Your Egypt

[SeaBird]

GoodMorning EveryOne
I sincerely hope that the Iranian Leadership has been calculating their act of detaining the 15 Marines correctly. America/Britain/Israel are in Iraq once and forever, and they need to tame the neigboring Iran too for ever lasting submission, knowing this crucial Fact while doing an act that could be easily used as a Justification of a new War in the MidEast against Iran complicate my ability to understand what is going on in Iraq and the Gulf in general.
I know that America used to leak Intelligence reports about having special forces acting certain operations ( hit & run ) inside Iran, but I have never read that the Britons are involved in this sort of nerve-breaking operations.
Is there something I can't see in this provacative topic?

[Eastern girl]

SB if u read the history of Iran around 100 or so back u will see that British had a strong hand in politic in Iran. They always have been in Iran even if u don't see it, so many of events planned by Britain and carried out by Americans, unfortunately Iranian government was always very stupid and weak to control the situation, even now u never know what is really going on there, it is just innocent people waiting to see when the war will start...ridiculous.... :?

[ratty]

i think if iran does not release the soldiers, they will be bombed back into the stoneage.

it just shows the cultural difference between the east and west saddam did the same thing paradeing hostages on tv just makes the west bomb them.

i would not be suprised if britain has a number of trident missile submarines close by waiting for the order.

[Hoss]

I don't think that Britain was waiting for their sailors to be detained by Iran to launch a war or even Bomb Iranian lands!
I believe Britian together with the USA have an attack plan ready for Iran and waiting for the right moment, but would it really come into action because of some detained sailors? God only knows.
I believe all what's happening now is just some tactics, with carefully studied reactions.
I really wonder what in heavens would make anybody think that Saddam was bombed and brought down, because of showing detained soldiers on TV!!
Attacking Iraq was planned for strategic reasons beyond the capabilties of the normal minds of common people...The victims are ONLY the Iraqi people, and an ancient civilisation being destroyed.

[Explorer the eighth]

The last thing I want is for my country, Britain, to go to war with Iran. :(

Is there a way that the Iranian government can release the hostages without losing face? I can't imagine them saying "Sorry, we made a mistake", even though they have made a mistake. I wonder whether the British government could say something like, "What can we do for you if you release the hostages?".

[SeaBird]

I agree with the opinions in the above posts except for that part about Saddam/TV show of hostages role in Occupying Iraq. Hoss rejected this possibility and I second him. Eastern Girl's opinion is very close to mine.
The Great Explorer as always a man of sophisticated human consciousness wishing to see his Sailors released without hurting Iran.
Salam

[ratty]

SeaBird wrote: I agree with the opinions in the above posts except for that part about Saddam/TV show of hostages role in Occupying Iraq. Hoss rejected this possibility and I second him. Eastern Girl's opinion is very close to mine.
The Great Explorer as always a man of sophisticated human consciousness wishing to see his Sailors released without hurting Iran.
Salam

what you dont seem to understand how insulting and angry it makes the west, to parade captured people on tv, and also forceing the female to wear a headscalf, is humiliating to her and humiliating to western culture.

also saying that they are only going to release just the female is sexist and and insulting to her status as a british sailor/soldier and all western woman saying they are week and should be in the home.and not fighting for there country.

iran is playing a very dangerous game.

[Hoss]

Some interesting, yet controversial opinion tof the Iranian/ British standoff :


There are on this planet Diplomats
and
unfortunately also inevitably, Pirates




Let us take two cases ,
isolate them and then to analyse them .
Hoping that one could isolate them.........


In the North or Iraq , the City of Arbil
the Iranian Consulate was attacked and ransacked
and the Iranian-Consular-diplomats were arrested by US-occupying-forces.
I shall spare you the presumed-accusations against those diplomats
because diplomats, by profession, would legally lie to anyone
and the USA does nothing else than lying .........by vocation .


1000 miles further south from Arbil
Iranian Coast-guard arrested 15 UK-soldiers in uniform and armed
while those UK Marines were searching a civilian-Arab-Ship.

