War is frightful

What does he want? Pillow fights?

Lord Bingham, retired senior law lord, says that UAV combat aircraft should be banned as "so cruel as to be beyond the pale of human tolerance".

Given that a UAV is nothing but an aircraft where the pilot is sitting safe thousands of miles away, so the machine can survey and attack areas where a manned aircraft can't, this sort of logic leads to the conclusion that the West's defence strategy should be to issue our people with hunting knives so they can slit their own throats in the event of war.

In other news, Ephemeral Isle asks if Lord Bingham should go and have a little lie down somewhere.

More Aid Than Aid

I've been following the situation in Georgia and it is breathtaking how Mr. Putin has managed to take on old 1930's play, scratch out Czechoslovakia, pencil in Georgia and restage it with a perfectly straight face.. Russia has managed to split Georgia in two within five days and it's "withdrawl" leaves it in occupation of a fifth of the country. Worse, it has made it entirely clear to the Georgians that they can take the whole lot over any time they feel like it.

Unfortunately, it's one of those situations where there's a whole lot of nothing we can do about it. Russia may have the long-term prospects of an old turnip in a compost heap, but today it enjoys an imperial Indian summer with its petrodollars and nuclear arsenal giving it a large degree of immunity against Western sanctions. In the case of Georgia, simple geography prevents any meaningful intervention and it looks as though Mr. Putin is going to have a free hand to do as he wills.

Or at least, it did until the Americans came up with an elegant little countering move. According to the BBC, President Bush has announced that the United States is sending humanitarian aid to Georgia–using military aircraft and ships to do the delivering. They may not be able to do any fighting, but a flotilla of ships in the Black Sea and troops on the ground in the path of Putin's tanks makes for a nice little trip wire that even a former KGB chief would think twice about stepping on.

Now if only the rest of Nato would send similar "aid" plus a couple of "goodwill" visits by a fighter wing and we'd be laughing.

Slience of the Lambs

Victory?

Is the war in Iraq over?

Michael Yon says yes.

Future War Tank (1939)

Not bad, but I've seen better.

Ben Magnan, Call Your Service

It turns out that Britain is taking the war seriously after all. Faced with Jihadist aggression in Asia and the Middle East highlighted by the assassination of a former prime minister of Pakistan, Mr. Gordon Brown is bringing the full might of Britain to bear by deploying a devastating task force-- of diplomats.

Talk 'em to death over smoked salmon and a nice Chablis; that always works against crazed barbarians. But that depends on the diplomat.

Benazir Bhutto Assassinated

The former prime minister of Pakistan is killed in bomb attack with fifteen others.

Not good.

Hicks Nix Peacenik Pix

Roger Simon looks at why the American public is staying away from Hollywood's anti-American films in droves.

An Un-Grim Milestone

Sometimes one image just says it all.

My Book To Help America

The children's book they would never publish today.

Al Qaeda in Iraq is Defeated

From Michael Yon:

“Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated,” according to Sheik Omar Jabouri, spokesman for the Iraqi Islamic Party and a member of the widespread and influential Jabouri Tribe. Speaking through an interpreter at a 31 October meeting at the Iraqi Islamic Party headquarters in downtown Baghdad, Sheik Omar said that al Qaeda had been “defeated mentally, and therefore is defeated physically,” referring to how clear it has become that the terrorist group’s tactics have backfired. Operatives who could once disappear back into the crowd after committing an increasingly atrocious attack no longer find safe haven among the Iraqis who live in the southern part of Baghdad. They are being hunted down and killed. Or, if they are lucky, captured by Americans.

Let us sincerely hope so. The situation in Iraq reminds me of war game simulations that I used to run. You'd be fighting forever, apparently making no progress against an enemy who seems to have infinite reserves, and then suddenly the front collapses like a wet paper bag and what's left of the hostiles is running for the hills.

Update:

Some graphic evidence.

Tiny Minds

Turning to the tinfoil hat section of the news, we learn that anti-war protesters in the United States believe that the CIA is spying on them with teeny, tiny flying robots.

At least, that's what the voices keep telling them.

If It Flops, Blame The Audience

David Kahane has a beautiful summing up of Hollywood's current raft of anti-war films:

Now, what do all these films have in common — besides being passionate indictments?

They all flopped. Or will, soon enough. (Except for, maybe, The Kingdom, which apparently has an appalling whiff of vigilantism.) And this is something we out here in Hollywood just cannot wrap our minds around.

