America has kidnapped many Iranians so far in iraq and Mr Taheri (whose articles are either anti arab or anti islam) has not shown his disgust yet .

fatima, Bristol , UK

"Iran does not threaten other countries."
Then I guess all that "Death to America", "Death to Israel" (and lately "Death to Britain") stuff for the past 25+ years must be the result of bad Farsi translations.

Dean, Washington, DC

Iran was a democracy before the CIA overthrew the government. Iran does not threaten other countries. Leave that to the US, israel and Britain. They want Iran's oil and don't want the country trading oil in Euros. That's what this is about - bankers.

john, los angeles,

Steve
Mot any relationship with Steve Jobs have you? Here is one comment that takes the nuts and bolts out of you. I mean you talk of 7th century. We are in 2007. I don’t know what century this is but Iran has left the Britains free. What is eating you? You don’t like Mullahs tell them. You were on in 7th century I was not. This Mr.Bob J., Carver, Mass. USA is right He says war is war. Then all is history and propagandas and you seem to you be fanning these gossips and all the lot. Why? You do not like Mullahs that is your problem. Why do we have to like or dislike what we like or dislike. Tell you what Steve see the vet and then come back May be you will have the Darwin theory some true.

Firozali A.,Mulla MBA PhD, Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania

To Jayne: Iran does not hang women for rape. They stone them. Since a woman's word is worth much less than a man's, according to islam, Rape victums are often made out to be adulterers who were "asking for it." And adultry (for females) is punishable by death.

An Iranian-American, los angeles,

Here's a shocking suggestion:

Would we be better off in the fight against Islamo-fascism with a re-armed Japan and Germany than with a Britain so weakened by Liberal policies? The times they are achanging. Maybe it's time to think outside the box when it comes to choosing allies we can really count on when the going gets tough.

Again, this isn't a knock against the British sailors. They were only carrying out their Britsh policies. After all, a helicopter monitoring the situation from overhead was recalled to the ship and the support ship did nothing. Everyone was under orders not to fight. I know that individual British personnel's blood still runs as red as ever and they would still die for their flag.

But it seems that Britain is more concerned about getting along with terrorists than standing up for itself these days.

AZGuy, Chandler, AZ

Excellent article. I am an American, and unfortunately we have been relegated back to our position ,of the worlds policeman. I fear Iran , Syria, Saudi, etc. will have free rein for the forseeable future.

We will exit Iraq next August. What CNN will run for us, 24/7 has them worried.

God save the Queen !

Dan Green, Palm Beach, USA, Florida

There are more creative solutions than "low level warfare". Offer immigration, citizenship and settlement help to people in a few key sectors : qualified university teachers, nuclear scientists, oil industry engineers, high-ranking intelligence officers. Encourage the smuggling of subsidised oil products out of the country. Encourage capital flight with tax breaks and confidential accounts. Mandate disinvestment from companies doing business in Iran.

Sen McGlinn, Leiden, The Netherlands

As an American, I am not familiar with Royal Marine protocol when captured. I would like to see some comments from those who have served Her Majesty's Service or the Royal Marines. Please comment on the behavior of the 15 hostages while in Iranian captivity.

To me, it seems unbecoming of a soldier/marine to act in such a way with one's captors. Comments from Her Majesty's subjects appreciated as well.

Kevin, Elgin, IL /USA

Mullah's are the servant of British ,if stay in power will destroy Iran and Middle East.

Ardy, Oakland, USA/Cal

Back in 1989 Amir Taheri was exposed as a journalistic felon. The book he published the year before, Nest of Spies, examined the rule and fall of the Shah of Iran. Taheri received many respectful reviews, but in The New Republic Shaul Bakhash, a reigning doyen of Persian studies, checked Taheri's footnotes. Suddenly a book review became an investigative exposé. Bakhash, a history professor at George Mason University and a former fellow at Princeton's Institute for Advanced Study, detailed case after case in which Taheri cited nonexistent sources, concocted nonexistent substance in cases where the sources existed and distorted the substance beyond recognition when it was present. Taheri "repeatedly refers us to books where the information he cites simply does not exist," Bakhash wrote. "Often the documents cannot be found in the volumes to which he attributes them.... [He] repeatedly reads things into the documents that are simply not there."

