<The British in Basra report a number of provocative Iranian steps, including seizing British troops on sea, seizing border areas, etc.>
Nadine the capture of British troops on sea were British troops in a boat provocatively inside Iranian waters. They were released because Iran didn't want to make a big deal about something that was relatively minor. Maybe there was some other capture and that isn't the one you meant.
The British were the ones being provocative, albeit possibly inadvertently, though it seems unlikely, given the important of territorial integrity and knowing where you are in a military conflict zone.
It's the same as the Korean pilot of the 747 provoked the USSR, which shot them down. The Koreans did the provoking, not the Russians.
It's not quite the same as the USS Vincennes shooting down the Iranian airliner, which couldn't really be said to be provocative by taking off as scheduled from a civilian airport, going about its civilian business in accordance with normal commercial flight rules. That one seems to have been an outright blunder by trigger-happy American soldiers on the Vincennes.
The border areas are disputed. It's understandable that the Iranians would try to recover territory they think is theirs, just as it's understandable that Saddam tried to take over Iranian territory he thought was his and Kuwaiti territory, with the tacit approval of the USA, which he also thought is properly part of Iraq, which I have some sympathy with, though I don't think he should be the owner of it.
Given the belligerence and threats of King George II against Iran, I would be surprised if they aren't doing what they can in self-defence, such as supporting fighters in Iraq who are on their side. The USA is out to get them and they have seen the carnage that the USA causes when it's out to get somebody. So they are figuring out and doing what they can to defend themselves.
The USA meanwhile doesn't want another country with an Islamic Jihad noocular bomb. Neither does Israel. So, I think we will see conflict with Iran at some stage, unless Iran backs down.
From Iran's point of view, if the USA electorate gives the game away due to carnage in Iraq, that's good. So, the more carnage the better, in Iraq. Which means supplying Sadr, Sistani and anyone else they can think of who won't turn the guns on them.
Mqurice |
