The warning came after the US received credible information that Iranian-backed extremists were plotting attacks on Western targets.
American intelligence analysts told their British counterparts that the arrest of the five Iranians would have a direct impact on southern Iraq. Crucially, they warned that there was evidence that Iran intended to step up attacks in the border area and around Basra, where British forces are based.
A security source said: "The intelligence was passed to the UK and was generally disseminated. The intelligence that led to the arrests showed that Iran was financing and facilitating operations on the border and in the South.
If there’s one thing Iran knows how to do, its take hostages. However, the world’s a different place than it was in 1979 –and we have 130,000 troops parked next door. These days, the capture of troops-as-hostages is usually a casus belli (see Israel last summer with the initiation of a hot war with Hamas and Hizballah.)
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Despite their domestic wobbly-ness, I expect the Brits to play hardball on this. We should play hardball too.
I also expect the anti-war crowd to forward the following premises: (1) the captured sailors were on a secret mission to attack Iran, which was only acting in self-defense when it graciously subdued them. (2) We should just do a hostage trade with the Iranians, trading captured Iranians in Iraq back to the Islamic republic.
yup…feed the croc, feed croc.
Hey, name ONE time in history that appeasement hasn’t worked.
yah David, not to mention our forces in Turkey and Afghanistan. We’ve got em flanked.
Intresting, indeed. If Britain can’t do a Falklands, they sure can’t do an Iran.
Charlie – You forgot talking point 1a from the “anti-war” left: The supposed intel saying that Iran has been operating in Iraq for over a year supplying training, IEDs and manpower is just Bush lying so he can start a war with Iran over more oil.
Am I the only one who noticed the strange coincidence in the fact that Iran suddenly manufactures an international incident right before the UN Security Council is about to take a vote on sanctions on the Iran nuclear program? Didn’t they do this just a couple of months ago? Duh?
Perhaps it is time to resurrect lend-lease.
Lend two B-2s, five B-1s, and a Nimitz and the UK would be quite overpowering.
Of course the UK has its pocket carriers and sub launched tomahawks but why should things be left to chance.
Although if Iran were wise it should keep iys expensive new subs away from any British subs in the area.
I don’t see the situation quite the same way.
What the Iranians have done is effectively make the Brits (and by shared hate) the U.S. look like weak, all talk, no guts militarys.
The Arab and Persian street loves it, eats it up and is getting off on it.
Iran knows that the Brits and the U.S. are not going to do anything and can’t do anything but try and force more sanctions (which we are trying to do anyway.)
The will continue the circus until they think that they have gotten all they can out of the media cycle, during which they will try and trade the hostages for some of their people we hold in Iraq.
But they will show everyone how compassionate they are after a while and return the hostages unharmed. I would not even be surprised if some of the Brits told the media how well they were treated.
It’s all part of the media plan, the distraction plan and the delay plan.
Then they will come up with another one, and another one and so on until they have their nukes mated on their missiles and can use them for their media plan and their blackmail plans.
Papa Ray
West Texas
USA