« Major League POTUS - Season Openers | Main | Adventures in the surreal estate trade »

Those arrogant Brits

Well, it's an odd situation, but I find myself agreeing with Iran's president on the British hostage issue -- the Brits are being a bit arrogant about things.

I didn't think so at first, but after reading my fellow New Hampshirite Mark Steyn's piece on the matter, I came to realize it.

The British are sending a delegation to Iran to apologize for the incident in the hopes of winning their sailors' and marines' freedom. This is the height of arrogance:

By the Iranians' own initial admission, the incident took place in Iraqi waters, not Iranian -- meaning that Britain has nothing to apologize over.

HMS Cornwall, the mother ship for the boat taken, is not acting purely as a Royal Navy vessel. She is on loan to the United Nations, acting as the base for the UN-sanctioned security patrols of the area. So while the Gobs might not have been wearing blue helmets, they were acting under the authority of the United Nations -- and as such, the UN is obligated to defend them.

Finally, Steyn points out that the Tars are not just British subjects, but citizens of the European Union -- and the assault against them is one against the EU. They are the ones who need to prove that the EU means something, that their citizens can expect to be protected, and not any single nation.

By issuing this apology, Great Britain is rejecting the notions of consensus-building, of the power of the coalitions of which it is a member, and acting unilaterally, practically a "rogue state" in this matter.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Those arrogant Brits:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Bush prods Iran on hostages

Comments (39)

The Iranian position is bot... (Below threshold)
Oxen:

The Iranian position is both inconsistant and a load of bull. But it's misleading to say they admit to the search taking place in Iraqi waters, since they released a second set of coordinates for the capture (in Iranian waters) shortly after announcing a the first coordinates (in Iraqi waters).

Other than that though, I think the post is funny.

Bazarro world: Wrong is now... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Bazarro world: Wrong is now right while right is now wrong. ww

Jay,Do you think the... (Below threshold)
Allen:

Jay,
Do you think the UK should hold its breath waiting for the UN or EU to bail the 15 out? You have to remember that France is part of the EU. I think the UK is trying everything they can short of armed conflict to resolve this matter.

What happens if Iran doesn't accept the apology? Will the EU then support the UK for armed response?

I don't know what's worse, ... (Below threshold)
Wanderlust:

I don't know what's worse, the keystone kops kidnapping routine by the Iranians, or the complete and utter neutering of the Union Jack.

Meanwhile, Churchill is spinning in his grave, and Chamberlain is toasting from his.

I have to wonder: is this what Rome was like, when they thought so little of their nation that they could not raise an army to defend against the Vandal hordes?

Must be.

I don't believe the West has fallen; rather, I think it's rotted from within, like a corpse that doesn't know - or won't admit - that it's been long dead.

The Europeans are finding o... (Below threshold)
kim:

The Europeans are finding out what happens when they organize their polity around their marketplace, but don't secure it.
=======================================

This is win-win for the Ira... (Below threshold)
kim:

This is win-win for the Iranians. At any moment, they can announce an error, and cave, earning plaudits. In the meantime, they can enjoy the spectacle of EU/British and UK/US faultlines jiggling under the stress. And of course, Russsia and China are 'interested' spectators.

But watch the cognitive dissonance of the leftists. Let's hear from a few prominent locals.
============================

Further, the U.K. is a memb... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Further, the U.K. is a member of NATO. And IIRC, NATO's charter states that any act of war on one member of NATO is considered an act of war on all members of NATO.

'Our' world bodies are repeatedly proving themselves impotent. It's time such as these that the UN, EU, and NATO are tested to determine their worth. It's times after these that we should re-evaluated whether their worth justifies their cost.

Despite the Princess Of Sna... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Despite the Princess Of Snark, nee Kim, vomiting some of her usual snark, here's a response from a "prominent local": I agree with her and I agree with Jay. Kinda sad to see the Brits do that. Raegan must be rolling over in his grave.

By the way Kim is "cognitive dissonance" the new phrase you learned today?