The Conscious-world called the UK presence in the Gulf , illegal
and even the UN General Secretary did the same, once also .......
which makes the British , as Pirates.

Iranians claims it to have happened in Iranian waters
while the UK must have thought that it was the Falklands.....again.


Trying,myself, to be impartial....and naive too
I shall believe , all three of them,
the Iranians , the British and the USA.


But....!!!
allow me to ask you,just one question:
What is worse ?
illegally arresting some Diplomats ?
in their own Consulate premises.
or
illegally arresting some Pirates ??
6.563 km away from Plymouth.


Sherlock Hommos
reporting from the Land of Sindbad
the last day in March 2007

[Hoss]

ratty wrote: SeaBird wrote: I agree with the opinions in the above posts except for that part about Saddam/TV show of hostages role in Occupying Iraq. Hoss rejected this possibility and I second him. Eastern Girl's opinion is very close to mine.
The Great Explorer as always a man of sophisticated human consciousness wishing to see his Sailors released without hurting Iran.
Salam

what you dont seem to understand how insulting and angry it makes the west, to parade captured people on tv, and also forceing the female to wear a headscalf, is humiliating to her and humiliating to western culture.

also saying that they are only going to release just the female is sexist and and insulting to her status as a british sailor/soldier and all western woman saying they are week and should be in the home.and not fighting for there country.

iran is playing a very dangerous game.

ratty,
They say, in Rome you do like the Romans do...
Why are you assuming force to be behind what the lady sailor is wearing...I would give the benefit of doubt until she gets home safe.
Why would not you assume that they explained to the lady what is acceptable in their country and what is not...Be her free or captive! ...I think there can be sources or people who try to understand rather than rush into conclusions...Are not the captives being well treated and respected?
About portraying the captured soldiers on TV, I would wonder...why did the Iranians do it? Is it only them that have done such a thing? I don't know..Is it a violating some international law in British eyes? Maybe.. Can you confirm such a thing?

P.S. I wouldn't like to see Egyptian soldiers being captive, even though it is possible in the time of war or in military affairs..It would still make a difference if those captives are well treated/ humiliated/ tortured/ killed

[ratty]

Hoss wrote: ratty wrote: SeaBird wrote: I agree with the opinions in the above posts except for that part about Saddam/TV show of hostages role in Occupying Iraq. Hoss rejected this possibility and I second him. Eastern Girl's opinion is very close to mine.
The Great Explorer as always a man of sophisticated human consciousness wishing to see his Sailors released without hurting Iran.
Salam

what you dont seem to understand how insulting and angry it makes the west, to parade captured people on tv, and also forceing the female to wear a headscalf, is humiliating to her and humiliating to western culture.

also saying that they are only going to release just the female is sexist and and insulting to her status as a british sailor/soldier and all western woman saying they are week and should be in the home.and not fighting for there country.

iran is playing a very dangerous game.

ratty,
They say, in Rome you do like the Romans do...
Why are you assuming force to be behind what the lady sailor is wearing...I would give the benefit of doubt until she gets home safe.
Why would not you assume that they explained to the lady what is acceptable in their country and what is not...Be her free or captive! ...I think there can be sources or people who try to understand rather than rush into conclusions...Are not the captives being well treated and respected?
About portraying the captured soldiers on TV, I would wonder...why did the Iranians do it? Is it only them that have done such a thing? I don't know..Is it a violating some international law in British eyes? Maybe.. Can you confirm such a thing?

P.S. I wouldn't like to see Egyptian soldiers being captive, even though it is possible in the time of war or in military affairs..It would still make a difference if those captives are well treated/ humiliated/ tortured/ killed

i agree with the statement when in rome ect,but this does not apply in britain anymore, muslim women do not remove there head or face coverings with respect to western culture. we have freedom and democracy.(we have a choose)

showing the woman sailor in a headcovering shows oppression, and that she can not express who she is.

(she has been MADE to wear that headscalf.)

she is being made to submit to islam.

and before you all jump on me. (this is religion being used as a political tool.)

as we say in britain THATS JUST NOT CRICKET OLD CHAP.

[Hedgehog]

I just wonder WHO is ruling Iran.....

Not too much has been heard from the leader ...Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

But much comment has been made by the Ayatollah Mojtahed Shabestari and other Ayatolla's in conjunction with the generals of the country....

So, it really makes me wonder what is truely behind Irans moves....

Hard line Islamic Shia's are a bit scarey to me, especially as they are testing for nuclear power..... :evil:

[SeaBird]

Hoss
You forgot to mention How every Christian Lady/Girl should wear a head scarf on facing the Pope of Rome at the Vatican. Nancy Reagan did it live on TV when the Reagans visited the Vatikan in the eighties. Also when the present Warrior Pope was inaugurated a couple of years ago, I watched the believers in rows with all the women wearing scarfs, get rid of the scarf as they finished touching the Pope or after he touched them, a sort of taking blessings, not the sensual meaning of "touch".
Also, in our Coptic churches I notice how the old Ladies wear scarfs on entering the churches, the younger rejected the scarfs as becoming a symbolic to Islam.

[moll]

Hoss wrote:


About portraying the captured soldiers on TV, I would wonder...why did the Iranians do it? Is it only them that have done such a thing? I don't know..Is it a violating some international law in British eyes? Maybe.. Can you confirm such a thing?

[/b]

Hoss, it's a violation of the Geneva Convention to parade captured prisoners :cry:

And before anybody says, the US and the UK are equally guilty, I know they've shown footage of captured prisoners, but I don't think they've sat them on front of a camers and interviewed them....

And as far as 'when in Rome do as the romans do' is concerned, wouldn't you be aggrieved if the situation were reversed and a veiled woman was 'persuaded' to remove hers bcs most women in the UK DON'T wear a headscarf? this woman isn't a Muslim, so if it's for religious beliefs that women wear the hijab, why should she be expected to wear one when it's NOT part of her religious beliefs? I think it's just an act of provocation to show her wearing it :?

I think she should be treated the same as the men, she knew when she joined the forces what the risks were........but I just hope that a diplomatic solution can be found soon.

[SeaBird]

moll wrote: Hoss wrote:


About portraying the captured soldiers on TV, I would wonder...why did the Iranians do it? Is it only them that have done such a thing? I don't know..Is it a violating some international law in British eyes? Maybe.. Can you confirm such a thing?

[/b]

........but I just hope that a diplomatic solution can be found soon.

Quote: ........but I just hope that a diplomatic solution can be found soon

Amen.

[Miss Ratty]

SeaBird wrote: Hoss
You forgot to mention How every Christian Lady/Girl should wear a head scarf on facing the Pope of Rome at the Vatican. Nancy Reagan did it live on TV when the Reagans visited the Vatikan in the eighties. Also when the present Warrior Pope was inaugurated a couple of years ago, I watched the believers in rows with all the women wearing scarfs, get rid of the scarf as they finished touching the Pope or after he touched them, a sort of taking blessings, not the sensual meaning of "touch".
Also, in our Coptic churches I notice how the old Ladies wear scarfs on entering the churches, the younger rejected the scarfs as becoming a symbolic to Islam.

Hi there Seabird :)

I'm not quite sure where you or Mrs Reagan got these ideas from, but most Roman Catholic women have not been wearing any form of head covering in mass for about 40 years :lol:

In fact it wasn't a headscarf like a hijab they traditionally wore during mass, but a sort of thick lacy shawl type head covering which hung over the eyes (sorry can't remember what it's called, but my gran has one).
When you see 'Catholic women' wearing standard headscarves, it is probably an old cultural tradition from their country,it's nothing at all to do with the Roman Catholic religion

Nancy Reagan would have just amused the Pope with her 'Catholic hijab' :lol: