Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Brit Wimps
NRO ^ | April 3, 2007 | John Derbyshire

Posted on 04/04/2007 9:42:54 AM PDT by balch3

Once again, it's me and Ralph Peters on the same wavelength, deploring the cowardice of the British sailors and marines kidnapped by Iran. When it happened, I said I hoped the ones who'd shamed their country would be court-martialed on return to Blighty, and given dishonorable discharges after a couple years breaking rocks in the Outer Hebrides (which, believe me—I've been there—have a LOT of rocks). Now, I confess, I wouldn't shed a tear if some worse fate befell them.

The only coherent response I get to these sentiments is: "How do you know what they've been through? How would YOU stand up?" To which the obvious reply is the one Dr. Johnson gave in some similar case: "I may criticize a carpenter who makes me a bad table, though I cannot make a table myself. It is not my job to make tables." It is the job of a Royal Marine to fight, and if necessary suffer and die, for his country. They know that when they go in. It's what they are told! I nurse a quiet hope that if put to the test, I would stand up as well as any Marine. Whether or not I would, however, is irrelevant. Whether or not I could stand up well to torture, I expect Marines to.

And in any case, there was no evidence of torture or mistreatment in any of the filmed cases I have seen. They look just fine. You can't fake that. The girl sailor had that headscarf on within hours. From what I've heard of torture, even weaker cases can hold out for a few days.

(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: britain; hostages; iran; nro
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-175 next last

1 posted on 04/04/2007 9:42:55 AM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: balch3

??


2 posted on 04/04/2007 9:44:46 AM PDT by nuconvert ([there are bad people in the pistachio business] (...but his head is so tiny...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3

What a silly point of view.


3 posted on 04/04/2007 9:46:36 AM PDT by Eurotwit (WI - CSC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3

Brits ARENT wimps. That credit goes to Downing St and their moonbat minority. The US has it’s wimp quotient as well.


4 posted on 04/04/2007 9:46:39 AM PDT by DogBarkTree (The United States failure to act against Iran will be seen as weakness throughout the Muslim world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eurotwit

Not sure I disagree with the premise. What happened to the standard reply of name, rank and serial number?

We’ll hear more soon enough. Did they threaten to torture the woman or others?
It does need answering.


5 posted on 04/04/2007 9:48:20 AM PDT by romanesq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Eurotwit
What a silly point of view.

The fact that this point of view is deemed "silly" by so many is part of the reason these soldiers were captured in the first place.

6 posted on 04/04/2007 9:48:28 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: balch3

I find this comment article by John Derbyshire premature (we haven’t heard from the sailors and marines themselves) and thus offensive.


7 posted on 04/04/2007 9:48:50 AM PDT by nuconvert ([there are bad people in the pistachio business] (...but his head is so tiny...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3

What a bunch of hooey.


8 posted on 04/04/2007 9:49:01 AM PDT by Chena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3

I sympathize with Derbyshire, but I’m not sure he’s right.

Apparently the Rules of Engagement were to surrender immediately rather than defend themselves. So they were taken hostage not because of any failure on their part, but because they followed instructions. The captain of the backup ship, too, followed direct orders not to defend his men.

And I’m far from sure what the rules are now for prisoners.

It used to be name, rank, and serial number, period. But I suspect that like the rules of engagement those guidelines may have been changed by the British politicians, so they are instructed to do whatever it takes not to get themselves killed. I’m not at all sure about that, but I suspect it. In any case, when your leaders refuse to let you defend yourself in the face of the enemy, it undermines the kind of resistance Derbyshire calls for.


9 posted on 04/04/2007 9:49:44 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eurotwit

I don’t think so. These guys were all too willing to make Iran PR clips for their captors. Maybe that had something to do with their ROE but on the whole the Brits did themselves little good overall here.

Remember, their comrades are going to have to work extra hard to overcome the perception that they are weak in a part of the world where being weak is the worst thing imaginable in the eyes of the enemy.


10 posted on 04/04/2007 9:50:16 AM PDT by misterrob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: balch3
It is the job of a Royal Marine to fight, and if necessary suffer and die, for his country.

"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his." - Patton
11 posted on 04/04/2007 9:53:00 AM PDT by Adammon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3

I’m reminded of that scene from “Red Dawn” at the makeshift re-education camp in that drive-in theatre. Harry Dean Stanton’s character Mr. Eckert tells his boys not to cry and as they leave, calls out to them “Avenge me!” That’s the backbone a captive should have. Don’t cry for me, don’t sacrifice your freedom for mine; “Avenge me.” If only I can be that strong if ever in such circumstances.


12 posted on 04/04/2007 9:53:14 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Prevent Glo-Ball Warming ... turn out the sun when not in use)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: romanesq
We’ll hear more soon enough. Did they threaten to torture the woman or others? It does need answering.

I'm not sure we will hear. For all we know know, an agreement has been made for their silence or perhaps their relatives were threatened, etc. Still there's 13 of them so you'd think at least one of them would tell the public what happened.

13 posted on 04/04/2007 9:55:32 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: balch3

This could have been avoided if the British hadn’t been denied authority to fire on the Iranians when they kidnapped the marines.Second,if i had a gun to my head i’d say anything too-i’d even put on a hajib:)


14 posted on 04/04/2007 9:57:26 AM PDT by Thombo2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3
There's almost nothing I can say about this article that doesn't involve banable behavior.

Here's a message for Dirby if he trolls FR: "Go to hell, you POS."

 

 

15 posted on 04/04/2007 9:57:31 AM PDT by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3

I faulted Ralph Peterson yesterday and I’ll fault Derbyshire now - to accuse the Royal Marines of anything at all based on a few Iranian television images is simply unfair. Let’s at least get their side of it before we go calling anyone a “wimp.”


16 posted on 04/04/2007 9:58:07 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Apparently the Rules of Engagement were to surrender immediately rather than defend themselves. So they were taken hostage not because of any failure on their part, but because they followed instructions. The captain of the backup ship, too, followed direct orders not to defend his men.

If they are not going to defend themselves, or be defended by their fellow RN personnel, what the hell are they doing out there other than providing themselves as a target?

17 posted on 04/04/2007 9:58:12 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank fan

they should have kept their mouths shut.


18 posted on 04/04/2007 9:58:58 AM PDT by pitinkie (revenge will be sweet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: romanesq

Look at Cicero’s answer. They are following orders.

That said, I do sympathise with the feelings behind Derbyshire’s sentiments. It has surely been infurating to observe this disgraceful Iranian theatre over the last few days.

We do not know how these people were treated, but we do know that the last batch were subjected to “mock executions”.

What now must be done is to make a new set of ROE, that makes a repeat of such a situation impossible.


19 posted on 04/04/2007 9:58:59 AM PDT by Eurotwit (WI - CSC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: balch3

This whole thing seems so stage managed by the left, to me. Traitors in high places to make a whole country look bad.


20 posted on 04/04/2007 9:59:54 AM PDT by monkeywrench (Deut. 27:17 Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor's landmark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3
When it happened, I said I hoped the ones who'd shamed their country would be court-martialed on return to Blighty, and given dishonorable discharges after a couple years breaking rocks in the Outer Hebrides

I wonder if Mr. Derbyshire has ever been held hostage. I wonder if he was ever in the military, and if so, in what capacity?

Easy to talk when one is sitting behind a computer keyboard.

21 posted on 04/04/2007 10:00:08 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: balch3
Well since Britain and Iran were not at war, what a propaganda value for the Iranians if the British had fought their captors. The Iranians could claim they were simply enforcing their own waters and the Brits opened fire on them and the Iranians were then forced to kill all in self-defense.

Talk about making the Brits look weak then!

As it went, it made the Iranians the aggressors and the show trial was just that, a show trial. And for any future confrontations with the Iranians, I think we will pick up a bit more support from the British populace.

22 posted on 04/04/2007 10:00:47 AM PDT by AmusedBystander (Republicans - doing the work that Democrats won't do since 1854.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Apparently the Rules of Engagement were to surrender immediately rather than defend themselves.

You would appear to be correct. Likely the individuals were instructed to be "cooperative". Otherwise, at least one of them would have resisted.

Now, we are abandoning the GWOT. Islamic radicals are good and, according to the UN, immune to any criticism. Pelosi is having her sensitivities enhanced in Syria. It's all part of the surrender folks.

23 posted on 04/04/2007 10:01:16 AM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: romanesq

Since no one took what they said seriously, then what was wrong with what they said?


