldn't be the first time] and crossed the boarder, in which the Iranians [for whatever reason] decided to take them.[/quote] Edited April 3, 2007 by T-Bone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mateo el Feo Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 (edited) [quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1228119' date='Apr 3 2007, 03:14 AM']That's a great question, I believe that the UK sailors were in the Persian Gulf but can't speculate the area because I don't have the means to track GPS.[/quote]For what it's worth, the British govt. (Ministry of Defence) released a picture of a GPS, taken inside a helicopter. Below is a ship (presumably, the one being searched?). Here's the image: [img]http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/DB42AC92-E1CC-4478-9910-B8CB299A6612/0/HeloGPS.jpg[/img] The reported long/lat location is: 29°50'10.44"N 48°43'32.64"E [url="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=29%C2%B050%2710.44%22N,+48%C2%B043%2732.64%22E&layer=&ie=UTF8&z=10&ll=30.007274,48.493652&spn=0.650496,1.496887&t=h&om=1&iwloc=addr"]Here's the link on Google Maps.[/url] I believe that the Iraq/Iran international boundary follows the direction of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arvandrud/Shatt_al-Arab"]Arvandrud/Shatt al-Arab[/url] at its mouth. Unfortunately, international water boundaries aren't included in Google Maps. Further, the boundaries representations are often subsampled anyway. We'd need something more precise, even though the location looks like it's on the Iraq side. To make matters worse, the boundary itself seems to be a subject of dispute between Iran and Iraq. Edited April 3, 2007 by Mateo el Feo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RezaMikhaeil Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 [quote name='T-Bone' post='1228136' date='Apr 3 2007, 12:30 AM']It was in the news. Perhaps you've heard of it? [b]Surely I knew what the news said, but you don't have proof beyond that. Have you heard the Farsi from the gov. of Iran's mouth?[/b] Um...yes you did. No what I said was, "The UK Sailors [who were in a very small boat] could have drifted off course [wouldn't be the first time] and crossed the boarder, in which the Iranians [for whatever reason] decided to take them." In which I'd never said that Iranians thought that these British sailors "drifted off course" or "were in the wrong area", I'd said that the British could have, but that the Iranians could have thought it was an invasion. The Iranians that plucked them out of the water could have had a standard protocol that dictated "what to do if..." kind of situation. Being former military, I can tell you that if a person [any person for that matter] violates a restricted area [even if they'd "slightly went off course", in a time of war, it wouldn't be just a "help get them back on course" kind of situation but they'd probably be detained, asked questions, etc. [and depending on the situation, could face much much more.][/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RezaMikhaeil Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 [quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='1228142' date='Apr 3 2007, 12:37 AM']For what it's worth, the British govt. (Ministry of Defence) released a picture of a GPS, taken inside a helicopter. Below is a ship (presumably, the one being searched?). Here's the image: [img]http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/DB42AC92-E1CC-4478-9910-B8CB299A6612/0/HeloGPS.jpg[/img] [b]Not to discredit you [because I have much respect for you and don't believe you'd fabricate nothing] but we can't count on the authenticity of this picture either. Militants in Iraq reciently had taken credit for shooting down a US helecopter but the US says that it was a video fabrication and since propaganda is much used in this war, its difficult to say what's real and what isn't. I often watch Iranian TV [and A.J.] and see alot of "documents" that appear to show actual evidence but in the end are very disputed.[/b] The reported long/lat location is: 29°50'10.44"N 48°43'32.64"E [url="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=29%C2%B050%2710.44%22N,+48%C2%B043%2732.64%22E&layer=&ie=UTF8&z=10&ll=30.007274,48.493652&spn=0.650496,1.496887&t=h&om=1&iwloc=addr"]Here's the link on Google Maps.[/url] I believe that the Iraq/Iran international boundary follows the direction of the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arvandrud/Shatt_al-Arab"]Arvandrud/Shatt al-Arab[/url] at its mouth. Unfortunately, international water boundaries aren't included in Google Maps. Further, the boundaries representations are often subsampled anyway. We'd need something more precise, even though the location looks like it's on the Iraq side. [b]I'm glad that you mentioned this, because even if the GPS was accurate [could be, could not be], what most don't understand is that the boarders are much disputed [particularly in the Persian Gulf]. If someone proclaims that they were in Iraqi waters [for sure] or weren't based upon this GPS, it's still so difficult to know for sure. As you probably know, most countries don't agree on boarders either, which is why alot of neighboring countries are at odds with each other.[/b] To make matters worse, the boundary itself seems to be a subject of dispute between Iran and Iraq.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mateo el Feo Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 (edited) [quote name='Reza']Not to discredit you [because I have much respect for you and don't believe you'd fabricate nothing] but we can't count on the authenticity of this picture either.[/quote]No worries. Though I personally trust the authenticity of the GPS, my intent was not to argue its authenticity. I wanted to provide the British government's side of the story, without passing judgment on it--I leave that to the reader. The only alternative viewpoint I have seen has come from the Iranian government video of the British sailors, who are making statements under duress. Quoting an AP report:[quote name='AP']The (British) military said satellite positioning readings showed the vessels were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters. Vice Adm. Charles Style gave the satellite coordinates as 29 degrees 50.36 minutes north latitude and 48 degrees 43.08 minutes east longitude. He said that position had been confirmed by an Indian-flagged merchant ship boarded by the sailors and marines. He also told reporters the Iranians had provided a geographical position Sunday that he said was in Iraqi waters. By Tuesday, he said, Iranian officials had given a revised position 2 miles to the east, inside Iranian waters. "It is hard to understand a legitimate reason for this change of coordinates," Style said.[/quote]I realize that you may not accept the British story, but I quote it for completeness. Anyway, I read the Iranian govt's Long/Lat, mentioned during one of the "confessions." Their location was: 29°51'9"N 48°45'11"E, which is about 2 miles northeast (surprise, surpise) from the British location. The image was a bit blurry, but I'm pretty sure that this is the right coordinate. If you have watched the Iranian govt TV, please let me know if you see the specific lat/long that they are claiming. Edited April 3, 2007 by Mateo el Feo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now