I'd like to see what would happen if US forces were taken...
US Marines would have blown the Iranians away rather than be captured.
Yes, because the British forces are just happy to be captured any old time :roll:
Of course they're not, but they were ordered not to fire (or so I remember hearing, I might be mistaken.) I really, really doubt that sort of order would have been made in the USMC.
And they would have been killed. Game fucking over.
US forces make stupid decisions all the time, and I doubt this would have been any different if there had been US Marines as opposed to Royal Marines.
More grandstanding on Fox News, I'm sure, with pretty computer animations of bombs and missiles and jets going off with COUNTDOWN TO WAR appearing somewhere in there.
The only force I see giving the raspberry would conceivably be the French Foreign Legion.
EDIT: I have this crazy thing where I believe unless you've been a POW or a hostage, you probably shouldn't be commenting on how to act in this situation.
The only force I see giving the raspberry would conceivably be the French Foreign Legion.
Don't get me started on that group of psychopaths.
Also one of the finest military forces in the world. Is it because they're psychopaths that they're so elite, or does being elite make them psychopaths?
The only force I see giving the raspberry would conceivably be the French Foreign Legion.
Don't get me started on that group of psychopaths.
Also one of the finest military forces in the world. Is it because they're psychopaths that they're so elite, or does being elite make them psychopaths?
It's because their recuiting policy encourages psychopaths to sign up. They take in pretty much anyone who got drummed out of other military organizations for whatever reason, no questions asked.
If firing on anything that moves in the desert (friend or foe) makes you elite, then I guess you can't get any better than these guys.
Why the fuck would anyone believe Iran or assume they have a "rational" reason for doing this?
I don't deny that the Iraq War is a clusterfuck of lies and deceit, but "we're liars so therefore Iran isn't full of shit" is the worst logic ever heard.
Iran is ruled by hard-line Shiite Muslims, both in the persons of Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah. Shia accept the doctrine of taqiyya, which essentially states that Muslims are free to lie to unbelievers if it is in defense of Islam. This alone should put a damper on any trust we have towards Iran. A government that lies about the initial coordinates, parades around the captives, dresses up the woman in a Muslim headscarf and then forces her to write letters home to her parents saying "I wish I was home safe with you instead of in the dangerous Persian gulf" and "Obviously we were in Iranian waters, I hope the UK realizes the error of their ways and takes their forces out of Iraq" is as full of shit as it gets.
And do we even know whether Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah would view a destructive war as a bad thing? Like crazy Christian evangelicals, they believe that the Mahdi (the 12th imam, a Messiah-like figure) will reappear and make things better when the world is on the brink of destruction. I am reminded of crazy Christians' support of Israel, not out of concern but rather because they think supporting Israel will bring the world closer to apocalypse and they are looking forward to that. Judging simply from their actions and their expressed religious beliefs, it seems likely that Iran is possessed by the same mentality.
"Rational reasons" my ass.
How did we go from Iran hostage crisis to comparing the crazies over there to Christian evangelicals? Are you serious?
I don't personally know a single Christian that thinks we should support Israel because we'll come closer to bringing about Armageddon. That's just stupid. I DO know a lot that believe that we should support Israel because they are God's chosen people, and that in the Bible, it says God will "bless those that bless thee, and curse those that curse thee". Not that hard.
Also, remember that modern-day Christians for the most part believe in the Rapture of the church. In other words, we won't be here. We're not actively fomenting wars to bring it about, as nothing WE can do can change God's timetable (hmm... he's the only one that can have one, it would seem).
Sure, there are some Christians I see on TV that have some pretty nutty ideas, but none that I have seen even comes CLOSE to rising to the level of these Muslim fanatics. So be very careful when bandying about this comparisons, it doesn't help your argument.
How about you research what you're talking about other than glancing at a cover of Soldier of Fortune and calling it good. That might have been true 60 years ago, but nowadays if you got drummed out of another nation's service, you have about no chance of getting in. The Legion is as professional as it is elite, but its also made up of tough motherfuckers who are about as hard as woodpecker lips.
Go grind your axe somewhere else.
Actually, the majority of my research comes from a friend who was an engineer in GW1, and almost died because they decided to fire on their HMMWV column.
How about you research what you're talking about other than glancing at a cover of Soldier of Fortune and calling it good. That might have been true 60 years ago, but nowadays if you got drummed out of another nation's service, you have about no chance of getting in. The Legion is as professional as it is elite, but its also made up of tough motherfuckers who are about as hard as woodpecker lips.
Go grind your axe somewhere else.
Actually, the majority of my research comes from a friend who was an engineer in GW1, and almost died because they decided to fire on their HMMWV column.
Yes, the Foreign Legion is the only army that has trouble with Friendly Fire. Way to take once incident and base a flimsy belief system off it.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
Iran, hell, the whole middle east scares me. There is just so much crap going down there that it makes me extremely nervous that we are heading toward World War territory. Or at least Really Big and Expensive war territory. The reactionary side of me wants to say "either just glass the bastards or get the hell out of there and let them be" but unfortunately it can't be that simple. I'm getting an idea now about how people must have felt during the cold war,and damb its not a good feeling at all.
Yes, the Foreign Legion is the only army that has trouble with Friendly Fire. Way to take once incident and base a flimsy belief system off it.
Nope, but it's a starting point. I go to great lengths to find out about things I hate.
What do you mean its a starting point? The Marines killed like 20 of their own guys in GW1 when they got trigger happy and started firing on their own support column. The Patriot Missile system took out a British Tornado Fighter Bomber recently, and we've also bombed Canadians in Afghanistan, and we had an A-10 take out a British Scimitar during the invasion.
What a fucking maroon. Obviously your "great lengths" really means "ancedotal bullshit from a second hand source occuring over ten years ago."
Iran, hell, the whole middle east scares me. There is just so much crap going down there that it makes me extremely nervous that we are heading toward World War territory. Or at least Really Big and Expensive war territory. The reactionary side of me wants to say "either just glass the bastards or get the hell out of there and let them be" but unfortunately it can't be that simple.
Don't worry. The rest of the world's more scared of you than you are of it.
I'm getting an idea now about how people must have felt during the cold war,and damb its not a good feeling at all.
You meen the feeling that you're being fed scare stories all day about the commies coming to get you so that you'll accept defense spending. That's pretty mush all the cold war turned out to be and they actually had nukes that could reach you.
I've only told you that I hate them, and one of the reasons why.
I haven't told you everything I know about the French Foreign Legion, nor have I brought in anything about Friendly Fire in general other than the aforementioned incident.
In truth, I have a lot of family and friends that either are in, or have been in the armed forces for the US, and there is a lot that I hate about some of the branches. FFL popped up on the radar, so I figured I'd chime in with a one liner.
I can't simply will you the knowledge, and make you understand my position.
You obviously idolize the FFL into something I believe it is not. I think you should actually obtain more information on them, not just from the French Government either. Think first hand accounts.
From the way you treat the situation, I can safely categorize you under "People I can do without." Therefore I am not really going to bother to expend the effort to explain things further.
I'm getting an idea now about how people must have felt during the cold war,and damb its not a good feeling at all.
You meen the feeling that you're being fed scare stories all day about the commies coming to get you so that you'll accept defense spending. That's pretty mush all the cold war turned out to be and they actually had nukes that could reach you.
I get the feeling that it's almost the reverse. During the cold war we had a lot of stories that tried to bolster morale, at least a little, basically that we would survive the cold night to see the breaking dawn, that whole BS. With this war it almost seems that the propaganda engine is geared towards demoralizing us, basically that we can never win, we should get out while we still can, so on and so forth. It doesn't help when someone f's up so monumentally over there that it makes the stuff that may not have been true, seem dead on.
I've only told you that I hate them, and one of the reasons why.
