Sunday, April 01, 2007
Why all the fuss?
Last week Iran captured 15 British sailors claiming they had entered Iraqi territorial waters. Hardly a newsworthy event, one would think. Iran would put them on trial and if they were indeed in Iran's waters maybe sentence them to some relatively short jail time. No big deal, you do the crime, you do the time.
Of course, the Brits are maintianing that they weren't in Iranian waters. Seems odd though Iranians would have been able to capture British sailors outside Iranian waters where they would have been protected by the British and U.S. fleets. Further, with all the electronic and satellite monitoring of that region it is interesting that the British government has presented no hard evidence of the Iranian version of events being wrong.
In all likelihood that has a simple explanation; the British government is probably lying and the sailors were indeed in Iranian waters. This would be quite like when the a U.S. naval ship shot down an Iranian civilian airliner in 1988 and then President Reagan, vice-President Bush, and the top brass all lied and said that the American ship had been in international waters. Turns out, they lied and it was in Iranian waters all along (gee top officials of a western government lying through their teeth and an uppity thirld world government telling the truth all along - who'd have thunk?).
The reality is, this probably isn't an inoccent and mistaken border crossing. Rather, as military action against Iran may in some ways already be under way this is probably a further attempt to ratchet up both the propoganda and real war against Iran. And considering that the U.S. Democratic presidential candidates are possibly even more bellicose towards Iran than is Bush we are likely to see more of this, and all the hysteronics that go with it, in the future.
|
Of course, the Brits are maintianing that they weren't in Iranian waters. Seems odd though Iranians would have been able to capture British sailors outside Iranian waters where they would have been protected by the British and U.S. fleets. Further, with all the electronic and satellite monitoring of that region it is interesting that the British government has presented no hard evidence of the Iranian version of events being wrong.
In all likelihood that has a simple explanation; the British government is probably lying and the sailors were indeed in Iranian waters. This would be quite like when the a U.S. naval ship shot down an Iranian civilian airliner in 1988 and then President Reagan, vice-President Bush, and the top brass all lied and said that the American ship had been in international waters. Turns out, they lied and it was in Iranian waters all along (gee top officials of a western government lying through their teeth and an uppity thirld world government telling the truth all along - who'd have thunk?).
The reality is, this probably isn't an inoccent and mistaken border crossing. Rather, as military action against Iran may in some ways already be under way this is probably a further attempt to ratchet up both the propoganda and real war against Iran. And considering that the U.S. Democratic presidential candidates are possibly even more bellicose towards Iran than is Bush we are likely to see more of this, and all the hysteronics that go with it, in the future.
|