24 posted on 04/04/2007 10:02:48 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
You are correct I believe. The ROE for surrender is abominable. And I did read an article that supported your contention of:

so they are instructed to do whatever it takes not to get themselves killed.

It's a shame that NRO doesn't even publish pertinent details like the ROE in this piece. Their credibility plummets on stuff like this.

25 posted on 04/04/2007 10:03:00 AM PDT by prairiebreeze (Iran needs a good swift kick in the teeth. Or ten.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: balch3

“It is the job of a Royal Marine to fight, and if necessary suffer and die, for his country..”

Could it have been that these Marines have given up on their country considering that it is given away to the very people that they are supposed to protect their country from?


26 posted on 04/04/2007 10:03:24 AM PDT by 353FMG (I never met a liberal I didn't dislike.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: romanesq
Here are excerpts from the Code of Conduct circa 1950's.

Article II of the Code of Conduct states: I will NEVER surrender of my own FREE will. If in command I will never surrender my men while they have the MEANS to resist.

Article III states : If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available, and I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.

Article V states: When questioned as a POW, I am bound ONLY to give Name, Rank, Service Number and DOB. I will evade answering further questions to the UTMOST of my ability. I will MAKE NO ORAL or WRITTEN statements disloyal too my country and it's allies or harmful to their cause.

There are SIX articles in all and each one was taught, understood and a COPY SIGNED by each recruit when I went to boot camp. I still have my signed copy.

I do NOT believe this CODE OF CONDUCT still exists in today's military. Although I could be mistaken.

27 posted on 04/04/2007 10:04:13 AM PDT by PISANO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Adammon

What good would any of their deaths have done? Start a war?


28 posted on 04/04/2007 10:04:27 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Adammon
"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his." - Patton

Well, they didn't really do that either. Did they.

29 posted on 04/04/2007 10:04:41 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Eurotwit
What now must be done is to make a new set of ROE, that makes a repeat of such a situation impossible.

Exactly right. However I read in at least one place these are UN imposed ROE.

Which makes me less hopeful that the Brits will tell the UN where to stick it. Hope I'm wrong on that.

30 posted on 04/04/2007 10:05:01 AM PDT by prairiebreeze (Iran needs a good swift kick in the teeth. Or ten.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: balch3

He’s right. Wimps. The Phony Blur government is a disgrace.


31 posted on 04/04/2007 10:05:40 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

You will not hear their part of the story, thats part of the deal that makes everyone save face. Blair and the Military will make sure of it.

BOTTOM LINE: The britz caved in to terrorists.

Ahmenidjad is the big winner in all this.


32 posted on 04/04/2007 10:05:49 AM PDT by owhl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded
Your invocation of Red Dawn is spot on.

AVENNNNGE MEEEE ! indeed.

It is perhaps one of the greatest movies of all time on the subject of resistance to a cruel oppressor, if you ignore all the stupid parts.

33 posted on 04/04/2007 10:06:03 AM PDT by -=SoylentSquirrel=-
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
I find this comment article by John Derbyshire premature (we haven’t heard from the sailors and marines themselves) and thus offensive.

What could we possibly "hear" at this point that would excuse the fact that these soldiers, once captured, engaged in all those "apologies" on camera? What?

34 posted on 04/04/2007 10:06:40 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
What good would any of their deaths have done? Start a war?

To the delight of thousands of anonymous armchair generals.

35 posted on 04/04/2007 10:06:55 AM PDT by Wormwood (Future Former Freeper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
It used to be name, rank, and serial number, period. But I suspect that like the rules of engagement those guidelines may have been changed by the British politicians, so they are instructed to do whatever it takes not to get themselves killed.

I don't know if you're right (and neither do you), but if so, that reflects a wimpiness on the part of the British leadership, and Derb's point stands.

36 posted on 04/04/2007 10:07:32 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Thombo2
Second,if i had a gun to my head i’d say anything too-i’d even put on a hajib:)

Perhaps I would too. But soldiers aren't supposed to.

37 posted on 04/04/2007 10:08:28 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood

Spot on.


38 posted on 04/04/2007 10:08:32 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: pitinkie
they should have kept their mouths shut.

Bingo

39 posted on 04/04/2007 10:08:57 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr; Wormwood
What good would any of their deaths have done? Start a war?

