What if they were American?

[Fugitive Sisyphus]

I am sure everyone has heard about the story the British sailors taken by Iran. So, I am curious. Do you think that Iran would have dared to apprehend them if they had been part of the US Navy instead of the British Navy?

Vote and discuss.

 

[Knowltok]

Hard to say. Doesn't seem entirely rational as it is, but under the assumption that they are somewhat rational, I don't think Iran would have taken them if they were American.

 

[skadistic]

They are just that crazy and want war more then any one else. Iran needs a war to keep its imams in power. So even if it had been Americans they would have taken them hostage.

 

[Little Raven]

Not a chance. We have what, two carrier groups in the region? No matter how outnumbered our hypothetical American marines are, the Fury of Heaven is only a radio call away. And both sides know it.

 

[Keshik]

Not a chance. We have what, two carrier groups in the region? No matter how outnumbered our hypothetical American marines are, the Fury of Heaven is only a radio call away. And both sides know it.

You're assuming they are rational. If they were rational I don't think they would have captured the Brits either. It certainly hasn't gotten them anywhere.

 

[Winner]

You're assuming they are rational. If they were rational I don't think they would have captured the Brits either. It certainly hasn't gotten them anywhere.

It is probably a well-calculated move.

 

[Leonel]

I don't know for sure but if I had to make a decision I would say Iran wouldn't have dared capture US soldiers as they might not want to give the US an excuse to invade and overthrow their government. Whereas based on the assumption that Iran believes the reports of Islam taking over Europe and on the assumption that Britons don't want any kind of war, Britain would be very hard pressed to do anything to hurt Iran.

PS. When I'm assuming things, it may or may not be true and I'm simply assuming that is the case and is open to correction.

 

[Little Raven]

You're assuming they are rational.

Oh, they're rational enough not to try and take Americans into custory with a carrier group next door. They might still have confronted the Americans, but they would have merely demanded we withdraw, (which we no doubt would have) instead of attempting to arrest our sailors.

 

[Irish Caesar]

Yes; they know we can't re-elect Ron Reagan.

But seriously, I doubt it. Iran is taking small steps, trying to see how far it can go before the rest of the world starts hitting back. So far it has learned that kidnapping Israelis leads to war, kidnapping Brits doesn't.

 

[GenMarshall]

No matter what, they would still take and kidnap our sailors.

 

[JollyRoger]

Not a chance. We have what, two carrier groups in the region? No matter how outnumbered our hypothetical American marines are, the Fury of Heaven is only a radio call away. And both sides know it.

So the Brits are not a strong enough ally to the U.S. for the U.S. to use its carrier groups on their behalf?

 

[Little Raven]

So the Brits are not a strong enough ally to the U.S. for the U.S. to use its carrier groups on their behalf?

Of course they are. Had they attempted to fight off the Iranian ships while calling for reinforcements, we would have come crashing in like the cavalry of old and reduced the Iranian ships to oil slicks and jetsam. (though possibly not until after the Brits had been killed) But they didn't...they surrendered. And once they're on board the Iranian ships, everything becomes more complicated.

And therein lies the difference. I don't think our boys would have surrendered. They would have withdrawn if confronted, but they would not have given themselves into Iranian hands without a fight. I don't know that would have been better in the big picture...but it would have different.

 

[Knowltok]

I'm not convinced of that.

They may have been less likely to surrender given tighter communications with the carrier assets, but there are plenty of scenarios where a group of US Marines could have been forced to surrender.

 

[woody60707]

So the Brits are not a strong enough ally to the U.S. for the U.S. to use its carrier groups on their behalf?

Oh come on. You know thats not true.

 

[JollyRoger]

Oh come on. You know thats not true.

Let's assume that the Iranians actually took Americans. Would the U.S. react more aggressively than it has in regards to our "allies" the Brits?

 

[Little Raven]

They may have been less likely to surrender given tighter communications with the carrier assets, but there are plenty of scenarios where a group of US Marines could have been forced to surrender.

Of course. But the scenario that occured was, IMO, not one of them.

Our boys would have agreed to withdraw from the area, under escort. But surrender? To Iranians? Not likely. It hasn't been THAT long since the 70s.

 

[Knowltok]

Fair point. I wasn't factoring in the Iranian part of it.

 

[Knowltok]

Let's assume that the Iranians actually took Americans. Would the U.S. react more aggressively than it has in regards to our "allies" the Brits?

Likely yes.

But since it is Brits that have been taken, it is their call.

I'd bet W has called Blair and pretty much offered him Carte Blanche if he wants it.

 

[JollyRoger]

Likely yes.

But since it is Brits that have been taken, it is their call.

I'd bet W has called Blair and pretty much offered him Carte Blanche if he wants it.

If so, why would Blair turn down that offer?

 

[Xanikk999]

Same thing would of happened i bet. Iran isnt afraid of us.