Plus ca change!

W Dean, Manchester, England

I think it is interesting to turn a situation around and see how it would stand up under scrutiny. Imagine what the world opinion would be if the British captured 15 Iranians in Iranian waters, blindfolded them while cocking their weapons, played psychological games with them, put them on TV, and forced them to confess, forced them to wear western garb, and then returned them as "gifts" to the Iranian regime a few weeks later. The "blame Blair blame Bush" liberals couldn't get to their computer keyboards fast enough to light up every liberal blog and "letters to the editors" section fast enough.

Dave, Seattle, USA

1979? Seventh century? In AD 260 the Roman Emperor Valerian was seized in a parley by the Sassanids. He lived the rest of his life in humiliating captivity.

Roderick Dunn, Ivyland, Pa

Mr. Taheri will forgive my distrust of the motives of a man who suggests that the lives of our troops might be well-spent in a "low-intensity conflict" - a conflict that, coincidentally, will not remotely threaten to include him in its casualty lists. I believe such callous disdain for the lives of our servicemen and women only drives home how wrongheaded his proposal is. Our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines defend our interests with their lives - and they are not to be frittered away as Mr. Taheri desires. Regime change or rapprochement are valid objectives - but not some bloody and inconclusive proxy war like the Americans fought against the Sandinistas in Nicaraugua in the 80s - which was funded by arms sales to Iran, so perhaps Mr. Taheri's "undeclared war... since 1979" isn't as accurate as he'd like us to think either.

Diogenes, Sinope,

This incident shows how easy it is for Britain or America to create an incident that could be developed to any depth or extent. And further emphasising that point is that none of this article’s commentators have considered that aspect. Tony Blair also did nothing to deny this point by insisting that he had made no concessions. Clearly President Ahmadinejad did the right thing, but it hasn’t prevented him from being labelled the troublemaker.

Henry Percy, London, UK

"England expects every man to do his duty" So, what was that duty? Apparently, your duty consists of obeying lawful orders. What were the orders? Apparently, the Royal Navy ordered the sailors to surrender.

They did so. If the British people are now unhappy with the sailors "submissive" behavior, they ought to consider demanding that Her Majesty's government issue different orders!

Aubrey Yates, Houston, TX

Jayne,

Atefah Sahaaleh, 15 August 2004, she was 16 years old.

John, Fullerton, Orange/Cal

I think this article goes too far when it says Arabs regard Ahmadinejad as the heir to Nasser. After all, the Iranians are Indo-Europeans, just like us. I firmly believe there is a two-tier system in Islam whereby Arabs are regarded as superior to Iranians, Pakistanis and other non-Arab Muslims. This may well cause trouble further down the line.

JL, Redditch, UK

How come "shows of power" like this can be made by Iran and they get away with it? Aside from the fact it is pointless posturing, and all it does is make Iran look foolish in the end, maybe they wouldn't be so quick to violate international law if we did blow one of their ships out of water. I think it's quite laughable to even hold them as comparable to the US/UK/etc coalition, and I think yet another stunt like this should have Iran on a very narrow ledge.

In the playground of the world, Iran is the insecure school bully who somehow manages to terrify the majority while still not being the largest kid on the playing field. All it needs is a good thumping and several therapy sessions, and the rest of us can get on with actually benefitting the world.

Martin E, St Andrews, Scotland

A G Khan, I challenge you to name any western country that is a theocracy.

C Heathcote, brick, NJ USA

Misguided and foolish George and Tony gave Iran the best possible gift of removing Saddam. Their idiocy persists by pursuing "democratisation" of a diverse set of religious and ethnic factions. What they should do instead is install the next Sunni thug in power who will control the country and antagonise Iran in the manner the author of the article suggests.

Jasper, Greenwich,

What a superb analysis.
Amir Tehari's insights are fresh and have the ring of truth to them.

Alex, Vancouver, BC

Dear Sir, I am troubled by your analogy with the incident you relate to Hazrat Saad Bin Abi Waqqas in early Islamic history. Parading prisnors of war as you claim to be a unique islamic tradition or practice! If you must critisize Iran kindly leave Islam out of it. I challenge you to critisize any westren country by attacking Chritianity or Israel by profaning Judaism. Are all westren nations such models of their respective religions?

A. G Khan, Atlanta, USA

People like Woody are living with their heads buried in the sand. I suppose hostage taking, video taping of beheadings of innocents, flying airliners into skyscrapers and a goal of international genocide of all "Infidels" can somehow be justified in their minds. My god, what is happening in the West when so many of us support those who seek our destruction?

Anti-Woody, Atlanta, USA

Lucid analysis, though I think the West (read US and UK) has stood neither completely impotent nor totally innocent. Consider, for instance, its significant support for Iraq through the 1980's and the Iran-Iraq war.

For those wringing hands over "western imperialism" and its nefarious agency in the tides of time, recall Persia's splendid legacy as an empire that still holds minority nations within its borders. At least today's international leaders are tempered by classical notions of liberalism.

Bill Bennington, indianapolis, USA

As I watched today's group press conference with The Fifteen unfold, I supposed that during interrogation their Iranian captors must have been chuckling to themselves, "With enemies like these....who needs friends!?" The behavior of these Royal Marines and sailors (and the government which they serve) can only embolden Iran and other tryannical regimes who will search for new ways to humilliate and blackmail the West.

Thomas W., Royal Oak, Michigan

Steve, I think you're making that oft-repeated mistake of dumping all the Middle Eastern countries in together. Since when does Iran hang womn for rape?

Jayne, Orange, CA

Western countries should start by enforcing strict sanctions against any company doing business with Iran. Coalition forces should continue to detain and question any Iranian Revolutionary Guard soldiers found in Iraq. Military forces, especially Naval forces in the Gulf should send the message that Iran is vulnerable and cannot take for granted that piracy will be tolerated. British credibility has been sorely wounded by this affair. We would not allow our soldiers or sailors to let themselves be taken captive without a fight!! What in the world are the leaders thinking, to order soldiers and sailors not to defend themselves? What are they then, soldiers or bait? It is simply shocking that the British Navy could have been so foolish in the first place.
Susan, Raleigh, North Carolina,USA

Susan, Raleigh, USA/NC

John Burack:
A tip of the hat and a raise of the glass to what you said. I am so sick of narcissistic ninnies who posture through a barrage of Fanon quotes to give themselves credibility as "progressive" thinkers. Beneath the surface lies such a frightening, rigid ideology of self-loathing. The masters to whom these sycophants choose to bow are elevated to idols simply by claiming their anti-West, anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-Bush credentials. Sad pathetic lot.

shockcorridor, Austin,

Sorry Sir, but which nations of the world gave UK the power to decide what's right or wrong in the Middle East? Which of the so called western countries gave UK or US any responsability or delegation? Why are you tryng to show the whole thing as to be a football match between Western "democracies" and the "scorpion of Iran"? First of all, USA do not represent America, neither UK represents Europe. You want to picture Iran as "the great western problem" while the Biggest Comunist and Atheist Country of the globe (aka China) with a full nuclear arsenal is spreading its comunist influence in Asia, signing strategic treaties with Russia and India. But for USA and UK, those are little details... So the easiest choice is to play old fashioned politics in the Middle East and before the very eyes of Russia who invested billions on the iranian nuclear project. How clever...and all with the slogan: "We, the democracy doers". While in Afghanistan Talibans regain power ...

Marcelo, Santa Teresita, Argentina

The mullahs in Iran and most other Middle Eastern nations are dictators. Therefore, the people of the region do not have a say in their own futures and will not until the tyrannical governments are gone. Iran's mullahs' don't play by any set of constricting rules so they have an advantage over the West in tactics. The taking of the 15 British hostages shows just how 'emasculated' the West is in dealing with Islamic fascism and terrorism. I agree with the thrust of this article that more heat needs to be applied to Iran and that they should receive a dose of their own medicine.

Denny, Raleigh, NC

Countries in the middle east have existed as an autocratic theocracies since the seventh centuary so I don't think that 'one side winning and one loosing' is a realistic outcome any time soon.

It's far more likely they'll just run out of oil before they become liberal democracies and we'll give up caring because these nations seem genetically pre-disposed to annihilate each other.

