If Iran keeps the Sailors indefinitely with no defense and no trial

[BOSSHOG]

what will our leaders do? Will limbaugh start shilling Club Tehran T-Shirts to the flag waving cowardly morons who turn to him for guidance (and give him money - ain't that a hoot?) Will there be OUTRAGE shouted on both sides of the pond?

I'm just trying to figure up things here since there is usually two sets of books kept in war time.

[Captain Hilts]

1. They'll be doing WHAT WE HAVE DONE!

THIS is why the military community adamantly opposed Gitmo and AbuGraib.

[BOSSHOG]

3. Yes and lets round up all those who aren't part of the military community

who make policy and support policy and encourage policy that gets members of the military community killed.

[Captain Hilts]

4. Powell should have resigned over Gitmo. nt

[youngdem]

2. Tell you what I'm gonna do...I'm gonna point at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Gharib and laugh and laugh

at the Law of Unintended Consequences coming to bite Bush and Blair in the ass so quickly. as they whine and complain about Iran not following international protocol in their handling of illegally detained enemy combatants captured in theater.

[sutz12]

5. New verb....the Brit prisoners are going to be "Gitmoed."

:evilgrin:

[Pro2nd]

6. What to do?

Iran won't keep them indefinitely. They're just going to use them as bargaining chips on the nuclear issue. I think the U.S. and British Navies should blockade the coast of Iran. Not a single drop of oil leaves Iran by sea until the sailors are returned. Better yet, nothing into or out of Iranian ports until this is resolved.

[gratuitous]

7. A blockade?

Since no state of war exists between Iran and either the U.S. or Great Britain, I believe a blockade would be an illegal action, exposing the blockading nations to sanction.

But legality has been out the window for years, and another crime more or less on the U.S. rap sheet isn't going to make much difference when the wheels of justice begin their inexorable grind.

[Pro2nd]

8. Act of War

Last I checked, abducting another nation's military personnel was an Act of War, and, thus, also illegal. There are those that would gladly have the Mullahs ass-rape these British sailors, then there are those that are calling for an immediate nuclear strike on Iran. I think a blockade is a good middle-ground. It could diffuse this situation before actual shooting starts.

[gratuitous]

10. Who would gladly have the Mullahs ass-rape the sailors?

Sorry, but that kind of nonsense doesn't fly with me. If there are people you can name, and citations you can either link to or publications that are readily available, I'd have to say that there is no one on the planet "that would gladly have the Mullahs ass-rape these British sailors."

In any event, it's awfully hard for the United States and Great Britain, under the extra-legal shenanigans employed by the Bush administration (eagerly aided and abetted by Blair's government), to have any credibility at all when it comes to protesting the capture of their soldiers by anyone else. Unilateral declarations that "detainees" are "enemy combatants" and subject to whatever treatment the Bush administration decides to mete out (including abuse, torture and killing) hardly gives either the U.S. or Great Britain a leg to stand on.

We should probably be thankful the Iranians aren't piling the sailors up in nude pyramids, siccing attack dogs on them, or posing them for pictures with electric leads clamped to various points of their anatomy. After all, that would be the exact same treatment prisoners in U.S. hands have been subjected to.

But would anyone be "glad" to see that? I think not.

[Pro2nd]

9. Another Blockade Note

I wasn't alive during this time, but there was no state of war between the U.S. and Cuba or the USSR during the Cuban Missile Crisis, but I think that we can all agree that Kennedy's blockade of Cuba was very wise and worked out quite well.