ykickamoocow

Iran Captures 15 British Sailors

308 posts in this topic

The SAS are good but they ain't quite Arnie in Commando. You cant send a crack commando unit into a place (that they dont even know where it is in Iran) and expect them to fight through what is probably an extremely highly fortified security stockade - Unless your the A-Team.

You can't even send in the A-team if you don't know where they're being held

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can there be an exchange? Britain isn't holding any Iranian prisoners. Britian has to have something to trade. It is the U.S. that has the 5 Iranians in custody. Do you believe the U.S. would trade their prisoners for the British prisoners? Doubtful under the American premise of not negotiating with terrorists.

Hmm. I had heard the Brits were holding Iranians..are you sure about your stance? I'd like to hear from a Brit on this, though.

If they are in fact U.S. prisoners, then you are correct, we would not do an exchange. If Britain has Iranian prisoners, then an exchange may happen because I'm less sure of Britain's stance as far as negotiating with other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm. I had heard the Brits were holding Iranians..are you sure about your stance? I'd like to hear from a Brit on this, though.

If they are in fact U.S. prisoners, then you are correct, we would not do an exchange. If Britain has Iranian prisoners, then an exchange may happen because I'm less sure of Britain's stance as far as negotiating with other countries.

Hey you may be correct yourself! I understood it as the Americans holding them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey you may be correct yourself! I understood it as the Americans holding them.

I checked it out, and they are being held by the U.S. military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No,there won't be any attacks by suicide bombers. As soon as they see that Iranian women have posed nekkid in British tabloids,the Iranian men will realise what the clerics had been depriving them of all these years. Then they will send the clerics to their makers & liberate Iran sexually.

Instead of bombing Iraq/Iran/any other axis of evil,western countries would be much better served by carpet bombing with magazines like Playboy,Maxim,whathaveyou.(Can you imagine? A jet fighter loaded with porno mags?) Trust me,repressed sexuality is a powerful weapon to overthrow the hardliners.

I can see the conversation now:

You can get 72 virgins in heaven!

Oh yeah? There's twice that many down the street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the great links ykick. One has made it into my sig (the first change to it in more than 2 years). Praise the Lord!

I think we have to be careful here. After all, 1000 years ago the top xian clerics were in favour of the Crusades, 500 years ago they burnt folks at the stake, 200 years ago they supported slavery and were themselves heavily involved in the slave trade, 100 years ago they supported cultural imperialism, racism, sexism, homophobia, including imprisoning folks in Britain for life for being gay, 60 years ago the Church in Germany supported Hitler, and even today I would argue the Pope is responsible for a lot of suffering around the world (as much as George Bush probably).

The point of course is that most xians today would say that most of those things were wrong and that the leading clerics of the day were wrong. Now of course that is slightly easier to say about xianity that Islam because you can point to the modern xian clerics for support. Nevertheless there are many well educated Muslims who would argue that their political leaders have gotten Islam all wrong, and I think we have to accept that there are different interpretations of the Islamic faith.

Fwiw, I think all religions are bunk, though some interpretations are better than others. After all, once you choose to hand over moral responsibility to "God" what's to say that burning fags, Swedes or xians isn't entirely proper?

I think it's debatable what the Koran says about that. There are sections that give that impression, but there are others that give the opposite impression. Muslim scholars say that you have to look very closely at the context. Also, there are very offensive passages of the Bible too.

Indeed. Their politicians reflect their national character, of course. I would add that they tend to be especially poorly informed about the rest of the world. (Not always, but on average, compared to other people.)

I couldn't agree more! Great post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok i have stayed away from this thread for a long time(coz i did not have time to post my full thoughts)

And i haven't read the rest of the thread as it is too long so someone may have allready bought these points up, but anyways....

First note:- All Politicans of any country are dirty scumbags, who just want to make money, be in power and don't care about other peoples lives.

If you don't agree with the above note, then don't read the rest....

Here are MY VIEWS:-

Iran in my view will soon be attacked my USA(on bush's last days of presidency unless iran prokes them earlier). This time however USA will have the support of UN( due to the british troops and many other reasons).

