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.

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.

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.

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.

Oil prices fell. The stock market rose. Video images of smiling British soldiers with Iranian President Ahmadinejad were everywhere. So were pictures of the 15 freed hostages embracing family members back home. The relief over the return of the Brits was so tremendous; you could almost hear birds singing.

Maybe it’s because military action won’t be needed or maybe it’s just because the ordeal won’t drag on and on, but the world is breathing easier now. A lot of folks are happy. The problem, as I see it, is that Ahmadinejad seems to be the happiest.

And why shouldn’t he be? He has shown the world that his forces can kidnap British citizens, subject them to brutal psychological tactics to coerce phony confessions, finagle the release of a high-ranking Iranian terror coordinator in Iraq, utterly trash the Geneva conventions and suffer absolutely no consequences.

What is your homie Jon Stewart makin light of this week? Whatever it is lets roll with it.

The Brits are what we refer to as “higher quality” human beings.

So why are you insisting they were tortured when they obviously don’t agree with you?

Happy Easter.