I haven't told you everything I know about the French Foreign Legion, nor have I brought in anything about Friendly Fire in general other than the aforementioned incident.
In truth, I have a lot of family and friends that either are in, or have been in the armed forces for the US, and there is a lot that I hate about some of the branches. FFL popped up on the radar, so I figured I'd chime in with a one liner.
I can't simply will you the knowledge, and make you understand my position.
You obviously idolize the FFL into something I believe it is not. I think you should actually obtain more information on them, not just from the French Government either. Think first hand accounts.
From the way you treat the situation, I can safely categorize you under "People I can do without." Therefore I am not really going to bother to expend the effort to explain things further.
Uh, let's see.
Wikipedia. Cervens.net. The books "Life in the French Foreign Legion" and "Legionaire". Various other books. Actually sitting down and talking to Legionaires. I'm not sure what the fuck you think I'm "idolizing" here. Everyone I've talked to says the Legion is pretty much a shithole as far as living conditions and how you're treated go (at least until you make NCO), but they also acknowledge that they know how to fucking fight.
I'm not sure you even have an argument, outside of "I just don't really like them". Either bring some actual meat to this table or get the fuck out. No one is saying the Legion is filled with nice people, but to call them a bunch of psychopaths with rifles is even more retarded.
I'm getting an idea now about how people must have felt during the cold war,and damb its not a good feeling at all.
You meen the feeling that you're being fed scare stories all day about the commies coming to get you so that you'll accept defense spending. That's pretty mush all the cold war turned out to be and they actually had nukes that could reach you.
I get the feeling that it's almost the reverse. During the cold war we had a lot of stories that tried to bolster morale, at least a little, basically that we would survive the cold night to see the breaking dawn, that whole BS. With this war it almost seems that the propaganda engine is geared towards demoralizing us, basically that we can never win, we should get out while we still can, so on and so forth. It doesn't help when someone f's up so monumentally over there that it makes the stuff that may not have been true, seem dead on.
It was the exact same way in the Cold War. The propaganda of the Cold War was basically about scaring the shit out of people. That was the whole point of the duck and cover stuff.
It was the exact same way in the Cold War. The propaganda of the Cold War was basically about scaring the shit out of people. That was the whole point of the duck and cover stuff.
I was thinking McCarthy's I am the only one you can trust schtick.
So I think this will eventually turn out positive for Iran. Once they find and try whoever's held 'responsible' they can use that as a springboard for further talks about the important stuff without anyone losing face in the international community.
This move is mere sabre rattling by Iran, which knows that neither the UK nor the USA can afford a second war right now. And by afford, I mean in terms of availability of military forces for the US and the willingness of the people in each country to support yet another war.
Unfortunately, Iran's move will increase its standing in the Arab world, because they are going to prove that they can stand up to the UK and the USA and not get bombed.
This move is mere sabre rattling by Iran, which knows that neither the UK nor the USA can afford a second war right now. And by afford, I mean in terms of availability of military forces for the US and the willingness of the people in each country to support yet another war.
Unfortunately, Iran's move will increase its standing in the Arab world, because they are going to prove that they can stand up to the UK and the USA and not get bombed.
Agree with the first part, disagree with the second.
Iran already has a high standing with all of the Shia Arab nations and groups. The Sunni Arab nations and groups are terrified of it and what "Persian dominance" means for them.
If Islam is so much worse about the whole deception in foreign policy thing, then what's Israel's excuse?
Probably that duplicity is an essential part of any viable nation's foreign policy? If we had to list every time every nation was ever dishonest in its dealings with other nations; well, it would be a very long forum post indeed.
Interesting side note: I read an article about the French Foreign Legion a year or so ago in The Economist; they seemed to imply that most of the FFL's recruits these days are ex-Soviet bloc area professional soldiers that want to work for a professional army.
because they are going to prove that they can stand up to the UK and the USA and not get bombed.
Shouldn't all countries have the right to do that, in general? Obviously we want these people back as soon as possible, but demanding that Iran do as they are told was never gong to help the situation.
