It's also retarded.

well this news report from the Royal Navy seems to give a few slaps across the face to the iranians

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6501555.stm

watch the news broadcast if u can,

it basically says Iran, you are a bunch of idiots, you can't read maps, you can't even agree when asked where you seized our personal

k, it didn't say the above but it might as well have, the evidence is totally clear now, in that both the boat searched and the the uk patrol where within Iraq waters. The merchant boat is still at anchor in the same position as when searched and if to add insult to injury to Iran we have photo's of its location displayed on GPS

[edit] Just a thought actually, I'm guessing that Iran is using GPS to say where the ship is located, but during times of "war" and in areas of conflict the US adds a huge amount of error to the GPS signal that only with the correct "passcode" can it be removed. Whether or not that is active around that area I don't know but I would suspect that it is. Therefore how can the Iranians make any claim on the exact location of the ship(s) when they have no means of correctly placing its position? I'd be damn sure that the US hasn't given Iran the code to remove the error from the GPS signal. [/edit]

I would imagine SA would be in place, if only to decrease the accuracy of R&D data of Iranian weapon prototypes they've been working on in that area.

Got to ask... why's it got to be a "conspiracy" that a segment of the Republican party wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11? I think you're reading allegations into my post that aren't there.

Exactly, anyone who automatically throws down the "conspiracy flag" because someone says republican think tanks have been forming Iraqi invasion schemes is obviously not familiar with Mr. Richard Perle.

I don't know why Iran thinks that any action at all means a total attack and occupation. We could just as easily drop a few conventional bombs in their capital and be done with it. Seems like a much better way of dealing with things to me. If the people don't like being bombed they can jolly well get a decent government together. No point in trying to give them one if half of them are to crazy to cooperate.

Has anyone stopped to consider the fact that maybe this is just a misunderstanding? Maybe they really were in Iranian waters. It seems a little silly to me to be so macho and defensive when all that is going to do is get us into it with Iran. All they want is an apology. We already owe Iraq one, so why not just get this one out of the way without sending thousands of coalition troops to die in Iran, too.

Who cares? Turn those sand ******* into glass *******!

That's not very nice now is it, precious?

While an apology may work wonders with a nation like China, I think we may find it a bit ineffectual in the Middle East.

Well... considering they said "all we want is an apology and we'll let them go" I think an apology might be a good idea for a first try...

If they don't let them go, then... you know... unleash hell.

Well seeing that uniformed Iranian troops have engaged coalition forces in Iraq, I don't think Iran gives a ****.

Iran is just as ****ed up as a toddler with ADD weilding a machine gun.

Are you seious? If we dropped a couple of conventional bombs in their capital it would just piss them off.

It's not like their capital is a village of huts. THEY HAVE COFFEE SHOPS THERE.

Shh... they all live in mud huts and run around barefoot! Right?!

Yeah they do.

And they don't read MAXIM either.

My point exactly. They can't actually attack us, unless they do it via terrorists, but they're probably trying to do that already. If you can't properly eliminate an enemy, just make them mad and laugh at them.

Yeah, cus that will help our situation in the rest of the world.

Uh, they CAN attack us. There is a world beyond the US and we have assets in it. Same goes for Britland and all the other lands.