Blair: Iran must free naval prisoners in days (or else?)

[babylonsister]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/26/wiran26.xml

Blair: Iran must free naval prisoners in days

By Christopher Hope, Whitehall Editor
Last Updated: 1:53am BST 26/03/2007

Tony Blair warned Iran last night that it has only a few days to find a diplomatic solution to the escalating crisis over the 15 missing British sailors and Marines.

As the tension grew, the first direct high-level talks took place between Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, and Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, to press Britain's concerns.

The moves came as the Foreign Office admitted it had no idea what has happened to the 15 Navy personnel seized by the Iranian military on Friday. The Prime Minister, in his first public comments since the incident, appeared to signal a hardening of attitudes after more than 48 hours of low-level diplomacy.

Speaking in Berlin, Mr Blair said he still hoped that there could be a diplomatic solution.

"I hope that this is resolved in the next few days," he said. "The quicker it is resolved, the easier it will be for all of us.

"We have certainly sent the message back to them very clearly indeed. They should not be under any doubt at all about how seriously we regard this act, which is unjustified and wrong."

more...

[IDemo]

1. Headline: "Poodle wags dog for chimp" n/t

[Big Pappa]

3. I'm not so sure.

These are his people that are being held prisoner. He should be asking in no uncertain terms that they be released. Were they In Iranian waters? Hell I don't know. No one else seems to know either. But what would it hurt to let these guys go? Hell it would probably go down as a great gesture if they did release them.

[still_one]

5. I believe this will end up in the UN or other diplomatic channels

and yes I believe they will be released, with a major conflict

good for oil prices, if you are the oil companies

[Big Pappa]

7. Well let's hope

cooler heads prevail.

[still_one]

8. of course, and I really believe they will

[Prophet 451]

2. OH SHIT!

What the fuck is he playing at? We can't get into a war with Iran. Firstly, those fifteen sailors would almost certainly be killed; secondly, there is no possibility of winning such a war and every possibility of losing and thirdly, we all know that Bush is hellbent on invading Iran and Blair is already widely seen as Bush's puppet.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. Actually, "warn" is the spin the Daily Telegraph put on it

Here's what Blair actually said in the press conference:

Question:


Prime Minister, we understand that (inaudible) granted access to the military personnel being held in Iran. How concerned are you about the situation escalating and what steps can you take to bring pressure to bear on Tehran?

Prime Minister:

I have not been commenting up to now on this because I want to get it resolved in an as easy and diplomatic way as possible because it is the welfare of the people concerned that have been taken by the Iranian government that is most important. But this is a very serious situation and there is no doubt at all that these people were taken from the boat in Iraqi waters - it is simply not true that they went into Iranian territorial waters - and I hope the Iranian government understand how fundamental an issue this is for us. We have certainly sent those messages back to them very, very clearly indeed. I hope that this can be resolved over the next few days, but the quicker it is resolved the easier it will be for all of us. But they should not be under any doubt at all about how seriously we regard this act which was unjustified and wrong.

http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page11340.asp

I think he's put that perfectly reasonably.

[Leopolds Ghost]

13. I thought the Shatt was shared between Iraq and Iran. They fought a 10-year war over it

Doesn't sound very reasonable to give one nation
(much less its invaders) boarding rights over the
other's ports and vessels in --joint territorial waters--.

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. I think it's shared as in "the border runs down the middle"

The last definite agreement said that:

After a number of incidents between the two countries, the Algiers Agreement of 1975 settled the border in the middle of the Shatt Al-Arab along the 100 km between Korramshar and the sea.

This agreement was unilaterally denounced by Iraq in 1980 after Khomeini's accession to power.

http://www.medea.be/index.html?page=0&lang=en&doc=36

If both countries use it for commerce, both are going to want boarding rights over vessels bound for their ports. So they're both going to need areas where they do have boarding rights.

[still_one]

4. In all honesty UK doesn't have the capibility to do anything

however, if bushco decides to jump in and do something on their behalf, Congress had better not let that stand unchallenged

My sense tells me this well be settled either through the U.N. or other diplomatic channels before our administrations trys to stick its nose in

[Colobo]

6. I don't know what to think

I don't really trust any of the two parties... but I could understand any of them making a case for armed conflict.

[Doc_Technical]

9. I may be wrong (it won't be the first time),

but didn't a similar event happen about 3 years age?

[radfringe]

11. behind the MSM news reports

it would be foolish to assume there are not any behind the scenes talks going on

These talks are most like not about whether or not the British Sailors were in Iranian waters. It's about trying to find a way out of the mess which "saves face"

Iran may be able to launch a few missiles if it comes down to an invasion, but I doubt they would be able to mount a sustained defense to fend off the initial invasion. The end result would be in essence an expansion of the Iraq war and it's "insurgency".

I doubt the Iranian leadership would want to risk sharing the same fate as Saddam.

I also doubt that Blair is eager to invade Iran. Of course this incident could be used as a rallying point to garner public support - but any bump in public support would be short-lived as it morphs into another Iran.

Would bush use it as a pretext to invade Iran? Wouldn't doubt it, the 3-toed gun monkey shoots first and blames the democrats second.

What is curiously missing it the cod-piece swaggering of bush regarding the sailors - if you start hearing that then you know that bush has "got his war on"

If the sailors (while in custody) are killed by the Iranians - then all bets are off

[cali]

12. they won't be killed or mistreated

As I'm sure you know, virtualy the same thing happened in 2004 when the Iranians seized 8 brits and held them for three days. The Iranians are making a bit of a show of this, but odds are strong that they'll be released within days.

[lonestarnot]

14. A shivering poodle blowing snot rockets.