We're already in one, pard. And in case you've forgotten, before AQ came on the scene, Hezbollah was responsible for more American terrorist-related deaths than any other group.

40 posted on 04/04/2007 10:09:20 AM PDT by mewzilla (Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Eurotwit
Look at Cicero’s answer. They are following orders.

Do you have any solid evidence that their orders included "apologizing" on camera and wearing hijab if/when told?

41 posted on 04/04/2007 10:09:46 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
I wonder if Mr. Derbyshire has ever been held hostage. I wonder if he was ever in the military, and if so, in what capacity? Easy to talk when one is sitting behind a computer keyboard.

Indeed, but that doesn't mean Derb is wrong, as he points out.

42 posted on 04/04/2007 10:10:13 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

Exactly. According to one earlier report, before the British government spin artists got things under control, the rules of engagement were said to have instructed British forces not to fire at Iranian forces.

The report further said that the captain of the escort vessel radioed his superiors (unnamed) for permission to fire, explained the nature of the emergency, and was refused permission to do anything.

And the head of the admiralty was quoted the next day as saying something to the effect that it was better to use restraint than to “escalate” things.


43 posted on 04/04/2007 10:11:30 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Since no one took what they said seriously, then what was wrong with what they said?

Britain lost face even if no one "took them seriously". Perhaps especially if, because it showed that Britain could be coerced into anything. It may not be logical that it works like that, but it does.

44 posted on 04/04/2007 10:11:46 AM PDT by Dr. Frank fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: PISANO

“Article III states : If I am captured I will continue to resist by all means available, and I will accept neither parole nor special favors from the enemy.

Article V states: When questioned as a POW, I am bound ONLY to give Name, Rank, Service Number and DOB. I will evade answering further questions to the UTMOST of my ability. I will MAKE NO ORAL or WRITTEN statements disloyal too my country and it’s allies or harmful to their cause.”

This is exactly what I was trained to do. The expectation is that under torture, everyone breaks. The whole point though, is to resist as long as possible, never knowingly give anything to the enemy, and to confuse the enemy as much as possible, for as long as possible.

I may be wrong, but it’s my impression that absolutely none of this was done by the sailors and marines involved.


45 posted on 04/04/2007 10:11:56 AM PDT by ex-NFO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
Still there's 13 of them so you'd think at least one of them would tell the public what happened.

There's 15 of them, and it's more than curious that all 15 weren't included in the photo-op farce following Ama-jerk's press conference (I can only count seven).

Perhaps some were not able to put on a happy face? If not, why not?

46 posted on 04/04/2007 10:12:53 AM PDT by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank fan
Indeed, but that doesn't mean Derb is wrong, as he points out.

Doesn't mean he is right either. Based on everything I've been reading, sounds like these hostages did what they were told to do by their superiors. If that is the case, would Derbyshire have them disobey their superiors?

Again, it is very easy for him to talk sitting behind a computer keyboard.

47 posted on 04/04/2007 10:14:25 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank fan

As I said, I have read news reports posted here that the British troops were instructed that if they were taken prisoner they should go along with what their capturers demanded, so as to avoid being killed or making diplomatic waves. But I don’t know for certain if that is true.

Difficult to be sure in any case, because they could have been told one thing in basic training and in normal military S.O.P., and something else while they were on their mission in Iraq.


48 posted on 04/04/2007 10:15:00 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

I agreed with most here in the first few days. After that, the extensive video clips began to look like reality TV shows. How humiliating for the British, and now that the 15 are to be released, I am sure that the circus will continue. Faye is a bona fide TV star now.

Derbyshire is correct in using the carpenter analogy, IMHO.
Somebody should be turning a jaundiced eye on the captain of the HMS Cornwall, but that will probably get the “hurry up and forget” treatment too.


49 posted on 04/04/2007 10:16:15 AM PDT by ishabibble (ALL AMERICAN INFIDEL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Frank fan

I have seen it reported that they are ordered to “cooperate”...

Anyhow. The Iranians are still churning out propaganda videos with the sailors.. Apparently they are at some sort of reception. News released just now is that they will not be released today afterall. Will be freed tomorrow instead.


50 posted on 04/04/2007 10:17:13 AM PDT by Eurotwit (WI - CSC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-175 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson