QuoteOriginally posted by: dibbleI think you will find that the military is usually a pawn in these type of operations. The military tend to be pretty dumb and follow orders. There is usually some quasi government force controlling their actions. While the military maybe pretty dumb, the controlling force is the "brains" behind the operation. This use to be the way in the u.s., but of course this has reversed under the current administration. The quasi government force under moe, larry and curly do not understand why the men on the ground do not behave like the dots on their Gantt charts.I agree, the military may not be the source of the manipulation but it is an instrument of manipulation. Then the question becomes, is the military as the instrument of manipulation capable of also being used as a manipulation instrument for information legitimacy. In these given scenarios, it appears the military is also being used for the source of legitimacy of information. Since you agree the military is capable of being manipulated, you would also have to agree that information from the military could also be manipulated.

-- have to agree that information from the military could also be manipulatedDoes Rose Kennedy have a black dress ?

Interestingly, the author of the International Law of Sea, also wrote Please Attack Iran!.

Good points from Please Attack Iran article:"However, the US must either attack in a way to cripple the whole Islamic system, or not attack at all. A limited attack to the nuclear facilities or similar ones will lead to:1. More vigorous plan of the regime for nuclear facilities2. Increasing the policy of suppression against the people of Iran3. Concentration of the terrorist activities of Iran's regime on the American targets4. More opposition of Iran in the Middle East peace process and beefing up of the hardliners. More attacks against Israel and subverting the peace process. 5. Strengthening of the extremists in Iran6. Giving many government posts to the civilian looking personnel of the Islamic revolutionary forces and Baseej (the disposable militias) (a kind of coup that has been planned, practiced and made ready for such occasions)."

Alternative to the regime of IranAnother informative article by Bahman Aghai Diba.

There are now claims that Former British Ambassador Craig Murray is challenging the legitimacy of the map published by the British government in the current dispute with Iran over those 15 captured British sailors and marines.Craig Murray's Blog

QuoteOriginally posted by: farmerQuoteOriginally posted by: ManIt seems to make perfect sense for UK military to purposely penetrate Iranian territorial space to create a precondition for war.Except for there is no actual actor who could do this. And whoever made the decision would have to hire a bunch of yahoos to actually do it. And yahoos as they might be, they would still be in posession of 21st-century GPS technology, and would realize what they were about to do, and follow an earlier set of rules instructing them not to. Because Israeli satellites record every cm for YouTube. And no one wants to screw up and ruin his whole life.Ummmm.... FUCK IRAN.Honestly, don't come on here and push this ridiculous propganda. You embarrass yourself. Luckily for you, no one takes you seriously, but someday they might. So grow up.Do you still stand by your original argument?

QuoteOriginally posted by: ManDo you still stand by your original argument?Nah, ignore anything I said, I was just having PMS. Lol, of course I stand by what I said.

QuoteOriginally posted by: farmerQuoteOriginally posted by: ManDo you still stand by your original argument?Nah, ignore anything I said, I was just having PMS. Lol, of course I stand by what I said.At least you've come to one conclusion.

Washington Institute for Near East Policy article

U.N. changes original British drafted statement, excluding "operating in Iraqi waters."If the U.N. feels they can't objectively determine the position of the incident, it is clear that the matter is complex.I feel bad for the soldiers, they are just pawns being used. I think Iran should release the soldiers immediately, regardless of arbitrary lines.I am not saying that Iran is right or UK is right, but obviously both sides are exploiting this ambiguity, the question is was this an intended strategy to use ambigious boundries as a point of contention?My concern is that this was an intended UK/US provocation for war with Iran. The fact that the UK is distinguishing maritime boundries that are indistinguished, seems to be an attempt to simplify a complicated issue for purposes of influencing public opinion.If you look at the British map you can see by a simple distance from land, it is closer to Iran than Iraq, no matter which point you choose. On top of that, the British Defense Ministry is making statements that are indefensible or misleading. I quote Beckett:"At approximately 0630 GMT on 23 March 15 British naval personnel from HMS Cornwall, engaged in a routine boarding operation of a merchant vessel in Iraqi territorial waters in support of Security Council Resolution 1723 and of the Government of Iraq, were seized by Iranian naval vessels. Ladies and Gentlemen, my primary message is clear. HMS CORNWALL with her boarding party was going about her legal business – in Iraqi Territorial waters, under a United Nations Security Council Resolution"That resolution makes zero mention of maritime borders and territorial waters. UNSC Resolution 1723The other things of concern are the US unexplained detention of five Iranians. The British assualt of Iranian consulate in Basra. Both of these incidents seem to be provocations, yet no one is requesting for their immediate release or issuing condemning U.N. press releases.To get the below images you have to go to the mod.uk website directly.

Iraqi military commander of the country’s territorial waters Hakim Jassim statement to AP"“We were informed by Iraqi fishermen after they had returned from sea that there were British gunboats in an area that is out of Iraqi control,” Brig. Gen. Hakim Jassim told AP Television News in the southern city of Basra.“We don’t know why they were there,” he said." He also said, "Brigadier-General Hakim Jassim, commander of Iraq's territorial waters, said: "Usually there is no presence of British forces in that area, so we were surprised and we wondered whether the British forces were inside Iraqi waters or inside Iranian regional waters." "BBC article

QuoteOriginally posted by: ManQuoteOriginally posted by: migalleyQuoteOriginally posted by: ManThose guys holding those posters, even after the British troops are released, will be "protesting" against some other Western "grievance" later. They remind me a lot of the Westerners who have the opinion of nuke Iran. It will be "nuke Venezula" or "nuke Syria" afterwards.I'd certainly sleep a whole lot easier if we did.Strange your sleep is affected, maybe you have deeper issues not related to middle east politics.Yes, of course. Maybe you can put "nuke NZ" in your list too?

The most embarrassingly dumb hole in your dumb theory, is the suggestion that someone would expect to be attacked or captured by Iran for floating a ponga 50 feet off course.If that were the case, they could expect the Iranians to lie, and do the same thing right inside Iraq.I mean, if the scheming Westerners are playing a trick that is transparent even to a dumb Iranian, you have to wonder why the Iranians are the ones spending all the calories to play along, LOL.If it were a Western ploy, it would be very easy to foil...

QuoteOriginally posted by: ManThey remind me a lot of the Westerners who have the opinion of nuke Iran. It will be "nuke Venezula" or "nuke Syria" afterwards.why does it have to be one or the other ? we've got enough nukes to do both