Deal to release British sailors in the works?
posted at 1:23 pm on April 3, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Drudge is leading with the Daily Mail quoting Blair about the next 48 hours being “critical,” but there’s not much to it. Ahmadinejad had scheduled a press conference today at which he was expected to do his usual anti-western vaudeville, but either he cancelled it or it was cancelled for him to avoid escalating the situation while negotiations are happening. According to the semi-official narrative, the “breakthrough” that precipitated all this was Iran’s NSA appearing last night on Britain’s Channel 4 — coincidentally, the same network responsible for the upcoming drama-ganda about British troops abusing Iraqi prisoners — to say that the sailors wouldn’t be put on trial. He also recommended some sort of international arbitration to decide who’s in the right here, to which I’m sure Blair will reply that he can kindly get bent. Channel 4’s posted the video; click the image to watch.
The interviewer is Jon Snow, by the way. You remember him.
Like I say, that’s the official narrative. The truth is that this is way, way too much of a coincidence not to be connected to the wrangling over the sailors. And that’s not the only maneuvering in terms of a prisoner swap. The AP is reporting that Iran’s “intensively” pursuing the release of the five Quds Force members captured by U.S. troops in Irbil, which is another dagger in the heart of that moronic Independent story insofar as it insisted that those five were small fry and that this is all about the two big fish we, um, didn’t actually kidnap. Anyway, Bush reiterated at today’s press conference that he doesn’t support any quid pro quos to get the sailors back; it’s unclear whether the diplomat released this morning was being held by Iraqi or American troops, so if Bush is secretly making deals, he’s at least got plausible deniability on that one. He won’t have deniability on the Irbil five. I trust he understands that.
Debka’s gone hog wild with this story, so if you’re into Independent-esque baseless conjecture, drink deep the intrigue. I leave you with a poll which I know will upset our three lefty readers as much as it does me, considering how gung ho they all are to fight the “real” war on terror in Afghanistan. Exit question: How do you reconcile the answers here?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
The poll contradicts itself.
amerpundit on April 3, 2007 at 1:31 PM
Or how about this?
amerpundit on April 3, 2007 at 1:36 PM
“I’m in favor of ‘peace-keeping operations’ as long as they’re easy an no one gets hurt.”
RedWinged Blackbird on April 3, 2007 at 1:39 PM
They believe in the concept of using the military to stop lonflicts conflicts, but they are unable to apply the concept in the real world. This is why Hollywood and the left is all about SAVE DARFUR and FREE TIBET and not INVADE SUDAN and BOMB CHINA.
BohicaTwentyTwo on April 3, 2007 at 1:42 PM
lonflicts = local conflicts
What? I can’t make up a word?
BohicaTwentyTwo on April 3, 2007 at 1:43 PM
Yes, they will be very, very upset by this.
Rick on April 3, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Exactly. Having the semblance of concern without the substance of it. Or, why actually do something about it when we can prattle on at parties, hold concerts and pat ourselves on the backs for being so socially conscious?
They don’t want to solve the problem. They just want everyone around them to think they care about it. And if someone actually does something, that’s even better. Now they have an imperialist to denounce and impede, so that the problem can continue and fester.
The modern left, which the British public is mostly made up of, feeds on suffering. They tend it and fuss over it like ghoulish little gardeners. The more intense the suffering, the more exquisite the flower in their garden.
spmat on April 3, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Hey, Iran, I got a “deal” for ya. Release the hostages or we start bombing your military bases. Deal?
The Iranians claim the Brits were in Iranian water, right? Ok, fine, but the Iranians WE captured were clearly IN IRAQ! And they should be released WHY again? This is kinda like: “We can build a mosque in YOUR country, but you can NOT build a chuch in ours because we are superior to you.”
Tony737 on April 3, 2007 at 2:10 PM
Jujitsu . . . . not sumo wrestling.
Iran seeks some small advantage; redefine the international boundary between Iran and Iraq, hostage exchange, humiliate the ‘bullying powers’. That is only a tactic.
The liberal leftist sympathizers say this is a chess game. Yes, the ‘middle game’, where grand masters have established a position, and wait patiently for the other side to blunder.
Iran will reach, and reach, and reach, and one day, over reach, and it will become the ‘end game’. The mad mullahs of Iran are dancing on a thread.
rockhauler on April 3, 2007 at 2:26 PM
C’mon we all know at the end of the day Iraq is going to give back the 5 non Iranians our American forces seized in the raid, Iran is going to continue going full steam ahead with it’s nuke program, Syria is going to slip more insurgents into Iraq, Lebanon with the UN providing security is going to get the arms shipments to hezbollah in a timely fashion and somehwhere in Baghdad a car bomb will go off.
Or as we refer to it around here Tuesday.
LakeRuins on April 3, 2007 at 2:33 PM
I reconcile it thusly: Most people are childish simpletons who don’t think things through. They thoughtlessly say whatever they think they’re “supposed” to say.
You can never go wrong underestimating humanity.
Enrique on April 3, 2007 at 2:33 PM
It’s wash. Back to square one.
budorob on April 3, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Wouldn’t it be nice if our side actually won one of these confrontations?
Oh well life goes on, for right now and I sure don’t want to be the one who hurts a dictators feelings. Might cause them to do something irrational like say try to host an all woman talk show on tv.
LakeRuins on April 3, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Easy, they’re liberals. No sence of reality and what it takes to get things done, as well as not understanding what we are doing NOW in Afghanistan and Iraq. It goes along with their crying about atrocities but not recognizing them when they meet face to face with real ones.
- The Cat
MirCat on April 3, 2007 at 3:19 PM
Comment pages: