Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Yeah, what about that?

Remember the "incident" back in January, where American forces grabbed five Iranians in a town in northern Iraq? The justification for it was that they were "Iranian agents" or something, and we've not heard a peep about their whereabouts or disposition since. Well, now it turns out that that act was apparently a blundered attempt by the US to snatch senior Iranian officials--highly-placed intelligence officers--who were in Iraq at the time.

So what's the difference between Iran's seizure of British sailors--even if they were in Iraqi waters--and America's seizure of Iran's officials on Iraqi soil? They're either both illegal, or neither is. But there's this difference: We know where the British sailors are.


Unknown said...

Question: Could a difference be argued based on the fact that the British people are military - in uniform?

Erik said...

A difference, perhaps. But a distinction?

Unknown said...

Well, no, not a moral distinction, and I guess that's the kind that matters.