Pages: 1 2 3

 

2007-04-06 16:59:41
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|7102

theelviscerator wrote:

Of course many people thought they were at club med the whole time.
I doubt anyone who's actually been arrested for anything vagely serious did... part of the whole experience is being told that they've got enough evidence to put you away for years, unless you just 'fess up, in which case they'll go easy... and all the rest, like telling you that other people have grassed on you, that they are going through your house with dogs right now, tell them what they'll find and get a lighter sentence, your friend in the next cell just went home 'cos he owned up, etc., etc., etc. 

I can see why people aren't being hasty to jump on the "they were mistreated" bandwagon, since what they went through actually does make it sound like Club Med if you compare it to gitmo.

Last edited by UON (2007-04-06 17:00:12)

2007-04-06 17:00:32
TrollmeaT
Aspiring Objectivist
+492|7121|Colorado
At least they made it out alive, now maybe Iran can give up enriching their uranium for easter as well. *rolls eyes*
2007-04-06 17:07:40
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|7102

TrollmeaT wrote:

At least they made it out alive, now maybe Iran can give up enriching their uranium for easter as well. *rolls eyes*
Can't we just give them a few nukes as a late Eid present and be done with it? 

Or at least pledge to send the weapons inspectors into Israel and destroy their illicit stockpiles which everybody knows about, which I'm sure would be just as effective as removing the need for an enrichment program.
2007-04-06 17:11:40
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7050|132 and Bush

UON wrote:

TrollmeaT wrote:

At least they made it out alive, now maybe Iran can give up enriching their uranium for easter as well. *rolls eyes*
Can't we just give them a few nukes as a late Eid present and be done with it? 

Or at least pledge to send the weapons inspectors into Israel and destroy their illicit stockpiles which everybody knows about, which I'm sure would be just as effective as removing the need for an enrichment program.
That in itself is worthy of a topic.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-04-06 17:14:35
LostFate
Same shit, Different Arsehole
+95|6934|England
Good on iran for letting them go !

But hell if they do it again we'll release this shit on them

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qO6TkxdeW8        shit yeah
2007-04-06 18:11:19
HunterOfSkulls
Rated EC-10
+246|6728

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

I cant wait to hear the same ole' rhetoric from the members who like to give aid and comfort to the enemy.
Treason is a pretty serious accusation. If you have names, you shouldn't be wasting your time with posting, you should be speed-dialing Homeland Security or the CIA. Or you should pull your head out of your colon and realize that not blindly agreeing with every government (or your political party) makes isn't treason, it's a sacred duty of every American citizen. Pack that "treason" shit off to some third-world authoritarian shithole that values that kind of servile bootlicking, we don't need it here. This country is supposed to value independence, not subservience.

theelviscerator wrote:

Of course many people thought they were at club med the whole time.
Some of you folks must be terribly disappointed that they didn't get their heads cut off so you could all scream about islamofascist jihadis instead of seeing these guys get released after just over two weeks of run-of-the-mill interrogation that does look like Club Med compared to years in Guantanamo enduring sensory deprivation, stress positions and waterboarding. What happened? I thought the Iranians were the brutal, subhuman and cruel enemy. 

Skorpy-chan wrote:

Then Carter lost an election, the next guy signed in, and as soon as Iran got the news, they released the hostages.
You left out the part about the backroom deals for armaments. The popular myth about that fucker Reagan is that his tough no-nonsense schtick got the hostages freed but the truth is he pretty much paid the radicals off to release them. But that gets ignored when talking about US government dealings with the Middle East, just like his decision to cut and run after the Marines got bombed in Lebanon. Now "cut and run" is bad and it's only something those Democrat and Liberal surrender monkeys do.
2007-04-06 18:12:50
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6997|San Diego, CA, USA

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.
With that logic then we should never fight a war because people might die.  We probably, with your logic, should have never liberated the French or fought in the Falkland Isles.

Mekstizzle wrote:

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.
I have to agree with you here.  Also we should be helping the young democratic reformers inside the country as well to peacefully replace the more radical people in charge now. 

Mekstizzle wrote:

An all out war with Iran would just go down too badly.
A conventional war, we would win hands down, but they fight an isometric war so we have no idea where they are coming from - basically they fight dirty and against the Geneva convetions, but we play nice.

