Isn’t Persian an Indo-European language, and isn’t Uzbeka not? How can one language be related to both? I guess in the same sense you might say Japanese is “related” to Chinese? (i.e. through a lot of borrowing?)
-FrL-
Agreed
I was talking about 2001
We don’t know what happened to them, but I suspect something is going on in Iran, so it is quite possible that they have defected - we simply don’t know.
Ok, Hamas’s leaders and Ahmadinejad are really smart, they know exactly how to get the best deal for their population - and everyone who voted for them did so in the full knowledge of what would happen.
Does that sound better than: ‘a bunch of idiots elected a load of dangerous windbags’
Well you slung in the racism card, and got the predictable ‘me too’ response.
Do you really think that Ahmadinejad is half way rational ?
Would you vote for him ?
Ok, Bush’s Axis of Drivel was enough to rile anyone, but anyone who voted for Ahmadinejad is not exactly over endowed in the IQ department.
Do you think that Hamas’s negotiating stance is likely to pay off, given a choice of Mahmoud Abbas or Hamas who do you think would have given the Palestinians a chance of moderate prosperity ?
Nonsense. You made a silly, racist statement. Someone pointing that out to you isn’t “[playing] the racism card”, and other people didn’t call you on it for the sake of saying “me too”. Just accept you screwed up and learn from it.
He seems to me to be perfectly rational - he’s a politician who makes emotive statements that are likely to gain a positive response from his electorate, as well as the other authorities in the country.
And, I reckon that if I was an Iranian voter who was deeply concerned at what could be seen as neo-colonialist plays by the US then I might well be tempted to vote for a candidate whose priorities were boosting national defences, and developing the one technology that could guarantee we didn’t suddenly become the next target.
Care to tell me what he’s done that is irrational, or just why a person would have to be thick as pig shit to vote for him?
UK reveals Iran dispute evidence:
The Royal Navy says satellite data proves 15 personnel being held in Iran were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when they were seized.
Vice Admiral Charles Style said the Iranians had given two different positions for the personnel - the first inside Iraqi waters in the Gulf.
He said they had been “ambushed” after the search of a vessel and that their detention was “unjustified and wrong”.
Iran insists the group were in its waters when they were taken on Friday.
This is the same Royal Navy that tried to sail through an island off Australia a while back, isn’t it ?
I presume the suggestion is ther Iranians are naughty boys for not playing by the rules - says the Admiral working for Tony Blair, our re-elected de facto war criminal leader.
GPS coordinates of merchant ship. Looks to me like they were where they say they were.
Go back and read what I said
- that, and do a dictionary search on the meaning of ‘racist’
Also if you would vote for Ahmadinejad, then you have very little understanding of consequences.
Until a few days ago he was saying that they were not trying to make a bomb, obviously nobody believed him, but that was what he was saying.
If they get remotely close to making one, then the Israelis will take it out, which will be very messy.
Having a nuclear weopon is far more dangerous for Iran than not having one.
Back to the main subject, we know what those two boats were doing, simple coastguard duty - they had no reason for going into Iranian waters, and they posed no threat to Iran.
Ah yes, the RNLI.
Used to like those little pins you got after putting your loose change into a collection box.
FRDE - you don’t occasionally feel a little blinkered or naive, at all ?
RNLI is not the same as HM Coastguard, although they they do overlap in rescue duties.
I wonder why Iran supplied incorrect coordinates, on two seperate occasions, before supplying a new set which matched the claims that they had been making all along? Who’s in charge over there?
Well, some helicopter was there, at some time, is what that “proves”.
If there were helicoptors (and presumably HMS Cornwall) so close, why did they let them arrest the troops? Surely a warship would have better… ahem… “gunship diplomacy” options than the Iranian coastal boats?
Because it was an arrest, you know ‘detained for questioning’.
What would you perfer in the circumstances - something more in the Anglo-Saxon Imperial tradition, a decent amount of death, mayhem and general all-purpose warfare, perhaps ?
An illegal arrest as far as I’m concerened…more like a bloody kidnapping
Oh and less of the Anglo-Saxon Imperialism bit if you don’t mind. Those days are long gone.
What?Iraq? Who?
Cracking Google ads above:
Engineering Job Iraq
Make a difference Apply online today
The Royal Navy
If you’re looking for a challenging career, consider the Navy.
Yes it does. At this point, claiming the USA will not be torturing kidnapped Iranians is akin to claiming the existence of UFO’s over Pittsburgh. You are making the extraordinary claim, you provide the extraordinary proof.
Yeah, we invented it. Yep, Ghengis Khan, Caesar, Alexander the Great, all proud Anglo-Saxon names.
The helicopters carried by the RN are for Airborne Radar, Anti-Submarine Warfare and Search And Rescue, they’re not gunships like the Army’s Apache Longbow. So their ability to actually take on 6 gunboats was rather limited.
HMS Cornwall (5-7nm away) could have engaged with it’s 4.5" guns, but the RN crews were in Zodiacs (or Zodiac-esque boats) so had no cover, and would have been wiped out long before the Iranian gunboats were.
the phrase you’re referencing is “Anglo-Saxon tradition”. No mention of “inventions”.
English folk music has a tradition as well, though it’s not the only kind of folk music, nor is it the oldest.
Had it been in Iranian waters, I’d have no problem at all with the “arrests”, but the British forces are claiming (very strongly) it was in Iraqi waters and an illegal arrest. In that case they should have stopped the arrests, by force, if necessary.
It’s nothing to do with wanting a confrontation, which seems to be your reaction. What’s the point of having a navy if you’re not going to let them defend themselves from illegal capture?
I can only imagine the forces weren’t close enough or did not realise what was happening until it was too late to take action.
Thanks, that explains things a lot better!