You do know that the government isn't actually just Trump and Boris sat micro managing every decision every day? They actually have departments and delegated people who follow procedures and laws
Ships under attack in the middle east
- Thread starter XeNoN89
- Start date
You do know that the government isn't actually just Trump and Boris sat micro managing every decision every day? They actually have departments and delegated people who follow procedures and laws
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,053
He doesn't.
Soldato
Oh do bore off. It's pretty sad when you have to keep on creating new accounts just in order to peddle your delusions.
Says the poster constantly doing down the UK... it would be nice if you genuinely had some kind of concerns about these things and occasionally hit on some genuine problems by intention rather than just a puppet for those pushing anti-Western propaganda.
Unfortunate that you view anyone who posts a different opinion or perspective to you in that manner - I have certainly not carte blanche agreed with UK foreign policy.
But of course that is the way you interpret them...
We seized the ship as it was breaking EU sanctions re: Syria, we don't follow US sanctions on Iran, you don't seem to understand this thus your unhinged replies.
Iran has provide assurances re: Syria ergo the ship can be released, this was also the case and stated publicly before Iran played silly ******* and just randomly seized a British flagged vessel.
The fact that the US Justice Department wanted to prevent the release and Gibraltar was happy to release the tanker does indeed undermine the "puppet" argument... if the UK is such a puppet then why didn't Gibraltar just follow the Justice Department's request? Hmm... perhaps because Gibraltar is concerned with enforcing EU law/sanctions!
The US has a small German military presence actually, the British Army makes use of Canada (BATUS) though regularly deploys troops on exercise in the US.
The thing is, there isn't a threat of invasion there, rather pointless having troops there. On the other hand, Europe, the Middle East parts of Africa... that makes sense!
Yes. Their current antics with shipping, the mine attacks, the seizures of ships etc.. involve playing a dangerous game.
There isn't an oil blockade. Unfortunately again you're just off on some uninformed and unhinged rant! Jet fuel is subject to sanctions some named individuals and named entities are subject to economic sanctions. This has been pointed out multiple times in the thread back when you were going off about how the seizure was illegal etc..
Yeah we had massive casualties in Vietnam didn't we? Oh right... we weren't following the US there.
The US was really keen for us to take back the Falklands with military force and flew over to have a meeting with Thatcher to say, go for it we really want you to fight the Argies.... oh actually, maybe not.
Obviously we only went into Sierra Leone because the US got involved... Oh wait, they weren't.
Oh and Kosovo was totally Bill Clinton pressuring Tony Blair and not the other way around... oh no, apparently not.
And Libya was totally Obama telling the UK and France to get involved... oh wait a minute, nope.
Obama was totally going to bomb Syria when the red line was crossed and the UK would have just followed... oh no the UK Parliament voted against it then Obama decided to not act unilaterally/without the UK on board too.
The facts just don't support your utter nonsense. The US is a very powerful and very close ally, that doesn't mean we always do what they want or we don't act independently or indeed much for action in some circumstance.
To be fair the US was pressuring for a political solution - even Argentina thought if they upped the ante it would force us into a political solution - we actually played a bit dirty to force Argentina into escalating to a shooting war in a way the US couldn't have much of a say in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTRHJQFbN8o (think that is the right video)
EDIT: What my point actually was, was that we were somewhat under the US thumb over that one even if we did defy them.
Last edited:
Well we weren't though, we didn't "defy" them, they weren't in a position to give orders in the first place!
The RM Sniper vs Warship in South Georgia was outstanding!
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
Aw 
Who was WinstonSmith? The weirdo who kept returning to post nonsense about ships and submarines?
Who was WinstonSmith? The weirdo who kept returning to post nonsense about ships and submarines?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,452
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49379144
So what happens now, do they have to re-seize the ship now there's a warrant for its arrest from the US ?
So what happens now, do they have to re-seize the ship now there's a warrant for its arrest from the US ?
Don
I don't think they have any jurisdiction here, so probably no.
That depends on the Gibraltar court. Unlike the conspiracy nutters seem to think it isn’t just the case that the US can say “seize that ship” and the UK just does. This time it is supposed to be links to the republican guard.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,129
Hopefully the Iranians will respond by releasing the British oil tanker
Soldato
Wait, so just like when they seized it, Gibraltar are following the EU direction and releasing the tanker, rather than following the instruction of our "American overlord masters".... Well blimey, what do the resident shills say about this?
Caporegime
Ohhhh shhhills, where are youuuu? Come out come out wherever you are!
Agent Orange . . . or his British proxy
Do you feel stupid now?