Ransom MoneyFollow

Ooh this is a tricksy one, and no mistake.

Recap:
Those 15 Sailors and Marines were snatched from Iraqi waters by Iranians out to score brownie points with the rest of the Arab World.

They were clearly coerced into making pro-Iranian, anti-Western statements, and wisely played along and were released after a couple of weeks.

Update:
As they were on active duty throughout the episode, they are bound by the usual Ministry of Defence rules about talking to the press. To paraphrase the code of conduct, their contact with the media must be in an official capacity (formal press conferences etc.)

Unusually, the MoD has allowed them to sell their stories to the press, who are able to pay big bucks (E.g. the ********** Munter 'Leading Seaman Faye Turney' is alleged to have been paid about $200K).

This has induced some delicious Tabloid Hypocrisy

Widows of soliders who died in Iraq are asking why these survivors are now rich, while they live on a crappy widow's pension.

So now the tabloids are howling with outrage about the money they paid to the freed hostages.



So should serving members of the military be allowed to sell their stories to the gutter press while still serving?

Somehow I'm uncomfortable with it.

The service men and women who were taken captive are just as entitled to make money off selling their story as are the widows of those killed in the war. If either party is unable to sell their story, tough ****.

[pedant]
Courts Martial
[/pedant]

I don't believe they should be able to. It's not like the military isn't paying them for their service in the first place, right? I also seem to recall some law stating that criminals can't profit from book or movie sales based on their own crime (hello, OJ!).

A bit of an Apples Vs Bananas comparison.

War Widows are free to sell their story to the press, serving officers and ranks are not (usually).

Andy McNab had to wait until he was demobbed before publishing "Bravo Two Zero".

Not sure who comes out of this looking worse. Tabloids who pay for stories then trash the process, the hostages cashing in, the tabloid readers for guzzling down the stories, or the MoD.

Actually, more the politicians in charge of the MoD, clearly hoping to cash in some popularity.

Seems sick whichever way.

As for the hostages' conduct while in Iran, what else were they to do? Risk their lives and an international escalation by pissing off the Iranians more than necessary? I'd have done the same.

I suspect we may have another difference between yer average Brit sailor and the average GI Joe. Trained to understand the wider political context of their operations, and briefed to ensure the bigger picture takes precedence over any Rambo style martyrdoms.

What say you tarv?

That might be relevant if we were talking about soldiers committing atrocities and writing memoirs about it (hello, My Lai).

Why not? They're providing a factual account of an event in their lives. If I write a book about going to china on business and not being able to come back, what's wrong with that?

While I agree they should be allowed, I dissagree with the reason they are being allowed. This is strictly for publicity. If these sailors sell their story it gets into the news. The world hears that they were tortured into saying they were in Iranian waters and the British military gains some credibility.

Personally I'm not entirely convinced they were tortured into anything or that they weren't in Iranian waters for that matter. We have absolutely no idea where they really were, and I'm more inclined to believe they were in Iranian waters than to believe that the Iranian military went out of their way to sail out of their waters and capture a few British sailors. It's just a little far fetched to me. The publicity isn't worth the possible repercussions unless there really was a violation.

The Iranians aren't a stupid people, they're actually one of the smartest nations. They are also very proud, they don't bow to pressure (and they shouldn't). I think the British sailed into their waters, were detained, told they would be detained until they admitted to the public that they had trespassed and then released to keep things from escalating further than neccessary. It could very well be a mistake, maybe they didn't realize they were in Iranian waters at first.

I don't agree with everything Iran is doing, but I don't think they're as bad as they're being made out to be.

Is there a smart nation listing somewhere?

Just curious where the US and Jolly ol England would fall on the global smart list, and how they may compare to other countries.

Btw my opinion on the OP: Most voluntarily give up some freedoms when they choose to enlist in the military. I see no reason why they can't wait until they've served their time to get over-paid for exploiting themselves.

Edited, Apr 9th 2007 7:28pm by Elinda

But would the nations with the high sales numbers be the smarter ones or the other way around??

Yes.

Nexa

Bhod said




I would imagine that this could be the start of a trend.


After all, a couple of weeks sitting around in Iran, getting your face on the telly (the average Brits ultimate dream) and getting a free flight home wearing a new suit, and clutching a souvenir bag filled with Persian sweets, pistachio nuts, CDs, books, and vases, has got to be far more preferable to hanging around in Southern Iraq waiting for a recently liberated (but still ungrateful) Iraqi to blow you and your Landrover into a squillion pieces.

If all you have to do is surrender to the Iranians at the first chance you get, and then wear pyjamas for a bit, while writing letters (criticizing Brit foreign policy!!)and planning how to spend your 150k, I would have thought that these wont be the last to be taken prisoner in some sort of 'disputed' border area.

I suppose one way of discouraging this sort of very un 'British' way of behaving would be to ask the Iranians (next time it happens) to do a bit of 'waterboarding' or perhaps, **** on a bible, or even the trusty old fall-backs, use of attack-dogs and rape with broom handles. You know... 'torture' them a bit. (not that any of the stuff mentioned is actually torture in the legal sense, you understand). That'll teach them that enforcing trade restrictions against the illegal importation of cars into a war zone, is a job not to be taken lightly.

It seems to work for the US of A. That should go a long way to restoring the tradition of 'name, rank, and serial number only'.

And as an afterthought, I would hope that the next time a trout like Faye Turney is paraded on the telly, she would be FULLY veiled. No bl00dy wonder theres a lot of uphill gardners in the Navy if the standard of WRN is that low nowadays.

I don't think he offended teh gheys.