Given that there is no proper agreement over the exact line of the boundary, we should be letting ships further in to Iraqi waters before we stop them and keep a demilitarised zone along the area of dispute that the UK and Iran can watch over. It wouldn't have to be large, just enough to take in where the UK draws the border and where Iran does.
Gorak on
0
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
On a serious note... I really really hope the news doesn't let this fall to the wayside. I'd hate to see these Brits forgotten.
It's weird that you think this is a plausible scenario.
I tried to find information on the hostages Hezbollah took triggering the war in Lebanon and couldn't. I never did hear of the hostages being released however. What I did hear, though, was Israel submitting to the UN Resolutions and Lebanon NOT submitting to the UN Resolutions. But no one talks about that at all anymore.
I don't think Britain will forget the soldiers, but the world will. Hopefully the soldiers will be released before that happens.
Interesting side note: I read an article about the French Foreign Legion a year or so ago in The Economist; they seemed to imply that most of the FFL's recruits these days are ex-Soviet bloc area professional soldiers that want to work for a professional army.
This is actually true, and not totally unexpected. It may be rough and hellish, but you know what? The pay is pretty good and you're going to get fed and taken care of. A lot of the spit and polish of the Legion nowadays can be attributed to the Germans who joined in the wake of WWII and helped mold the Legion.
because they are going to prove that they can stand up to the UK and the USA and not get bombed.
Shouldn't all countries have the right to do that, in general? Obviously we want these people back as soon as possible, but demanding that Iran do as they are told was never gong to help the situation.
Given that there is no proper agreement over the exact line of the boundary, we should be letting ships further in to Iraqi waters before we stop them and keep a demilitarised zone along the area of dispute that the UK and Iran can watch over. It wouldn't have to be large, just enough to take in where the UK draws the border and where Iran does.
Iran: "No, the border's not there, back a bit, no, back a bit more, keep going, keep going..."
On a serious note... I really really hope the news doesn't let this fall to the wayside. I'd hate to see these Brits forgotten.
It's weird that you think this is a plausible scenario.
I tried to find information on the hostages Hezbollah took triggering the war in Lebanon and couldn't. I never did hear of the hostages being released however. What I did hear, though, was Israel submitting to the UN Resolutions and Lebanon NOT submitting to the UN Resolutions. But no one talks about that at all anymore.
I don't think Britain will forget the soldiers, but the world will. Hopefully the soldiers will be released before that happens.
Provided Britain doesn't decide to obliterate Iran due to the actions of a non-governmental organization, including blowing up all sorts of civilian infrastructure, destroying an oil refinery then not letting anyone clean up the coastline, I doubt it will happen.
I'm going to bet this will end in a negotiated settlement.
It's a pretty safe bet. While Britain + allies could mess Iran up, it would cost far more than we're willing to spend and possibly severely impair our armed forces in the long run, we just can't afford to fight 3 seperate conflicts.
On a serious note... I really really hope the news doesn't let this fall to the wayside. I'd hate to see these Brits forgotten.
It's weird that you think this is a plausible scenario.
I tried to find information on the hostages Hezbollah took triggering the war in Lebanon and couldn't. I never did hear of the hostages being released however. What I did hear, though, was Israel submitting to the UN Resolutions and Lebanon NOT submitting to the UN Resolutions. But no one talks about that at all anymore.
I don't think Britain will forget the soldiers, but the world will. Hopefully the soldiers will be released before that happens.
Provided Britain doesn't decide to obliterate Iran due to the actions of a non-governmental organization, including blowing up all sorts of civilian infrastructure, destroying an oil refinery then not letting anyone clean up the coastline, I doubt it will happen.
The soldiers were taken by the Iranian military and are in custody of the Iranian government. How do non-governmental organizations factor into the situation here?
Knuckle Dragger on
Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.
I'm going to bet this will end in a negotiated settlement.
It's a pretty safe bet. While Britain + allies could mess Iran up, it would cost far more than we're willing to spend and possibly severely impair our armed forces in the long run, we just can't afford to fight 3 seperate conflicts.
The important thing is getting to the table. If Britain and Iran start serious talks then hopefully that can pave the way to gradually transitioning into what's realy at the heart of our problems.
Malkor on
0
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
edited April 2007
All I was saying was that the Israeli soldiers have not been returned (And Hezbollah has a significant presence in the Lebanon government) and it's become a non-issue. The same could happen to the British soldiers.
because they are going to prove that they can stand up to the UK and the USA and not get bombed.
Shouldn't all countries have the right to do that, in general? Obviously we want these people back as soon as possible, but demanding that Iran do as they are told was never gong to help the situation.
Given that there is no proper agreement over the exact line of the boundary, we should be letting ships further in to Iraqi waters before we stop them and keep a demilitarised zone along the area of dispute that the UK and Iran can watch over. It wouldn't have to be large, just enough to take in where the UK draws the border and where Iran does.
For all we know, there is a sound tactical reason for not letting ships get further into Iraqi waters before stopping them. For example, letting ships further in might make it harder to prevent them from reaching a port before stopping them. Or it might allow the ships within range of covering fire from the shore.
In addition, the only border the UK (or anyone, for that matter) has to respect is the one that sets the international standard for where international waters end. By way of analogy: Argentina claims a portion of Antarctica as part of its sovereign territory. However, no other nation in the world recognizes Argentina's claim. Just because Iran says, "The border is here," does not obligate the rest of the world to listen.
All I was saying was that the Israeli soldiers have not been returned (And Hezbollah has a significant presence in the Lebanon government) and it's become a non-issue. The same could happen to the British soldiers.
It could, if the UK does to Iran what Israel did to Lebanon.
Elki on
0
Nova_CI have the needThe need for speedRegistered Userregular
All I was saying was that the Israeli soldiers have not been returned (And Hezbollah has a significant presence in the Lebanon government) and it's become a non-issue. The same could happen to the British soldiers.
It could, if the UK does to Iran what Israel did to Lebanon.
I'm not sure if I agree that that's the reason, but even so, isn't that an outcome that people in this thread are considering? That this ends in a war?
I suppose if it does, those soldiers are well and truly screwed.
At any rate, I have no love lost for Iran. I just don't think this'll end well for anyone.
I tried to find information on the hostages Hezbollah took triggering the war in Lebanon and couldn't. I never did hear of the hostages being released however. What I did hear, though, was Israel submitting to the UN Resolutions and Lebanon NOT submitting to the UN Resolutions. But no one talks about that at all anymore.
I don't think Britain will forget the soldiers, but the world will. Hopefully the soldiers will be released before that happens.
Provided Britain doesn't decide to obliterate Iran due to the actions of a non-governmental organization, including blowing up all sorts of civilian infrastructure, destroying an oil refinery then not letting anyone clean up the coastline, I doubt it will happen.
The soldiers were taken by the Iranian military and are in custody of the Iranian government. How do non-governmental organizations factor into the situation here?
Actually, they were taken by a special forces unit that is under the exclusive authority of the Ayatollah, and aren't part of the Iranian regular military.
All I was saying was that the Israeli soldiers have not been returned (And Hezbollah has a significant presence in the Lebanon government) and it's become a non-issue. The same could happen to the British soldiers.
It could, if the UK does to Iran what Israel did to Lebanon.
Exactly. I just don't see the British acting anywhere near as immensely irresponsibly in this situation as Israel did in regards to Lebanon. I don't think Tony Blair has any interest whatsoever in turning Iran into the UK's Iraq, only much worse, because the Iranians will actually fight back against the initial invasion.
I tried to find information on the hostages Hezbollah took triggering the war in Lebanon and couldn't. I never did hear of the hostages being released however. What I did hear, though, was Israel submitting to the UN Resolutions and Lebanon NOT submitting to the UN Resolutions. But no one talks about that at all anymore.
I don't think Britain will forget the soldiers, but the world will. Hopefully the soldiers will be released before that happens.
Provided Britain doesn't decide to obliterate Iran due to the actions of a non-governmental organization, including blowing up all sorts of civilian infrastructure, destroying an oil refinery then not letting anyone clean up the coastline, I doubt it will happen.
The soldiers were taken by the Iranian military and are in custody of the Iranian government. How do non-governmental organizations factor into the situation here?
Actually, they were taken by a special forces unit that is under the exclusive authority of the Ayatollah, and aren't part of the Iranian regular military.
No, they were taken by the Revolutionary Guard Navy, which parallels the Iranian Navy in terms of manpower. The Revolutionary Guard has it's own chain of command separate from the other armed forces of Iran(just as the Iranian Army and Navy do), and is ultimately under the authority of the Ayatollah, like the other armed forces of Iran, but it is not some small elite force that answers only to him.
Knuckle Dragger on
Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.
because they are going to prove that they can stand up to the UK and the USA and not get bombed.
Shouldn't all countries have the right to do that, in general? Obviously we want these people back as soon as possible, but demanding that Iran do as they are told was never gong to help the situation.
Given that there is no proper agreement over the exact line of the boundary, we should be letting ships further in to Iraqi waters before we stop them and keep a demilitarised zone along the area of dispute that the UK and Iran can watch over. It wouldn't have to be large, just enough to take in where the UK draws the border and where Iran does.
For all we know, there is a sound tactical reason for not letting ships get further into Iraqi waters before stopping them. For example, letting ships further in might make it harder to prevent them from reaching a port before stopping them. Or it might allow the ships within range of covering fire from the shore.
Or, for all we know, it was neither of those things and there isn't a reason why we can't do the searches further from the border. It just makes sense to carry out their job in Iraq with as little antagonism of the neighbours as possible.
In addition, the only border the UK (or anyone, for that matter) has to respect is the one that sets the international standard for where international waters end. By way of analogy: Argentina claims a portion of Antarctica as part of its sovereign territory. However, no other nation in the world recognizes Argentina's claim. Just because Iran says, "The border is here," does not obligate the rest of the world to listen.
Britain saying the border is where they are saying equally doesn't obligate Iran to agree. The border needs to be agreed between Iran and Iraq. There are plenty of unsolved problems in the region without exacerbating those that don't affect us.
No, they were taken by the Revolutionary Guard Navy, which parallels the Iranian Navy in terms of manpower. The Revolutionary Guard has it's own chain of command separate from the other armed forces of Iran(just as the Iranian Army and Navy do), and is ultimately under the authority of the Ayatollah, like the other armed forces of Iran, but it is not some small elite force that answers only to him.
It's neither small nor any more elite than the rest of the army, but it does answer ultimately to the Ayatollah, which explains their tendency to do things that frequently piss off the Iranian Ministry of State.
Posts
And they would have been killed. Game fucking over.
US forces make stupid decisions all the time, and I doubt this would have been any different if there had been US Marines as opposed to Royal Marines.
More grandstanding on Fox News, I'm sure, with pretty computer animations of bombs and missiles and jets going off with COUNTDOWN TO WAR appearing somewhere in there.
The only force I see giving the raspberry would conceivably be the French Foreign Legion.
EDIT: I have this crazy thing where I believe unless you've been a POW or a hostage, you probably shouldn't be commenting on how to act in this situation.
Don't get me started on that group of psychopaths.
Also one of the finest military forces in the world. Is it because they're psychopaths that they're so elite, or does being elite make them psychopaths?
It's because their recuiting policy encourages psychopaths to sign up. They take in pretty much anyone who got drummed out of other military organizations for whatever reason, no questions asked.
If firing on anything that moves in the desert (friend or foe) makes you elite, then I guess you can't get any better than these guys.