Naw, Hugh, just having spec... (Below threshold)
kim:

Naw, Hugh, just having special fun pointing it out today.
=================================

Anyone else think "hughie" ... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Anyone else think "hughie" is an asshole?

Britain may want to see a d... (Below threshold)

Britain may want to see a diplomatic end to this tense situation. However, Britain cannot allow Iran to dictate where the water boundaries are and impact the British or U.S. efforts to provide security to Iraq's oil terminals or stop ships with illegal smuggling from the area.

Jhow - I second that nomina... (Below threshold)
Mike:

Jhow - I second that nomination, do we have a third?

Here's the third for the tu... (Below threshold)
Old Coot:

Here's the third for the turd.

Time for the Brits to think... (Below threshold)
Corky Boyd:

Time for the Brits to think about leaving the EU and making their bed with the US and Canada. They have a lot more in common with their North American allies than they do with a French and German dominated EU.

The EU culture of cowardice, led by the French, will ultimately lead to a repeat of 1939-40. You simply cannot summon up courage after generations of running away. Hopefully the Brits will see the light before they become infected with the French disease.


I feel so hurt. Well actual... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

I feel so hurt. Well actually that's a lie. I mean proud to be nominated by the extgremely goofy fringe of Whizbang. What makes it even more funnier is that i agreed with Jay and Kim. Keep up the good work goofballs.

Stick around, Hugh; I've fo... (Below threshold)
kim:

Stick around, Hugh; I've found that when you don't resort to snark you do have a thought or two. Lame, misguided, but not so closely following blindly the usual talking points. Congratulations, I think you can think.
=================================

CB, I agree; functionally, ... (Below threshold)
kim:

CB, I agree; functionally, GB is more a part of the Commonwealth, including that apostate colony the US of A, than of Europe. The world's functioning civil authority today is a variable coalition of the legitimate democracies. Iran's action is jiggling the web of this authority.
================

It doesn't seem to be just ... (Below threshold)
kim:

It doesn't seem to be just nomination, either; rather, election by acclamation.
========================

When I elected I will proud... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

When I elected I will proudly serve Princess Snark

Can't be stumbling over you... (Below threshold)
kim:

Can't be stumbling over your lines, now.
=======================

Hey Paul; you don't think I... (Below threshold)
kim:

Hey Paul; you don't think Iran can dictate where the water boundaries are? How about when they have 'Da Bum'?
=======================================

Hugh:<br... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Hugh:


When I elected I will proudly serve [as] Princess Snark

Congratulations, on your new title. I present to all, Hugh, Princess of Snark.

The Spider and the Fly.... (Below threshold)
kim:

The Spider and the Fly.

You don't see Ahmadinejad taking to the air, lately, do you?
=================================

Whooey, just past equinox a... (Below threshold)
kim:

Whooey, just past equinox and there's cobwebs in the garden shed.
===================================

It should be Prince [Snark... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

It should be Prince [Snark]Mike....don't be tossing gay labels around like the homophobe you probably are.

Try Riehl World View on 'De... (Below threshold)
kim:

Try Riehl World View on 'Democrats strong on defense', today. Suck the juice out of that blue dog bottle.
==========================

Hugh gaily godwins gaiety?<... (Below threshold)
kim:

Hugh gaily godwins gaiety?
==================

As usual, When do the bombs... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

As usual, When do the bombs from the U.S. and U.K start falling on Iran? No one else has the balls to defend themselves and their citizens, and with one more dhimmi win we'll be back to the Dimmy Carter days when our leaders will join those without balls. How many billons of dollars have we wasted on the totally worthless U.N.?

Steyn's article is good and... (Below threshold)

Steyn's article is good and makes a darn good point.

We've put our faith (even those of us who are constantly UN bashing) in institutions that are fundamentally illegitimate.

To be a "nation" there needs to be some element of common identity. In the case of the EU it seems there is not. If citizens of the EU do not react "they've taken our people" then the British sailors are not "our people."

