Posts: 327204 Topics: 12964 LOGIN

Favourites

Most popular topics | World-issuesopen/close

Latest topics | World-issuesopen/close

 

Searchopen/close

Posts Topics

>> extended Search
 

  POST A NEW TOPIC REPLY  

Home >> World-issues >> Britain takes case against Iran to U.N.

01.04.2007, 12:16 quote

Greystone
Greystone Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Posts: 419 Location: United Kingdom, England, London
View user's profile Visit poster's website

By the way even if they had accidently strayed into Iranian terroritorial waters that would not give Iran the right to sieze them. They were not illegal immigrants for example they were on a legitimate mission to stop smuggling into Iraq. At the most they should have been told to leave if they had strayed into Iranian waters. Imagine if an Irish vessal had strayed into British terroritorial waters, would Britain sieze its sailors and refuse to hand them back?

 
Back to Top

01.04.2007, 12:31 quote

Anonymous

If the Irish vessel had rockets, bombs, guns.....and supported the USA to bomb Scotland or something....

 
Back to Top

01.04.2007, 13:43 quote

spdarkhorse
Joined: 21 Jun 2005 Posts: 797 Location: United Kingdom, England, Merseyside
View user's profile Visit poster's website

Greystone wrote:
spdarkhorse wrote:
Im not a law expert but I guess that if you are driving a boat into waters controlled by any country then you come under their laws. So if it against the law to drive about in a boat and be armed then I guess you get arrested?
But iut has been proven by satelite positioning systems that those troops were over a mile inside Iraqi waters when they were siezed and did not stray into Iranian waters at all.

Of course, that depends whose on propoganda you believe.

You should have read further in my post:
Quote:
Both sides are saying that they were in water controlled by different people and thats tricky to prove really, one bit of sea looks like another unlike the land where there are things to show where you are like fields and forests

_________________
I've loved, I've laughed and cried, I've had my fill; my share of losing.
And now, as tears subside, I find it all so amusing.

 
Back to Top

01.04.2007, 16:05 quote

Anonymous

spdarkhorse wrote:
Greystone wrote:
spdarkhorse wrote:
Im not a law expert but I guess that if you are driving a boat into waters controlled by any country then you come under their laws. So if it against the law to drive about in a boat and be armed then I guess you get arrested?
But iut has been proven by satelite positioning systems that those troops were over a mile inside Iraqi waters when they were siezed and did not stray into Iranian waters at all.

Of course, that depends whose on propoganda you believe.

You should have read further in my post:
Quote:
Both sides are saying that they were in water controlled by different people and thats tricky to prove really, one bit of sea looks like another unlike the land where there are things to show where you are like fields and forests


The waters there are disputed so by nature they are both going to say they were in their waters Smile,,,but its a job to know who to believe, I don't believe our government. Unfortunately the service personal are just pawns.

 
Back to Top

01.04.2007, 18:46 quote

Anonymous

Jeggea wrote:
spdarkhorse wrote:
Greystone wrote:
spdarkhorse wrote:
Im not a law expert but I guess that if you are driving a boat into waters controlled by any country then you come under their laws. So if it against the law to drive about in a boat and be armed then I guess you get arrested?
But iut has been proven by satelite positioning systems that those troops were over a mile inside Iraqi waters when they were siezed and did not stray into Iranian waters at all.

Of course, that depends whose on propoganda you believe.

You should have read further in my post:
Quote:
Both sides are saying that they were in water controlled by different people and thats tricky to prove really, one bit of sea looks like another unlike the land where there are things to show where you are like fields and forests


The waters there are disputed so by nature they are both going to say they were in their waters Smile,,,but its a job to know who to believe, I don't believe our government. Unfortunately the service personal are just pawns.


whatever

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 08:26 quote

Anonymous

KEVIN53846 wrote:
Jeggea wrote:
spdarkhorse wrote:
Greystone wrote:
spdarkhorse wrote:
Im not a law expert but I guess that if you are driving a boat into waters controlled by any country then you come under their laws. So if it against the law to drive about in a boat and be armed then I guess you get arrested?
But iut has been proven by satelite positioning systems that those troops were over a mile inside Iraqi waters when they were siezed and did not stray into Iranian waters at all.

Of course, that depends whose on propoganda you believe.

You should have read further in my post:
Quote:
Both sides are saying that they were in water controlled by different people and thats tricky to prove really, one bit of sea looks like another unlike the land where there are things to show where you are like fields and forests


The waters there are disputed so by nature they are both going to say they were in their waters Smile,,,but its a job to know who to believe, I don't believe our government. Unfortunately the service personal are just pawns.


whatever


Not sure what the 'whatever' was pertaining to Kev, but if it was the comment about service personnel, Jeggea is right. Our forces services are there to do our governments bidding. They are mearly pawns in a very big game played by governments across the world.

Many join the forces with dillusions of standing by their country and doing 'the right thing', but many learn fairly quick that their ideals are not those of our governments.

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 09:01 quote

Greystone
Greystone Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Posts: 419 Location: United Kingdom, England, London
View user's profile Visit poster's website

god wrote:
If the Irish vessel had rockets, bombs, guns.....and supported the USA to bomb Scotland or something....
But the British vessal was there at the request of the Iraqi government to stop arms smuggling to insurgents in Iraq. It had a legitimate reason for being there. Iran is already in deep enough trouble with the world community over its uranium enrichment programme without making matters worse for itself. If Iran wants to aviod the same fate as the previous Iraqi regime then it should improve its behaviour fast and maybe start helping the allies and the new Iraqi government instead of working against them.

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 09:52 quote

Anonymous

Not sure what the 'whatever' was pertaining to Kev, but if it was the comment about service personnel, Jeggea is right. Our forces services are there to do our governments bidding. They are mearly pawns in a very big game played by governments across the world.

Many join the forces with dillusions of standing by their country and doing 'the right thing', but many learn fairly quick that their ideals are not those of our governments.[/quote]


He wasnt referring to 'service personnel' Red ... P.m Kev

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 11:21 quote

Anonymous

anothermansjulie wrote:
KEVIN53846 wrote:
Jeggea wrote:
spdarkhorse wrote:
Greystone wrote:
spdarkhorse wrote:
Im not a law expert but I guess that if you are driving a boat into waters controlled by any country then you come under their laws. So if it against the law to drive about in a boat and be armed then I guess you get arrested?
But iut has been proven by satelite positioning systems that those troops were over a mile inside Iraqi waters when they were siezed and did not stray into Iranian waters at all.

Of course, that depends whose on propoganda you believe.

You should have read further in my post:
Quote:
Both sides are saying that they were in water controlled by different people and thats tricky to prove really, one bit of sea looks like another unlike the land where there are things to show where you are like fields and forests


The waters there are disputed so by nature they are both going to say they were in their waters Smile,,,but its a job to know who to believe, I don't believe our government. Unfortunately the service personal are just pawns.


whatever


Not sure what the 'whatever' was pertaining to Kev, but if it was the comment about service personnel, Jeggea is right. Our forces services are there to do our governments bidding. They are mearly pawns in a very big game played by governments across the world.

Many join the forces with dillusions of standing by their country and doing 'the right thing', but many learn fairly quick that their ideals are not those of our governments.


Not sure he read my post Red...just a childish poke at me.

But I agree with you..service personal always have been 'Lions led by donkeys' unfortunately.

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 11:25 quote

Anonymous

Greystone wrote:
god wrote:
If the Irish vessel had rockets, bombs, guns.....and supported the USA to bomb Scotland or something....
But the British vessal was there at the request of the Iraqi government to stop arms smuggling to insurgents in Iraq. It had a legitimate reason for being there. Iran is already in deep enough trouble with the world community over its uranium enrichment programme without making matters worse for itself. If Iran wants to aviod the same fate as the previous Iraqi regime then it should improve its behaviour fast and maybe start helping the allies and the new Iraqi government instead of working against them.


To be honest mate 'request of the Iraqi government' and the request of the Americans/British is seemingly [to me anyway] the same thing. Who knows the real reason they were there ??

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 16:03 quote

spdarkhorse
Joined: 21 Jun 2005 Posts: 797 Location: United Kingdom, England, Merseyside
View user's profile Visit poster's website

The Iraqi's asked the british soldiers to sail into Iranian waters? How add settling old scores by getting someone else to do it for you!
_________________
I've loved, I've laughed and cried, I've had my fill; my share of losing.
And now, as tears subside, I find it all so amusing.

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 18:05 quote

Greystone
Greystone Joined: 28 Mar 2007 Posts: 419 Location: United Kingdom, England, London
View user's profile Visit poster's website

According the Jersulam Post America is planning to strike Iran early this month in a 12 hour blitz on its nuclear enrichment installations. See this.

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 19:29 quote

Anonymous

Greystone wrote:
According the Jersulam Post America is planning to strike Iran early this month in a 12 hour blitz on its nuclear enrichment installations. See this.


I wouldn't believe that mate, its probably a load of bollox...just my opinion.

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 19:37 quote

Anonymous

Apparently now..because no one can decide where the Iraqi and Iranian waters are. The allies are going to discuss the disputed waters with Iran and possibly it could be a get out for Iran, to release the service personal without Iran losing face.

 
Back to Top

02.04.2007, 20:26 quote

spdarkhorse
Joined: 21 Jun 2005 Posts: 797 Location: United Kingdom, England, Merseyside
View user's profile Visit poster's website

And then also define where the territorial waters are - which because of the state of Iraq'a government, Iran might gain from that. They werent arrested for just wandering over the boarder, the Iranians must have been monitoring them and taken them for a reason.
_________________
I've loved, I've laughed and cried, I've had my fill; my share of losing.
And now, as tears subside, I find it all so amusing.

 
Back to Top
  POST A NEW TOPIC REPLY  
 
Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum