Iran press conference and the released British sailors

Akrasia

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...

well, one reason people might hate it, is the fact that we are 'effectively Americans' but for us it's not a 'liberal democracy' it's a dictatorship.

We have to deal with all the **** the U.S. government stirs up around the world, but we don't get a vote.

Erin Go Brath

I'm not sure that Iran and other middle-east countries tar Ireland with the same brush as the US/UK. (not that they'd give it a huge amount of thought in all honesty)

For example in the early 80's they changed the name of the street where the British embassy is in Teheran; from Winston Churchill Street to Bobby Sands Street. The idea obviously to annoy the UK. This shows, if anything that they are aware of differences of different states in the West.

We've always promoted the country as neutral. However the government giving the US access to Shannon Airport for their "War on Terror"; (without a referendum/approval of the people) has compromised our neutrality. So I guess their attitude to us may have changed since the 80's. It would be interesting to see if they regard us as "effectively Americans".

Zambia

I would say most white Westerners are all the same to them really.

jank

http://www.thesun.co.uk/

LOL look at the front page.

Typcial Sun. Overnight the president is branded a tyrant and they are at fault for the deaths of 4 british service personal....

KerranJast

It's sensationalist crap as always from the Sun but there's a grain of truth buried underneath. There are certainly elements within the Iranian Republican Guard supplying Shia insurgents in southern Iraq with ammo and bomb making material in order to attack British and Iraqi police/army personnel. How high up that interference goes is not yet proven but I wouldn't be surprised if some of the hardliners in the Iranian Govt. were involved.

jank

KerranJast wrote:

It's sensationalist crap as always from the Sun but there's a grain of truth buried underneath. There are certainly elements within the Iranian Republican Guard supplying Shia insurgents in southern Iraq with ammo and bomb making material in order to attack British and Iraqi police/army personnel. How high up that interference goes is not yet proven but I wouldn't be surprised if some of the hardliners in the Iranian Govt. were involved.

So they have learned something from the CIA

InFront

KerranJast wrote:

there's a grain of truth buried underneath. There are certainly elements within the Iranian Republican Guard supplying Shia insurgents in southern Iraq with ammo and bomb making material in order to attack British and Iraqi police/army personnel.

It's the Revolutionary Guard, not the Republican Guard. And I'm sorry, but what do they expect to happen to those soldiers - from any rebel group in Iraq, tea and daisy chains?
They are invaders. They were put there by the "coalition of the willing", this coalition put their soldiers into the line of inevitable fire.
I think most people are well able to see beyond the spin; the Iranians freed fifteen British prisoners, then Blair lost four more soldiers in Iraq. Swapping around responsibilities for both events was just a messy attempt at saving face.

KerranJast

InFront wrote:

It's the Revolutionary Guard, not the Republican Guard. And I'm sorry, but what do they expect to happen to those soldiers - from any rebel group in Iraq, tea and daisy chains?
They are invaders. They were put there by the "coalition of the willing", this coalition put their soldiers into the line of inevitable fire.
I think most people are well able to see beyond the spin; the Iranians freed fifteen British prisoners, then Blair lost four more soldiers in Iraq. Swapping around responsibilities for both events was just a messy attempt at saving face.

Typo. My bad. The invasion may have been a bad idea but at the moment most rational people want the Coalition to succeed in securing Iraq so that the Iraqis can govern themselves. They are now operating under a UN mandate so are no longer invaders but a stabilising force. What members of the Revolutionary Guard are doing is in effect attacking or helping to attack UN troops.

InFront

No, the revolutionary guard are not attacking US or UK soldiers, it's just that some people think they are helping insurgents who are attacking a continued occupation.
However necessary we (on the sidelines) feel any outside security presence to be, you can be pretty sure that the Iraqis just see invaders who have brought and inflamed nothing but destruction on a scale far worse than Saddam's. I can't really see that they can be blamed for wanting them out.

pork99

Zita wrote:

Its something they will be able to reiterate again and again, to show how they have mercy.
Not like some "western" militaries, who hold people without any rights at all.....

Your post is an example of Moynihan's law in action.

Yes the merciful Iranian Islamic Republic - a state where they torture trade unionists
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGt6lEzcn6w&mode=related&search=

You can be tortured to death for advocating democracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaMBZDtcKFE

More Islamist mercy to their own (warning - images of the effects of torture)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkMJSAGgFx8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6lfFk520Ag
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaN4ZXz2mV0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN5rO0Z6R-w

But of course it's ok because those brown-skinned peoples have a different "regime of truth" from us as Michel Foucault put it. (If a right winger came out with guff like that he'd rightly be branded as a racist.)

Zita, read this book

Frederico

pork99 wrote:

Your post is an example of Moynihan's law in action.

Yes the merciful Iranian Islamic Republic - a state where they torture trade unionists
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGt6lEzcn6w&mode=related&search=

You can be tortured to death for advocating democracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaMBZDtcKFE

More Islamist mercy to their own (warning - images of torture & mutilation)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkMJSAGgFx8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6lfFk520Ag
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LaN4ZXz2mV0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN5rO0Z6R-w

But of course it's ok because those brown-skinned peoples have a different "regime of truth" from us as Michel Foucault put it. (If a right winger came out with guff like that he'd rightly be branded as a racist.)

Zita, read this book

Your post is an example of what exactly? you wanna post some videos up from China or Saudi Arabia to back your theory of.. what again?

InFront

I find it hard to understand why you say that you get tortured in Iran for advocating democracy, when the current President beat the then (and current) supreme leader in a democratic vote, and they aren't exactly ideological bed buddies over issues of either domestic or foreign policy. Something tells me that protestor was advocating something more than just democracy.

Kevster

After the sailors now admitted that they were actually bound and forced to say what they said while in Iran I am left to wonder this:

Who really coerced them: The British or Iranian government? How can we possibly trust either governments.

robinph

Whilst both story's may be a load of bull I'd be more inclined to believe the version that they are now giving out as the British don't have any leverage over them to try and persuade them to come out with a particular version, other than maybe to cancel their next pay cheques.

DrFunkenstein

to Kev.. simple, You can trust neither, the men and woman are bound to feel some sort of duty to uphold britans image, at the expense of Iran, no matter what actually happened.

For queen and country and all that, wonder what the others have to say about the whole thing.

Governments lie, media lies and the truth gets lost.only the people involved know for sure what happened, although I doubt their account was too far off the truth, which would have to be considered mild treatment.


you can imagine the treatment 15 iranian sailors and marines would recieve if captured in british waters lil trip to git'mo via shannon.



Anyway.. check out this Wiki..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadegh

Iran should be a first world country.

Kevster

DrFunkenstein wrote:

you can imagine the treatment 15 iranian sailors and marines would recieve if captured in british waters lil trip to git'mo via shannon.

Yeh like what the hell is wrong with this world? Even if they were bound in Iran, the Americans do it in Guantanamo (and apparently much worse). The British and American governments are such hypocrites.

That's an interesting link. It doesn't surprise me that the British and Americans did something like that though. They have a nasty habit of interfering in nations that just wish to remain introverted. I'll go back a few years now to say that I was delighted when France rejected to join the alliance in the Iraq war. France is a great nation and they keep to themselves.

AbusesToilets

I'll go back a few years now to say that I was delighted when France rejected to join the alliance in the Iraq war. France is a great nation and they keep to themselves.

I got a chuckle from that quote :rolleyes:

Kevster

Well, I honestly regard France as the model nation. While Ireland is my home country I despise our drinking culture and dislike the fact that we do so little for the prevention Global Warming.

mike65

French keep to themselves? What planet are you on?

Rainbow Warrior bombing? Intervention on Ivory Coast? (a good thing btw), nuclear programme in Pacific, the Suez Crisis and Algeria (a while back but hey if you can be selctive so can I)

Mike.

Zambia

mike65 wrote:

French keep to themselves? What planet are you on?

Rainbow Warrior bombing? Intervention on Ivory Coast? (a good thing btw), nuclear programme in Pacific, the Suez Crisis and Algeria (a while back but hey if you can be selctive so can I)

Mike.

France if they go in go in hard and tell no one till the bodies are all buried. I read somewhere the Foriegn Legion are kept around for that purpose as none of them are registered as french they are not french soldiers. Even though they are french troops they can be deployed instantly without an act of parliment or something like that. Or just plain political suicide to see French young men killed.

We and the US on the other hand seem to bring the press everywhere.

AbusesToilets

Not forgetting France's decades of supplying arms etc to countries like Iraq and other upstanding regimes around the world.That and they've bolloxed up the HEC. Cnuts

robinph

DrFunkenstein wrote:

you can imagine the treatment 15 iranian sailors and marines would recieve if captured in british waters lil trip to git'mo via shannon.

Are there any actual full time military personell from any state being held in Guantanamo?

I thought it was only the unlawful enemy combatants, or whatever they were calling them, that were being held there. Any IRG that might be captured would get better treatment than the guys being held there as they are from a recognised national force so come under the Geneva convention. The guys in "git'mo" do not represent any nation as such which is why the US think it's OK to do what they are doing there.

DrFunkenstein

I'd say your 100% on that. was just talkin through my arse as I tend to do.

but what i'm really getting at is, they cannot expect any kind of ethical treatment of their servicemen and women and even civilians by an opposing force weather political, ideologicol or military when the brits are allied with the U.S. on most issues.

You gotta remember the person who advises America on what is right and lawfull, (Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales)
doesn't put a stop to the detention and torture of children and from what i've read can take place infront of their parents.. I mean WHAT THE ****.. What kind of people Ok that behavior (1. and who (2. calls unspecified parts of the geneva convention 'Quaint', meaning they do not apply to all humans so torture is ok :mad:

not only that, he's a slimey lying bastard (3.

and the brits aint much better (4.


See... there I go again...


(1. http://www.swr.de/report/archiv/sendungen/040705/02/frames.html

Doesn't seem to be available in english anymore, surely someone here can speak german? http://carryabigsticker.com/news/iraq_child_prisoners.htm

(2. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4989481/
(3. http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_0002638196
(4. http://www.counterpunch.org/rajiva02132006.html

Edit: Very off topic I suppose, but still just in case any of you missed this stuff

lostexpectation

mike65 wrote:

French keep to themselves? What planet are you on?

Rainbow Warrior bombing? Intervention on Ivory Coast? (a good thing btw), nuclear programme in Pacific, the Suez Crisis and Algeria (a while back but hey if you can be selctive so can I)

Mike.

i believe france are bombing the congo at the mo, or parts of chad or somewhere around there.

SeanW

lostexpectation wrote:

i believe france are bombing the congo at the mo, or parts of chad or somewhere around there.

Links?

Manic Moran

Central African Republic, actually. It borders Chad and Darfour, though. France are on the Government side against the rebels. There was a spate of public air force bombings at the end of last year, though it cropped up again a week ago in passing in a BBC article.

Not just the Air Force, though. I'm looking at an Independent article from last week saying that french paratroopers air-dropped into a town in "France's first major airborne para drop into a war zone since 19 May 1978"

NTM

Zambia

This was what I found little light on detail

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/africa/article2076138.ece

lostexpectation

the CAR, thats right

did you hear that 15 soldiers were raped, torture and excuted.


http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1259730,00.html


oh no right sorry there _weren't_.

where would they get the idea that the would get sexually abused from,

although Im surprised that Iran went realised more footage of them together in the nice room and not some pics of the jail, which would have merely shown standard military treatment of capture and questioning.

Lou.m

Hi i just wanted to voice my opinions apologies if they have already mentioned.

Firstly the british have stated that they were firmly in Iraqi waters although i have heard that this area of water is heavily disputed by other countries.

They were studing (they refuse to call it intelligence work or spying) Iranian navy movements by their own admition.

They were taken prisioner and appeared to co-operate fully. (I do not have an issue with this they were outgunned although i am not sure why they did not attempt to retreat although i do not know all the facts).

When they were taken hostage they were subjected to hearing the cock of a gun and one soldier was subjected to being called Mr Bean apparently. This is nothing compared to what we have seen U.S and British forces do to soldiers in Guatanimo and other parts of the world we have seen the evidence. SOme of this may have been without official sanction but terrible things have been done to prisoners with officail U.S sanction. Prisioners have been taken in by the British and the U.S without good reason and proper adherance to normal law. And we have seen far greater mistreatment of these people and they have been treated much more harshly.

And now the British and Americans have by their own example changed the practised rules of engagement you can take prisoners(or let us call them hostages) at will now. You may treat them as badly as you would wish in order to use them as you see fit. If the British and Americans are against holding people against the accepted code of behavouir in war they have many to free.

And now these soldiers retell their story for money telling what they were subjected to for money (or at least some of them) now i do not judge anyones choices in life i do not know what these peoples financial situation is nor how they have suffered.

But it seems to me that their suffering has not been as shocking as what we have seen from the hands of Britain and America.

I do not wish to turn suffering into some type of grotesque competition of who endures more. And i do not claim to be made of more stoic stuff but it does seem that a soldier might be called upon occasionally to behave in a way more suited to a warrior type code of ethiics and behaouir. I realize that recently the British and Americans have let down their soldiers and broken their covenent to give them good care in return for their service ( indeed one wonders whether this has led to a lack of discapline from soldiers in thier behvouir one wonders if they have lst respect for the authority that is supposes to guide them). But the behavouir from the service men is less than i would expect from the Irish army of whom i hold (now more than ever) in greater esteem.

I have not seen much in the British press about comparing the treatment of their soldiers to the people their forces have detained without being subject to a code of suitable behavouir (or at least they have often to ignore such a code) and how actions such as these might influence the way war and any type of engagement might be waged by other interested parties in response to this. Other countries might take behaviour such as this as a licsense to a free for all.

Since this all began i cannot tell you how many times i have heard people who are supposed to be in the know say that to the world Iran is a mystery. It seems they have forgotten the CIA backed coup that toppled a democratically elected government and how the british reacted before this to that democratically elected goverments decision to nationalize its own enrgy industries (the British reacted by an imbargo). And after the coup and pro western but very autocratic regime was installed and the west was happy but unfortuanately it did not seem to matter that freedom for most Iranians (particularly intellectuals) was curtailed very seriously. And there was a revolution and the Ayotollah was brought into power and reacted in a way that not even the Iranians had expected.

The conception of Iran in the west is that it is an Arab country it is not they are persian they speak farsi they are completely different to Arab culture. Persian culture has been full of Artistic are scientific achievement for thousands of years and still is. I would personally say that Iranian cinema is one of the best in the world. It has always seemed to me that Artists poets and writers in Iran have been reaching out to the world and the world has never had an answer. Being obsessed and confused over its leaders.

How does the west expect to be able to ease the situaiton if it does not know the history and culture of Iran.

This apathy is often blamed on Irans being a muslim country but the Persian interpretation of Islam(or at least it seems this way to me) is completely different to other countries.

Well these are just some of my thoughts.

sovtek

AbusesToilets wrote:

Not forgetting France's decades of supplying arms etc to countries like Iraq and other upstanding regimes around the world.That and they've bolloxed up the HEC. Cnuts

Unfortunetly they were behind the US and UK in gettin' them arms and biological weapons to Saddam.