And the UN is as bad. Or worse. Because there is no feeling at all that the UN has been transgressed upon. There is no common feeling and no common sensibility and that's not because conservatives in the US aren't supportive enough of the grand vision of the United Nations. There is no "United" involved.

Grim, over on Blackfive, made the shocking observation the other day that while we all take civilization for granted, that the "state of nature" exists in the areas between nations. There essentially is no law because there is no social contract, no agreements, no binding together in cooperation. Pretending there is does no one any good. Steyn makes the shocking observation that one side of this conflict is pretending that there is law between nations and the other side is not even making a token effort (except to their advantage) and violates borders and the geneva conventions and anything else it d*mn well pleases.

Meanwhile some UN commission on human rights or other passes a resolution so against the foundational principles of the west that it's not even funny. We are now supposed to stop bashing Islam or talking like terrorism has anything to do with Islam and we aren't supposed to defame anyone's religion. Free speech now "officially" does not include speech about religion. Islamic states pushed this through. They don't want to hear people talk bad about their prophet, or make cartoons they don't like, or point out that the terrorists blowing stuff up and a whole heck of a lot of the "street" that has a party every time they do, are claiming religious motivation.

Can't talk about that anymore without violating a UN commissions passed resolution.

But we're supposed to believe that the space between nations is governed by civilization, by laws and agreements and all that good stuff.

We bind ourselves to these one-sided delusions. Better to look at what is true, what Grim explained quite well, that the space between nations exists in a state of nature, a state of fundamental conflict, and that the conflict goes from cold all the way to hot but is *always* in conflict. The interests of one nation, even friendly with another, are still the interests of that nation. Russia and China and Brazil and Germany and France and England and the US have different interests and are, at some level, in conflict. Always. The UN makes as little difference to this as the EU.

If you don't think so, just remember that you have given up your right to free speech in the interest of supporting "your" UN and the international resolutions it makes to define your behavior.

What Steyn said should be obvious to anyone. What is right is right, even if China raises its hand and opposes a measure, and wrong is wrong, even if the human rights commission declares that only approved speech is free.

Hugh, the Princess of Snark... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Hugh, the Princess of Snark, tossed his ignorance around and blurted:

It should be Prince [Snark]Mike....don't be tossing gay labels around like the homophobe you probably are.

Unsurprisingly, you leap to a flawed conclusion. My comment was emasculating, not homophobic. ..so don't be tossing your ignorance 'round.

Actually, since Dan Rather ... (Below threshold)

Actually, since Dan Rather has apparently declined the title, perhaps Hugh could be named "Queen of the Space Unicorns".

Yes Mike, exactly what a ho... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Yes Mike, exactly what a homophobe would do....label another man as gay. Congrats, you showed what you really believe.

Hugh, Prince of Snark, crie... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Hugh, Prince of Snark, cried:
Yes Mike, exactly what a homophobe would do....label another man as gay. Congrats, you showed what you really believe.

What I really believe is that your very limited knowledge (or expansive ignorance if you prefer) apparently fails to include the concept of emasculation.... which is why you moronically believe that simply because a male is gay that they are feminine. Your recitation of the stereotypical view of a gay male reviews what a closed minded bigot you truly are.

I hear that people that accuse others of being homophobes are really homophobes themselves.

Oops..First line s... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Oops..

First line should read:

Hugh, Princess of Snark, ...

My appologies, Princess.

Keep rationalizing Mike and... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Keep rationalizing Mike and continue showing your true side. Sad but not unexpected.

There are some who would re... (Below threshold)
kim:

There are some who would resent your implication that gay men are emasculated, Hugh. Show this thread to a gay friend or two; you are ignorant.
=================================

No Kim, I am gay.... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

No Kim, I am gay.

Keep rationalizing Mike ... (Below threshold)
_Mike_:

Keep rationalizing Mike and continue showing your true side. Sad but not unexpected.

Okay, Princess.

Then why did you confound e... (Below threshold)
kim:

Then why did you confound emasculating and gayness?
===================================




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy