Britain says 15 sailors detained by Iranian forces in Iraqi waters

International Herald Tribune ^ | March 23, 2007 | AP

[Islander7]

LONDON: Iranian naval vessels seized 15 British sailors and marines Friday in Iraqi waters, the Ministry of Defense said.

The British personnel from the frigate HMS Cornwall were "engaged in routine boarding operations of merchant shipping in Iraqi territorial waters," and had completed their inspection of a merchant ship when they were accosted by Iranian vessels, the ministry said in a statement.

"We are urgently pursuing this matter with the Iranian authorities at the highest level and ... the Iranian ambassador has been summoned to the Foreign Office," the ministry said.

"The British government is demanding the immediate and safe return of our people and equipment."

[Islander7]

Heads up!

[50sDad]

I wonder what was so important on that "merchant ship" that Iran felt they had to scoop up the inspectors?

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

hopefully we will provide ahmadnutjob a lengthy sidetrip to Langley if/when he shows up here....

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

the British Navy was inspecting merchant ships....it is not merchant ships that were siezed

[rwilson99]

Act of War?

[boomop1]

I would start taking out one of their ships an hour until they release them, warn them once. But they are British, so proper.

[boomop1]

I would start taking out one of their ships an hour until they release them, warn them once. But they are British, so proper.

[neocon1984]

This was a very predictable act. The West is going weak kneed on the WOT. Iran wants to find out just weak we are. It's like betting into a poker pot to see where you stand in the hand.

[Publius6961]

The British personnel from the frigate HMS Cornwall were "engaged in routine boarding operations of merchant shipping in Iraqi territorial waters," and had completed their inspection of a merchant ship when they were accosted by Iranian vessels, the ministry said in a statement.

So many questions. No answers.

Why were ships being boarded? If it was Iraqi waters, why did the sailors not have enough backup to prevent being captured?
were they armed? Did they resist?

[Tommyjo]

Nothing. The vessel had been searched and allowed to go on its way. It was while returning from the boarding that the inflatables were seized. This was from HMS Cornwall's Captain on the incident. It looks like it was the Iranian Revolutionary Guard just like the last seizures.

[F-117A]

Why were ships being boarded?

Merchant ships (and fishing boats, etc.) are routinely boarded in the Persian Gulf by allied forces. There are valuable oil assets in the Gulf that need to be protected.

[popdonnelly]

"I wonder what was so important on that "merchant ship" that Iran felt they had to scoop up the inspectors?"

I think they want to swap the Brits for the Revolutionary Guard agents we busted in Iraq.

[Last Dakotan]

I would start taking out one of their ships an hour until they release them, warn them once.

Now is the perfect time. Their "Navy" is out on wargames. Make the games a little less a game for them.

[F-117A]

“We want every vessel we board to understand that the main reason we’re here in the North Persian Gulf is to protect Iraq’s oil terminals,” said Commander Task Group (CTG) 158.1, Capt. Chris Noble.

The primary mission of CTG 158.1 is to deliver 24-hour protection to Iraq’s oil terminals, Khawr Al Amaya Oil Terminal (KAAOT) and Al Basrah Oil Terminal (ABOT).

“If those assets are protected, it’s the Iraqi people who will ultimately benefit,” Noble said.

Every week the boarding teams, comprised of both Sailors and Coast Guardsmen, traverse the North Persian Gulf waters, gauging the pulse of what’s going on around the exclusion zones surrounding the oil terminals. As part of the MSO, the boarding teams meet and establish rapport with fishermen while simultaneously ensuring the fishermen understand the coalition’s presence in the North Persian Gulf is intended to help Iraq become a self-sufficient nation. MSO protect Iraq’s sea-based infrastructure, which provides the Iraqi people the opportunity for self-determination.

More info

[Tommyjo]

Vessels are routinely boarded. Nothing new in this. Everything from oil smuggling to maritime safety issues. The vessel was search and released after the search.

The U.S. Navy has just commented on the incident. Coalition forces showed prudent and proper restraint into not escalating the incident. What did you expect all the Iranian vessels to be sunk?

Yes all boarding parties are armed with light weapons.

[Red6]

This happened before. Our inaction only reinforces the belief in Tehran that they can act with impunity.

[ClearCase_guy]

What did you expect all the Iranian vessels to be sunk?

No. I think one would be sufficient.

