Irans protects its borders

I have to respect Iran in that they do not mess around with their borders. If you are a British SSA member or a hiker you better not cross the line without going through customs first. Perhaps if we had that attitude in this nation we would not have our debt crisis..

 

So you respect trumped up charges and preordained/government determined verdicts? Good one!

 

A lot more then I respect people in their mid twenties going where they shouldn't be then expecting the US to save them. And who paid that half million dollar bail anyway. I am sure they do not have any ten percent downs over there. Bet you it was us.

By the way the anti-american women who was brought out was writing this type of stuff long before she was detained. The problem is Iran is shite and these three were closely involved with Iraqi Sunnis.

The population of Aden is driven indoors by the sound of dozens upon dozens of loudspeakers. Mosques scattered across the city’s face erupt into a kind of song that is not music or chant, not beautiful or ugly but awesome and commanding.
From my birds-eye perch 500 feet up on the backbone of an extinct volcano the locals call Crater, the sound is deafening. It ricochets off Crater’s walls and collides in my inner-ear like a great, booming storm, “God is great, God is great. I bear witness that there is no god but Allah.”

 

Why would anyone hike along the Iranian border, and why would that have even been allowed in a warzone (Iraq), if not for military purposes?

 

It was in the Kurdish area of Iraq which is not really a war zone. It is a stable, semi-independent area located in Iraq. They have had their stuff together for decades and have prospered since Saddam's ouster. Tourism is even part of their economy and they boast of no foreign kidnapping nor US soldier deaths in the areas they control.

Now why they were the Americans along the border of Iran in that area? That part I don't know. It is one thing to go to that area. It is quite another to be along the Iran border where you could be snatched by Iranian forces.

 

Um are you talking about the 15 British sailors taken by Iranian Navy in International waters while carrying out UN authorised vessle searches? Because as far as I am aware no member of the SAS has been captured in Iran, 2 SAS men were arrested in Basra in 2005 but that is not Iran

 

Admittedly, I don't know the details of their arrest, but the whole thing just doesn't pass the smell test ...though I know someone who travels abroad all the time, visiting some of the strangest places, and could picture her hiking along the Iranian border.

I would suspect that Iran crossed into Iraqi territory to capture these hikers, believing them to be spies or just to aggitate the West, rather than the hikers mistakenly crossing into Iranian territory. That said, there are not that many reasons to be that close to the border, adventure-seeking may be one of them, but spying is more likely.

I am also somewhat familier with the Kurdish (Northern) region of Iraq and would consider that a war-zone personally, but admit I'm unsure of the actual designation at the moment. It certainly isn't a stable region, though I could understand adventurers wanting to do adventurous things. If I were Iranian though, I would have suspected them of spying too. I also would have found them guilty before being tried, spit in the general direction of America, ululated at my victory of the American devils, etc.

 

I was talking about the 3 hikers captured a couple years ago, though I do remember the british sailors being captured as well, sometime before the hikers I believe. If I remeber right, the sailors were released soon after, though I doubt the ship was lol

 

First let me start that I think Iran is one of the most dangerous nations on the planet and I feel sorry for those who are born in that nation and are either brainwashed or trapped from an early age. With that said:

1. The three hikers were not innocent american college tourists who took a wrong turn hiking.
2. The three hikers were in their mid twenties and had a history of being in the middle east with sunni elements in Yeman, Syria, and of course Iraq.
3. The three have a history of being anti-american and pro-sunni islamic.
4. I personally do not think they were spies. They might have thought that their anti-american stance was their protection no matter where they went but Iran as you know is Shite and views both Americans and Sunnis as the enemy.
5. Wish we kept our borders as secure.

 

DE Orc, hi. I was referring to the bottom one not the 2007 where the brits were in international waters.

"On 21 June 2004,[130] eight British servicemen were detained for three days, after Iran said they had entered Iranian territorial waters in somewhat similar circumstances. They were released unharmed after the British and Iranian governments agreed there had been a misunderstanding. Their equipment was not returned and a rigid inflatable boat (RIB) was put on display in a museum in Tehran. During their detention, according to former detainee Marine Scott Fallon, he believed that they had endured a mock execution in which they were marched into the desert and made to stand blindfolded in front of a ditch while he heard their captors cock their weapons.["

 

Fact is the area is democratic with elections, economically booming, attracting foreign investments, quite secure and a tourist destination. And, while these 3 are Americans, they were quite familiar with the Middle East. It wasn't like 2 surfer dudes and a valley girl going to Baghdad.

 

"Bogus trip, dudes!" ..."Totally!" "For sure!"

 

This should be your sig line!

 

I block sig lines...

 

...especially taken out of context sig lines...

 

...

 

The context doesn't really matter since it is true so often.

 

True, there are many things I don't know, and I admit that, but I'm far from stupid. One thing I do NOT do is let others think for me... I don't believe everything I see or hear. Instead, I ask "Why?" a lot... 'why' do people say or do what they say or do? It's not that I can't get fooled into believing things that are not true, but I'm confident that I have a better chance at catching lies than most. An example of this would be the Iraq invasion after 9-11. While most of the country believed it was necessary to remove Saddam from power, I saw otherwise. What I saw was the administration using 9-11, and the immense patriotic spirit present afterwards, as an opportunity to invade a country that, in normal times (and normal patriotic spirirt), would have been impossible to justify. I saw our troops massing for the invasion (in the Persian Gulf) months before the actual 'decision' was made. Most people ignored these observations, but I didn't. Did you? I'm just sayin' lol

 

We should have bombed saudi after 911 but couldn't because they own us so we went after someone Saudis did not want in power for even if he was sunni he was a threat to all persian gulf nations. That is why we invaded Iraq.

 

I though it was for the olives? ...mmmmm...olives...

I'm guessing there were a number of reasons why Bush's administration thought it was a good idea to remove Saddam, and your reason could be a part of the answer. The more obvious was control, America tends to dislike not being able to influence other nations, and has backed many rebellions in order to 'improve relations'... which usually means installing a regime that listens to the U.S. and complies with our demands.

Oil is always part of the equation too. The bigger the oil fields the more the U.S. feels the need to have a say on how that country does business. 'National Security' is the all-encompassing blanket reason, it covers any and all reasons for removal of resistant foreign leaders. Yeah... that one's my favorite, I'll go with THAT as the reason we invaded Iraq... lol