Political and topical news and commentary
Impasse caused by poor diplomacy?
Published on April 3, 2007 By adnauseam In Current Events
As the 15 British sailors captured as hostages by Iran are paraded by the Iranians ad nauseam on TV, one wonders whether either side has a "calming down" policy that will resolve the situation. Iran is a revolutionary state with enough hidden agendas to confuse the brightest of diplomats. Little Ahmed (Ahmadinejad), is the President of Iran but I'll venture he's a figurehead way down in the pecking order of Iranian politics. He is probably a puppet President but very popular for his outspoken views ( do as we say Ahmed!)

I personally think Britain should alter its stance regarding this situation. Mrs Beckett, the foreign Secretary (she is no Jack Straw, this lady), should concede that the waters are murky, literally and figuratively, and say, in reserved terms, "We'd like our sailors back, let's talk about more control over boundaries."

I'm no diplomat but it seems to me that if you are clashing horns with an oppressive Ram, then you should connive to say sorry but report on unfair compromises later.

Comments
on Apr 03, 2007
We saw 28 years ago that any sign of weakness is not the answer.  It just emboldens them to new crimes.  Appeasement only works when you are ready to surrender.
on Apr 04, 2007
We saw 28 years ago that any sign of weakness is not the answer. It just emboldens them to new crimes. Appeasement only works when you are ready to surrender.


Every time we look weak we get attacked. Every time we try to negotiate we get a telephone pole shoved up our butts. The Brits are getting to do the same thing. The problem is if anyone attacks Iran we will have a global war on us. If the Brits don’t do anything but talk they look weak but it is still the best strategy. Iran is worried about our being in Iraq and the success we are having. So far Iran has lost three generals captured and being interrogated by the USA. A few hundred Iranian troops with all their pay records also being interrogated. At the same time they have the internal problems of not enough stuff to keep the people happy and they want to be friends with America. While the leadership wants to bring about world war. We had a simple way of dealing with terrorist. We hunted them down and killed them off the books. It worked all through Mr. Reagan and Mr. Bush then ended with Mr. Clinton. No matter how bad it sounds to the peace groups it worked keeping the peace groups alive to complain about how mean America is but we did not lose thousands of Americans in a single day or attack. Back then the best they could do was kill in groups of tens rather than groups of thousands. Time to go back to the same old thing.
on Apr 04, 2007
Thanks for comments. Little Ahmed has, today, "gifted" us the release of the sailors and I am pleased about that. I'm not sure what the hidden agenda is here but there is sure to be one!
on Apr 04, 2007
He is acting like he just granted absolution to GB.
on Apr 04, 2007
We freed some of their people captured in Iraq.
on Apr 04, 2007
Where is the world outrage againt this? They violated the Geneva Convention when they put the hostages on TV and coerced sataements out of them. No outrage?

A couple of rednecks stack up some naked Iraqis and we're STILL hearing about it, years later. They weren't beheaded, tortured with an electric drill, vivisected, amputated, etc.
on Apr 04, 2007
Where is the world outrage againt this? They violated the Geneva Convention when they put the hostages on TV and coerced sataements out of them. No outrage?


The world is only outraged when America is involved or can be pointed at as the bad guys.