[Fred Nerks]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6491581.stm

What are the rules of engagement in this type of situation?

"The rules are very much de-escalatory, because we don't want wars starting. The reason we are there is to be a force for good, to make the whole area safe, to look after the Iraqi big oil platforms and also to stop smuggling and terrorism there.

So we try to downplay things. Rather then roaring into action and sinking everything in sight we try to step back and that, of course, is why our chaps were effectively able to be captured and taken away.

If we find this is going to be a standard practice we need to think very carefully about what rules of engagement we want and how we operate. One can't allow as a standard practice nations to capture a nation's servicemen. That is clearly wrong."

Puke!

[Salem]

"If we find this is going to be a standard practice we need to think very carefully about what rules of engagement we want and how we operate. One can't allow as a standard practice nations to capture a nation's servicemen. That is clearly wrong." "

Puke!

---

Right you are, Fred. This guy is talking about locking the barn door after the horses have been stolen. I can't imagine what their families are thinking. "Rules of engagement" like this by active participants in a war zone as tense as the Persian Gulf is incredible and the results, as we have seen, predictable.

The British need to get their people out of harm's way if they aren't going to fight back.

Or get some new Admirals.