What the hell is wrong with this country? We support the troops, showing them as the dysfunctional, murdering, drug-addicted, red-state crypto-rapists in need of psychoanalysis we all know they really are. Hey — even the Marine officer in Alan Ball’s award-winning American Beauty a few years back was humanized by making him a sadist and a closet queen. And this is the thanks we get?

Ungrateful so and sos. And after we gave them Gigli, too!

If You Want Peace, Prepare for War

From the Telegraph:

The world should "prepare for war" with Iran, the French foreign minister has said, significantly escalating tensions over the country's nuclear programme.

Bernard Kouchner said that while "we must negotiate right to the end" with Iran, if Teheran possessed an atomic weapon it would represent "a real danger for the whole world".

The world should "prepare for the worst... which is war", he said.

At last we know where David Cameron shipped all those Conservative party spines.

Shooting One's Foot

Al Qaeda has not only moved the Swedish Cartoon War from a question of "sensitivity" to deadly serious by putting a price on the head of the cartoonist and his editor, but they've also responded to their waning support in Iraq by declaring war on the very Sunnis they claim to champion.

Yup. All the foresight of Julius Caesar on the Ides of March.

War is Peace

Bruce Bawer over at City Journal has an uncompromising look at the so-called Peace Movement and sums up its more unbalanced fringe once stripped of its Marxist double talk:

In other words, if you want to ensure peace, worry less about freedom. Appease tyranny, accept it, embrace it—and there’ll be no more war.

This reminds me of something I read in one of Robert Conquest's books where he points out that this attitude is rank nonsense even on its own terms. Using the Communists as his example, Conquest notes that once a tyranny becomes secure in itself the result is not a perpetual albeit repressive peace, but that the tyrants instantly split into competing factions ala the Bolsheviks and the Menesheviks, Hitler and Stalin, or the Soviets and the Maoists and war against one another forever.

Want to find the road to Oceania? Start at your local Peace Institute.

Calling a Terrorist a Terrorist

The United States is about to officially declare Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organisation. This announcement came on the same day Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at Iran's embassy in Afghanistan (emphasis added),

There is no truth on earth but monotheism and following tenets of Islam and there is no way for salvation of mankind but rule of Islam over mankind.

"Overreaction" by the US bows to "about time" on this one.

The Mask Slips

Neil Clark, in a piece in the Guardian titled "Keep these Quislings out" weighs in on the question of whether or not Iraqi interpreters who have been working for the Coalition should be granted Asylum because the Jihadists have marked them for death. Where he stands isn't too much of a mystery, given that in the title itself he compares the interpreters to pro-Nazi traitors and, by implication, calling the Coalition forces Nazis. However, his attitude summed up in this quote is particularly striking (emphasis added):

The interpreters did not work for "us", the British people, but for themselves - they are paid around £16 a day, an excellent wage in Iraq - and for an illegal occupying force. Let's not cast them as heroes. The true heroes in Iraq are those who have resisted the invasion of their country.

As Seumas Milne wrote in yesterday's Guardian: "More than any other single factor, it has been the war of attrition waged by Iraq's armed resistance that has successfully challenged the world's most powerful army and driven the demand for withdrawal to the top of the political agenda in Washington."

"Resisted" in this case being stretched to include blowing up markets, beheading journalists, kidnapping aid workers, baking children and feeding them to their families, wiping out whole villages, and trying to recreate the Taliban all over again. The quote in the second paragraph is also revealing in that it shows the nostalgia that the Left has injected into the war. Mr. Clark may hark back to French Resistance, but it's clear that his real models are rose-tinted and sanitsed versions Che Guevara other Communist "resistance" leaders who the Chattering Classes lauded as the true representatives of The People to be supported against the evil, Capitalist West, but whose fruit was invariably the gulag and the guillotine.

As the old saw goes, they're not anti-war, they're just on the other side.

The Pope, Bears, & Islam

From the BBC:

The failed bomb attacks on London and Glasgow have damaged public perceptions of Islam, a survey has suggested.

No doubt that would be the "No #&%$, Sherlock" survey.

The Australian Connection

In the wake of last week's bombing attempts in London & Glasgow, Australian authorities are carrying out raids and are questioning five more doctors with (if you read the BBC) nothing in common beyond being doctors.

By a staggering coincidence, at least one is named "Mohammed", so I suspect that they are not Methodists

A Former Jihadi Speaks Out

Hassan Butt, who was once a member of radical group Al-Muhajiroun, addresses the ostrich mentality of the West and moderate Muslims when it comes to radical Islam:

When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network, a series of semi-autonomous British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology, I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy.

By blaming the government for our actions, those who pushed the 'Blair's bombs' line did our propaganda work for us. More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.

Read the whole thing, as they say.

Death With Indignity

The Telegraph reports on a terrorist web site based in Britain where 45 Muslim doctors threatened to blow up naval bases and "clubs for naked women" in the vicinity of Jacksonville, Florida.

I guess that's what happens when you start treating the Hippocratic Oath as "guidelines."

Blackburn Arrests

Two "Asian" men have been arrested in Blackburn on terrorist charges.

In other developments, the number of Jihadi doctors has now risen to seven. The eighth is a medical technician.

Now We Are Eight

The bombing arrest toll has risen to eight.

It also brings the number of doctors under arrest to three.

Update: Make that five doctors. This is starting to slip into surrealism.

Update: Six doctors and arrests in Brisbane. Surrealism achieved.

Net Widens

Two more men have been arrested in connection with the recent bombings, bringing the total to seven. The BBC describes the suspects as "not thought to be of British origin," so I presume that they are Lithuanian Buddhists.

Also reported, one of the people arrested in Cheshire is named "Mohammed." What are the odds?

Update: The connection between the Glasgow and London bombings is more of a unity, according to CNN:

Authorities suspect the two men who rammed an explosives-laden vehicle into Glasgow's airport on Saturday are the same people who parked two car bombs in central London a day earlier.

Damn It, Jim; I'm a Doctor, Not a Jihadist!

Five people from Glasgow to Cheshire to Liverpool have been arrested in Britain in connection with the recent bombing attempts with more to follow over the next few days.

Interestingly, two of the five are physicians.

So much for the "poor and disenfranchised" theory of Jihadism.

Still, it's perplexing that we keep finding so many people from such diverse backgrounds and over such a wide area of the country involved in terrorist attacks. I keep looking at the news reports for something that they all have in common, but it still remains a mystery.

Glasgow Attack

Two "Asian" men rammed a Jeep Cherokee into the main terminal at Glasgow airport with the vehicle bursting into flames. The men in the car and two others are reported to be under arrest by Strathclyde police. Eye witnesses say that this was no accident and that the driver deliberately swung the car into the entry way. According to Sky News, one witness said that the men were "throwing petrol around".

Who is behind this attack, what their motive might be, whether it is part of some larger events, if it is related to the failed London bomb attacks, if there is some religious element (Heaven knows what), or if anyone named "Mohammad" is involved remains an utter mystery and will remain so for as long as the major media outlets can manage.

Update: Sky News is now reporting that only two men have been arrested.

Update: Witness tells Sky News that one of the suspects shouted "Allah" while attacking a policemen.

Update: Fox News has reported that Britain's threat level has been raised to "critical", meaning that another attack is thought imminent. The BBC confirms.

Update: The BBC is reporting that two people have been detained in Cheshire in connection with the bombings in Glasgow & London. Looks as if the two incidents are part of the same plot.

Update: The Jihadist who was taken to hospital in critical condition from severe burns was wearing a suicide bomb belt.

Update: CNN reports that there may be a third Jihadist in the Jeep. Also, the burns of the bomb belt terrorist are explained:

Witness Jackie Kennedy told the BBC that after the crash, a passenger in the Jeep doused himself with fuel from a can and ignited it, then got out of the vehicle. Airport police used fire extinguishers on him, and he fell to the ground, she said.

"I realized that this was obviously deliberately done -- the fact that the guy was in flames and seemed to be enjoying himself, even smiling," Kennedy told the BBC.

How anyone can read this and think it's no problem if these madmen get their hands on nuclear weapons is beyond me.

London Bombing Attempt

Authorities in London have neutralised a car bomb in the Haymarket. Planted outside of the Tiger Tiger nightclub, which has a maximum capacity of 1700, a green metallic Mercedes packed with petrol, propane and nails was discovered by an ambulance crew when it started emitting smoke at about 1:30 AM. Police destroyed the vehicle with a controlled explosion and a second car in Park Lane is under investigation.

This bomb smells so heavily of Al Qaeda that even the BBC can't skirt around the obvious, though the AP does a valiant effort by reporting that "Police were also investigating the possibility that the planned attack could have been criminal in nature."

Uh, yeah.

My impression is that this happening within two days of Gordon Brown becoming Prime Minister is no coincidence and that the Jihadis were hoping to pull a Madrid by killing hundreds, if not thousands within a stone's throw of Piccadilly Circus before Mr. Brown had a chance to finish unpacking his underwear at No. 10. Hopefully this misfire will turn into a backfire that will make Mr. Brown declare what his predecessor could never bring himself to do, which is that what is happening on the streets of Britain is nothing less than enemy action in time of war and that those who carry these acts out, those who aid them, and those who support their goals are nothing less than enemy agents or traitors to be treated accordingly..

But I'm not holding my breath.

Update: In a concerted effort to sweep things under the carpet, AP (no surprise here) is reporting that terror links were "not found," though a closer reading indicates that there isn't any positive evidence linking the bomb to specific terrorist suspects. It's important to keep an open mind in these situations, but until the police put the finger on someone who isn't named Mohammad, I'm leaving this in the Jihad basket.

Update: Fleet street has been closed off because of a third suspicious vehicle.

Update: CBS claims to have uncovered a connection to a posting on a Jihadist web site.

Talking to Death

Iran now has enough nuclear material (that we know of) to construct two fission bombs.

Looks like all that talking did the job-- for the Mullahs.

The Gulf

Apparently the Royal Navy isn't the only service that the Iranians have attacked. In 2004, the mullahacracy tried to capture an Australian boarding party, but that one never made the headlines. Why?

Answer: They fought back and won.

According to the Sydney Morning Herald,

Quoting a "military source", BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner reported Iranian forces made a concerted attempt to seize a boarding party from the Royal Australian Navy and that the Australians "were having none of it".

"The BBC has been told the Australians re-boarded the vessel they had just searched," Gardner reports, "aimed their machine guns at the approaching Iranians, and warned them to back off, using what was said to be 'highly colourful language'.

Our sources inform us that the Royal Navy has requested a shipment of spines from the RAN.

Lawfare

As if this war wasn't overlawyered enough, British soldiers in the field must now operate under the scrutiny of the Human Rights Act, which means that if a soldier puts a foot wrong, the Ministry of Defence can get the pants sued off it.

That slapping sound you hear is Jihadis everywhere high-fiving each other.

Axis of Evil? What Axis?

North Korea tested its new 3000-mile range Musudan missile-- in Iran.

Nothing to see here, folks. Move along.

Quote of the Day

From the Telegraph:

If the choice is them continuing [towards a nuclear bomb] or the use of force, I think you're at a Hitler marching into the Rhineland point. If you don't stop it then, the future is in his hands, not in your hands, just as the future decisions on their nuclear programme would be in Iran's hands, not ours.

John Bolton on Iran's nuclear weapons power programme.

Don't Connect the Dots

MI5 reports that there are 2000 terrorists in Britain actively supporting Al Qaeda.

But remember, this is just a police matter; we are not at war.

And maybe I'm a Chinese jet pilot.

Surrender Bill Vetoed

Now that we've got the political posturing out of the way, perhaps the US Congress will get down to some real work and end this war by winning it.

Also Stable?

Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, is reported dead in a fire fight with rival Jihadists.

Until it is confirmed that Abu is sharing a pew with Castro in a very warm spot, I'm holding off on the celebrations.

Fun Fact from GlobalSecurity.org:

He probably came into Iraq in 2002, before Zarqawi's arrival, and may have helped establish the first al-Qaeda cell in the Baghdad area.

But Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda and is just a distraction from the "real" war.

US Congress Turns French

The United States Congress has voted to surrender in Iraq-- apparently unconditionally, as they have yet to contact the Jihadists about terms and concessions.

High fives all around at Al Qaeda HQ.

Update: Courtesy of the EI time scanner, we present a view of the American embassy in Baghdad, March 2008.

Peace in Our Time

Senate Majority Leader Harry "The war is lost" Reid on Kosovo (Emphasis added):

Just a reminder to the predominantly Muslim-led government[s] in this world that here is yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe. This should be noted by both responsible leaders of Islamic governments, such as Indonesia, and also for jihadists of all color and hue. The United States' principles are universal, and in this instance, the United States stands foursquare for the creation of an overwhelmingly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe.

Translation: "We're good dhimmis. Here is your Sudetenland. Take it and don't hurt us, please."

Someone hand Senator Reid his umbrella.

Missing Factor

The BBC is running a feature article on the "flight" of middle-class Muslims from Britain for the more "tolerant" climes of the Middle East.

The reasons for their being so fed up with life under the Union Jack are cited by the Beeb as "Islamophobia," a "witch hunt" and "glass ceilings"against Muslims, "an environment where the messages in the media are anti-Islamic" and "intense pressure to explain their faith and its place in British society."

One tiny factor that is left out of the BBC's leave-no-stone-unturned approach to journalism might be that perhaps there is this little matter of a war against crazed Jihadists who wish to destroy civilisation and have demonstrated this in the Mosques and on the streets of London with words and bloody deeds and the marked reluctance moderate Muslims have in speaking out-- much less in taking a hand in combating these barbarians. Yet, if this article is to be believed (which is problematic), middle-class Muslims regard the British people and Her Majesty's Government as their enemy, not the Jihadists who hate moderate Muslims as much as they do the infidels.

Perhaps Muslims in Britain who are packing their bags would get a better reception if they chose the side of civilisation and the resolve of fight over flight.

Hornblower & the Ice-Cream Navy

William S. Lind over at d-n-i.net weighs in on the Royal Navy debacle:

For Britain, and especially for the Royal Navy and Royal Marines, the incident ended in utter disgrace. The initial surrender of the British boarding party to what appears to have been a much larger Iranian force is the only defensible British action in the whole sorry business. Even in Horatio Hornblower's Royal Navy, a British frigate captain was not disgraced if he struck to a French or Spanish ship of the line. Force majeure remains a valid excuse.

But everything else that was said or done would have given Hornblower or Jack Aubrey an apoplexy. The failure of HMS Cornwall to foresee such an event and be in a position to protect her people; the cowardice—there is no other word for it—of the boarding party (including two officers) once captured; their kissing the Iranian's backsides in return for their release; and perhaps most un-British, their selling their disgraceful stories to the British press for money on their return -- all this departs from Royal Navy traditions in ways that would have appalled the tars who fought at Trafalgar.

Yet that is not the worst of it. The worst of it is the reaction of the Navy's higher-ups. According to a story in the April 7 Washington Times, the Royal Navy's top commander, Admiral Jonathon Band, leapt to the boarding party's defense with virtually Jerry Springeresque words:

He told the British Broadcasting Corp. he believed the crew behaved with "considerable dignity and a lot of courage" during their 13 days in Iranian captivity.

He also said the so-called confessions made by some of them and their broadcast on Iranian state television appear to have been made under "a certain amount of psychological pressure."…

"I would not agree at all that it was not our finest hour. I think our people have reacted extremely well in some very difficult circumstances," he said.

Had the captives been 10-year old girls from Miss Marples' Finishing School, Admiral Band's words might make some sense. But these were supposed to be fighting men from the Royal Navy and Royal Marines! Yes, I meant men. What Politically Correct imbecile detailed a woman to a boarding party?

I've reserved my opinion on who is culpable in this mess on the grounds that it is unfair to judge a man in a tight spot, but after the appalling way that both the former hostages (I almost hesitate to acknowledge them as Royal Navy) and the government has acted in the aftermath, it is clear that this is an episode that the Navy and Her Majesty's Government can only look back upon with shame. I'm willing to give all the benefit of the doubt to someone who falls into the hands of a load of murdering Jihadists and is forced to make propaganda against his will, but there are limits. Compare these images of RAF pilots John Peters & John Nichols that were broadcast on Iraqi television during the first Gulf War:

To this one of the fifteen hostages in Iran:

They didn't even have enough pride (or sense) to leave those blasted "goody bags" behind. Talk about selling your birthright for a mess of pottage! It's one thing to cooperate with the enemy to the absolute minimum under extreme pressure. It is quite another to do so with such enthusiasm after what we now know was so little persuasion-- unless fear of missing a daughter's birthday or being called "Mr. Bean" now counts as duress vile (And no, I have not forgotten the mock executions. On that point I refer back to Private Moyes).

As Mr. Lind points out, far more blame can be placed on the commander of HMS Cornwall, who sent his men into harm's way without adequate protection-- indeed, we now learn no protection at all. No RN officer should be in a position where he can't say this (courtesy of C. S. Forester):

Capt. Horatio Hornblower, R.N: If I am not back aboard the Lydia within one hour, she'll train her guns upon your fort and reduce it to rubble.
El Supremo: With you in it, Captain?
Capt. Horatio Hornblower, R.N: That is my order.

Near enough blame can also be placed with the boarding party officers who did not order their men to give the enemy as little as possible and a great deal more blame can go to Faye Turney and Arthur Batchelor, who sold their stories to the press regardless of whatever Whitehall fathead said that it was okay to do so. At the very least, I hope that a fistful of official reprimands are being shoved into service records.

But the real villian in the piece (aside from the Iranians, but that's irrelevant, as they should have come out of this with nothing but a few shot up patrol boats and a stern warning to never try it again) is the Blair government, who from the first were more worried about spin than giving the armed forces the support they need and deserve and it's going to take a damn sight more than Des Browne falling on his sword to put things right. According to Michael Smith and Maurice Chittenden in the Sunday Times,

The origins of the shambles lie in the navy’s concern over cuts. At the height of its power in the mid-19th century, it could muster more forces than the seven next biggest navies combined.

Now it is the Cinderella of the three services and has been largely sidelined during the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Royal Marine commandos and the SBS, still both part of the navy, have fought with distinction in both operations, but the main contribution from the navy proper was to fire off a few token cruise missiles on the opening days of each war. Even then the United States snaffled all of the best targets.

During the attack on Afghanistan, said one senior intelligence source, the Royal Navy’s expensive cruise missiles had done “little more than rearrange the rubble” at a couple of disused Al-Qaeda training camps. Her Majesty’s ships have not seen any serious action since the Falklands and are struggling to attract the right calibre of recruits.

Even the royal family now give the “senior service” a miss. It used to be standard practice for royals to serve in the navy, a tradition followed by George V, Edward VII, George VI, Edward VIII, the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Edinburgh. But Princes William and Harry have both preferred the army, although William is scheduled for a short spell in the navy next year.

Fearing further decline, navy chiefs ordered a publicity drive centred around HMS Cornwall, a frigate sent to take over last month as flagship of Task Force 158, the allied flotilla protecting the Iraqi oil installations and territorial waters.

Television crews from Sky and the BBC were flown on board the ship to film the crew at work monitoring the northern Gulf; Cornwall was to be the front-page story in Navy News, the navy’s in-house journal. But from the start the publicity drive went awry.

Cornwall, known as “the ice-cream frigate” because of its designation F99, travelled to the Gulf via Barcelona, Malta and Croatia. Along the way the crew engaged in a series of sporting events with local teams; they lost every match.

From the wooden wall to ice-cream frigate in two centuries. Ye gods, if the shades of Cochrane, Fisher and Churchill aren't howling and clanking through the corridors of Westminster and affording Mr. Blair et al not a moment's peace, then they are seriously wasting their afterlife.

I remember during the Falklands War that I remarked that the conflict in the South Atlantic marked a crisis in British history. This was a moment when afterwards Great Britain would have the choice of either becoming once again a world-class power or joining her Continental brethren in slinking off to historical obscurity.

It looks as though Horatio Hornblower has been forsaken for Mr. Bean.

Pure Gall

After Iran committed piracy and God knows how many violations of the Geneva conventions (up to and including mock executions) against a Royal Navy patrol operating under a UN mandate in Iraqi waters, Tehran's ambassador to London, Rasoul Movahedian had the bare-faced nerve to demand a reward for his country's perfidy:

We played our part and we showed our good will... now it is up to the British government to proceed in a positive way.

I don't know how much oil Iran has, but one thing it will never run short of is brass.

Britons To Be Freed

Iran claims that it is releasing the fifteen Royal Navy sailors and marines that it kidnapped.

I'm holding off any celebrations until the men and woman are home safe-- and we find out exactly why they were let go.

The Kowtow

Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonour. They chose dishonour. They will have war.

Winston Churchill on the Munich Agreement, 1938

John Derbyshire looks at the easily-wrought "confessions" of the kidnapped Royal Navy sailors and marines and compares them to Private John Moyse.

Who? Unless you're up on your history of the Anglo-French expedition to Peking in 1860 you may need this reminder:

How on earth can Britons behave like that? A previous generation would not have done so. I knew the women of my mother’s generation pretty well (Mum was born in 1912), and I am certain that any one of them, given that headscarf and told to put it on, would have said: “You can hang me with it if you like, but I’ll be damned if I’ll wear the filthy thing.” The men likewise. What on earth has happened to the British? Where is John Moyse?

Well, he is of course on Wikipedia. Who isn’t? To spare you the trouble of reading all through, Moyse was a British soldier of the East Kent Regiment, nick-named “The Buffs” on account of their 17th-century uniforms, which prominently featured that color. Moyse was captured by the Chinese during the Second Opium War of the late 1850s. Taken before a Mandarin, he was ordered to kowtow, but refused. He was thereupon clubbed to death and decapitated, and his body thrown on a dung-heap. Sir Francis Doyle wrote a poem to celebrate Moyse’s defiance of the enemy. You can read the poem here.

Sir Harry Flashman had his own take on it based on his "eye witness" account:

That was how it happened-- The stories that he laughed in defiance, or made a speech about not bowing his head to any heathen, or recited a prayer, or even that he died drunk-- they're false. I'd say he was taken flat aback at the mere notion of kow-towing, and when it sank in, he wasn't having it, not if it cost him his life. You may ask, was he a hero or just a fool, and I'll not answer-- For I know this much, that each man has his price, and his was higher than yours or mine. That's all. I know one other thing-- whenever I hear someone say Proud as Lucifer, I think, no, proud as Private Moyes.

Derbyshire is a bit harsh on the captives; they are, after all, operating under standing orders and it's a bit much to judge another man in a tight situation when you aren't in his shoes, but the fact that a group of modern Britons acquiesced so quickly to the Iranian equivalent of the kowtow when their grandparents would have said "f*** you" and damn the consequences is painfully telling-- not so much on the seamen, but on a time where such humiliation is accepted by Britons and their government without so much as a shrug. However, such indifference in the face of tyranny cannot go for long without a heavy price.

Today, the white feather carries no stigma; no able-bodied man squirms with shame at the knowledge that he stays safe at home while a woman goes to war and risks captivity, death or worse in his place; and the words Ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς are meaningless in more than their Greek, but that will have to change in the years to come unless we want to end up paraphrasing Churchill to our cost.

1979 Redux

Iranian "students" attacked the British embassy in Tehran. What could possibly go wrong with that?

Like it or not, Mr. Blair, you may have a real honest-to-God war on your hands.

Update: It looks as though Mr. Blair is about to go into full Jimmy Carter mode. From the Sunday Telegraph:

The Sunday Telegraph has learnt of plans to send a Royal Navy captain or commodore to Tehran, as a special envoy of the Government, to deliver a public assurance that officials hope will end the diplomatic standoff.

The move, which was discussed at a meeting of Whitehall's Cobra crisis committee yesterday, came as Downing Street officials explicitly cautioned against hopes of a speedy outcome and said that families of the hostages should prepare for the "long haul".

The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, and the Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett, have been warned that the impasse may develop into a long-term stand-off. Privately, officials are speculating that the crisis could continue for months.

Good old gambler's logic: It didn't work the last time, so it's bound to this time.

Update: The Captain's Quarters on how EU membership has prevented Britain from even imposing trade sanctions on the Mullahs.

Pleae, Sir, May I Have Another?

Mark Steyn on the Iranian crisis"

So we live today in a world of one-way sovereignty: American, British and Iraqi forces in Iraq respect the Syrian and Iranian borders; the Syrians and Iranians do not respect the Iraqi border. Patrolling the Shatt al-Arab at a time of war, the Royal Navy operates under rules of engagement designed by distant fainthearts with an eye to the polite fictions of "international law": If you're in a ''warship,'' you can't wage war. If you're in a ''destroyer,'' don't destroy anything. If you're in a "frigate," you're frigging done for.

On Sept. 11, a New York skyscraper was brought down by the Egyptian leader of a German cell of an Afghan terror group led by a Saudi. Islamism is only the first of many globalized ideological viruses that will seep undetected across national frontiers in the years ahead. Meanwhile, we put our faith in meetings of foreign ministers.

"It is better to be making the news than taking it," wrote Winston Churchill in 1898. But his successors have gotten used to taking it, and the men who make the news well understand that.

As the kids say, read the whole thing

Raving Mad

Comment by Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt:

It was deplorable that the woman hostage should be shown smoking. This sends completely the wrong message to our young people.

It isn't often that one sees priorities being so insanely skewed.

Tale of Two Maggies

I think everyone regrets that this position has arisen. What we want is a way out of it - we want it peacefully and we want it as soon as possible.

Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett on Britain's response to Iran's kidnapping of fifteen Royal Navy sailors and marines.

Our diplomacy is backed by strength, and we have the resolve to use that strength if necessary.

Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher on Britain's response to Argentina's 1982 invasion of the Falkland Islands.

Guess which one will be the Jimmy Carter of the 21st century.

Turtle Bay Farce

The UN has issued a statement of "grave concern" over Iran's kidnapping of 15 Royal Navy sailors and marines. The British government is disappointed because it wanted the UN to "deplore" the kidnapping.

The only thing to deplore here is the gaping hole where Britain's spine used to be. It would be laughable if it weren't so tragic.

Quote of the Day

(C)learly very much like a cock-up and not a conspiracy.

Margaret Beckett on the kidnapping of fifteen Royal Navy sailors and marines.

Someone please take the post of Foreign Secretary away from this insane woman.

Quote of the Day

We are not seeking to put Iran in a corner. We are simply saying, 'please release the personnel who should not have been seized in the first place'.

Prime Minister Tony Blair's spokesman on Britain's response to Iran's kidnapping fifteen Royal Navy sailors and marines.

That sound you hear is the Mullahs laughing their guts out.

Geneva Conventions? What Geneva Conventions

The argument keeps being put forward that we should scrupulously follow the Geneva Conventions so that our enemies will be compelled to do likewise. Question is, when is this reciprocity supposed to kick in, if ever? So far the Iranians have committed the following violations of the Conventions:

• Threats to try the kidnapped fifteen Royal Navy sailors and Marines for espionage.
• Interrogating them.
• Parading them before cameras
  

I won't even go into how the Iranians have exploited Leading Seaman Faye Turney by making her wear a hijab, having her write "personal" letters to her family, making her "confess" on camera to invading Iranian territory, and dangling promises of her release. Some bloggers have been rather unkind to her about her co-operation with the Iranians, but this seems unfair, as in this situation she operates under the standing orders given to her and she must be judged accordingly. The true responsibility lies with the lunatics who knowingly put a woman (and a mother!) into harm's way for the sake of some wretched political orthodoxy that would have made Cromwell blanch.

Meanwhile, the British government is responding by cutting off bilateral relations with Tehran.

The Mullahs must be quaking in their sandals by now.

Hit 'Em With Your Handbag, Tony

Taking a cue from how well the nuclear negotiations have gone, the Blairites have said that they are trying to free the fifteen British sailors and marines kidnapped by Iran by engaging the Iranians in "discreet talks." If these do not work, then the British government will be "more explicit," but have made it clear that they "expect the immediate release of our personnel."

"Immediate" in this case being defined as some indeterminate point sometime in the future after which a stern letter will be sent followed by months of crawling to the United Nations for a raft of sanctions that will be as weak as a month-old teabag.

If this had happened in the days of Thatcher, the RAF would be fully briefed on targets and a Royal Navy task force would be passing Gibraltar by now. Come back, Maggie. All is forgiven.

A Step Closer

A new development in the Britain/Iran crisis from the Times:

A website run by associates of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, reported last night that the Britons would be put before a court and indicted.

Referring to them as “insurgents”, the site concluded: “If it is proven that they deliberately entered Iranian territory, they will be charged with espionage. If that is proven, they can expect a very serious penalty since according to Iranian law, espionage is one of the most serious offences.”

As the Captain's Quarter's points out, if this is true, it's a clear violation of the Geneva conventions. You cannot charge a man with espionage when he is operating in uniform.

Memo to White Hall: This is no time to be playing "Softly, softly catchee monkey." Start getting in touch with your inner Thatcher.

Update: The Belmont Club predicts that the "human rights" crowd is going to be strangely quiet about this episode because,

As currently interpreted the Geneva Conventions only apply to individuals bent on destroying America. Individuals who blow up elementary schools, kidnap children, attack churches and mosques, kill invalids in wheelchairs, plan attacks on skyscrapers in New York, behead journalists, detonate car bombs with children to camouflage their crime, or board jetliners with explosive shoes -- all while wearing mufti or even women's clothing -- these are all considered "freedom fighters" of the most principled kind. They and they alone enjoy the protections of the Geneva Convention. As to Americans like Tucker and Menchaca or Israeli Gilad Shalit -- or these fifteen British sailors for that matter, it is a case of "what Geneva Convention?" We don't need no steenkin' Geneva Convention to try these guys as spies. That's the way the Human Rights racket works.

On The Knife Edge

Iran has seized two Royal Navy patrol boats with fifteen sailors and marines on board, claiming that the craft were in Iranian waters. Meanwhile, Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has suddenly cancelled his trip to New York, citing "America's obstruction in issuing visas," though one suspects a more immediate reason.

Clearly, Iran is trying to provoke the West into either reacting or backing down and now the ball is in White Hall's court. If Britain does not take this act of war for what it is and act accordingly, then we might as well trade in the white duster for a white flag.

Personally, I'm hoping for a quiet meeting with the Iranian ambassador that includes the words "regime", "change" and "Trident".