A war with Iran will increase oil to $120/barrel, putting the world in an economic recession for at least 3-5 years til we converted to other types of alternative energy production.

Mekstizzle wrote:

Attacking Iran wouldn't necessarily even stop the flow of arms. It would just make things worse in this situation. That's my opinon.
We could do it, but as you've seen with Iraq unless we have 400,000 troops (what McCain suggested when the war started in 2003), we'll have what we have today more than 4 years later.

Iran is much larger than Iraq.  Could we assume the same would happen, yes.  Do we have enough troops to stop it from happening - no.  We could easily destroy their nuclear technology and whatever they have in a 'military', but all it will do is embolden the already weakened Revolutionary Guard.

In 2002 I thought the way to 'break' Iran was what we did with China, win them over economically.  The only reason why I don't think that now is because I don't think they can be reasonable - they are brainwashed (i.e. they use their own children to do suicide attacks). 

My only hope is that the people within Iran can be helped to make a peacefully democracy.  Otherwise by October this year we will be probably be bombing their nuclear plants - if not us then the Israeli.
2007-04-06 18:23:49
Masques
Black Panzer Party
+184|7171|Eastern PA
One would think the Geneva Conventions were "rendered quaint" in some fashion.

Gonzales then laid out startlingly broad arguments that anticipated any objections to the conduct of U.S. soldiers or CIA interrogators in the future. "As you have said, the war against terrorism is a new kind of war," Gonzales wrote to Bush. "The nature of the new war places a —high premium on other factors, such as the ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities against American civilians." Gonzales concluded in stark terms: "In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."
2007-04-06 18:30:37
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|7217

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.)
and the US has held people for 5 year + at Gitmo with torture
2007-04-06 18:58:23
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,073|7221|PNW

sergeriver wrote:

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.
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.
A statement made under duress is not valid.
2007-04-06 19:11:55
Skorpy-chan
Member
+127|6794|Twyford, UK

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

Skorpy-chan wrote:

Then Carter lost an election, the next guy signed in, and as soon as Iran got the news, they released the hostages.
You left out the part about the backroom deals for armaments. The popular myth about that fucker Reagan is that his tough no-nonsense schtick got the hostages freed but the truth is he pretty much paid the radicals off to release them. But that gets ignored when talking about US government dealings with the Middle East, just like his decision to cut and run after the Marines got bombed in Lebanon. Now "cut and run" is bad and it's only something those Democrat and Liberal surrender monkeys do.
That part is called 'biased viewpoint', and so would not last long on my usual source of this information; Wikipedia.
And I know it's not a good resource for politics, but I approached the subject during a tangent while shopping for transport aircraft for a fictional mercenary organisation.
2007-04-06 19:23:08
Magius5.0
Member
+106|6830|UMass Amherst

Pubic wrote:

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".
My thoughts exactly.  It's only patience that Blair didn't  launch a rescue in the first place, and I'm sure he was flipping Iran the finger under the negotiating table the whole time. 

Only major problem, conventional war isn't going to work with Iran.  Destabilizing that country with Iraq and afghanistan the way they are right now will throw the whole middle-east into chaos.  Ripple effect, anyone?  Plus, consider that there are probably easier and cheaper ways to keep Iran isolated, like economic sanctions and tightening up the borders, all-out war would probably make things worse.  'Blow shit up until things get fixed' mentality is what got the US into Iraq...and greedy corporates who wanted construction/oil contracts.
2007-04-06 19:45:16
jonnykill
The Microwave Man
+235|7128
I look at it this way. President Muhadinajad is a very smart busieness man. Every paper across America is filled with " Hostages released as an Easter Gift " . That's all that metters. The end result is Iran looks good , deviates from thier master plan and looks like a beat up hero. He got skills.
2007-04-06 19:46:49
BVC
Member
+325|7144
An invasion wouldn't be necessary, just bomb a few of the right targets to let them know what they're dealing with.
2007-04-06 19:50:27
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7050|132 and Bush

jonnykill wrote:

I look at it this way. President Muhadinajad is a very smart busieness man. Every paper across America is filled with " Hostages released as an Easter Gift " . That's all that metters. The end result is Iran looks good , deviates from thier master plan and looks like a beat up hero. He got skills.
Except for the small fact that Americans have TV's and they just watched the Brits explain how they were forced to say that they were in the wrong.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-04-06 19:59:53
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6997|San Diego, CA, USA

Pubic wrote:

An invasion wouldn't be necessary, just bomb a few of the right targets to let them know what they're dealing with.
Isn't that what they are doing to us right now?
2007-04-06 20:43:58
Skorpy-chan
Member
+127|6794|Twyford, UK
Two bombings over 6 years isn't a sign, it's terrorism.
A sign is when the power grid suddenly shorts, the SAM batteries go up in fireballs, and everything millitary-looking gets cratered in one night.

Man, situations like this are exactly why they should upgrade and reinsate the Iowa-class. Nothing says 'quit messing with us' like 16" shells impacting precise targets.
2007-04-06 20:46:33
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6978|Global Command

Skorpy-chan wrote:

Two bombings over 6 years isn't a sign, it's terrorism.
A sign is when the power grid suddenly shorts, the SAM batteries go up in fireballs, and everything millitary-looking gets cratered in one night.

Man, situations like this are exactly why they should upgrade and reinsate the Iowa-class. Nothing says 'quit messing with us' like 16" shells impacting precise targets.
I wish.
2007-04-06 21:10:57
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7050|132 and Bush

[google]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6718324046691757021[/google]
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-04-07 03:49:52
JahManRed
wank
+646|7077|IRELAND

Kmarion wrote:

JahManRed wrote:

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.
Yeah, well, we will never know for sure unless a 3rd source comes forward.
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.
Britain has at least provided a little more than words.
It doesn't take much to throw together a few doctored satellite pictures (Colin Powell proved that) and doctor a GPS or 2. The British Special Branch in Northern Ireland, destroyed evidence, armed terrorist assassins, turned a blind eye as their informants murdered with impunity, passed address and Intel on Solicitors and Lawyers who represent prominent nationalists to loyalist hit squads, I could go on............. So forgive me if I don't blindly believe them.
2007-04-07 08:40:35
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6894|The Land of Scott Walker

BN wrote:

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.)
and the US has held people for 5 year + at Gitmo with pyramid of buttcrack and panties and barking dogs
Fixed
2007-04-07 09:04:50
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|7215|UK

JahManRed wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

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.
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.
Yeah, well, we will never know for sure unless a 3rd source comes forward.
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.
Comon man get real for a second. Iran first claimed we were still in Iraqi waters,  then realising changed it. Keep in mind the whole time they just claimed with no evidence. Which the UK had pictures of the ship they had boarded which had been at anchor the whole time with GPS on the picture which shows the location that is 1.7 NM inside Iraqi waters.
2007-04-07 09:43:51
Hunter/Jumper
Member
+117|6803

jonnykill wrote:

I look at it this way. President Muhadinajad is a very smart busieness man. Every paper across America is filled with " Hostages released as an Easter Gift " . That's all that metters. The end result is Iran looks good , deviates from thier master plan and looks like a beat up hero. He got skills.
looks good to who? looks like a hero to who? skills ? ? ?, please. not everyone is that gullible
2007-04-07 10:21:17
blademaster
I'm moving to Brazil
+2,075|7094

Ottomania wrote:

lol? according to newspapers here they said that they were acted very good and they gain some friends there I am serious.
yeah where you are they are saying they got treated nicely but Uk media not saying they made friends like your media does hehehe
2007-04-07 10:41:15
fadedsteve
GOP Sympathizer
+266|6939|Menlo Park, CA
What I dont get is how the Brits didnt fire on the approaching speed boats. . .?

The HMS Cornwall WAS RIGHT THERE!!! Who lets their service personel get taken hostage WITHOUT A FIGHT?  The Marines were trying to "reason with the Iranians, and they kept becoming increasingly hostile in tone". . .No shit. . .!!!! The Iranians ARE IRRATIONAL! Basically sums up the whole reason negotiations have FAILED up to this point with this entire criminal regime. . . .

side note: That frigit (HMS Cornwall) has the most modern weapons available!!! It could have taken out those Iranian boats before they even reached the Royal Marines. . . . It was obvious that the Iranians were engaging in a hostile act. . .Why not fire a warning shot? Why just sit back and let your fellow servicemen/women get jacked like that?

Whoever was the Commander of that operation, needs to be relieved of duty effective immediately. . . .

Do you guys realize how embarassing this is for the British military. . . .I mean its bad folks!! Really bad!

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-04-07 10:43:51)

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard