Iranian forces capture British sailors

[Eki]

There has been both good news and bad news for British efforts to free the hostages. First, the bad news. President Bush has confirmed what Eki predicted as long ago as post 32: no way will America release the five Iranians they're holding in exchange for the Britons. Imagine that! Eki right about something!!!

Whatever people say about me, I know Bush. He's a taker not a giver. He won't help unless there's something there for him, not even when he's probably the root cause of the incident:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,263480,00.html

Report: Iran Grabbed British Troops in Retaliation for Botched U.S. Raid in Iraq

Monday, April 02, 2007

A botched attempt by the U.S. to abduct two senior Iranian officials on a visit to Iraq 10 weeks ago was the flashpoint for the current crisis in which detained 15 British troops in the Persian Gulf, the Independent reported.

The U.S. move happened on the morning of Jan. 11, when forces carried out a surprise raid on an established Iranian liaison's office in northern Iraq, the newspaper claimed.

While the forces nabbed five junior Iranian officials, whom the U.S. still holds on accusations of being intelligence agents, the paper said the objective of the mission was to seize two men at the "very heart of the Iranian security establishment."

[pvtjoker]

If the Iranians want to play then lets play. We're already in combat with these guys anyway.

http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...605487,00.html

[SOD]

If the Iranians want to play then lets play. We're already in combat with these guys anyway.

http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...605487,00.html

you might want to ship your backside out there then.

[pvtjoker]

you might want to ship your backside out there then.

LOL. Just say when.

I've there (Iraq) twice and scheduled for another deployment in '08. We're already fighting them now, might as well make it official and be done with them.

[Eki]

LOL. Just say when.

I've there (Iraq) twice and scheduled for another deployment in '08. We're already fighting them now, might as well make it official and be done with them.

Wouldn't it be better first to be done with Iraq? Remember what happened to Hitler when he bit off more he could chew (invaded the Soviet Union before he was done with the Western Europe)?

[SOD]

LOL. Just say when.

I've there (Iraq) twice and scheduled for another deployment in '08. We're already fighting them now, might as well make it official and be done with them.

you're still not done with the Iraqis.

[Roamy]

bigger bombs less people I would say will do the trick

[Dave B]

you're still not done with the Iraqis.

But then they weren't exactly finished with Afganistan before they started doing the whole shock'n'awe thing...

[O&A Virus]

you're still not done with the Iraqis.

True, but another point is we're not just fighting Iraqis in Iraq -- never have been! Western Iraq is a hot bed for Sunni Muslim terrorists/insurgents (take you pick), while Eastern Iraq and Baghdad is crawling with Iranians and Hezbos.

[O&A Virus]

bigger bombs less people I would say will do the trick

Which is probably what we'd do if the US does strike inside Iran. However, Iranian forces are already in Iraq.