Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Did their forcing of our marines to cross the border and then taking them prisoner consitute an act of war?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    No, they didn't force them across as far as I know - it was their fault.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mik1a)
    No, they didn't force them across as far as I know - it was their fault.
    Its just been on the news, the marines in question claim that they were 'escorted' over the border before being taken captive.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3854921.stm

    the source.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Did their forcing of our marines to cross the border and then taking them prisoner consitute an act of war?
    No we don't need anymore war.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    No we don't need anymore war.
    An irrelevant answer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Did their forcing of our marines to cross the border and then taking them prisoner consitute an act of war?
    An: Iran's just seen one of its neighbours experience regime change, caused at least partially because the UK and the US didn't like the regime in power. The Tehran regime is arguably even less popular in the West than Saddam was. Do you think their reaction (namely, giving no quarter whatsoever) is in any way surprising?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    An: Iran's just seen one of its neighbours experience regime change, caused at least partially because the UK and the US didn't like the regime in power. The Tehran regime is arguably even less popular in the West than Saddam was. Do you think their reaction (namely, giving no quarter whatsoever) is in any way surprising?
    Thats not what im asking but to answer it yes its surprising, it seems remarkably stupid.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Thats not what im asking but to answer it yes its surprising, it seems remarkably stupid.
    You have to consider the context for an action when commenting on it. Iran's regime is notoriously aggressive; that's just how they do things. Given that the Brits crossed into Iran's waters (I've yet to see any evidence otherwise), they were always going to act that way. And to acuse them of an act of war when British marins enter their waters is more than a little one eyed, wouldn't you say? I've less sympathy for the Iranian regime than probably anyone on UKL who isn't actually Iranian; nevertheless, I think that in this particular case, they acted justifiably.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    You have to consider the context for an action when commenting on it. Iran's regime is notoriously aggressive; that's just how they do things. Given that the Brits crossed into Iran's waters (I've yet to see any evidence otherwise), they were always going to act that way. And to acuse them of an act of war when British marins enter their waters is more than a little one eyed, wouldn't you say? I've less sympathy for the Iranian regime than probably anyone on UKL who isn't actually Iranian; nevertheless, I think that in this particular case, they acted justifiably.
    Try to answer the question in its own context. I did not ask whether or not Iran taking the marines prisoner after they inadvertantly crossed into their waters was an act of war as it obviosuly isnt. However as the news revealed tonight the marines were forcibly escorted across the border by Iranians before being taken prisoner THUS the question 'does this constitute and act of war'. The temperment of Irans regime is completely irrelevant unless foreign policy now goes along the lines of dont react to illegal and antagonistic acts if commited by a volatile regime. Incidently Iraq was not thought to be the initial cause, more the fact that the UK withdrew its support for Irans nuclear developement plans.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Try to answer the question in its own context. I did not ask whether or not Iran taking the marines prisoner after they inadvertantly crossed into their waters was an act of war as it obviosuly isnt. However as the news revealed tonight the marines were forcibly escorted across the border by Iranians before being taken prisoner THUS the question 'does this constitute and act of war'. The temperment of Irans regime is completely irrelevant unless foreign policy now goes along the lines of dont react to illegal and antagonistic acts if commited by a volatile regime. Incidently Iraq was not thought to be the initial cause, more the fact that the UK withdrew its support for Irans nuclear developement plans.
    Of course foreign policy has to take account the nature of the government you are dealing with. Iran and Iraq both funded suicide bombers in Israel for years, yet Israel never did anything. I've never understood why people think foreign policy is guided by principal; this couldn't be further from the truth.

    At any rate, it does not consitute an act of war. Irrespective of how they ended up in Iranian waters, once they were there, they were fair game to be captured. Perhaps they were tricked by the Iranians, if they were too bad. Nevertheless, they were in a place they shouldn't be during an extremely sensitive time; the results were highly predictable.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    just a aside: related topics-Wetherspoons=Iran apparently. Well if I can get cheap double vodka Red Bulls in Iran, then I'm all for opening them up to the West.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    Of course foreign policy has to take account the nature of the government you are dealing with. Iran and Iraq both funded suicide bombers in Israel for years, yet Israel never did anything. I've never understood why people think foreign policy is guided by principal; this couldn't be further from the truth.

    At any rate, it does not consitute an act of war. Irrespective of how they ended up in Iranian waters, once they were there, they were fair game to be captured. Perhaps they were tricked by the Iranians, if they were too bad. Nevertheless, they were in a place they shouldn't be during an extremely sensitive time; the results were highly predictable.
    Funding terrorist groups from the shadows and openly capturing the troops of a foreign power in neutral waters are completely incomparable incidents. You still seem not to realise what has apparently happened - the marines were in neutral waters and were *forced* into iranian waters whereby they were then arrested. If thats a legitimite act then international relations could get very interesting in the future.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Funding terrorist groups from the shadows and openly capturing the troops of a foreign power in neutral waters are completely incomparable incidents. You still seem not to realise what has apparently happened - the marines were in neutral waters and were *forced* into iranian waters whereby they were then arrested. If thats a legitimite act then international relations could get very interesting in the future.
    I agree: funding people who murder civilians is infinitely worse than questioning soldiers of a far from friendly country in your back yard and releasing them after 3 days.

    With regards to the specific situation, I do accept your point. However, it depends on what "forced" means. If they were physically rammed into Iranian waters, or opened fire upon, that is a hostile act and therefore technically an act of war (though, of course, nor worthy of starting a war). If, however, they ended up in Iranian waters as a result of any other course of action, be it misreading maps or somehow being tricked by the Iranians, they can have no complaints. Personally, I'm being sceptical because I am inclined to believe the latter option; I remember a few years ago reading about British Marines assaulting a beach in Spain, having misread a map and concluding it was in Gibraltar. If you've been to Gibraltar you'd realise this is quite some **** up; it would be far easier to make an error in the present situation, the sea doesn't have borders on it etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    An act of war if i ever saw one, I just wish the troops would have engaged those who were FORCEFULLY removing H.M troops onto foregin soil
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    With regards to the specific situation, I do accept your point. However, it depends on what "forced" means. If they were physically rammed into Iranian waters, or opened fire upon, that is a hostile act and therefore technically an act of war (though, of course, nor worthy of starting a war). If, however, they ended up in Iranian waters as a result of any other course of action, be it misreading maps or somehow being tricked by the Iranians, they can have no complaints.
    Presumably they were neither rammed nor fired upon, however i think we can conclude the threat of the latter was in place to force the marines into their waters. Id be greatly surprised if this report turns out to be nonsense, as embaressing as losing your way and ending up in another nations waters and creating the incident which ensued what kind of fool would try to excuse this incompetence of command by claiming an act as hostile as has been described was actually what happened?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Presumably they were neither rammed nor fired upon, however i think we can conclude the threat of the latter was in place to force the marines into their waters. Id be greatly surprised if this report turns out to be nonsense, as embaressing as losing your way and ending up in another nations waters and creating the incident which ensued what kind of fool would try to excuse this incompetence of command by claiming an act as hostile as has been described was actually what happened?
    Exactly the sort of fool who'd get lost in the first place and was bloody embarrased. Or perhaps, the sort of fool who also know it's rather unlikely to be concluded decisively, each side will stick to their story and agreement will not be reached.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    Exactly the sort of fool who'd get lost in the first place and was bloody embarrased. Or perhaps, the sort of fool who also know it's rather unlikely to be concluded decisively, each side will stick to their story and agreement will not be reached.
    I think thats a ridiculous thing to expect.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    I think thats a ridiculous thing to expect.
    I just don't see why you have such a positive view of the British involvement in the incident. The only fact we have at the moment is that they were in a place where they shouldn't have been. Thus the only wrong which is agreed upon was on the part of these British marines. They've blamed the Iranians, without providing any evidence or even a specific accusation, and not only do you immediately accept their story, you even start hyopthesising on whether Iran committed an act of war. Unsurprisingly, no thread appeared questioning whether Britain's (limited scale) invasion of Iran was an act of war.

    You may have noticed I am generally frustrated with the excessively rosy view many in this country have of the British armed forces, a conclusion reaced long before I chanced upon this website.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by H&E)
    I just don't see why you have such a positive view of the British involvement in the incident. The only fact we have at the moment is that they were in a place where they shouldn't have been. Thus the only wrong which is agreed upon was on the part of these British marines. They've blamed the Iranians, without providing any evidence or even a specific accusation, and not only do you immediately accept their story, you even start hyopthesising on whether Iran committed an act of war. Unsurprisingly, no thread appeared questioning whether Britain's (limited scale) invasion of Iran was an act of war.

    You may have noticed I am generally frustrated with the excessively rosy view many in this country have of the British armed forces, a conclusion reaced long before I chanced upon this website.
    And tell me why you immediately accept the Iranian story? what evidence have the Iranians produced that the Marines were ever in their water? The marines state that they were forced into Iranian waters before being captured, i can see no reason why they would create this lie- it would neither benefit them nor the UK(and i do not immediately accept their story, i accept it as being most likely true).
    What do you mean they havent produced a specific accusation? They claim to have been forcibly escorted into Iranian waters before being taken prisoner how much more specific could you want.
    As for the excessively rosy view of the British Armed forces you must spend a great deal of effort ignoring a great deal of people as there are far FAR more people of an anti-war persuasian than there are those for it.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 1, 2004
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.