Your point is so weak, that you must exaggerate, in order to make it.
I'm glad to hear your opinion, but noticed you offered nothing except your own condescending opinion to support it. Weak. Here's how to strengthen it:
"kidnapped"- Surely British sailors are prepared for the possible eventuality of being captured or "kidnapped", especially when conducting "patrols" in territory that is known to be in dispute - and further - in dispute by a country which is the target of hostilities by the British and US governments.
Here's the dictionary definition. My usage was correct.
kid·nap (kĭd'năp') pronunciation
tr.v., -napped or -naped, -nap·ping or -nap·ing, -naps or -naps.
To seize and detain unlawfully and usually for ransom.
The sailors were seized. The seizure was unlawful, as was the following false imprisonment. A ransom was paid, in the form of a prisoner exchange.
" 'Let me make this clear — irrespective of what was said in the past, we were inside Iraqi waters,' Lt. Felix Carman told a news conference attended by 5 of the 15 British sailors and marines held in Iran for nearly two weeks. 'We were 1.7 nautical miles from Iranian waters,' Carman told the news conference." Carman's assertion matches the original coordinates supplied by the Iranian ambassador at the outset of the incident. Iran later changed the coordinates it supplied once it was apparent those coordinates located the British sailors well within Iraqi waters.
(ABC News)
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=3015628&page=1" Lieutenant Carman and Royal Marine Capt. Chris Air, 25, described how two Iranian speedboats closed on two British inflatable patrol boats after the personnel had boarded an Indian-flagged vessel, seeking contraband. Theirs was the first direct explanation of why the Britons did not resist capture.
" 'Some of the Iranian sailors were becoming deliberately aggressive and unstable,' Captain Air said. 'They rammed our boat and trained their heavy machine guns, R.P.G.’s and weapons on us. Another six boats were closing in on us,' he said, referring to rocket-propelled grenades by their initials.
" 'We realized that our efforts to reason with these people were not making any headway. Nor were we able to calm some of the individuals down.'
" 'It was at this point that we realized that had we resisted there would have been a major fight, one we could not have won, with consequences that would have had major strategic impact. We made a conscious decision to not engage the Iranians and do as they asked. They boarded our boats, removed our weapons and steered the boats towards the Iranian shore.'
" 'Let me be absolutely clear,” Captain Air said. “From the outset it was very apparent that fighting back was simply not an option. Had we chosen to do so then many of us would not be standing here today. Of that I have no doubts.' "
(NY Times)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/07/world/europe/07britain.html?ex=1333598400&en=3abff35638cb5289&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss"stripped"- And then promptly provided with "pajamas", according to at least one source.
"The sailors said that after their arrest in the Gulf, they were taken to a prison in Tehran. 'We were blindfolded, our hands were bound, we were forced up against a wall,' they said. They were 'stripped and dressed in pyjamas … we were kept in stone cells, approximately eight feet by six, sleeping on piles of blankets. All of us were kept in isolation.' "
(Reuters)
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL3169193320070406"Once captured the personnel were subjected to 'constant psychological pressure' during their time in captivity and agreed to comply with their captors wishes in order to win their freedom. At one point they were lined up against a wall while weapons were cocked, making them 'fear the worst.' The statement was read out by their two most senior members, Lieutenant Felix Carman, 26, and Royal Marine Captain Chris Air, 25."
(U.K. Telegraph)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/06/wiran406.xml "Their greatest scare, they recalled, came on the second day, when they were flown to Tehran, blindfolded and backed up against a prison wall while their Iranian captors fiddled with weapons, cocking rifles and making them fear for their lives.
" 'We thought we were going to the British Embassy but we got taken to a detention center,' said Royal Marine Joe Tindell, 21, one of 15 British sailors and marines seized by Iranian Revolutionary Guards in disputed waters in the Persian Gulf on March 23.
"At the detention center, the mood turned drastically, as their captors changed from military dress into all black, their faces covered.
" 'We had a blindfold and plastic cuffs, hands behind our backs, heads against the wall,' Royal Marine Tindell said in an interview with the BBC. 'Someone, I’m not sure who, someone said, I quote, ‘Lads, lads, I think we’re going to get executed.’
" 'After that comment someone was sick, and as far as I was concerned he had just had his throat cut. From there we were rushed to a room, quick photo, and then stuffed into a cell and didn’t see or speak to anyone for six days.' "
(NY Times)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/07/world/europe/07britain.html?ex=1333598400&en=3abff35638cb5289&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rssFull text of the sailors' statements can be read here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/06/wiran506.xml Doesn't sound like quite the cozy evening at home in pajamas you implied with your carefully-chosen wording.
"made to rebuke their own country"- Perhaps true, but just a bit on the melodramatic side.
"Perhaps" true? I'm sorry you don't own a television or a computer (you must be posting from the library, right?) Anyway, I do. I heard the statements, and read them, too. No "perhaps" about it. It clearly pains you to admit, though, judging from your wording. Why? What's uncomfortable about condemning coerced statements from abducted sailors that will be used for propaganda? Isn't speaking against the abuse of power *what we stand for*?
" It was the beginning of days of psychological pressure that would ultimately extract televised “confessions” from some of the Britons that they had strayed into Iranian waters. The admissions tempered for some the joy at their safe return home to their families, with some military analysts expressing dismay that the sailors and marines had capitulated to their captors’ demands.
" 'It was highly damaging that all of them apologized publicly for something they had not done,' said Sir Max Hastings, a military historian and former newspaper editor, in a BBC radio interview on Friday, comparing the Britons unfavorably to American pilots who withstood much crueler treatment in North Vietnam for much longer.
"But the captives defended their decision to play along with their captors, saying they were subjected to a determined campaign of psychological intimidation. They were separated, stripped, put in pajamas and placed in small stone cells in complete isolation — not permitted even a whispered word with a fellow captive, they said. The lone woman among them was tricked into believing the men had all been released."
(NY Times)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/07/world/europe/07britain.html?ex=1333598400&en=3abff35638cb5289&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rssMeanwhile, melodrama is characterized by exaggerated emotions, stereotypical characters, and interpersonal conflicts heightened beyond the range of normal experiences. I've already dealt with the exaggeration claim. Where's the stereotyping here? I see unfortunate sailors who were abducted and psychologically abused, used as pawns in an intergovernmental conflict. Being abducted, threatened with imprisonment and/or death, and coerced to lie on international television, calls for strong language and condemnation.
Unless, of course, it's politically inconvenient.... In that case, thugs get a free pass.
Putting one's politics ahead of the welfare of unpowerful people is the *antithesis* of progressive thinking. It's how I sort the actual progressives from the merely anti-Repuglicans.