I didn't even notice that the news item is from AP. My faith is in the Kurdish authorities, and especially the Iraqi foreign minister Hoshair Zibary (who also happened to be a kurd). These people may not have been diplomats, but they are in Iraq legally as I understand. They were captured in Irbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan. When you have a senior Kurdish regional official (I think it was their PM) saying they were KIDNAPPED by armed Americans, and repeatedly stressing this word, then its a serious affair. The standoff with Kurdish security was so close to causing casualties between friends. I for one don't like to see that.
As for what you said about why the place didn't become a consulate before. I don't know. But it could not have become a consulate during Saddam's era as it would have required permission from Baghdad (not possible in those days).
I can't find this mentioned in any articles. Can you point me to a reference for this?
Zebari does seem like a very credible source even though he once called our presence in Iraq an occupation when providing testimony to the UN. He appears to be a proud Kurdish Iraqi who believes strongly in the sovereignty of his nation.
As the foreign minister he is also probably very upset since it appears he was left out of the loop regarding this raid.
That doesn't however necessarily mean the Iraqi government wasn't informed about the raid beforehand or that the raid wasn't approved by appropriate members of the Iraqi government.
The Iraqi government is full of leaks and people with divided loyalties. If this raid was approved by members of the government, they are very likely to keep quiet about that for their own safety as well as operational security.
The standoff with Kurdish security was so close to causing casualties between friends.
LOL! Here's what the article says:
An American team went to the airport, where they "surprised" Kurdish forces, who apparently had not been informed they were coming, said the Defense Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak about the incident on the record.
"No shots were fired, no one was injured, it was just a tense situation," said the official.
The first sentence is a paraphrase by an associated press reporter. The second sentence doesn't have much context with it, but it's likely in response to questioning by reporters, and it's seems like it's trying to counter the idea that this was a dangerous situation, not support it.
It's also an unnamed defense department official. It's not like we haven't heard a lot of sensationalized and misleading crap being attributed to unnamed officials in the defense department by the AP.
The press general sensationalized situations. That Assosicated Press when reporting on the US military is far worse at doing this than most.
Do you really think that US forces rushing to the airport to try and apprehend someone is going to cause the Kurdish forces to think they are being attacked by US forces?
As for what you said about why the place didn't become a consulate before. I don't know. But it could not have become a consulate during Saddam's era as it would have required permission from Baghdad (not possible in those days).
True, but that was quite a few years ago. Sadam hasn't been in power for a while now. The Iraqi government chose not to make this a consulate for some reason or another, or perhaps it's more appropriate to say that the different factions within the Iraqi government couldn't agree on making it a consulate.
The effect is the same. It was not a consulate. Those who are being detained don't have diplomatic immunity. That means that they were simply individuals working and residing in Iraq. So the question is if there were valid reasons to raid the offices and detain these people.
The rest is just a bunch of political posturing.
The Iraqi government did not officially grant these people or this office any special rights.
Some apparent tension as American troops rushed to the airport is hardly a standoff.
You're buying a lot of hype.