Posted on 03/31/2007 3:59:54 AM PDT by SkyPilot
WASHINGTON (AP) - Members of the House left Washington on Friday for their two-week spring break without weighing in on the international crisis tormenting the nation's closest ally: the capture of 15 British sailors and marines by Iran.
The omission by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is being noted by some Republicans, who say they should have gotten the chance to join the Senate in denouncing Tehran's bold actions.
"I am very disappointed that the speaker chose not to act," said Rep. Charles Dent, R-Pa.
"I believe it's important for us as Americans to show our solidarity with the Britons," he added in a phone interview Friday. "The British are our closest allies, and I think we have to stand next to them in a moment like this."
The Senate on Thursday, before adjourning for its one-week break, passed a resolution condemning the act "in the strongest possible terms" and calling for the sailors "immediate, safe and unconditional release."
Pelosi's spokesman Brendan Daly said the speaker was reluctant to weigh in on the incident without knowing that such a message would do more good than harm. Daly said the British government had not asked Congress to try to pressure Tehran.
"The leadership discussed it and agreed that inserting Congress into an international crisis while ongoing would not be helpful," Daly said.
Pelosi is traveling in the Middle East, where she plans to visit Syria, Israel and the West Bank.
The sailors were seized on March 23 off the Iraqi coast while searching merchant ships for evidence of smuggling. Britain insists the seven Royal marines and eight sailors were taken in Iraqi waters and has said no admission of error would be made.
Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., says Congress should not only call for the release of the British personnel but also should press the United Nations to explore harsher sanctions against Tehran.
Cantor, the GOP's chief deputy whip, pressed Pelosi this week to pass the measure.
"The illegal seizure of the British forces is a signal that Iran views us as powerless to prevent it from realizing its aggressive ambitions," Cantor wrote in a letter to Pelosi.
There you have it people. This is what you get when you allow Democrats in power.
Meanwhile, this Beyotch is traveling to Syria - a nation that backs Iran and Hezbollah - despite the White House asking her not to go. Oh yes, she gets to travel this time on her precious "Pelosi One" supplied by the 89th Airlift Wing from Andrews AFB - at your expense.
Why doesn't she just go over to Tehran and offer the surrender of the United States on behalf of the House of Representatives?
These people are repugnant!
Regards.
It is irrelevent what pelosi does. What does matter is what the Brits and the U.S. does.
Iran is now saying they may try the 15 sailors.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070331/ap_on_re_mi_ea/british_seized_iran
I believe we can agree that carter started this mess when Iran held the American Embasy hostage, and did not challege it.
The Brits are in a very similar situation. Obviously the iranian leadership believes that this will also go unchallenged. What Britian has to do, is tell Iran if the sailors are not released within 48 hours, their country will become a parking lot.
The Iranians will realize VERY quickly that NO ONE will come to their aid.
The Iranians are not Arabs, they are mostly Shia, and are surrounded by Arabs and Sunni who cannot stand them. Russia is NOT going to cause WWIII because of this, and I suspect Russia will tell Iran in no uncertain terms to release the sailors
Unfortunately, I think the Iranians have read the west very well, and realize that no such ultimatium will be given
Pelosi didn't want to do anything controversial before making her visit to Syria to herald the passage of the cut and run strategy by the House.
ON THE NET...
http://www.truthusa.com/IRAN.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1793738/posts?page=1670#1670
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=threatmatrix
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=stuckonstupid
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=democrats
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=dncvalues
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=pelosi
It would ironic that Britain could say that these captives are in actuality traitors defecting to Iran and the UK has just decided they must be eliminated and are now sending cruise missles to their location.
That would definately be egg on a face for Ahmanutjawb and his seeing eye goat country.
One word fits the House under the Democrats
I would be extremely surprised if that happened. However, I would like to see this challenge answered in no uncertain terms, release the sailors or ELSE
You can even see this reputation reflected at FR; everyone assumes that GB has some sort of capability to respond. In actuality, their naval forces are no stronger than Sweden's. They are worse than a paper tiger - they are nothing. That's why it was foolish to put their people at risk; what we're seeing is the logical conclusion.
She'll do it via Syria
I know that comment was off the wall in a fantasy context but all I see is Iran giving us orders, we the US and Britain cannot be manipulated even if it means sacrificing lives. Yes this sounds also like a jimmy Carter monologue but it also does not exclude all out dark-ops.
A combined Delt-SAS contingent goes in Iran, assasinates Irans leaders.
Or better yet we get a modern day "Dirty Dozen" to do it.
I could just imagine MS13 loaded up with modern weapons air dropped in downtown Tehran.
Your implying UK does NOT have the ability to respond. Perhaps you are correct, but if this drags on like the hostage crisis under carter, what kind of message does that send?
We will probably not intercede on Britian's behalf unless we are asked, but this will only embolden Iran more if nothing is done.
Personally I don't want to put forces on the ground in Iran. I want to bomb the crap out of them if they don't release the sailors, and if they try to cause the Shiite to rebel in Iraq against the Americans, I wouldn't have much of a problem going nuclear.
The message is that if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Or, don't take a knife to a gun fight; or, don't play high-stakes poker if you don't have the stakes.
GB choose socialism over internationalism a long time ago. They simply do not have the military capability to respond to any threat anywhere, which is why it was foolish to put their service people at risk.
The only way out for GB is pay whatever ransom Iran will eventually demand. Then, they should withdraw their troops in a similar fashion as Spain. At present, there are only two countries in the entire world that can project force beyond their borders: Israel & the USA.
When we eventually take on Iran, NATO/EU might help out in a supporting role, but it will be our responsibility.
I expect their won't be any troops sent deep into Iran, we have a large enough stockpile of guided munitions to wage an air ops to completely eradicate Irans quest of becoming a nuclear nation. If anything we should use psy-ops to instigate a civil war instead.
Border conflicts however require feet on the ground, its possible after the bombing Iran may decide to do a fools rush with all the armor he has into Iraq, or let go all of his missiles into Israel.
Its what will trigger him off, I would say that if 300 or more troops were to suddenly HALO into Tehran he may cut and run and his next in command will surrender.
Britain should do what they did in WW2, make thousands of dummies and air drop them by chutes over Tehran, have a proximity grenade on each one.
"Pelosi's spokesman Brendan Daly said the speaker was reluctant to weigh in on the incident without knowing that such a message would do more good than harm."
But going to Syria was a brilliant idea.
Do they really believe we are that stupid?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.