Brits taken Hostage

Site Issues 2007 Archive Room
#61

What your not getting or fail to understand is that the RN knows exactly the position of the kidnapped hostages, the Iranians are just guessing as can be seen by the misleading positions they have given.

Also the ability for the RN to known its location is very important if they wish to put a Tomahawk through your window from 500ks.

Iran is looking for a fight and wants the west to fire the first shot so that they can clame poor me they are picking on us.

Saw a report saying that Iran was looking to capture blond blue eyed westerners because the US has captured Iranian terrorists in Iraq.

POWs are covered by the Third Geneva Convention and in particular in this case article 13,

(Article 13): “…Prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.”

Showing film of them confessing is insulting intimidating and public curiosity.

But as article 2 has not been enacted then it dose not apply,

Article 2 specifies when the parties are bound by GCIII
· That any armed conflict between two or more “High Contracting Parties” is covered by GCIII;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Geneva_Convention

#62

Before posting do some reading.

They had just completed a search for smuggled cars, as this is quite a lucrative trade in the area. If you did some research you would also find that a large part of the oil from Iraq is being smuggled out of Iraq into Iran. The IRG have been implicated in this. It is also beloved that they control much of the smuggling in the gulf area.

Have a look at the other links to see the pattern.

What happened if USA or Britain captured in they waters bunch of guys dressed in military foreighn uniform, with weapons? And to make things worse one of them have a beard…

Why do soldiers not have beards?

They are probably re-enactors who got lost.

Carry a weapon in the UK you get 7 years so not a good idea.

It is normally accepted by the sane part of the world they you ask them to leave your waters as trying to escort the Nimitz any place can be problematic.:smiley:

#63

Sure, escaping and withholding snesetive iformation is cool.
But I was talking about “piss them of as much as possible” kind of thing attitude. If it is part of the code of conduct.

#64

As a general proposition I doubt that this is correct.

The essence of a criminal offence is intent by the offender.

An accident lacks intent.

Entering national waters by accident falls more under the general head of unlawful entry as distinct from intentional crime. Much the same as walking onto private land by accident is more in the nature of a civil trespass than the crime of intentionally entering a building with intent to steal. The significance is that you would be entitled to defend yourself against or arrest a burglar in your home, but not someone who strays onto your land by accident.

There is also the question of whether or not a nation’s claim to national waters is valid or recognised. A lot of territorial claims over the sea are disputed. I wouldn’t bet on Iran’s claims being valid just by reference to the mid-point between Iran and Iraq. They’re both just as likely to be disputing some 9th century event or religious claim which gives one or other title to the whole area. :slight_smile:

Rather than viewing the Brits as criminals, why not view the Iranians as pirates (who are subject to elimination by anyone)? There is more to support the latter view.

#65

It is, really, although Gen Sandworm being an American expressed himself clearly rather than obliquely like a Eurpoean diplomat.

A captured soldier does not cease to serve his or her nation, nor is released from his or her own military law, just because he or she is a POW.

A POW can still damage the enemy’s forces by being difficult in captivity and requiring the enemy to use more forces to maintain prisons or to move difficult POW’s between prisons and to run higher security prisons.

An escaping POW in Germany or elsewhere in occupied Europe diverted German forces, and in the case of the Great Escape largish forces as well as civilian resources at a difficult time for the Germans. It won’t win a war, but neither will a single conventional air raid or infantry attack, but as part of the total effort even POW’s pissing off their captors helps.

#66

You will NEVER know complete truth about the intent of those sailors. They might easily conducted surveilance or just tested the Iranian border guards. The point is you will NEVER find out. Guess what, if they actually crossed the border, it all does not matter .

Entering national waters by accident falls more under the general head of unlawful entry as distinct from intentional crime. Much the same as walking onto private land by accident is more in the nature of a civil trespass than the crime of intentionally entering a building with intent to steal. The significance is that you would be entitled to defend yourself against or arrest a burglar in your home, but not someone who strays onto your land by accident.

Yes, you are right. But you find all this only AFTER you arrest them and find out and the judge make the verdict.

And by the way, projecting the legal implications of one person wondering into a neighbour pig farm on this incedent is not valid, IMO.

There is also the question of whether or not a nation’s claim to national waters is valid or recognised. A lot of territorial claims over the sea are disputed. I wouldn’t bet on Iran’s claims being valid just by reference to the mid-point between Iran and Iraq. They’re both just as likely to be disputing some 9th century event or religious claim which gives one or other title to the whole area. :slight_smile:

From my source the border we are talking about was drown in 1975 and agreed between Iraq and Iran and it was internationally recognised border.

So it is NOT the question of disputed border.
It is NOT whether brits did not know they possition corectly - they have all latest positioning systems.
It is NOT a question if brits did it on purpose or just wondered in. They knew their exact location.

It is ONLY about did they do it or not. This you will NEVER know! At east within next 10 years…

Rather than viewing the Brits as criminals, why not view the Iranians as pirates (who are subject to elimination by anyone)? There is more to support the latter view.

Yes, very reasonable and absolutely not bieased description of the situation! :shock:

#67

to 2nd of foot:

Before posting do some reading.