Iran is simply an irritation which we could crush if we really wanted to but - like North Korea - it's in our best intrests to leave the despots in in-situ because the ensueing chaos would be even more annoying.

In reality Iran isn't the threat the media percieve it to be. Even if it had nuclear weapons it wouldn't use them because their sole objective is to inspire terror not pre-empt their own distruction.

We're in far more danger from crossing the road, McDonalds and venomous spiders than we are from Mr Ahmadinejad and Muslims are far more in danger from other muslims than they are from us

martin carnaffin, Nottingham, uk

I am 73 years old. I always remember the Battle of Britton,
the Blitz, Dunkirk, the sinking of the Bismark. Battles where many people died that made England famous. Now I hear these Soldiers and Sailors tell of their ordeal in Iran. When you go to war you go to fight and live or die. You make every effort to survive but you make every effort not to be captured. You always fight no matter what. You die you die. You are their to fight not to give in. The same day that they were released 4 British soldiers were killed. What of them. Did they die in vain. No, they fought the fight.
These men did not. I am proud of the British people. They are fighters. But you do not need men that forgot the fight, forgot why there were there and chickened out to save themselves. Nobody wants to die. But war is war and you must fight for what is right. Then they lied when they said they did not say they were not in Iranian water. They did say that on TV. I wish them luck.

Bob J., Carver, Mass. USA

I am amazed at how much we in the West fear Iran - we fear their reactions to our "provocations," we fear hearing ourselves critisized in their propoganda, we fear the censure of their supposedly unified and loyal populace, we fear the moral outrage of our own leftists with their made-up history. The mullahs in Iran walk on thin stilts and we fear them as giants. Just like Saddam, they are full of sound and fury, but signify nothing - and just like Saddam, no one will think seriously of them starting the day after they are gone. The mullahs are weak, divided, brutal, and rule over a discontented populace being further impoverished every day. Let the Iranians themselves deal with what happens inside their own borders - but any event that has or may occur outside their borders (including nuclear development) should be met resolutely from the natural position of strength the West has

Paul, New York, USA

Careful! Americans and the Brits are crazy and unpredictable - especially in war. Let's review - Sunni Arabs condemn Hiz'B'Allah last summer, Saudi Arabia buys billions of weapon systems, 4 American Carrier groups are in range of Iran, The French (in a rare moment out of dry dock) has the De Gaulle on station and HMS Ark Royal may be enroute.

"Operation Great Satan" may build a coalition of sorts and launch a massive blitz on the top 20% of Iran's ruling clerics using cruise and conventional missiles, attack aircraft and old school special ops.

While Iran's rulers have some redundancy in their command and control posts, these are actually quite few in number as are the few calling the shots. Any wanna be 'supreme leader'
had best think fast before his own people stomp his guts out in the street.

courtney, chattanooga, TN, America

Steve,
You're right.
The women of Iran. according to our allies the MEK, are crying for the same kind of democracy we have given Iraq.

Tom, Tallahassee, Florida

We should go further adn repay them with their silver by stirring up and supporting insurgent activity in Iran.

The reason they kidnapped British sailors and marines was because of their not unjustified perception of our weakness. Western liberals' national self-hatred and appeasement of aggressive non-Caucasian opponents is always correctly interpreted by the latter as a potentially fatal weakness.

Traditionally the Royal Navy always used to have a proactive, aggressive policy of engagement. Has it been nobbled by those pro-Moslem appeasers in the Foreign Office?

Gervas Douglas, Andorra la Vella, Andorra

A brilliantly informative article, many thanks. Hezbollah, Iranian controlled, sparked crisis with Israel by kidnapping a sentry. Iran sparks mini crises at will, and Khomeini's doctrine is to create crisis, to cause instabiltiy, to provoke, to cause unease. Iranian policy is working well, and the liberal West has no answer at all to this determined, long term, guerrila strategy.The situation is strikingly akin to the 1930's and Hitler's 'struggle', Mein Kampf, to unseat liberal democracy with his claims of victimisation, his outrageous demands, his bullying, his permanent political violence.

