Am I the only one who has wondered why there have been a couple of incidents of British military personnel being captured by Iranians without any resistance from the British?
It seemed odd to me each time. After all, the British are known to be disciplined and fierce warriors. The British are certainly known to have one of the best Naval services in the world. That’s their reputation. It has been for centuries. The British Navy defeated the Spanish Armada for crying out loud.
A senior American commander in the Gulf has said his men would have fired on the Iranian Republican Guard rather than let themselves be taken hostage.
In a dramatic illustration of the different postures adopted by British and US forces working together in Iraq, Lt-Cdr Erik Horner - who has been working alongside the task force to which the 15 captured Britons belonged - said he was “surprised” the British marines and sailors had not been more aggressive.
Asked by The Independent whether the men under his command would have fired on the Iranians, he said: “Agreed. Yes. I don’t want to second-guess the British after the fact but our rules of engagement allow a little more latitude. Our boarding team’s training is a little bit more towards self-preservation.”
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?’”
The British had been warned by the CIA that the Iranians were looking for retribution for the capture of Iranian operatives in Iraq. Over the past two months over 300 Iranians intelligence officers have been captured in Iraq. The British did not raise their threat level in response to the Iranian threat.
Apparently, the British rules of engagement are even more restrictive than the American rules of engagement.
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.”
Can you just imagine what that kind of statement does for the morale of the British Troops!
Meanwhile, eight British Sailors and seven Royal Marines are being ‘interrogated’ in Tehran. One of them is a new mother.
No one questions the bravery, valor, gallantry and aggressiveness of the British military men and women. What I question is the rules of engagement under which they are having to operate. I thought our military had their hands tied, it’s nothing compared to this.
Would you want your son or daughter having to go to war without the ability to defend themselves?
I imagine Winston Churchill is undoubtedly rolling over in his grave.
Previous: Britain Demands Iran Free Seized Sailors
—————–
Disclaimer: trackbacks to this post do not necessarily represent the opinions or standards of the Blue Star Chronicles.


March 27th, 2007 at 10:32 am
I cannot imagine that the British military feel their government has their back when they are not even allowed to defend themselves against attacks.
March 27th, 2007 at 10:47 am
Ted and Bernie - we are on the same side here, boys!!!!
Ted, don’t you think there is a possibility that we have had more casualties because we have more Troops in the Middle East? I don’t know what the stats are in terms of percentages, but I think that would be a more accurate assessment.
Friendly fire incidents happen in all wars, as you know. And they don’t just happen on the American side. No one wants that. Please also take into account that those friendly fire incidents occurred while American planes were providing air cover for the British and/or Canadian operations on the ground. Had the Brits or Canadians been providing air cover it could have just as easily been the other way around.
Ted, I NEVER said nor do I believe that the British are cowardly. I would never even think that. They, of all people, have a history of standing for good against evil. The British stood alone against the Germans in WWII for a very long time - and survived! There is nothing cowardly about the British. I have mostly British blood (and Scot-Irish, of course - but not Shanty Irish! lol).
What bothers ME is that those men were sent out without proper orders to protect themselves and without cover. That is what bothers me.
The rules of engagement are such that our guys (and even more so yours) are handicapped in fighting this enemy. They would not be so aggressive towards us if they knew we’d unleash our power against them. They are no where near as good Soldiers as our boys are. They know it, so they count on the fact that we value life and honor the decent treatment of fellow human beings. They use that against us.
You bring up the IRA and use the line ‘One mans freedom fighter is another’s terrorist. That’s the same ol’ argument the left always uses, which leaves me wondering if you are just repeating the talking points.
The difference is who are our enemies. I’m sure the SS felt that God was on their side. Every army does. But that doesn’t mean we have to choose that side.
I’m sure the jihadists are quite sure that allah wants them to fly planes into our buildings, push Israel into the sea and kill Americans and Jews (and British, btw). That doesn’t make them right.
Are they terrorists or freedom fighters? Who cares - they are my enemies. Sometimes you have to chose a side. Sometimes it really matters which side you chose.
March 27th, 2007 at 10:48 am
Agreed Anna - you said that much less wordy than me! ]:-)
March 27th, 2007 at 11:51 am
Theodore Roosevelt criticizes Liberal Idiots…
I don’t understand why liberals object to being called unpatriotic; after all, they hate everything that America stands for. Damn it, if you’re a traitor, stand tall and announce it proudly. …
March 27th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Israel: Set an Example wouldya?…
Condi has joined the ranks with her pansy leftist dribble about how disengagement means more peace .
Blah frikkin Blah.
……
March 27th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
The Congressional Pork Show moves to over the Senate, plus a House Pork total correction…
I always publish retractions and corrections when I am wrong, and I was in my blog yesterday. I said the House bill had over 6.4 Billion in pork spending. I was wrong.
It is actually over 20 billion. My bad.
C…
March 27th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
More Nutroot Derangement. Todays victim: Tony Snow…
How people can live with such inner hatred and bitterness, I will never understand.
And the scary thing is that this is fairly mild for the HuffPo, but still, how can anyone even go there? How can you make such rude and idiotic statements?&n…
March 28th, 2007 at 2:40 am
Fair Play Beth, I’ll stand down. The rules of engagement are exactly that though, rules unfortunately we have to play by. If the ROE allowed them to engage, then believe me it would have happened. However like you eluded to, our hands are handcuff.
As for the history of the ‘Irish Struggle’ I could bore you death with it all; that could be a decent thread on it’s own. For now lets hope this current situation ends soon, another front in the war on terror being opened is the last thing both our nations need.
BSC: Ted, I agree, none of us want another front in this war opened. Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem to be up to us. THEY want it opened and are thumbing their noses at us. If their aggressions go unanswered it will only get worse. History teaches us that.
btw - no need to stand down. I’m just saying, we are on the same side. I’m ANGRY out guys hands are tied by what I perceive to be unreasonable ROE. It’s bad for their morale and it puts them in untenable situations with an enemy who knows they won’t/can’t fight back.
March 30th, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Alas, the Sun Has Set on the British Empire…
The country that brought you Admiral Lord Nelson, The Duke of Wellington, the RAF pilots, the Knights of the Round Table is now exhibiting the rebirth of a Neville Chamberlain-like appeasement policy.
‘Peace in our time.’ Chamberlain declar…
April 4th, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Yeah man! Bomb them! Otherwise they will be held for years! Oh wait — they’ve been released! You people amaze me. Shoot first, ask questions later — morons.
BSC: ‘you people’?? Who is ‘you people’? Oh, and, the end of the story hasn’t been written.