British Sailors seized by Iran.

[pbfoot]

Firstly they were not POW's nor was it a war . Was the detention illegal yes ,
and you can't say squat until you've walked in the mans shoes ,. Did you believe the confession's I know I didn't nor did anyone with an iota of sense . I'm quite sure the RM's know the code and probably have done training in interogation techniques . Were there not US pilots who confessed on Iraqi TV back in 91 I believe there were but could be wrong

 

[Matt308]

Well said, Pb. Its part of the captive training. Agree to anything for well being, but attempt to provide clues to your duress.

 

[plan_D]

Has the stupid bug just bitten everyone who is "showing concern" here?

Those soldiers would have been killed instantly for absolutely no gain. Why should they fight back just to be killed for nothing? America might not care about its troops and expects them to fight in any situation, but Britain shows some restraint.

Those troops did the right thing, and they gave away no military secrets. Everyone knew they were forced to say those things about entering Iranian waters, they would have known we had the idea they were forced. So what fu*king difference does it make?!

Basically, being concerned about their actions just says to anyone with a brain that you wanted them to go all gung-ho and get themselves killed. It ISN'T Hollywood, people die, those people have families ...trying to act like John Wayne would have got them killed, their families distressed and the British government in the position of war. For what? Just to make Hollywood junkies happy?!

And it WAS said the sun never set on the British Empire - the Empire has been and gone. Those lads were not fighting for a tradition, they're family members and soldiers ... I feel the need to repeat - opening fire would have got them all killed for NOTHING.

 

[FalkeEins]

..these people have families....

and I thought that they were in the military to lay down their lives for us in time of war - couldn't see that lot doing it frankly......they'll be suing the government for compensation next... taking on those Iranian gunboats might have avoided the whole sorry farce of their 'captivity' ..and shown the Iranians that we will not tolerate the Mullahs messing around with the UN ...

mind you having said that, why should we believe anything our government tells us about the location of these 15 when they were taken....they have been economical with the truth with us so much over the past few years..

I come back to my previous point of women in the military..while we have some 20,000 serving women in the British armed forces they are still barred from serving in units likely to close directly with the enemy... ..yet over 500 service women have been wounded, maimed or killed in Iraq, (mostly US) many of whom have (had) kids at home....
...here a recent review arrived at the conclusion that 'mixed' forces hinder combat effectiveness..as far as the 15 were concerned it seems to have completely emasculated it...certainly the Iranians 'milked it' ....

interesting piece in the paper today ..apparently 83 service women have been sent home from Iraq after falling pregnant...

 

[Erich]

gents/ladies :

hoping this makes sense, as I am on more cancer fighting drugs this grey morn.

what type of ship and what type of arms did this British vessel have on board and did it have the capabilities to take on the Iranian copters or whatever they used to capture the British as hostages ? I have not really followed this as close as i should have .........

 

[trackend]

My concern has never been about the conduct or non conduct of the personel in the incident ( the end resolution was better than having a volley fired over 15 boxes it was all political bollocks and not worth one persons life) I am more interested in how the hell it happened in the first place.
A war ship fitted with modern radar close helo air support available and they never saw a bloody thing coming a small show of force before arrival would of been enough to send half a dozen Tupperware boats packing somebody wants their backside kicking pronto.

 

[Erich]

so do we dare say it ? : someone was asleep at their post - a certain R/O

 

[Jank]

And what was with that kissy face session with Imadinnerjacket before they left? No doubt the cherry on top of that "best tradition."

There is no way around the conclusion that this whole episode left England looking like a pushover in the "best tradition" of international embarrassments.

The only thing missing from this story so far is an allegation that the female Brit slept with her captors. You know, as Matt 308 said, "Agree to anything for well being." Maybe if she was offered a more comfortable bed or a nice Persian carpet.

 

[Jank]

I just saw an analyst on CNN state that he has been told by a source in the Briish Navy that the brass is not happy with how the british captives handled themselves in light of the coercive circumstances they faced. The criticism was characterized as an "unnecessary capitulation."

Best Tradition my ass.

 

[mkloby]

Jank - I think that if there's any thought of a breeching of whatever the British military's code of conduct is, there will be an investigation and it will be taken care of. I really don't think it's our place to judge sitting on the sidelines. I think it should just be left at that.

 

[renrich]

Plan D, I live on the same planet as you. Let me clarify my prior message and say that I am not complaining nor am I pointing fingers at any nationality. I am concerned about the incident in Iraqui waters and I was concerned and still am about the actions of the CO and crew of the Pueblo. By clarification, if the training of the British personnel led them to act in the manner they did, then they acted properly and if the EM were following orders from an officer and it did not contravene what they were trained to do then they acted properly. The Code of Conduct(thank you Mkloby) was adopted in the US Military after the Korean War when some American POWs acted in their own self interest while in the hands of the enemy. Believe me when I say that when I was serving, we took the Code of Conduct seriously. Never having been exposed to combat, thankfully, I do not know if I would have comported myself according to the Code but I hope I would. I know we are not dealing with hollywood here, this is real life, but neither were John McCain, Sam Johnson, Jim Stockdale and many others in Hollywood. If one has not read about what they endured, I invite you to do so. Some of them kept the faith until their bodies were broken and when they finally gave in it broke their hearts. McCain cannot lift his arms above his shoulders today because of the torture he endured. Maybe the Code of Conduct is outmoded and is no longer relevant today like a lot of other "old fashioned" stuff. I hope not. I am out of date on much today but if the training of troops teaches them to act in a fashion that they apparently(I know we don't know all the issues) acted, then I am concerned about the training.

 

[Jank]

mkloby said, "I really don't think it's our place to judge sitting on the sidelines."

Sorry but I disagree and to be accurate, I am not in a position to sit in judgement. I am merely expressing an opinion which is just that, an opinion. I also expressed the conclusory opinion that OJ was guilty even before the trial in which he was judged. In fact, it is still my opinion that he is guilty.

Many areas of this forum exist to express opinions about events and circumstances that involve an element of speculation. If you disagree with the conclusions I have stated because the "jury is still out" then that is fine and a legitimate criticism of me.

I for one don't subscribe to the notion that we can't express opinions embracing ultimate conclusions because the truth of all the facts are not yet known. Often, the truth of conflicting "facts" are never known.

It is certainly wrong for those who are investigating or sitting in judgement to pre-judge without sufficient facts. Occupying the sidelines, I am free to conclude anything I like.

I understand that you think I have rushed to judgement. Again, that is a valid criticism and I promise not to protest if you later throw my rush to judgement in my face should new or different facts come to light.

Lastly, I suspect that had this incident involved French sailors instead of British, many of those do not wish to rush to judgement would be speaking louder than me in the face of uncertain facts about their training, the expectations of them when in captivity and what they actually endured. Do you really disagree?

 

[mkloby]

Jank - you have the right to draw any conclusion you wish. However, my whole point is that you will never get all the facts, regardless of what you may think you know. The Brits themselves will investigate as to whether they breeched their code of conduct, which nobody has ever mentioned any specifics as to what theirs is. It may be different from ours. The British military will likely not release much of what they ascertain from their investigation, if one is indeed launched. Obviously, they'll debrief, and take it further if deemed necessary.

I pray to God that if I'm ever shot down and captured, that I have the strength to abide by the code of conduct and don't weaken.

Renrich - The Code of Conduct is just as stressed today as it was when you were in. Our monthly Professional Military Training for Feb was on Code of Conduct. They particularly stress it for us involved in aviation due to the chances of going down isolated in unfriendly territory.

 

[Ajax]

The main ship they were serving on had more than enough guns to take on the Iranians, but the captives were a "boarding party" and were basically on board a souped up rubber dinghy. They used it to do a routine check on a merchant vessel, but ended up with several heavy machine guns trained on them. And the rest, as they say, is history...

 

[mkloby]

The main ship they were serving on had more than enough guns to take on the Iranians, but the captives were a "boarding party" and were basically on board a souped up rubber dinghy. They used it to do a routine check on a merchant vessel, but ended up with several heavy machine guns trained on them. And the rest, as they say, is history...

Thanks for the info - I think that the Brits' SOPs will likely be revised due to the vulnerability of the boarding party.

 

[pbfoot]

Having seen and watched many incidents such as aviation incidents its amazing how many take the news bytes and believe what some gossip show or magazine spews > the best bet is wait til the inquiry deseminates all the info and then make your call as to whether the actions were correct or not. At this point we know squat we have not heard the radio transcripts or seen the tapes of the radar either intercepted or the RN's or the Awacs that was more then likely present .
So how can anyone with a modicum intelligence make a call on the what occured certainly not a soul on this forum

 

[mkloby]

Pb - I agree in full. That's the point I've been trying to make.

 

[FalkeEins]

The only thing missing from this story so far is an allegation that the female Brit slept with her captors. You know, as Matt 308 said, "Agree to anything for well being." Maybe if she was offered a more comfortable bed or a nice Persian carpet.

..investigation, facts, enquiry ..??? we hear now that the 'captives' are being allowed to sell their stories to the press... and keep the cash ...as the only woman she stands to make a cool $500,000 ....

 

[pbfoot]

..investigation, facts, enquiry ..??? we hear now that the 'captives' are being allowed to sell their stories to the press... and keep the cash ...as the only woman she stands to make a cool $500,000 ....

Once again securuty clearance is Not Top Secret Nor Secret Nor Restricted or Classified but cleared to rumour

 

[renrich]

Mkloby, I hope you never have to test yourself on the Code of Honor but have no doubt that you will keep the Faith if you are so tested.