- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- British Captives talk: Iran was not so good
Standard interrogation techniques.
I still think after reading their accounts that they were fairly treated. None of them were as much as slapped.
I still think after reading their accounts that they were fairly treated. None of them were as much as slapped.
What do you expect from Iran? They held U.S people captive for 3 years! (Those were radical students, but the government didn't exactly step in.)
The question is if they were in Iranian waters or not. That makes a huge difference. Apparentely they admitted it only coz they were threatened.JahManRed wrote:
Standard interrogation techniques.
I still think after reading their accounts that they were fairly treated. None of them were as much as slapped.
I cant wait to hear the same ole' rhetoric from the members who like to give aid and comfort to the enemy. The part of the Iranian Govt. and their leaders are horrible people, they aren't very happy. I'm kinda disappointed though that the Royal Marines and Sailors broke down and gave the statements that they did, during their captivity. Still, the Iranian leaders that ordered this fiasco, still had no right to start this or drag it out as long as they did. At the same time, I feel the British Leasers should have demanded from the first minute that the captives be released immediately... BTW Diplomacy did not win here, in context to the hostages, being released. They were hostages. Diplomacy has nothing to do with that!
lol? according to newspapers here they said that they were acted very good and they gain some friends there I am serious.
Last edited by Ottomania (2007-04-06 09:59:57)
Of course many people thought they were at club med the whole time.
No surprise.
CHIVENOR (Reuters) - The 15 British sailors and marines seized by
Iran in the Gulf last month said on Friday they were blindfolded, bound, kept in isolation and warned that they faced up to seven years in jail.
"Throughout our ordeal, we faced constant psychological pressure," they said in a joint statement.
"We were interrogated most nights and given two options. If we admitted that we had strayed, we would be back on a plane to the UK pretty soon. If we didn't, we faced up to seven years in prison," they revealed.
They heard weapons being cocked behind them and feared the worst.
The sole woman among the group, Faye Turney, was kept isolated for several days and told by her captors that the others had been freed and gone home.
The sailors and marines were released in Tehran on Thursday after a tense 13-day stand off and flown back to Britain for an emotional reunion with their families.
The sailors' description of their captivity was in sharp contrast to the images of them smiling on Iranian television. Those images were an Iranian "media stunt," they said on Friday.
KEPT IN ISOLATION
After their arrest in the Gulf, the sailors and marines were taken to a prison in Tehran. "We were blindfolded, our hands were bound, we were forced up against a wall," they said in their statement.
They were "stripped and dressed in pajamas ... we were kept in stone cells, approximately 8 feet by six, sleeping on piles of blankets. All of us were kept in isolation."
They insisted they had been arrested in Iraqi waters and answered accusations that they should not have surrendered so readily.
"Had we resisted, there would have been a major fight, one which we could not have won, and with consequences that would have a major strategic impact," Captain Chris Air said.
"I can clearly state we were 1.7 nautical miles from Iranian waters," Lieutenant Felix Carman told the news conference.
Asked for the government's reaction, a Foreign Office spokeswoman said: "The words of the group speak for themselves and we will give them careful consideration."
Britain has suspended boarding operations in the Gulf and is reviewing rules of engagement in the area's waters amid disquiet over how easily the sailors were seized on March 23.
"As part of this ongoing review, the operational procedures and the rules of engagement that go with them will be reconsidered," navy chief Admiral Jonathon Band told BBC Radio.
Iran still holds the only two boats used to carry out the search operations in the area.
Iran said they had strayed into its territory but Britain said they were in Iraqi waters on a regular U.N. mission.
CHIVENOR (Reuters) - The 15 British sailors and marines seized by
Iran in the Gulf last month said on Friday they were blindfolded, bound, kept in isolation and warned that they faced up to seven years in jail.
"Throughout our ordeal, we faced constant psychological pressure," they said in a joint statement.
"We were interrogated most nights and given two options. If we admitted that we had strayed, we would be back on a plane to the UK pretty soon. If we didn't, we faced up to seven years in prison," they revealed.
They heard weapons being cocked behind them and feared the worst.
The sole woman among the group, Faye Turney, was kept isolated for several days and told by her captors that the others had been freed and gone home.
The sailors and marines were released in Tehran on Thursday after a tense 13-day stand off and flown back to Britain for an emotional reunion with their families.
The sailors' description of their captivity was in sharp contrast to the images of them smiling on Iranian television. Those images were an Iranian "media stunt," they said on Friday.
KEPT IN ISOLATION
After their arrest in the Gulf, the sailors and marines were taken to a prison in Tehran. "We were blindfolded, our hands were bound, we were forced up against a wall," they said in their statement.
They were "stripped and dressed in pajamas ... we were kept in stone cells, approximately 8 feet by six, sleeping on piles of blankets. All of us were kept in isolation."
They insisted they had been arrested in Iraqi waters and answered accusations that they should not have surrendered so readily.
"Had we resisted, there would have been a major fight, one which we could not have won, and with consequences that would have a major strategic impact," Captain Chris Air said.
"I can clearly state we were 1.7 nautical miles from Iranian waters," Lieutenant Felix Carman told the news conference.
Asked for the government's reaction, a Foreign Office spokeswoman said: "The words of the group speak for themselves and we will give them careful consideration."
Britain has suspended boarding operations in the Gulf and is reviewing rules of engagement in the area's waters amid disquiet over how easily the sailors were seized on March 23.
"As part of this ongoing review, the operational procedures and the rules of engagement that go with them will be reconsidered," navy chief Admiral Jonathon Band told BBC Radio.
Iran still holds the only two boats used to carry out the search operations in the area.
Iran said they had strayed into its territory but Britain said they were in Iraqi waters on a regular U.N. mission.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-04-06 10:06:36)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Yeah, well, we will never know for sure unless a 3rd source comes forward.sergeriver wrote:
The question is if they were in Iranian waters or not. That makes a huge difference. Apparentely they admitted it only coz they were threatened.JahManRed wrote:
Standard interrogation techniques.
I still think after reading their accounts that they were fairly treated. None of them were as much as slapped.
Iran says one thing, Britain says another. After some of the lies told by the British in their clandestine operations in Northern Ireland like colluding with terrorist to have solicitors murdered etc, I trust their word as much as Iran's.
So I am officially on the fence.
I think we all knew they were not at a Club Med. The question here is where were the British sailors when they were captured?
Britain has at least provided a little more than words.JahManRed wrote:
Yeah, well, we will never know for sure unless a 3rd source comes forward.sergeriver wrote:
The question is if they were in Iranian waters or not. That makes a huge difference. Apparentely they admitted it only coz they were threatened.JahManRed wrote:
Standard interrogation techniques.
I still think after reading their accounts that they were fairly treated. None of them were as much as slapped.
Iran says one thing, Britain says another. After some of the lies told by the British in their clandestine operations in Northern Ireland like colluding with terrorist to have solicitors murdered etc, I trust their word as much as Iran's.
So I am officially on the fence.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I think this is what happened: Iran captured them in Iraqi waters. They threatened them and forced to admit they were in Iranian waters. Iran released them "as a gift for British people". The sailors arrived home. They told they were in Iraqi waters. And I believe them. Think about it for a minute. Why would UK lie about this if admitting they committed a mistake would be better for them than saying "we were right and we didn't do anything about it".JahManRed wrote:
Yeah, well, we will never know for sure unless a 3rd source comes forward.sergeriver wrote:
The question is if they were in Iranian waters or not. That makes a huge difference. Apparently they admitted it only coz they were threatened.JahManRed wrote:
Standard interrogation techniques.
I still think after reading their accounts that they were fairly treated. None of them were as much as slapped.
Iran says one thing, Britain says another. After some of the lies told by the British in their clandestine operations in Northern Ireland like colluding with terrorist to have solicitors murdered etc, I trust their word as much as Iran's.
So I am officially on the fence.
Assuming you mean leaders then they they did.(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:
I feel the British Leasers should have demanded from the first minute that the captives be released immediately
Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett has demanded the immediate and safe return of the HMS Cornwall servicemen. She added that she had called for a "full explanation" from Iran and had left them in no doubt that she wanted the group and their equipment back immediately.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6484279.stm
Unfortunately, IMO, the Brits lost the propaganda battle here. The Iranians gained massave popularity with the Islamic countries, and have now shown that they are the big players in the region. I really wish that the Brittish would have made a public display of aggression through words or more. This is really the first time that I've seen them back down on a situation regarding the capture of their countrymen and women. The acts of the Iranians clearly could have been classified as an act of war, and would not have necessarily called for immediate actions. Sanctions and embargo's could have been implaced.
Unfortunately, it seems like it was handled on a behind the doors deal. It would have been far more effective had they stuck to their claims and presented the facts that indeed the Iranians were out of bounds on what they did. The best thing that Brittan could do is go directly back to the area with a heavy armada of warships and continue patrolling the EXACT same areas. Only this will show that the Brittish were serious about it's claims from here on out.
Unfortunately, it seems like it was handled on a behind the doors deal. It would have been far more effective had they stuck to their claims and presented the facts that indeed the Iranians were out of bounds on what they did. The best thing that Brittan could do is go directly back to the area with a heavy armada of warships and continue patrolling the EXACT same areas. Only this will show that the Brittish were serious about it's claims from here on out.
Last edited by howler_27 (2007-04-06 11:03:18)
It did, actually. The rescue attempt failed, and the soldiers got captured.gooner wrote:
What do you expect from Iran? They held U.S people captive for 3 years! (Those were radical students, but the government didn't exactly step in.)
Then they attempted a daring aerial rescue, with landing Hercules transports in a stadium. That was scrubbed when someone pushed the 'stop' button when flying during testing, causing the plane to fall out the sky.
Then Carter lost an election, the next guy signed in, and as soon as Iran got the news, they released the hostages.
1. I note we haven't heard from all 15 of them.
2. They're making a big thing out of the fact that Faye Turney (sp?) was kept in isolation. Erm? Iran? Islamic country?
From what I've heard they were treated reasonably given the circumstances.
2. They're making a big thing out of the fact that Faye Turney (sp?) was kept in isolation. Erm? Iran? Islamic country?
From what I've heard they were treated reasonably given the circumstances.
i think that sums up the entire worlds problems right thereOttomania wrote:
lol? according to newspapers here they said that they were acted very good and they gain some friends there I am serious.
It's called 'spin' or 'propaganda' and every country, yes, EVERY country does it.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
i think that sums up the entire worlds problems right thereOttomania wrote:
lol? according to newspapers here they said that they were acted very good and they gain some friends there I am serious.
I have to say, this sounds quite credible. Really, they were eating their meals very hastily when they were on TV. Probably it wasn't like this all the time. Yet, they were soldiers - and being imprisoned for 15 days is not as bad, as being heavily injured or even dead. Don't get me wrong, I'd never want to be in Iranian captivity for even a single day - but neither would I want to go to Iraq.
I think we were all expecting this.
Are some of you guys actually shocked? Or is it more of a "oh my, look at these guys, i can't beleive it! CAN WE'S BOMB THEM NOW!"!?"!??"1"
Infact i was expecting to hear worse than this.
Are some of you guys actually shocked? Or is it more of a "oh my, look at these guys, i can't beleive it! CAN WE'S BOMB THEM NOW!"!?"!??"1"
Infact i was expecting to hear worse than this.
Responding to post above me:
What about Iran supplying insurgence with upgraded armor peircing ied's that are not only killing US soldiers but killing way way more Iraqi civilians? Can we attack Iran with the worlds blessing if it is found Iran is responsible for thousands of innocent Iraqi lives?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17978388/
What about Iran supplying insurgence with upgraded armor peircing ied's that are not only killing US soldiers but killing way way more Iraqi civilians? Can we attack Iran with the worlds blessing if it is found Iran is responsible for thousands of innocent Iraqi lives?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17978388/
Last edited by rawls2 (2007-04-06 15:49:34)
What's the point of going to war with Iran though, even under those circumstances? It's only going to end up with even more Soldiers dead and way more Civilians dead and an even stronger Insurgency in Afghanistan and Iraq.
If it does get out of hand then yes, something has to be done. The ideal solution is properly sealing the borders with Iran which is probably harder than we all think and i think that's what they're trying to do. An all out war with Iran would just go down too badly.
Attacking Iran wouldn't necessarily even stop the flow of arms. It would just make things worse in this situation. That's my opinon.
If it does get out of hand then yes, something has to be done. The ideal solution is properly sealing the borders with Iran which is probably harder than we all think and i think that's what they're trying to do. An all out war with Iran would just go down too badly.
Attacking Iran wouldn't necessarily even stop the flow of arms. It would just make things worse in this situation. That's my opinon.
That's the same arguement that was used when we dropped nukes on Japan.Mekstizzle wrote:
What's the point of going to war with Iran though, even under those circumstances? It's only going to end up with even more Soldiers dead and way more Civilians dead and an even stronger Insurgency in Afghanistan and Iraq.
If it does get out of hand then yes, something has to be done. The ideal solution is properly sealing the borders with Iran which is probably harder than we all think and i think that's what they're trying to do. An all out war with Iran would just go down too badly.
Attacking Iran wouldn't necessarily even stop the flow of arms. It would just make things worse in this situation. That's my opinon.
Gee, big surprise there.
What Tony Blair needs to do is get on TV and say to Iran, in front of the whole world "Pull this shit again and we'll bomb you".
What Tony Blair needs to do is get on TV and say to Iran, in front of the whole world "Pull this shit again and we'll bomb you".
Did anyone honestly believe the Iranians when they said that the british soldiers were beig treated better in Iran than they were at home?
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- British Captives talk: Iran was not so good