Blair pledge to get forces out as soon as possible

#1
Lets just say i wont be holding my breath.

Britain wants to hand over military control in Iraq as soon as Baghdad's forces are ready to take control of security, Tony Blair said yesterday.

Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the transitional prime minister, called for a swift withdrawal of US troops - something America's senior general in Iraq indicated could begin next spring.

Mr al-Jaafari urged a quickening of the pace of US training of Iraqi forces, as well as closely co-ordinated planning between the US-led military coalition and the emerging Iraqi government on a security transition.

Mr Blair said Mr al-Jaafari's comments were consistent with the long-standing British and American policy that troops would stay only as long as necessary to assist home-grown security forces.

At a press conference at No 10 following talks with Jose Luis Zapatero, the Spanish prime minister, Mr Blair said: "It is the position of Britain, of America, of everybody, that as the Iraqi force capability builds, so the necessity for our support there diminishes. That is not a new announcement. That is the political strategy.

"It's important to keep emphasising that so people in Iraq and the Arab world don't think it's our strategic objective to remain. It is not."...
[c]Telegraph
 
#2
Britain wants to hand over military control in Iraq as soon as Baghdad's forces are ready to take control of security, Tony Blair said yesterday.
Yes, namely Britain wants it, as to highly esteemed mr.Blair then it is not so obvious. He personally wants to obey American orders as long as possible.
 
#3
I'm sure Tone will get the guys out of the sand pit soon ... cause He'll want to send them somewhere else in a bit (N korea, Iran, France, London tube etc).
 
#4
Mr Blair said Mr al-Jaafari's comments were consistent with the long-standing British and American policy that troops would stay only as long as necessary to assist home-grown security forces.
'Economic with the truth' That was the policy on the break-in and immediate aftermath as far as we were concerned , then Jay Garner started making loud noises about stabilising and leaving ASAP and he got sacked. If it really was policy to do this, why award multi-billion contracts to your favourite companies, when you could have funded Iraqi companies to do that?

The Politicians have finally seen the writing on the wall and the horrendous expense and they're looking for a 'withdrawl with honour'
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#5
PartTimePongo said:
... then Jay Garner started making loud noises about stabilising and leaving ASAP and he got sacked...
Jay Garner got sacked because he was an incompetent prat. An example of one of his top ideas: go out into Basra with a wad of money and give every Iraqi he met a $20 bill. I'm not joking. Can you imagine the aggro that would cause, firstly with people rioting to get hold of the wedge, secondly when they got to the market or shop and couldn't get any change for their new found wealth.

The problem was that there had been virtually no investment in the Iraqi infrastructure since 1991, the Coalition gave it a bit of a kicking in 2003 and then the Iraqis themselves had another crack when they stole everything they could grab after Saddam fell. The real failure was in not anticipating the amount of work that would be needed to get everything working again. I wouldn't begrudge Halliburton, KBR and co a cent of (US :D ) taxpayers' money had the Coalition bothered to create a workable civil administration to follow the military into Iraq, but they didn't. We squandered the honeymoon period that we got when Saddam got the push scratching our heads and wondering what we were going to do next, micromanaging tiny bits of the economy and putting off the big problems. I could write a book about all the things I personally failed to achieve in Iraq which might have made a difference, but these are trivial in comparison to the gross strategic errors made by Bremer and his immediate team.
 
#6
I agree. Jay Garner was an idiot. Any one in his team who didn't agree with him was met with the quote " I'll f**king kill you".
 
#7
would you? theres nothing in the shops about the nitty-gritty of the management of the occupation/liberation, just some pretty pictures of planes and yanks handing out sweets.

personally i'm bemused, the british army has possibly the finest doctrine/experience of COIN/occupation in the world - Oman, and yet it appears to have had no effect whatsoever on the iraq operation.
 
#8
Funny that. We had little or no influence where it mattered and all the money was american.
 
#9
Let’s not forget that it was (as Cpunk implies) L. Paul Bremer the idiot savant who pushed through the neo-con policy of debathification and the disbandment of the Iraqi army. So if we are going to pour scorn on the works of the pro-consuls lets do it equally!
At least Garner wasn't a committed ideologue who was going to push policies through no matter the consequences.
 
#10
I thought I'd leave my usual anti-Bremner rant out of it :D
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top