What should I read about? Man, you have not answered ANY single point of mine!
The only thing you keep saying that the sailors did a good thing there and therefor should not be deteined.

This is rubish if you try to be just a tiny bit objective!

Read my lips again and try to comprehend it:
IF the british sailors crossed the border, they could be lawfuly arrested by the Iranian border guards.
Please, point me at the inconsistencies in this statement.

#68

It may be the border you’re talking about, but I don’t know where the border is.

What is the source of the border you accept?

What document(s) do you rely upon to show that both Iraq and Iran ratified this as the border?

As far as I’m aware they’ve never concluded a border dispute which, as I indicated earlier, goes back into the mists of time into at least the 16th century Ottoman conquest of Iraq.

#69

All your point have no bearing, which you would see if you bothered to read.

They were on a ship at anchored in Iraqi waters, and it is shill in the same place. So the location can be proved.

Hi

I have not been following the news lately and might say something way too stupid. So bear with me, please.

Your statement, read up on what has been going on before opening mouth.

From my source the border we are talking about was drown in 1975 and agreed between Iraq and Iran and it was internationally recognised border.

It is a disputed border, as Iran does not recognise the 1975 agreement.

You will NEVER know complete truth about the intent of those sailors. They might easily conducted surveilance or just tested the Iranian border guards. The point is you will NEVER find out. Guess what, if they actually crossed the border, it all does not matter .

We do know the intent as they had been doing this for months. The day before they had a film crew with them so it is nothing secret. A number of the sailors were filmed and interviewed before the kidnapping. What possible surveillance would they take on a search of a ship crewed by sailors form a foreign country. Put your tin foil hat on and get real. As to crossing the border, this information will be in the GPS and the radar logs of the ships. The GPS records your route and can easily be seen. So it is a bit difficult to take your claim seriously.

So it is NOT the question of disputed border.

It is as they Iranian could only arrest if they is some discrepancy in the border.

It is NOT whether brits did not know they possition corectly - they have all latest positioning systems.

Yes they do and they know exactly their location, so who do you think is in the right place, a matlow with a GPS or some guy in a motor boat with a big gun?

It is NOT a question if brits did it on purpose or just wondered in. They knew their exact location.

Yes they did and they were kidnapped by the Iranians.

Now what points of yours have I not answered?

#70

I don’t think that much pig farming goes on in that part of the world. :smiley:

#71

Even if they are under several meters of water/

#72

I have a Iranian colleague whose judgment I trust (Do not ask why I have my reasons). The border was settled after a short 3 days conflict before Saddam time. It should go in the middle of the watter.

#73

Iranian President says that they are to be forgiven and freed! :smiley:

#74

So many word, so little meaning. Well done!

I will only reply on your statement that I marked in bold.

Iranian actually showed the GPS from the ship. Do you know that? And it supports the Iranian version. But it does not matter because they could have manipulated the device.

You see I am not insissting that brits crossed the border. I said that IMO there is 2/3 of the chances that it is the Iranian provocation.

But it pisses me off immensely that you make your statesment like you actually been there and know what really happened, and not even allowing for possibility of them crossing the border!

[INDENT]“Keep it real!”
Ali G[/INDENT]

#75

Good! The guys can go home now.

It is because they got in contact wit Americans about those Iranians they captured.

#76

These are the special Iranian revolutionary pigs that live their whole lives under water and come out halal clean, unlike the unclean ones that can fly. :smiley:

#77

Has it occurred to you that you’re expressing a strong opinion favouring Iran without producing anything to support it?

[INDENT]“Keep it real!”
Ali G[/INDENT]

[INDENT]“Talk to the hand,
'cos the face ain’t listening!”
Ali G[/INDENT]
:smiley:

#78

So many word, so little meaning. Well done!

Which part has little meaning? Identify it and I will endeavour to clarify.

GPS data cannot be altered, it can be misreported but on careful inspection the track will become clear. The GPS works on date/time, which cannot be altered as it is transmitted from satellites not the devise its self. You did not see the Iranians at the location all you saw was them sowing a position. Was the GPS the one used by the RN? The one they used is commercially available

#79

No, it has not occured to me. Have I said anything like that?
I remember I said that, in my opinion, 66% probability it is an Iranian provocation and 33% it is British fault.
This I remember. What are you reffering to?

I am not producing any prove because I do not have them. Just like you can not produce prove of the Brits innosence.
What I said, and I repat, that IF they crossed the border, then they are arrested and detained legitimately.

#80

I said that Iranians presented (as I know) the GPS device alegibly from the ship. The device shows that the ship was in the Iranian border as it declared by Iran according to the UN recognised agreement of 1975.

But I also said that this display of GPS device does not REALLY prove it because the data (coordinates and time stamps) could be theoreticaly altered in the device before the presentation.

And I said all this only because you mention GPS at all.

You did not see the Iranians at the location all you saw was them sowing a position. Was the GPS the one used by the RN? The one they used is commercially available

No I did not see the Iranians at the location.

Did you see brits at the location. If by any chance you did not, then have decency to give the Iranians the benefit of the doubt.

Peace and love!