Ibnez, Homerton, UK

Simply put, the British mother ship, a destroyer I believe, should have had Her guns aimed directly at or the vicinity of the alleged smuggling ship that the 15 crew members were headed for.
When the Iranian Naval vessel was seen and it appeared they were acting in a hostile manner, the Commander of the mother ship should have simply blown them out of the water.
End of story!
You can't tell me that with the sophisticated equipment to see long range or with direct communication with the 15 crew members who were close enough to see what the Iranians had in mind that the Mother ship couldn't have simply put the Iranians in their gunsights and justifiably defended her members from an aggressive vessel coming towards them.
Didn't want to provoke an act of war is what were fed by the British. How about the act of war by Iran and simply defending your ships and it's members?
The end result would be no hostages and it would cause Iran to think twice next time it tried something similar.

Mike D., New York, U.S.A.,

The scorpion is not one. The west has a to bad record not to be called the same. The west should stop talking with weapons, but with diplomacy and money. Encouraging cooperation rather than fight could be possible. But do the west really want peace and harmony in the oil-producing countries, or they onlt want control.

Oluf D. Røe, Trondheim, Norway

Good article. Might I suggest that as thanks for releasing the hostages, Britain present 15 Tom Tom Sat Nav devices to the Iranians.

Then tell them they now have no excuse for making more errors, and will be blown up if they do.

Alex, Tunbridge,

I love this from Woody, "self-actualized pan-Arab or pan-Muslim leader." Combining Western-style psychobabble with Middle Eastern-style post-colonial babble. Good job. Of coures, Iran is neither Arab, pan or otherwise, nor is it pan-Muslim, since it is Shiite. As for the Officer Krupki excuse making for tinpots like Ahmadinejad, when will Marxists and other lefties stop condenscending to the wretched of the earth, treat them like the responsible human beings they are, and hold the responsible?

Jon Burack, Stoughton, Wisconsin

I've come to realize that there is and always will be a small group of people in the West who could find their grandmothers on their knees before the Iranian mullahs who are about to saw her head off with a large knife, and those people would sigh, shake their heads and ask, "Grandmother, what have you done to wrong the mullahs?"

T. Roth, Danbury, CT,

The West is soft, self-absorbed and poorly educated. They have been
convinced that "being nice" is all that is necessary for world peace.
When the blood of their families is running in the streets they will
perhaps respond. But not a moment sooner. Iran knows this and
Britain just confirmed it.

True Larsen, San Francisco, ca

Well OK, if we're going to bicker over past injustices as justification for current injustices, we'll just be stuck in an endless loop of back-biting and even worse.

Iran's stated goals of destruction of another sovereign state (Israel) goes against every concept of peaceful co-existence. Their pursuit of violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty has already been decried by the IAEA and UNSC.

There's no equivocating in the above two sentences. They are gross violations of every known convention that has governed civilized nations: stated goals of genocide, and gross violations of international treaties.

I challenge anyone to find anything even remotely comparable in the last century, as Woody states, that the West has perpetrated against Iran and its people.

bjjfiter, Annapolis,

This is the first article I have read that states that British forces' rules of engagement preclude self-defense in the Gulf theatre. If that is the case, then the coalition's war planners, whether at the front or comfortably removed, bear severe moral responsibility both for this unfortunate incident and for the criticism being heaped upon the sailors and marines for having submitted to their kidnapping. I am a Yank, and I want us to win this New Hundred Years War, yet why didn't our commanders coordinate battleground tactics with our best and most faithful ally? The 101st defended itself when engaged by Iranian forces, and evaded capture thereby. I only wish that your fellows would have been able to do the same. In the meantime, let's hope that these necessary boarding missions will continue, although with appropriate force protection in future.

Ferguson, New York, USA

Quite right. What is irritating is the patronising tone of Woody Mclean and his ilk, who assume that all non Western countries are somehow different to us, more likely to behave altruistically, and to need the sympathy and protection of people like him.
Pan Arab? Pan Muslim? These are fantasies that only exist in the minds of fevered empire builders. (Anyway, was Pan Germanism a good thing 70 years ago?)

The reality is that the Persians were making Empires when the Britons were still very small beer, and the followers of Mohammed are empire builders first last and always. A few centuries of poor success doesn't change that, nor make them worthy of our sympathy or support.

Woody would do well to listen to what the Mullahs say, and take them seriously. Actually listening and understanding in this case might just make him less rather than more sympathetic.

D Croaker, Canberra, Australia

Dumb, war-stoking piece. There is simply no basis for most of the assertions here.

The people of the various countries of the Middle East will decide their own forms of government.

One thing we know for sure is that they will not want the 'democracy' brought to Iraq by America.

John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada

All foreign Nations shall leave Iraq.
Then we will see what happens.
Civil war ? Ok. How long will it last ?
Three different states. Why not.
We have to change energy policy in the west now !
Nuclear. New stations, combine technology. British,german,
french, american etc.

D.Jaeger, Douglas, Isle of Man - UK

Woody, I guess we should just leave them to hang women who've been raped then?

Steve, London,

Woody, are you aware of your double-standard on hegemony/empire?

Your view that regimes free of U.S. influence would be champions of Arab/Muslim self-actualization is misguided. Any regime over there is autocratic, not giving the citizen the power to chose his/her government (i.e., one person, one vote... one time).

So why is Islamic empirealism ok but not another?

All things being equal, wouldn't you at least support a country that, although admittedly not perfect, has a stronger track record of fostering self-actualization over one that is fundamentally illiberal?

Pui Gati, Genoa,

Iran has good reason to harass the West, especially Britain and the United States, having long suffered from abuse by these nations. The West has made a point of emasculating any self-actualized pan-Arab or pan-Muslim leader, preferring instead to set up puppet regimes that will do its bidding. How frustrating for you empire-boosters that Iran is no longer your stooge. And what a ludicrous argument: to engage Iran in "mischief"; it is Western mischief, for over a century, that Iran, since 1979, has been responding to.

woody mclean, beaufort,

When will we ever learn? As long as we play the game on their terms we will always be on a losing streak. Come on - a little intestinal fortitude and a bit of nous would do wonders to even the playing firelsd and make them think twice before tweaking our tails..

Fred Hillman, Perth , Australia

Okay, before this thread fills up with Americans calling British cowards who give in at the first sign of trouble, two words: Embassy Siege

Gilman, Shenzhen, China

The only way to solve the "Persian puzzle" is to first confront the reality of the nature of the regime ruling it. For years dissident Iranians have been imploring the world to stop feeding and safeguarding the Khomeinist regime -- its not even worth the illegal, sweetheart, business "deals" that's been made with the mollas -- because this regime and its circumstances are like NO OTHER the world has perceived before or can gauge; because even as it has devoured Iran, it will NEVER stop there; because it does truly believe in its own destiny and because it has a powerful and all consuming ideology; because Iran MEANS NOTHING TO IT, and it is not about Iran.

Not all is always illuminated, but the beast in Iran NEVER lurked in the shadows. It's been in the open; it’s the world who's been pretending. Isn't it time to end the charade and help THE REAL Iranians who have wanted their country back for a long time?

pouran, alpharetta, USA

You forgot the 650 000 killed Iraqis.

H. Mathys, Hameenlinna, Finlad

We have been warned. A solution has been suggested.

Robert, London,

If the trouble in Iraq could be turned into a full scale Sunni-Shia civil war throughout the middle east then Bush could go down as a genius. And the west could make a fortune selling them weopons to sort each other out. And instead of planting bombs in london the home-grown jihadi's could head off and get killed for allah on foreign soil. This is the only situation that can save the west from the higher birth rate islamics. Sad but true. Labour have caused this mess but they won't get us out of it.

max bradman, bradford, uk

The jury is still out on Amir Taheri's credibility after the false claim that jewish people in Iran were to be made to wear a yellow star. One has to be pretty wary of anything the man has to say.

Jez, London, UK

If the Iranians had invaded Canada and were reaping its natural resources would the Americans not be involved in "terrorist" activity,too?

Ken, bournemouth, uk

I agree with Amir Tehen. Additionally, I would like to comment that this was just a "trial run" for Iran. You Brits are not only our allies and friends, many of us Americans, such as myself, have British ancestors. Only through our united effort will the free world survive.

Kay Throgmorton Presson, Bardwell, Kentucky, USA