British sailors paraded on TV?

Seattle Slew · 03-28-2007, 01:17 PM

Anyone else surprised Britain and the US have allowed this to continue? Female British sailor forced to admit Iranian propaganda in videotape released in violation of international law.

If the US did this, all hell would break loose. Iran does it, let's go through diplomatic channels.

Why is Tony Blair only talking and doing nothing?

Any thoughts on what action should be taken against Iran?

Dark Horse · 03-28-2007, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seattle Slew

If the US did this, all hell would break loose. Iran does it, let's go through diplomatic channels.

You might want to check Guantanamo Bay, where people have been locked up for years without as much as a trial. Not to mention the torture condoned by the present administration.

Seattle Slew · 03-28-2007, 01:23 PM

Not defending that either. Just saying if the US were doing what Iran is doing, the world would be in an uproar.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

You might want to check Guantanamo Bay, where people have been locked up for years without as much as a trial. Not to mention the torture condoned by the present administration.

Dark Horse · 03-28-2007, 01:27 PM

Under the cloak of 9/11 the US has been getting away with murder and worse. Including invading a nation that everyone knows had nothing to do with 9/11. The purpose has always been to extend the war to Iran. This is just what the evil doctor ordered.

By the way, I should probably phrase this differently. The US forces are being misused by a totally corrupt political leadership that represents bankers and corporations. So this is not the 'US' as such.

Unfortunately, this takes a long time to sink in, because the corporately owned media is a very effective propaganda machine. For free press we rely on the internet.

increasedodds · 03-28-2007, 01:32 PM

I totally disagree with the US on many fronts.

That does not make it alright for Iran to kidnap people.

If I were Tony Blair, my response would be:

You have 12 hours to release my 15 people.

If you do not, ______ building in Tehran will be blown up.

You have 12 hours to release my 15 people.

If you do not, _____ and _____ building in Tehran will be blown up.

You have 12 hours to release my 15 people.

If you do not, all buildings between ____ and ____ streets will be blown up.

You have 12 hours to release my 15 people.

If you do not,Tehran will be flattened.

I bet not one building would have to go down.

Sean

tribet · 03-28-2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seattle Slew

Not defending that either. Just saying if the US were doing what Iran is doing, the world would be in an uproar.

I'm in no way defending him but I think you're forgetting the parading of Saddam by the US nobody was up in arms about that.

Seattle Slew · 03-28-2007, 01:34 PM

Maybe, but the US military has no people left to do that, so I think regardless of what Iran does, the US can't touch them, except a few airstrikes if they want but that won't accomplish what they want.

[quote=Dark Horse;244065]Under the cloak of 9/11 the US has been getting away with murder and worse. Including invading a nation that everyone knows had nothing to do with 9/11. The purpose has always been to extend the war to Iran. This is just what the evil doctor ordered.

Seattle Slew · 03-28-2007, 01:35 PM

Again, no argument on that either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tribet

I'm in no way defending him but I think you're forgetting the parading of Saddam by the US nobody was up in arms about that.

increasedodds · 03-28-2007, 01:39 PM

The US could take over Iran in a week.

The casualties would be another 200,000 to 2000.

The US could flatten Iran either from sea or air without even making an effort in under a day.

The below statement is crazy -

"Maybe, but the US military has no people left to do that, so I think regardless of what Iran does, the US can't touch them, except a few airstrikes if they want but that won't accomplish what they want."

Seattle Slew · 03-28-2007, 01:44 PM

You mean a full scale invasion like Iraq? I think that's impossible. Where are the troops?

Airstrikes could do a ton of damage, but I meant a regime/policy change would not result.

Quote:

Originally Posted by increasedodds

The US could take over Iran in a week.

The casualties would be another 200,000 to 2000.

The US could flatten Iran either from sea or air without even making an effort in under a day.

The below statement is crazy -

"Maybe, but the US military has no people left to do that, so I think regardless of what Iran does, the US can't touch them, except a few airstrikes if they want but that won't accomplish what they want."

Seattle Slew · 03-28-2007, 01:46 PM

Does Britain have the ability to launch an airstrike against Iran if the US was opposed/didn't assist?

Dark Horse · 03-28-2007, 01:50 PM

Let me repeat that what is happening in the Middle East does not represent the US. It represents the dark forces that have taken over our country.

Although the conflict is first and foremost fought on behalf of corporations and bankers, if the US is representing any country in the Middle East it is not America; it is Israel.

Netanyahu, immediately after 9/11, while the world was in total shock, called it 'very good for Israel'. That was some quick deduction. So was the celebrating that day on the banks of the river Hudson by five Israelies, later linked to the Mossad.

The lease holder of WTC building #7 and the Twin Towers, Larry Silverstein, with close connections to the Israeli leadership, bluntly admitted that #7 had been taken down through controlled demolition. Not only that, but the BBC reported this collapse 23 minutes before it had occurred, with the reporter shown against a NY skyline including building #7.

I could go on. But I won't.

increasedodds · 03-28-2007, 02:09 PM

Yes, Britain could air attack or take over Iran without US assitance unless the US actively interferred.

And where are the troops? Well we seem to have 100,000+ in Iraq policing. They could simply leave for a few months or a good portion could. We also have many non committed troops back home.

-Sean

cobra_king · 03-28-2007, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by increasedodds

Yes, Britain could air attack or take over Iran without US assitance unless the US actively interferred.

And where are the troops? Well we seem to have 100,000+ in Iraq policing. They could simply leave for a few months or a good portion could. We also have many non committed troops back home.

-Sean

With all due respect you can't possibly believe either of these statements are true. Britain is no longer capable of leading a war against any country with even a decent military. They are however, very effective at being the number 2 power in any situation they enter and have proven this in Iraq, even with that situation in complete disarray. As for where the U.S troops would come from. Iraq is in total chaos even with 100,000+ troops there, how could they just simply "leave" for a few months without that situation being totally lost (if it already isn't). And opening a 2nd front in the middle east is no longer a viable option with the failure thus far in iraq. No level of U.S. governement and especially the people of America would allow another 100,000+ men to go into that quagmire, especially considering in all probability, this would entail re-instating the draft and there is no appetite for that right now.

tevari · 03-28-2007, 03:42 PM

Kinda off topic, but supposedly...the Russian media among others know the US will hold airstrikes over Iran on the 6th of April.

wpet99 · 03-28-2007, 05:04 PM

Maybe the mention of some damage to Irans Nuclear facility might make things happen ?