Did they do what they should have done?

Many are up in arms over the conduct of the British Royal Marines and Royal Navy personnel who were kidnapped by Iran two weeks ago.  The ranking officer in the kidnapped party said:

"We were aware that many people have questioned why we allowed ourselves to be taken in the first place. From the outset it was very apparent that fighting back was not an option. Had we done that many of us would not be standing here today.

"There would have been a major fight, which we could not have won, and the consequences would have had a major strategic impact. We made a conscious decision not to engage the Iranians."

I don't think that's cowardice.  It seems more like common sense.

The British navy made a severe tactical error.  As I understand the events, the frigate Cornwall, which was the Royal Navy gunship from which the patrol boat carrying the 15 was launched, apparently moved out of visual range when the patrol boat approached the Iraqi fishing vessels it was sent to investigate.  Obviously the Iranian navy had been monitoring Allied craft for some time, and when they detected that the Cornwall could not immediately respond, they sent out an armed speedboat and intercepted the British patrol boat.  If the Cornwall had been close by, then this event would never have happened.

The naval capture was a stroke of genius for the Iranians.  In open waters it is not easily possible to point to a landmark and immediately ascertain your position.  Thus, charging the British with a trespassing claim surprised them and caught them off guard.  Also, no state of war existed between Iran and Britain, so if the British had opened fire then the Iranians could claim an ambush by the Royal Navy.  That would have been the worst possible outcome in this situation.  As it was, the Cornwall was ordered by London not to open fire on the Iranian vessel after the patrol boat radioed for help.  The British got caught with their pants down, and they paid an embarrassing price for it.

The bad news, though, is that Britain has apparently stopped its patrols and cargo inspections off the coast of Iraq.  They should not have done this.  As long as they stay in Iraqi waters, Iran has no right to interfere with their operations.

Allahpundit notes,

[T]he fact that the [US] carriers didn’t need to be used to obtain the sailors’ release is evidence for doves that Iran can ultimately be dealt with peacefully, and even act pseudo-magnanimously when need be. You can already imagine Ahmadinejad’s speech to the UN next year, in which he compares and contrasts Iranian treatment of prisoners — illegally seized in another country’s waters, but never you mind that — to Abu Ghraib. They already had Faye Turney mention AG in one of her letters, in fact. The whole thing is aimed at persuading the left and the Third World members of the nonaligned movement that Iran has the moral high ground in its confrontation with the west. Shouldn’t be too hard given how eager they are to be persuaded.