what the HELL is a routine inspection? A set up for invasion?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/23/iran.uk/index.html

15 brit soldiers were detained by Iranian naval forces, after the brits boarded an iranian merchant vessel allegedly in Iraqi waters.
They are now in Iran.

What constitutes a "routine inspection" Does anyone else thing this timing is extraordinary? With Bush looking for any way to push AlbertoGate from the news, what better way than to have his lapdog Blair concoct an international event so we forget about subpeonas, so Haliburton gets more contracts with a new front (and legally, as a Dubai corporation) and so the war president will forever be a war president?

Everything about this stinks to high heaven. The timing, the location, the ships involved, and more.

Now, the Kurds and Turkey are about to start a major battle. the kurds in three surrounding nations may get involved. All because Dickhead Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush pushed around and angered the Turks to protect the one group in Iraq that still likes us. We are talking major league catastrophe here, throughout all of Iraq and the surrounding countries. Hell, the whole world is now at risk because of our administration.

[MiniMe]

1. I believe the word you are looking for is catrastrophuck

credit to Jon Stewart for that one

[SpiralHawk]

5. Are you sure it's not 'catastrorepubliconphuk'?

eom

[MiniMe]

11. Its a little long, but equally appropriate.

[Javaman]

28. Personally, I perfer, "they are poking the gasoline filled balloon" LOL nt

[madokie]

29. I'll add, with a burning stick

[Javaman]

30. LOLOLOLOLOL nt

[whistle]

2. Sounds like a set up alright

[bryant69]

4. Even if it isn't directly as set up

There is a sense of inevitability in something like this happening eventually.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[whistle]

21. It is a set up for invasion just like with Israel and the two captured

....Israeli soldiers that triggered the invasion and bombing of Lebanon. Blair and Bush are still scheming and dealing and wagging the dog to keep their perpetual wars just rolling along! Bastards

[bryant69]

26. ANd your proof of this assertion is?

Or is the standard "Look those guys are bastards and if you don't believe them responsible for every bit of crap that happens on the planet you must be a secret freeper!"

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Kelly Rupert]

3. A "routine inspection" would be an inspection

performed on a vessel to insure that it is complying with international arms-control law. Such an inspection is not performed because of probable cause, but rather as part of an ongoing policy of performing inspections.

This is sabre-rattling by Mr. Ahmadinejad. Other than that, nothing about this stinks. The timing? This is terrible timing for a war. We're just entering the summer season, there hasn't been any anti-Iran talk in a month, and American support for interventionism is at an all-time low. The location? Where else would you expect British vessels to interdict and inspect Iranian cargo ships? The ships involved? Yes, Iranian and British ships were involved. It would be surprising if ships from other nationalities were involved when a British naval unit inspects Iranian shipments.

[soothsayer]

6. or maybe it was sabre rattling by the Brits, trying to cause trouble

[Kelly Rupert]

9. Interdiction of vessels is commonplace.

You can't really call it sabre-rattling if it's been an ongoing policy and a fundamental pillar of arms control.

After all, AQ Khan's nuclear-smuggling ring was broken up by a routine Italian inspection of a German-registered ship. Inspections are routine, and the entire world community administers and consents to them. Iran is the odd man out here.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

13. It barely even amounts to sabre-rattling by the Iranians.

Well, no more than the usual ongoing kerfuffle over territorial waters in Shatt al-Arab.

[tomp]

14. just curious?

who checks britsh ships?

[Kelly Rupert]

16. Depends on where they're going.

All ships entering the US would be inspected by the US Coast Guard. All ships going to Britain would be inspected by the British. All ships going to Pakistan would be inspected by Pakistanis.

It's not like we just wouldn't search British ships; keep in mind it was an inspection of a German ship that broke up AQ Khan's ring, and nobody would suggest that the German government was assisting Pakistan in its nuclear proliferation.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

18. yet, look a tad east and recall

that there has been ever increasing (and deadly) piracy going on.

Inspections don't seem to be helping out there.

The line between iraqi and iranian waters has always been murky, and under dispute. I wonder where the actual incident took place. I like how no news report (except the BBC radio) mentions the ID of the merchant ship.

[Kelly Rupert]

19. Certainly there's inadequate patrolling off African waters.

Piracy exists wherever there is shipping but no local naval strength. I don't see what that has to do with the relative efficiency of inspections re: arms control.

I'm guessing the situation is exactly like you claim: the British were in disputed waters, and the Iranians staked their claim.

[YankmeCrankme]

20. They were searching for smuggled cars not weapons...

so they weren't complying with international arms-control laws. Plus, since when are those British territorial waters? It's Iraq responsibility to police their own waters, if we assume they are a soveriegn nation. History recalls the Brits searching US vessels for contraband and impressing US citizens caused a war. Lastly, the Iranians claim they were in Iranian waters, which due to the disputed claims between Iran and Iraq, historically, could be true. In additional, Iran siezed some Brits a few years earlier for going into its territorial waters. So, there is precedence on the Iran side.

[Kelly Rupert]

24. Iraq may be a sovereign nation,

but the British are in Iraq at the request of the Iraqi government, so the British are well within their rights to interdict Iranian ships in Iraqi waters.

[ronnie624]

38. The British invaded Iraq.

They are not there at the request of the Iraqi government.

Did you post that blatant untruth with a straight face?

You do remember the illegal invasion of Iraq, do you not?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

27. smuggled cars before they become car bombs?

I can't wait to hear condi say that.

[Kelly Rupert]

32. It's reasonable.

If the cars have forged registrations and appear to be either owned by the US or US contractors, then they'd be rather effective at bypassing security checkpoints. I'm not saying that's what it is, I'm just saying that it might be.

[ronnie624]

33. "There was a previous similar incident in 2004,

when Iran stopped three British boats and seized eight sailors and six marines.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry said at the time the three boats had crossed into Iran's territorial waters. The detained servicemen appeared on Iranian television blindfolded. They were released after Iran said it determined they had mistakenly crossed into Iran's waters. (Full story).

Mike Critchley, former British Navy officer and publisher of Warship World magazine, told CNN that the latest situation seemed to be a repeat of the earlier incident."

It doesn't seem like saber rattling by Ahmadinejad to me. It seems like Iran defending its territory.

If foreign navel forces were seized off the coast of North America, in waters that are considered US territory, would you view the incident as saber-rattling by the US government?

I don't think you would.

[Kelly Rupert]

36. This incident did not occur in Iranian waters.

This one, taking place in territory claimed by both nations but generally recognized as Iraqi, is more aggressive. Iran is "defending its territory" by expanding its territory. I'm not going to say whether this is good or bad. I'm just saying they're taking a hostile stance.

I do believe the 2004 detaining was justifiable, btw.

[ronnie624]

42. The exact location of the incident

has not yet been made clear.

I suspect it will turn out, that the British were in Iranian territory.

In what manner has Iran been expanding its territory?

[Blackhatjack]

7. This is a tailor made event to set off an attack on Iran .....

.... what will ratchet up this event into the immediate action category is for there to be reports that some or all of the Brit soldiers have been injured, tortured or killed.

This would have a dual benefit for Tony Blair, in that it would preserve his holding office at least until his stated date of departure in July, and likely would be the leverage he needs to stay in office after that date if Britain engages in hostilities with Iran.

The Kurdish situation is an absolute no-win situation for the United States, but a gold mine for war profiteers. Imagine a war in which we arm and support almost all sides --that would be the situation with Turkey and the Kurds if Turkey invades Northern Iraq and attacks the Kurds. Further, there would be no 'fence-sitters' in the region. Every country in the region would choose sides.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

8. yeah, like we have a lot of friends in the neighborhood.

You are right that everyone would choose sides, and with diplo-turds like Condi in charge, ours won't be the popular side.

[leftchick]

10. timely move by nancy to open the door to the chimp for an Iran Attack

when she took that provision out of her bill at the request of AIPAC. real nice nancy. :grr:

[Octafish]

12. Brits have been messing up ME for years. Remember the ''phony'' terrorists who killed a cop?

British “Pseudo-Gang” Terrorists Exposed in Basra

by Kurt Nimmo

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20050924&articleId=992

[NightWatcher]

15. Welcome to Friday

Get ready for the news stories that they'd rather slide under the radar.

[lonestarnot]

17. Repugs always steal from the poor and start wars. That is why

one should never vote for one of those pigs.

[Igel]

22. The timing is not extraordinary.

Ahmedinejad is due in NY. The Iranians are holding war games "in defiance" of American warships in the area. (Although "in defiance" is probably more their perspective than "ours" ... one must engage in honor-protecting dick-wagging in order to preserve one's self-esteem, and the mullahs in Qom have a mega-shitload of self-esteem that needs protecting).

When a puffer fish is threatened, it puffs up. Think of Iran as a puffer fish.

[BluePatriot]

23. Busting auto theft rings maybe?

Stolen US vehicles "look" like contractor-owned ones, can plow straight into restricted areas, and then boom, car bomb. I would think an inspection of a vessel carrying vehicles falls into their mission.

Check out these links for more info:

http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2005/10/02/us_car_theft_rings_probed_for_ties_to_iraq_bombings/

http://www.khou.com/topstories/stories/khou070207_tnt_stolencarsiniraq.5e7af063.html

edit: note that these stories are from port cities (I live in Houston) and cars are likely being smuggled out via ocean container to the region.

[stirlingsliver]

25. Brits Find It Difficult

The Brits apparently find it most difficult to give up Empire.

Their arrogance is just astounding here.

[LSK]

31. I think you have it reversed, Albertogate pushes Iraq off the headlines

Bush prefers Albertogate.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

34. could be. he ain't happy about today's vote, that's fersher.

Wish I could watch him sputter and spew, but I have clients coming in the door.

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. No these impections are routine and happen every day

of the week.

As to Iraqi waters... it is a stretch of water a mile wide at best, so getting into Iranian waters, even by accident and not on purpose is extremely easy

[ends_dont_justify]

37. It does seem like a part of a routine doesn't it?

Soldiers are put in harm's way, some war is justified, more people die? It's beginning to look more than just a routine...but a pattern.

Also interesting to note: why was clinton criticized for the bombing on the US naval vessel cole's handling, and bush isn't blamed for 9/11's bumbling? Many things seem routine in this country...

[Kelly Rupert]

39. So how often has that happened?

I'm counting a total of zero in the last ten years. One if you count Israel-Lebanon, but I'm assuming you're just referring to America.

[ends_dont_justify]

40. China taking US air personal? Didn't start anything heated, but...

It did cause a lot of tension in the united states. As to my referal, I more meant bad things in general happening to soldiers. Not just this specific instance.

[Kelly Rupert]

41. That was settled diplomatically. This will be too. n/t