[NewTeaBag]

Im confused how an armed Unit of UK forces could be forcibly kidnapped and it NOT be considered an "act of war." When a foreign Naval power threatens or uses force at sea on another Navy it is clear "act of war."

Had this occurred with a US detachment there is a high probability that air cover would have been called in and a firefight at sea occurred.

To ascribe any sort of reason to this kidnapping by The Iranians is to attempt to asign reason to the unreasonable.

Iran has a professional military(Including their Navy and especially the Republican Guard Units). In my 9 mos in the Gulf, despite whatever political rhetoric was spewing between Tehran and Washington, our 2 navies always acted professionally to each other. Even when they think you may be entering a disputed area of water they would easily have gotten on the radio with the Brits and WARNED you long before attempting any sort of hijack at sea. I find it highly unlikely that this warning could have been made in that the Brits would almost definitely have withdrawn rather than force a poor situation (poor from both a tactical and poltical standpoint).

This leads me to believe that there must have been a standing order from V high up in The Iranian Govt. to make something like this happen. I don't seriously see how a professional sailor is going to commit an "act of war," on a known foreign force with clearly known and routine intentions, without authorization.

Why doesn't the press and governments start calling this what it really is, an act of war by a country which is increasingly attempting to place themselves outside the boundries of reason, professionalism, and any sense of international standards for conduct between nations.