One wonders just how crazy these Iranians are–will they, as some suggest, seek to block the waterway and drive oil up to %150/barrel. (At which time I have no doubt our johnny on the spot President and ace Congress will pull together an energy policy).

- The Cat

I’m just wondering what they were thinking having such a small boat next to such a hostile country. Or was it that they weren’t and the Iranians came (very much) into Iraqi waters?

And nobody outside his circle likes Brown.

I doubt the Iranians much care about who’s running the show in the UK; it doesn’t matter when your oft-declared plan is to exterminate them.

I’m appalled that the Brits are busily twittering away, talking about things they cannot know, handing propaganda to the enemy. The Iranians aren’t about to start killing them – they should shut their mouths and help their own side, not Iran’s.

It’s my understanding that the “infamous” tiger cages were used by our side in Viet Nam; and that they were above ground structures with a secondary ceiling for ventilation purposes.
Prisoners of the NVA were generally kept in dank cells, not tiger cages.

The term “Tiger Cages” commonly refers to the dank, dark, maximum security cells (originally built by the French in 1907) that held political prisoners at the Con Son Prison on Con Son Island in South Vietnam untill 1970. These cells, actually built below ground with two levels of cells above, were similar to those used to imprison such POW’s as Mr. McCain in North Vietnam, like the infamous Hanoi Hilton. These “Tiger Cage” prisoners were released shortly after exposure by Time magazine and a Congressional Investigation which caused an international furor.

After closing the infamous “Tiger Cages” of Con Son, additional maximum security cells were constructed as you described above. These cells were used to house violent and disruptive prisoners and these prisoners were treated humanly, according to the International Red Cross which conducted numerous interviews and medical inspections of the prisoners.

An American Admiral was in ultimate charge…
Romeo13 on April 2, 2007 at 11:46 AM

Looks like Rosie’s been vindicated: All the Brits have confessed, even though well-treated, and the US was at the top of the chain of command. So – it’s dispositive – it was a Bush ploy to start a war with Iran. (I haven’t seen the show – did she say that today?)

georgej on April 2, 2007 at 12:45 PM

Good question, one I’ve been asking for days.

I’ve had experience with multinational battle groups and ops… and in the past ROE’s were handed down by command authority… ie regional or tactical command, not by the Admiralty….

It sounds to me like basic British training and thought conflicted with the ROEs in theatre… and they blinked.

But my basic point remains… these guys were under US CentCom command when they were taken… we need to be part of this fight too.

If he were chopped to Fifth Fleet, why would HMS Cornwall be operating under different rules of engagement that we do?

From the UK’s Independent (as captured by Hot Air on 3/25/07):

The executive officer – second-in-command on USS Underwood, the frigate working in the British-controlled task force with HMS Cornwall – said: “The unique US Navy rules of engagement say we not only have a right to self-defence but also an obligation to self-defence. They [the British] had every right in my mind and every justification to defend themselves rather than allow themselves to be taken. Our reaction was, ‘Why didn’t your guys defend themselves?’”…

Yesterday, the former First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, said British rules of engagement were “very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting … Rather than roaring into action and sinking everything in sight we try to step back and that, of course, is why our chaps were, in effect, able to be captured and taken away.”

So, who was in charge? Was this Lambert’s decision to not intervene? Did the guy in charge in the boats decide that surrender was the better part of valor?

And, caution, source = the Russians, the U.S. ready to strike.

I tried….I went here http://www.aryanpour.com/ and typed in ‘duck’……the result….a Hardy Boys novel would weigh 300 lbs.

Seriously, this has nothing to do with what the West thinks….it has to do with what the Arabs/Persians think.
They know war is coming. They are trying to make sure they have backup when the time comes. At this rate they will get it. If we would have put a daisy cutter on a oil refinery there would have been a lot of screaming and hollering but rich oil princes in other nations would have gotten the message. Now….all bets off.

Maritime Forces under the leadership of Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/U.S. Fifth Fleet, Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff.

From

http://www.cusnc.navy.mil/articles/2007/071.html

Centcoms own website.

An American Admiral was in ultimate charge… This is our fight folks.

Of course, if McCain says different, I must be wrong in my understanding.