OK Stinky, imagine I'm HMS Cornwell...

 The Spectator

Friends with military experience ponder two questions about the Iranian kidnap of the 15 British sailors. The first is, ‘Why didn’t they put up a fight?’ The answer seems to lie with the rules of engagement. This was effectively confirmed by Sir Alan West, until recently the First Sea Lord, who said that the rules were ‘de-escalatory’, and part of the British attempt to be a ‘force for good’ (the government’s cant phrase about our armed services). ‘Rather than roaring into action and sinking everything in sight we try to step back and that, of course, is why our chaps were... captured,’

Actually the answer lies largely with the fact that they were completely outgunned. Perhaps they didn't feel Blair's little adventure was worth dying for. Let's club together and buy Charles Moore a tin hat and a dinghy and he can show us how it's done. Arse. Had he spent a moment or two on Google he might have found some more answers, like this one:

The Iranians had three to four gunboats armed with 3" Guns and heavy machine guns. The thought of going up against these craft while in two Zodiacs type semi-rigid craft make it seem that surrender was the best course of action. In fact boarding parties are required, even the USN and Coast Guard, to surrender and to allow diplomacy to run it's course.

Back in the olden days, says Moore,...

Another change since the Falklands is the growth of the idea that the British media are being unprofessional if we display any preference for our own country’s cause over that of its enemies.

What the fuck? Haven't you read the papers?

I do know one thing that's changed since the Falklands and that is the quality of the Spectator. It used to be worth reading. Now it's largely crap. And, in spite of repeated attempts to get it right, the website still stinks.