How did we go from Iran hostage crisis to comparing the crazies over there to Christian evangelicals? Are you serious?
I don't personally know a single Christian that thinks we should support Israel because we'll come closer to bringing about Armageddon. That's just stupid. I DO know a lot that believe that we should support Israel because they are God's chosen people, and that in the Bible, it says God will "bless those that bless thee, and curse those that curse thee". Not that hard.
Also, remember that modern-day Christians for the most part believe in the Rapture of the church. In other words, we won't be here. We're not actively fomenting wars to bring it about, as nothing WE can do can change God's timetable (hmm... he's the only one that can have one, it would seem).
Sure, there are some Christians I see on TV that have some pretty nutty ideas, but none that I have seen even comes CLOSE to rising to the level of these Muslim fanatics. So be very careful when bandying about this comparisons, it doesn't help your argument.
Sarge out.
Actually, the majority of my research comes from a friend who was an engineer in GW1, and almost died because they decided to fire on their HMMWV column.
Yes, the Foreign Legion is the only army that has trouble with Friendly Fire. Way to take once incident and base a flimsy belief system off it.
Nope, but it's a starting point. I go to great lengths to find out about things I hate.
What do you mean its a starting point? The Marines killed like 20 of their own guys in GW1 when they got trigger happy and started firing on their own support column. The Patriot Missile system took out a British Tornado Fighter Bomber recently, and we've also bombed Canadians in Afghanistan, and we had an A-10 take out a British Scimitar during the invasion.
What a fucking maroon. Obviously your "great lengths" really means "ancedotal bullshit from a second hand source occuring over ten years ago."
Don't worry. The rest of the world's more scared of you than you are of it.
You meen the feeling that you're being fed scare stories all day about the commies coming to get you so that you'll accept defense spending. That's pretty mush all the cold war turned out to be and they actually had nukes that could reach you.
I haven't told you everything I know about the French Foreign Legion, nor have I brought in anything about Friendly Fire in general other than the aforementioned incident.
In truth, I have a lot of family and friends that either are in, or have been in the armed forces for the US, and there is a lot that I hate about some of the branches. FFL popped up on the radar, so I figured I'd chime in with a one liner.
I can't simply will you the knowledge, and make you understand my position.
You obviously idolize the FFL into something I believe it is not. I think you should actually obtain more information on them, not just from the French Government either. Think first hand accounts.
From the way you treat the situation, I can safely categorize you under "People I can do without." Therefore I am not really going to bother to expend the effort to explain things further.
I get the feeling that it's almost the reverse. During the cold war we had a lot of stories that tried to bolster morale, at least a little, basically that we would survive the cold night to see the breaking dawn, that whole BS. With this war it almost seems that the propaganda engine is geared towards demoralizing us, basically that we can never win, we should get out while we still can, so on and so forth. It doesn't help when someone f's up so monumentally over there that it makes the stuff that may not have been true, seem dead on.
Uh, let's see.
Wikipedia. Cervens.net. The books "Life in the French Foreign Legion" and "Legionaire". Various other books. Actually sitting down and talking to Legionaires. I'm not sure what the fuck you think I'm "idolizing" here. Everyone I've talked to says the Legion is pretty much a shithole as far as living conditions and how you're treated go (at least until you make NCO), but they also acknowledge that they know how to fucking fight.
I'm not sure you even have an argument, outside of "I just don't really like them". Either bring some actual meat to this table or get the fuck out. No one is saying the Legion is filled with nice people, but to call them a bunch of psychopaths with rifles is even more retarded.
It was the exact same way in the Cold War. The propaganda of the Cold War was basically about scaring the shit out of people. That was the whole point of the duck and cover stuff.
I was thinking McCarthy's I am the only one you can trust schtick.
Unfortunately, Iran's move will increase its standing in the Arab world, because they are going to prove that they can stand up to the UK and the USA and not get bombed.
Agree with the first part, disagree with the second.
Iran already has a high standing with all of the Shia Arab nations and groups. The Sunni Arab nations and groups are terrified of it and what "Persian dominance" means for them.
If Islam is so much worse about the whole deception in foreign policy thing, then what's Israel's excuse?
Probably that duplicity is an essential part of any viable nation's foreign policy? If we had to list every time every nation was ever dishonest in its dealings with other nations; well, it would be a very long forum post indeed.
Interesting side note: I read an article about the French Foreign Legion a year or so ago in The Economist; they seemed to imply that most of the FFL's recruits these days are ex-Soviet bloc area professional soldiers that want to work for a professional army.
Shouldn't all countries have the right to do that, in general? Obviously we want these people back as soon as possible, but demanding that Iran do as they are told was never gong to help the situation.
Given that there is no proper agreement over the exact line of the boundary, we should be letting ships further in to Iraqi waters before we stop them and keep a demilitarised zone along the area of dispute that the UK and Iran can watch over. It wouldn't have to be large, just enough to take in where the UK draws the border and where Iran does.
I tried to find information on the hostages Hezbollah took triggering the war in Lebanon and couldn't. I never did hear of the hostages being released however. What I did hear, though, was Israel submitting to the UN Resolutions and Lebanon NOT submitting to the UN Resolutions. But no one talks about that at all anymore.
I don't think Britain will forget the soldiers, but the world will. Hopefully the soldiers will be released before that happens.
This is actually true, and not totally unexpected. It may be rough and hellish, but you know what? The pay is pretty good and you're going to get fed and taken care of. A lot of the spit and polish of the Legion nowadays can be attributed to the Germans who joined in the wake of WWII and helped mold the Legion.
Iran: "No, the border's not there, back a bit, no, back a bit more, keep going, keep going..."
It's a pretty safe bet. While Britain + allies could mess Iran up, it would cost far more than we're willing to spend and possibly severely impair our armed forces in the long run, we just can't afford to fight 3 seperate conflicts.
The soldiers were taken by the Iranian military and are in custody of the Iranian government. How do non-governmental organizations factor into the situation here?
- John Stuart Mill
The important thing is getting to the table. If Britain and Iran start serious talks then hopefully that can pave the way to gradually transitioning into what's realy at the heart of our problems.
For all we know, there is a sound tactical reason for not letting ships get further into Iraqi waters before stopping them. For example, letting ships further in might make it harder to prevent them from reaching a port before stopping them. Or it might allow the ships within range of covering fire from the shore.
In addition, the only border the UK (or anyone, for that matter) has to respect is the one that sets the international standard for where international waters end. By way of analogy: Argentina claims a portion of Antarctica as part of its sovereign territory. However, no other nation in the world recognizes Argentina's claim. Just because Iran says, "The border is here," does not obligate the rest of the world to listen.
It could, if the UK does to Iran what Israel did to Lebanon.
I'm not sure if I agree that that's the reason, but even so, isn't that an outcome that people in this thread are considering? That this ends in a war?
I suppose if it does, those soldiers are well and truly screwed.
At any rate, I have no love lost for Iran. I just don't think this'll end well for anyone.
But I was actually referring to Lebanon, there.
Exactly. I just don't see the British acting anywhere near as immensely irresponsibly in this situation as Israel did in regards to Lebanon. I don't think Tony Blair has any interest whatsoever in turning Iran into the UK's Iraq, only much worse, because the Iranians will actually fight back against the initial invasion.
No, they were taken by the Revolutionary Guard Navy, which parallels the Iranian Navy in terms of manpower. The Revolutionary Guard has it's own chain of command separate from the other armed forces of Iran(just as the Iranian Army and Navy do), and is ultimately under the authority of the Ayatollah, like the other armed forces of Iran, but it is not some small elite force that answers only to him.
- John Stuart Mill
Britain saying the border is where they are saying equally doesn't obligate Iran to agree. The border needs to be agreed between Iran and Iraq. There are plenty of unsolved problems in the region without exacerbating those that don't affect us.