Royal Embarrassment
04.06.07I’m still embarrassed for the British on this captured sailors incident. I would be ashamed of my country. Whats even more important about this ordeal, is that it foreshadows what is to come of the entire western civilization.
Iran needs to be afraid. Terrified of us. They need to be looking over their shoulder’s and watching their every step. If anything, this incident just gave their drive and mission that much more of a boost. They picked a fight, and Britain was just a delicate flower. Iran is the new bully that knows Britain doesn’t have the brass to fight back, and Iran is going to enjoy pushing them around more in the future. Even worse, is that Britain has its hands tied by the EU, and other “Euro Influences” who would rather watch those sailors die, then to bring action against the “abused and unloved” Iranian bastards.
The West needs to put its boot to the skulls of these islamo-fascist tools, who only seek jihad on every one in the world. What are the chances that we could bring the crusades back into style?
I must confess I didn’t pay attention to the situation or how it ended—Bea was violently ill all week and I was taking care of her so I didn’t have time to keep up with the news, so the situation ended before I even knew everything about it.
What exactly is the complaint from the right about what happened? I have heard that some are angry at the sailors, and it appears that you think the UK gov are jackasses.
Not knowing what happened, I hear “Brits captured, Brits released” and all I can think of is OK, so what’s the problem?
# April 6th, 2007 at 10:29 amMy beef is how the British were in Iraqi controlled waters, and the Iranians take them captive. And the pandering British government wasn’t gonna do much about it.
But the reason the Iranians captured them, was for leverage to have some of their captured key leaders released. So they got their “key leaders” back, and we got the sailors back.
what we should have done, in my arrogant opinion
We (mostly Britain) should have showed the Iranians that, to quote the big Labowski “this aggression will not stand, man”.
and we shouldn’t have give them their guys back…. at least without first injecting them with government created killer nanabots that gradually eat away at the vitals when ordered by top secret CIA computers.
# April 6th, 2007 at 11:08 amAhhh … so Britain traded dudes? OK, I see why that would piss people off.
# April 6th, 2007 at 12:40 pmIt was a test. The Iranians tested the will of Britain and the Brits failed miserably. They came off as weak and now Iran knows they have an advantage. What a crappy chain of events.
Also, it is my understanding from what I read that these sailors were psychologically tortured by being stripped naked and being led to believe they were going to be executed. Now I am not a anti-torture guy (Jack Bauer is my hero) but where is the voice of outrage from the Left on how the Iranians used these tactics? They are sure quick to condemn us when we use similar tactics on known terrorists. Double standard, much?
# April 6th, 2007 at 9:08 pmJJ, the problem is that we don’t use our tactics on “known terrorists”—real life is nothing like 24, where Jack always has perfect intelligence, he always knows the person he’s torturing is guilty and that they always have useful information. And his torture almost always works.
In the real world, the people we’ve mistreated are not “known terrorists.” Some of them are, but the vast majority were not—which is why almost half of the people we detained at Guantanamo have been set free without charges. Most of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib were common criminals—some were there for traffic violations—not terrorists or insurgents (although some were, of course).
I don’t personally have a problem with treating harshly someone who we know is guilty of a terrible crime, such as terrorism. I’d love to personally violate bin Laden’s human rights in the most painful manner. I do, however, have a problem with treating people harshly before they have been convicted (or even accused) of a crime in order to get information they might not have or a confession of things they didn’t even do. That’s what the Gestapo and the NKVD did, it’s what makes authoritarian dictatorships so crappy.
As Rod Dreher, a well known conservative said:
As for why you’re not gonna see me hysterically condemning the Iranians for how they treat their prisoners, it’s for the same reason you don’t see me hysterically condemning them for executing homosexuals—I expect that sort of behavior from crazed religious fundamentalists.
Perhaps this is a shocking concept for you, but I hold us to higher standards than muslim extremists, terrorists and dictators. Shouldn’t you?
# April 7th, 2007 at 7:50 amGuav, thanks for the insight on Guantanamo but I really think you are missing what I am saying here. When I made the profound and undeniably amazing observation that the we hear no outrage from the Left I was not specifically referring to you. I was referring to the masses who spend all their time hoopin and hollaring on the streets about how evil the US is and how groups like the Palestinians and Hamas are victims. I just made an observation.
Jack Bauer is a fictitious character on a TV drama?! How come nobody told me that? Thanks again Guav for setting this stupiidd redneck straight.
# April 7th, 2007 at 8:46 amYou said:
Except that is not in fact, what we do, and so that is not why people on the left are outraged at what we have been doing.
Our tactics are not similar—they are undeniably worse than what these men dealt with—and we do not use them on “known terrorists.”
Your question rests on a false premise.
# April 7th, 2007 at 10:44 amDude, why are you trying to dissect something that doesn’t need dissected. You are making painstakingly wrong assumptions on a simple comment.
Your are mistaken. The people on the left will disagree with any form of torture to ANYONE the government believe has usable intel. Again, I am not against certain types of torture (mainly psychological)… so back to what I was trying to say before you overcomplicated the comment: Many on the left have no qualms about demonizing their own government for torture, yet they have no qualms about other countries practices on us or allies of our. (And no Guav, it is not because they are just used to their whacky fundamentalist culture, as you are). Don’t deny what is so obvious. These folks don’t need your protection… they are more than willing to admit the double standard publicly while drinking a ice cold six-pack of kool-aid.
# April 7th, 2007 at 11:16 amI want some Kool Aid…I think I’ll go buy some right now. Thanks for the tip JJ. Mmmmmm….Koooollll Aiiiid. “OH YEAAAH!!!”
# April 7th, 2007 at 6:02 pmNonsense … people on the left are not outraged at their treatment because the British sailors were not tortured.
They were not beaten. They were not forced to kneel for 14 hours. They didn’t have dogs set upon them. They weren’t kept naked in freezing rooms, nor were they locked in sweltering transport containers. They didn’t have lightsticks jammed up their butts, they weren’t raped or sexually abused, and they certainly were not beaten to death or held for five years with no trials.
Being blindfolded, bound, kept in isolation and warned that they faced up to seven years in prison is not “torture,” it’s standard treatment for prisoners even in this country.
# April 7th, 2007 at 6:03 pmNonsense to you Guavy boy. To be stripped naked, blindfolded, and being led to believe for many hours that you will be executed is a form of psychological torture. You need to read up on the definition of “psychological torture” Mr. I Know Everything About Everything. AND AGAIN, I never said I was against this tactic.
But these sailors were not POW’s. Iran is not at war with GB. They were hostages that were illegally taken out of Iraqi waters… AND LOOK once again you run your yapper which results in totally missing the point I was trying to make in the first place. Dude, get a life.
# April 7th, 2007 at 6:38 pmhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/07/nhostages07.xml
# April 7th, 2007 at 6:41 pmoh well? so what’s happen here? can we say nothing? can we say something or maybe its over and we just can’t see it?
# April 7th, 2007 at 8:09 pmHappy Easter to ya’ll! May God’s sacrifice bring you hope and joy. He is Risen!
# April 8th, 2007 at 1:35 pmNotice how the Brits said what they subjected to was “psychological pressure”? Notice how the actual captives in question have not claimed that they were tortured?
So why are you insisting they were tortured when they obviously don’t agree with you?
Happy Easter.
# April 8th, 2007 at 4:07 pmGuav - It is in my opinion that the Brits don’t mind using the word “psychological pressure” because they are not trying to exploit the Iranians. Had it been the other way around and the exact same situation, I can imagine the Iranians would be acting so “mortified” that they were “tortured” in their attempt to demonize the West in front of the world.
The Brits are what we refer to as “higher quality” human beings.
# April 8th, 2007 at 6:51 pmhahaha! Guav, yur killin me here. I think yo beat this dead horse into oblivion. Its way past due for you to ramble on about sumfin else. Pick anything for the love of Pete!