[Cooking101]

"Why were ships being boarded? If it was Iraqi waters, why did the sailors not have enough backup to prevent being captured? were they armed? Did they resist?"

This story will be revealed in time. But I do know this, the HMS Cornwall is a powerful frigate with plenty of firepower, including anti-ship missles. They are equipped with anti-ship/anti-aircraft guns, anti-missle system and shore bombardment guns. They also, of course, have state-of-the-art radar/surveilance equipment, so there's no way in hell they weren't aware of the Iranian navy boarding their smaller patrol boats nearby. So why didn't this ship come to the aid of their marines? My guess is that they radioed for permission to engage the Iranian navy vessels but were told to stand down. This is a politically correct war with corresponding rules of engagement. The Coalition forces don't want to start an "incident" with Iran, is the only rational explanation right now.

[Cooking101]

"The U.S. Navy has just commented on the incident. Coalition forces showed prudent and proper restraint into not escalating the incident. What did you expect all the Iranian vessels to be sunk?"

"Prudence"???? You've got to be $#itting me. "PRUDENCE" is the Iranian navy not daring to mess with the British and U.S. fleets. Politically correct, cowardly nonsense is how to describe standing by and watching the Iranian navy kidnap 15 British marines in Iraqi waters while a heavily armed British frigtate was on the scene, (the mother ship of the two smaller patrol boats), as well as several U.S. Carrier groups in the region.

[Logical me]

This happened before. Our inaction only reinforces the belief in Tehran that they can act with impunity.

Belief? They are and will continue. Weak knee West, what in the heck do we expect. After all, Iran has been killing our military in Iraq for years. We are no different that Britain.

[Red6]

Over many years and long before Iraq, Iran has been actively involved with terrorist and overt military operations against us, but the US public as most in the West, are simply not willing to deal with this problem.

I'm with you 100% if you say we need to bomb the snot out of them. We have to create causation, a price. Without cause and effect, Iran will simply continue indefinitely and what people can’t get into their narrow minds is if Iran becomes nuclear, their mouth and their belligerence will increase ten fold. But now you’re dealing with a nation that has nukes and Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles. The Eurowienies, some of whom are already in appeasement mode, are now within range of a 150KT or so nuclear deveice. What actions against Iran would they be willing to take then?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis

Long before Iraq, Iran was already a major antagonist. This is not even counting Iran’s involvement with Hezbollah, which they more or less created. Iran is a problem, and it appears as if the West wants to sit and wait until this problem grows.

[Tommyjo]

So what did you want the Coalition forces to do? Chase after the Iranian boats and put the Royal Navy people in direct danger? Even firing warning shots could have made one of those Iranian Revolutionary Guards open up on the detained RN guys.

In this incident it would be the preservation of human life that would dictate matters. All the armchair generals want B-52 strikes and half the Iranian Navy sunk in retaliation. It just isn't going to happen. The same as people wanted the EP-3E pilot to sacrifice his crew and aircraft rather than landing it at a Chinese airfield or the aircraft bombed in China.

Incidents like this become diplomatic incidents. No rescue missions and no military action however frustrating it appears.

[Tommyjo]

And how is that going to safeguard the lives of the captured Marines and Sailors?

[ClearCase_guy]

In this incident it would be the preservation of human life that would dictate matters.

You think about this matter in much the same was as top-level government officials think about this issue. That's a compliment, but I also mean to imply something less complimentary.

I don't see the captured servicemen as the center of this. I see the potential for other servicemen to be captured as a bigger issue. Or for an embassy to be seized. Or nuclear weapons to be developed in Iran because the West decided to focus just on diplomatic efforts.

My feeling is that lives can be saved by blowing things up. For example, I believe that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved about over a million lives (many of them Japanese). I don't suggest nuking Tehran. But I do think that sinking an Iranian ship would be smart.

But, as I implied at the beginning, I will never be considered for a top job in Washington. The folks at the State Dept would find your views far more sensible.

[Cooking101]

"So what did you want the Coalition forces to do? Chase after the Iranian boats and put the Royal Navy people in direct danger?"

Ah, you mean they weren't already in grave danger being kidnapped on the high seas by an islamofacist nation that is helping to kill their fellow marines on the ground nearby? Or do you mean the West has become pansies? I'm not sure which?

If we are afraid of "endangering" our captured troops and hence allow their capture right under our noses as we look on impotently, then we are lost anyway. It's just a matter of time.