Reasons for Bush to attack Iran:-

1. His party(Republican) will proabbly not win the election next time around, so to screw the democrats when they win, they will start the war on Iran, So the democrats(who now want all US Soldiers to return) will be faced with a very hard choice, a) to call back troop from the newly invaded iran and iraq( and thus be flamed for the second/third vietnam(depends on if u consider iraq as the 2nd vietnam) or stay and fight in Iran. Doing any of these the republican being in the opposition will demand for the other alternative to as to get majority for the next 2011/12 election, and would blame them for any decisions. The public who generally have a lot to do in their lives will forget which side actually started the wars, but what they are doing at the present moment, forget the past concentrate on the future....

2. $$$$$ oil money

3. one more Miltiary base in Middle east to check Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and obviously China.

-------------------------------------------

On another note i think USA should just go after pakistan where all the terrorists are and end thier war on terror....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On another note i think USA should just go after pakistan where all the terrorists are and end thier war on terror....

America will never attack Pakistan as it is well known Pakistan has nuclear weapons capable of destroying just about any country they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
America will never attack Pakistan as it is well known Pakistan has nuclear weapons capable of destroying just about any country they want.

that is the unfortunate part, china gave them the nuclear tech....

But Musharaff will soon die(too many attempts on his life, they are bound to get lucky)) And no one in Pakistan likes him or his peace with India or helping America ideas, so some actions will have to be taken when he dies.

I met a Pakistani guy on campus and i asked him what will happen if Mush dies, he said "Chaos".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On another note i think USA should just go after pakistan where all the terrorists are and end thier war on terror....

The war is on Islamofacism, not terror. Terror is a tactic. Can you honestly declare war on a tactic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The war is on Islamofacism, not terror. Terror is a tactic. Can you honestly declare war on a tactic?

your president did!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Words aren't his forte though, Jem.

What is George Bush's forte as im struggling to think of anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm he's good at making us laugh. That's the best I can do. Here's a funny but long video of

. It's a debate on MSNBC (a US TV channel) on whether Bush is an "idiot".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm he's good at making us laugh. That's the best I can do. Here's a funny but long video of
. It's a debate on MSNBC (a US TV channel) on whether Bush is an "idiot".

Its like giving a monkey a nuclear weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here we go again............

Seriously, people were supposed to concentrate on my big Note, not ht elittle on the end, coz i really wanted to hear the counter argument s to the post, Oh well....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The war is on Islamofacism, not terror. Terror is a tactic. Can you honestly declare war on a tactic?

A very good point.

your president did!

Well, he listened to his military commanders who know quite alot about war. The theory, as I've explained in a post above, is to force the 'terrorist' element into fighting in one spot - in a sense, making them act more like an army than like a group using guerrilla tactics. Bush's commanders have done this with Iraq. Iraq is that 'spot' where we are sitting...and just by sitting there, the middle-eastern pride is forcing the terrorists to focus on Iraq, and us. This is, to some small extent, forcing them to wage a split war. That kind of war is very costly. Bush's error is that he's assuming just because the terrorists are focusing their efforts on ridding Iraq of us, that those terrorist will not be attacking elsewhere.

Now the interesting part is whether or not their resources will run out before our stomach for the fight runs out.

Edited by Autumnpuma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here we go again............

Indeed..........................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed..........................

With the lack of thought-provoking threads in the F1 Discussion board, what else should we do but post all this crap again and again...? ^_^

It is getting boring. Almost as boring as the whole Alonso vs. Kimi crap. Hell, I could just cut and past my replies from earlier threads....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now the interesting part is whether or not their resources will run out before our stomach for the fight runs out.

If Petraeus had been in charge from the start, or if there had been enough troops there, perhaps things would have been different but as is, I think the battle in Iraq is already lost. But you already know I think that it will probably be a safe haven and rallying call for terrorists for many years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, the same $hit posted ad-nauseum by the same people, me included, that's why I'm trying to stay out of this.

Did you see where the projected corn crop for this year in the U.S. is to be the largest since 1944? Ethanhol it's a beautiful thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: I read somewhere that the south americans are p**sed at bush for that too! Maybe we shouldn't go there though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed, the same $hit posted ad-nauseum by the same people, me included, that's why I'm trying to stay out of this.

Did you see where the projected corn crop for this year in the U.S. is to be the largest since 1944? Ethanhol it's a beautiful thing.

Are you going to use it as fuel or as a drink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you going to use it as fuel or as a drink?

Hope not a drink, otherwise alchol over here would suck...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now