What is your homie Jon Stewart makin light of this week? Whatever it is lets roll with it.
# April 8th, 2007 at 8:42 pmOK, I lied. I guess I will be the one beating this dead horse but I just had to post this comment by Fred Thompson (who I hope will run for the presidency in 08)
# April 8th, 2007 at 9:30 pmJJ, I’m in agreement with Chad and yourself that the Brits handled this badly—both their government and the British sailors who cried uncle at the first threat of jail time. I tend to agree with Rod Dreher in his piece What John McCain Did. So you don’t have to convince me that the winner here is Iran.
However, you’re just plainly and factually wrong when you say that these men were tortured. They were not. They are not calling it torture, and if you read their statements about how they were treated, it simply is not torture—it’s how prisoners (legitimate or not) are usually treated at a bare minimum: they were restrained and threatened. If you get arrested for any common crime here in the US the cop is gonna threaten you with jail time unless you cooperate.
Until the sailors say they were tortured, then you’re just flappin’ yer gums—Unless you were held captive with them, I’ll take their word over yours.
# April 9th, 2007 at 7:33 amNobody is better for making a fuss over total bullsh*t quite like those damn Iranians. the arguments over the coordinates of their location, etc. - such a pathetic cry for attention and recognition. I don’t know if I entirely agree with you that it worked. like all political showmanship this thing has a limited life span.
one kidnapping - ok, negotiate. 2 - maybe. after that, it becomes a pattern of behavior and even the iranians will have trouble denying that they’re purposefully stiring up trouble. that’s when it’s really important for britain to have backbone. at this point, i’d say it was definitely an embarassment and a political loss of face, but not that big of a deal. it’s significance will depend on what happens next, iran-wise.
that’s my two cents.
this one thing will be forgotten by the vast majority of people in a week or two, but if it happens again, people will really be paying attention.
# April 9th, 2007 at 2:03 pmand that last sentence was my third cent
# April 9th, 2007 at 2:11 pmThe Brits were and embarrasement to their country. Resistance seemed little if any of their SERE training if they have recieved any training in this section of their military career.
Irania Waters ? I think not ! One thing to consider is that if the U.S. Navy had attempted a VBSS (Vessel board search and seizure) and over watch of security would have been placed to thrawrt off boats and approaching vessels (large or small) Security would have been offset if the sailors had imagined for one moment that their VBSS was to done in Iranian water. Imagine 10 fast boats with crew served weapons and small arms engaging boats that are nearing the vessel. (For those not in the military)
The Brit sailors seemed to have just given in to the Iranian demands to admit failure to restrain from entering their waters and it’s debatable by the GPS locating systems that those waters were infringed by the Brit.
This emboldens democrats to believe that Iran can be reasoned with without military action or the threat of military action. Just as Nancy Pelosi took it upon herself to visit Syria and offer foreign policy when it’s the POTUS that sets foreign policy.
Watch out people, these democrats are swift and likely to win the address for the White House in 08.
# April 9th, 2007 at 9:19 pmThis sad affair just goes to show there is no England anymore… that’s why I moved here, the last bastion of hope.
# April 12th, 2007 at 5:28 pmWe (and Britain) need to retaliate 10 times worse to anybody who does a terrorist act,kiddnapping,etc.. I’m sure it wouldn’t take them long to figure out that it’s not worth it. The problem these days is our government either doesn’t have the balls to do it or they are worried about what other countries will say or do to us. Why do they actually do for us ? Nothing.
# April 16th, 2007 at 12:43 pmRetaliate against who? That’s the difference between terrorists and armies—terrorists are stateless.
Sure, all terrorists have contacts in various countries, but that doesn’t mean that the governments or people in those countries knew or were responsible for it.
After all, the 9/11 hijackers were living in this country. They planned the attack, learned to fly and trained right here.
I’m all for retaliation against the guilty. The only problem with stateless terrorists is that there is often no guilty state to retaliate against.
# April 17th, 2007 at 6:34 am