Iran Captures 15 British Sailors

[monza gorilla 1]

I have an interesting game for everyone concerning this thread. Without going back to read my previous posts, would you say I advocated a military response (guns blazing) to this situation or a diplomatic one? Because of my nationality, I would guess most of you would say that I advocated the military response...

The answer is nope. This is what I think, without looking. You were stirring the pot with your large wooden spoon and exhorting us Brits to show some backbone. I got shirty. What a memory I have. Good question though.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

I just came in to peak, glad the boys are back home....

Post something political and you get a thread that's 11 pages long in no time flat. There's too much hatred in this world

[Schumikonen 2]

car bomb drivers, they could jut import ide....

there are some other that are very good for this, like Sato, Montoya, ...

[Shane2 0]

Maybe even the greatest Crash architect of them all, a certain M.Schumacher?

[AutoRacer5 0]

Nah.

No one tops De Crasheris.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Indirectly yes. You and Bruce.

Indirectly? I stated quite directly that diplomacy should be tried first, it's your own erroneous assumptions about me, and Americans in general, that make you think my comments about 'backbone' meant a military response.

The answer is nope. This is what I think, without looking. You were stirring the pot with your large wooden spoon and exhorting us Brits to show some backbone. I got shirty. What a memory I have. Good question though.

That's exactly what I was doing. I wanted some real responses, not politically correct BS. Sometimes to get those responses the pot needs to be stirred. I think I went too far, however, and mildy insulted you Brits. Sorry about that The 'backbone' I was referring to is this: Diplomacy first, but not shirking from a stronger response if diplomacy failed. Of the Brits that responded, only one, Jem, would choose diplomacy only.

[dribbler 6]

Indirectly? I stated quite directly that diplomacy should be tried first, it's your own erroneous assumptions about me, and Americans in general, that make you think my comments about 'backbone' meant a military response.

That's exactly what I was doing. I wanted some real responses, not politically correct BS. Sometimes to get those responses the pot needs to be stirred. I think I went too far, however, and mildy insulted you Brits. Sorry about that The 'backbone' I was referring to is this: Diplomacy first, but not shirking from a stronger response if diplomacy failed. Of the Brits that responded, only one, Jem, would choose diplomacy only.

To be fair Mike, you had ample opportunity to make your position clear at the time and i didn't see you do that. Now that it has been resolved you deem it necessary to justify your opinion and i find that interesting. All i could see at the time, as many did i believe is that you were suggesting a military response. Maybe i'm wrong.

[Autumnpuma 0]

My position at first was as someone interested in how Britain would handle the situation. I was then shocked by Jem's lack of outrage as the situation progressed and it became more and more apparent that the sailors were captured in Iraqi waters in a move that is a literal act of war by Iran on, at the very least, Iraq, and at the most, Britain itself. I then challenged you Brits into a more real opinion than 'peace at all costs'. Russ suggested the first sane response when he said Britain should try diplomacy first. The first is the crucial part that was missing in Jem's response. I then said that I personally agree with Russ. That was, and is, my position from very early on.

My attitude on all matters is to try diplomacy first, but back it up with a possible military response.

My reason for asking the question a few post above was to break people of the knee-jerk reaction in assuming all Americans want the military to solve things first. This is not the case.