Iran press conference and the released British sailors

stevedublin

Instant Karma wrote:

What country dosn't have extremists playing power games?

You could substitute US for Iran in your sentence there and it would still make just as much sense.

True, I guess, but I just think that the US is more democratic and liberal and less likely to veer to extremism for very long.
I guess I just trust the US more, even though I hate their current government. I think the world is a more progressive and freer place with western cultural values than islamic values.

Akrasia

stevedublin wrote:

True, I guess, but I just think that the US is more democratic and liberal and less likely to veer to extremism for very long.
I guess I just trust the US more, even though I hate their current government. I think the world is a more progressive and freer place with western cultural values than islamic values.

what's the difference between a one party state controlled by Religious clerics, and a two party state controlled by billionaires? They're just different kinds of dictatorship.

cyclopath2001

mike65 wrote:

Well no great surprise by Iran, they've done the only thing they plausibly could do.

The sailors have been better treated than the 'unlawful enemy combatants' held in Guantanamo.

Good move by Iran, face saving all-round & makes them appear more reasonable than Bush.

stevedublin

Akrasia wrote:

what's the difference between a one party state controlled by Religious clerics, and a two party state controlled by billionaires? They're just different kinds of dictatorship.

The latter is not as repressive.

cyclopath2001

cyclopath2001 wrote:

The sailors have been better treated than the 'unlawful enemy combatants' held in Guantanamo.

LoL whilst I don't agree with Gitmo,I find all these comments about how well the sailors have been treated funny.
This is a country that executes homosexuals remember and whips girls that have unapproved boyfriends.
Iran were using their treatment of the sailors to hold themselves up as some false paragon of example and I don't buy it.
Had they not wanted to pretend that their justice system and values are some paragon of good example,I doubt these sailors would have had the holiday they seemed to have had.

Good move by Iran, face saving all-round & makes them appear more reasonable than Bush.

Again I don't buy it.His conference was 100% spin and taunts.While I've no doubt ahminajad likes to express himself in spin,I'm of the view that he didn't want a full enemy made of Britain,the security council member, as opposed to the half enemy they already were (half in the sense of being opposed to Irans nuclear objectives and policy towards Iraq etc).

El Stuntman

stevedublin wrote:

I think the world is a more progressive and freer place with western cultural values than islamic values.

well duh

it's time all the lefties here faced up to reality.

We are on the side of the US in the current undeclared war between fundamentalist Islam and liberal democracy.

we are all effectively Americans, some people really seem to hate that. I'm not sure why...

dragon_lordMTB

Is anyone else suprised by the conduct of the British Sailors and Commandos on the telly and in the interviews? It looks to me that they basically collaborated with the Iranian Authorities since they have been arrested.

Just really suprised that no-one in the papers or TV have talked about it.

ednwireland

what happened to name rank and number ????

NeverSayDie

Far as I know, that applies when held as a prisoner of war - ie, by the enemy. Iran and the UK are not at war, hence they were not prisoners of war, just detained by a foreign government in regard to an alleged criminal offence.

Akrasia

homah_7ft wrote:

The Iranians would be happy to govern Iraq by proxy. .

Which we can't allow because damnit, America thought of it first.

The off topic yet interesting discussion can be found here

Please remain on topic in both threads-Thank you

Call Me Jimmy

Tristrame wrote:

LoL whilst I don't agree with Gitmo,I find all these comments about how well the sailors have been treated funny.
This is a country that executes homosexuals remember and whips girls that have unapproved boyfriends.
Iran were using their treatment of the sailors to hold themselves up as some false paragon of example and I don't buy it.
Had they not wanted to pretend that their justice system and values are some paragon of good example,I doubt these sailors would have had the holiday they seemed to have had.

Again I don't buy it.His conference was 100% spin and taunts.While I've no doubt ahminajad likes to express himself in spin,I'm of the view that he didn't want a full enemy made of Britain,the security council member, as opposed to the half enemy they already were (half in the sense of being opposed to Irans nuclear objectives and policy towards Iraq etc).

QFT, people seem to be easily swayed by blatant propaganda. When I first saw the soldiers being paraded in front of cameras and suddenly being 'inspired' to write letters about their own country's modern day imperialism I was astonished. I was thinking, there is no way in hell that even one person could buy into this ****. And I would doubt very much that Iran or the US wants a full blown war.

Akrasia

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

QFT, people seem to be easily swayed by blatant propaganda. When I first saw the soldiers being paraded in front of cameras and suddenly being 'inspired' to write letters about their own country's modern day imperialism I was astonished. I was thinking, there is no way in hell that even one person could buy into this ****. And I would doubt very much that Iran or the US wants a full blown war.

Well, we'll probably see very soon whether they were coerced to say these things or whether they were speaking the truth. They'll almost certainly feature in some interviews over the next few days or weeks (Unless the MOD tell them to shut up which would lead me to believe that the MOD doesn'[t like what they would have to say.... (but that inference isn't very solid... It could be argued the MOD might want them to stay quiet to prevent them from inflaming the incident further)

The BBC rebroadcast interviews between the Soldiers and Iranian TV last night, and even when their return home was guaranteed and they were out of danger, they still held to the position that they had been wrongly trespassing in Iranian/disputed waters and that they had been treated very well by the iranian army.

wes

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

And I would doubt very much that Iran or the US wants a full blown war.

Why did the US then threaten Iran in 2003 with the entire Axis of Evil stuff? Its no coincidence that 2 out of the 3 threatened starting developing nuclear tech after one of the 3 was invaded.

Iran is rightly paranoid since they remember what the US and UK did to Mossadegh, so they could get there hand on oil. Then there was the years of oppression by the Shah, who was not only backed by the US and UK, but was put in that position by them. They even trained his secret police who brutally tortured and murdered thousands of Iranians.

What about the Iranians the US has captured? Any actual proof they were helping insurgents? Its amazing so many have forgotten about them already isn't. I wonder how they have been treated.

Now Iran played a very dangerous game by capturing these sailors and what they did was wrong and thankfully they were released unharmed.

However Iran is not the only aggressor here, the US and the UK have been just as aggressive with Iran. Is it any wonder that things have deteriorated so much?

Its also great to see that quite diplomacy solved this mess rather than more violence.

Akrasia

Oh, and the fact that the soldiers were treated so well is in stark contrast to the 11 Iranian diplomats held by 'the good guys' who have been held in an undisclosed location since january. It shows in black and white the double standards that are being appplied by the Media and the British and American governments (I haven't seen a single Media story that mentioned plight of the disappeared Iranian diplomats), and it's also really interesting that evidence for the guilt of the British soldiers was immediately demanded by the U.S. government all the worlds media, but no such evidence has been asked for or provided by the U.S. captors of the Irianians from Iraq.

Why are Britain and America exempt from following the same the standards they demand from their enemies?

Call Me Jimmy

wes wrote:

What about the Iranians the US has captured? Any actual proof they were helping insurgents? Its amazing so many have forgotten about them already isn't. I wonder how they have been treated.

Its also great to see that quite diplomacy solved this mess rather than more violence.

I haven't forgotten about the iranians the US captured, this thread is about the british the iranians captured.

And tbh, I don't think diplomacy solved anything, if iran didn't want to release them they wouldn't have. I think Iran was always going to release them, it was just a matter of how long should they make their point for.

Dr_Teeth

El Stuntman wrote:

We are on the side of the US in the current undeclared war between fundamentalist Islam and liberal democracy.

War is unnecessary.. secular democracy *is* the superior way to govern people but the only way to spread these values is by setting a good example to the rest of the world instead being of a cheat (Africa) and a bully (Middle East).

stevedublin

Dr_Teeth wrote:

War is unnecessary.. secular democracy *is* the superior way to govern people but the only way to spread these values is by setting a good example to the rest of the world instead being of a cheat (Africa) and a bully (Middle East).

I agree that setting a good example is usually the best way to spread the idea of secular democracy.
However, there are dangerous fanatics in the Middle East who want to spread an alternative way of governing people (Theocracy, Sharia Law etc.) and they are not content to peacefully setting a good example. Do you want these people to have access to nuclear weapons?

Jimboo_Jones

El Stuntman wrote:

well duh

it's time all the lefties here faced up to reality.

We are on the side of the US in the current undeclared war between fundamentalist Islam and liberal democracy.

so you want all us lefties to act more like ... say a war-mungering fundamentalist?

Akrasia

stevedublin wrote:

I agree that setting a good example is usually the best way to spread the idea of secular democracy.
However, there are dangerous fanatics in the Middle East who want to spread an alternative way of governing people (Theocracy, Sharia Law etc.) and they are not content to peacefully setting a good example. Do you want these people to have access to nuclear weapons?

How many of these supposedly imperialist Islamic countries have attacked the west trying to spread islam?

(answer = None of them)

How many countries has the west attacked over the last 50 years under the pretext of bringing 'freedom and democracy' (you might want to use a calculator to answer that question)

wes

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

I haven't forgotten about the iranians the US captured, this thread is about the british the iranians captured.

And tbh, I don't think diplomacy solved anything, if iran didn't want to release them they wouldn't have. I think Iran was always going to release them, it was just a matter of how long should they make their point for.

Well its one of the reasons they captured them in the first place. I was just pointing out the danger of tit for tat reactions that all sides seem to be engaged in.

stevedublin

Akrasia wrote:

How many of these supposedly imperialist Islamic countries have attacked the west trying to spread islam?

(answer = None of them)

How many countries has the west attacked over the last 50 years under the pretext of bringing 'freedom and democracy' (you might want to use a calculator to answer that question)

okay, fine, let the people of the Middle East govern themselves. So what if they will be governed by religious fanatics with nuclear weapons. Hopefully they will want to live in peace and leave the liberal democracies of the West alone. (You never know!!!)

wes

stevedublin wrote:

okay, fine, let the people of the Middle East govern themselves. So what if they will be governed by religious fanatics with nuclear weapons. Hopefully they will want to live in peace and leave the liberal democracies of the West alone. (You never know!!!)

Democracies could have been achieved at the end World War 1, but the West handed the place over to tyrants so they could get easy access to oil. The British handed over most of Arabia to the Saud family who's Whabbi ideology is what the terrorists own ideology is based on. With there new found oil wealth they went to work spreading there ideology and helped spread there intolerance farther than they could have previously imagined.

Very often people forget the promises of freedom made to the Middle East when they rebelled against the Ottomans. Instead tyrants and Israel was created in Palestine for there troubles. Any wonder why they aren't exactly trusting of us? There paranoia didn't spring out of nothing, there are many reasons for it as well the paranoia of the "West".

Also as I pointed out above, why did the US and UK destroy Irans democracy for oil by killing there prime minister and putting the Shah in his place? Could it be that they are less interested in democracy and more interested in money? Why would we expect Iran to be different? There playing the game that the US and UK set the rules for. There 2 sides to this mess and Iran has been very reactionary, as we can see by the capture and release of the UKs sailors.

Frederico

stevedublin wrote:

okay, fine, let the people of the Middle East govern themselves. So what if they will be governed by religious fanatics with nuclear weapons. Hopefully they will want to live in peace and leave the liberal democracies of the West alone. (You never know!!!)

They already do govern themselves, our meddling has only made them hate the West and has created most of the instability.

El Stuntman

Frederico wrote:

They already do govern themselves, our meddling has only made them hate the West and has created most of the instability.

yes it's all our own fault, why didn't I see this before? <slaps forehead>

well hopefully the oil runs out soon (and the scientists find something better :cool: ). Then they can enjoy their medieval religious fanatacism in private without any interference from "us"

Ping Chow Chi

It's funny that you should post a link to how bad the human rights are in Saudi Arabia as when we (the west) bomb the crap out of Iran I suspect that one of the reasons will be to protect our good friend Saudi Arabia

And if their oil does run out soon, what justification could we use to stop them using nuke power?

KerranJast

Just seen a clip on Sky News of an interview with one of the released sailors conducted just prior to their capture by Iranian forces. Part of the role they had in that area was gathering intelligence regarding Iranian activity. One of the guys said that several Iraqi fisherman had reported being boarded and robbed by Iranian troops while inside Iraqi territorial waters.

SeanW

El Stuntman wrote:

well duh

it's time all the lefties here faced up to reality.

We are on the side of the US in the current undeclared war between fundamentalist Islam and liberal democracy.

we are all effectively Americans, some people really seem to hate that. I'm not sure why...

Hammer, Nail and Head.

lostexpectation

oh say shall we see.... da da dahhh da da daaaaaaaa

too true I guess. I stil dissent

so we still a big question mark over wher they wer, there weren't at the big boat when they were taken that clearly a li wby the UK gov to the iranians and their own people, the journalist had already written about them boarding dhows and shown that footage of that interview, i don't know what they are talking about saying they witheld it?

it seesm there weren't lieing to the iranians cause they know all there is to know about but to their most of their people and the rest of the world

I wonder about the guy they said was not shown on tv and kept alone, maybe he showed a bit more resistance then the pics on tv and got put away and there was their motivation for their performances

Manic Moran

KerranJast wrote:

Just seen a clip on Sky News of an interview with one of the released sailors conducted just prior to their capture by Iranian forces. Part of the role they had in that area was gathering intelligence regarding Iranian activity. One of the guys said that several Iraqi fisherman had reported being boarded and robbed by Iranian troops while inside Iraqi territorial waters.

Shouldn't surprise anyone. The Iranians have always had an issue of some contest with the declared border. As for the intelligence gathering, who would not expect the British to report what they see going on on the far side?

NTM