Kwackerz wrote:lazarus wrote:Kwackerz wrote:
Ferry ticket to Lympstone? Im sure a few of my webfooted mates'd like a chat with him
They certainly seemed very happy to tell the Iranians what they wanted to hear but maybe they would be a bit more up for it in their own barracks!
Like it or not Kwaks, most British people seem to think that the Marine's behaviour in captivity was sycophanitc at best.
The Falklands war started as much as anything because the Argentinians thought that we were a nation of poofs and cowards - and this was literally the info fed back from their military attache prior to the invasion. They were astonished when we fought back. Sadly, the result of this recent farce is that conflict is made more likely not less - the average man in the souk is likely to regard our low key response as cowardice on our part.
According to a Navy officer I spoke to today, the likely culprit is the rules of engagement combined with a feeling that they would not be backed up back home had they fought back, and would have been thrown to the lawyers. Seems likely to me when soldiers in Iraq get investigated for unlawful killings yet nothing whatever happens when plod kills an unarmed man yet again.
You have to contrast all this with the much more robust approach of the yanks. Would they have allowed the men to be captured? And when they do nothing about friendly fire incidents by their forces, how likely are they to worry about a few dead Iranians if their soldiers fought back.
Thing is, we're not in conflict with Iran. Hence our ROE are going to be very low key when dealing with the likes of Iran.
They couldnt fire against the approaching vessels from the merchantman, that was running under a different flag. That on it's own wouldve caused an international incident (seeing as the iranians didnt open fire on approach, so the moral high ground of defending innocent civilians couldnt be used))
On returning to the RIB's which are under our Union Jack, theyre then outnumbered, outgunned and still on the edge of the ROE. More international incident waiting to rear it's head (Not to mention a suicidal act.. Bravery walks a fine line with Stupidity)
The heli had bugged out by then to avoid being shot down I believe. Ive yet to hear them being criticised.
Unlawful killing if they had opened fire? Most probably it wouldve stuck too with the fact that the Iranians arent currently 'at war' with us. The ROE mentions being under threat of loss of life. As they hadnt spoken to the Iranians as they approached, they were hardly in a position to say they were under threat. a few scary unshaven armed ragheads from Iran doesnt make for reason to shoot them.
The only people in a position to make that call are those guys amongst the 15. I think they did pretty well considering.
The Yanks do tend to have a more 'robust' approach as you put it.
The fact is that they have the manpower to support this, we sadly do not. -look at the size of our operation compared to them, then look at the results. They get 15 slotted in a skirmish? Pah. Throw in another 30 with bigger guns. We are but a small fish in a huge pond compared to the yanks, but we're still the ones out there in it (and winning it)
Question: 15 bods in a couple of dinghys taking on those gunships wouldve achieved what? Would you feel we'd spent your tax money better? Would the deaths of servicemen in action make you feel more British or something?
I cant see what them taking on those Iranians couldve proved, apart from a severe lack of understanding of the gravity of the situation.
As another Question and an aside.. why didnt the two Cyclone-class fast patrol boats (USS Chinook and USS Whirlwind who ARE shallow hulled enough to have accompanied the RIBs or provide assistance and who were all under the same command) come to the aide of the RIBs? They were in the area. Presumably under the same ROE and couldve engaged the gunships in order recover the 15, surely?
