Quote Originally Posted by goesh View Post
From the AP: 3/27:

"DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - The U.S. Navy on Tuesday began its largest demonstration of force in the Persian Gulf since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, led by a pair of aircraft carriers and backed by warplanes flying simulated attack maneuvers off the coast of Iran.

The maneuvers bring together two strike groups of U.S. warships and more than 100 U.S. warplanes to conduct simulated air warfare in the crowded Gulf shipping lanes.

The U.S. exercises come just four days after Iran’s capture of 15 British sailors and marines who Iran said had strayed into Iranian waters near the Gulf. Britain and the U.S. Navy have insisted the British sailors were operating in Iraqi waters."
Hostage taking is an old standby for trying to enforce certain behaviors by other states. This may be a chicken and egg question, but it may also just be a game of chicken.
1. Did the Iranian government, knowing about the impending US naval "exercise," take a few hostages to ensure that the exercise does not become a "live fire exercise" against Iran? The 15 UK hostages are used as a means of keeping the US force from attacking Iran.
2. Alternatively (the game of chicken), the capture might be used by the Iranians as an attempt to goad the US into a military response. If the US does not attack, the Iranians score a propoganda victory--the big bad US won't/can't help out its UK ally.

Either way, the Iranians might be successful in a divide and conquer attempt aimed at the US-UK partnership.
If the US attacks (1 above), the Iranians kill the hostages, hoping to drive a wedge between the US and UK.
If the US doesn't attack (2 above) another wedge may be driven between the US and UK.