Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Archangel, Apr 30, 2009.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Breaking news on Sky (12.39)
British Forces End Combat Role In Iraq
the mission is ending and the inquests are already beginning,"time to ask the tough question,was the British military defeated in Iraq?":
And will the US leave victorious?
Will the US leave?
I read the article thinking what is the point of this article. The last paragraph answered the question - an insecure Yank wanting to have a pop at Britain using the War of Independance as an up to date example of the power of the USA. Whilst we may have fought to free the French a couple of times at least we don't have to rely on them to win our wars! Ungrateful bloody colonials.
We never lost.
We did most the work.
Left the shit for the US to clean up.
I don't think we won, and I don't think we lost either. Actually we didn't do much, and thats kind of the point. We didn't commit decisively enough, partly due to political ineptitude and partly due to the logistics of commiting to large scale operations on two fronts. Today is not really a day for celebration.
HALLE - FUNKING -LUHIA
we who served there didnt fail.
those who sent us there failed us on many fronts.
the only failure was in our politicians
as for iraq.
i hope the few remaining "advisors" finish their jobs there and get out as soon as.i am just glad i never have to go back to that god forsaken shi thole full of ungrateful back stabbing smiling assassins ever again. whatever they end up with they will deserve it.
Whatever the fcking politicians say about Iraq, it wasnt worth the sacrifice we paid for it
We also lost a considerable degree of stock with the USA over our arrogant/misguided transfer of tactics used in NI and applied with limited/poor results in Iraq. For too long we lectured US on how to do it, without analysing our own mistakes.
The fact of the matter is that the US Military is unwieldy and beauracratic, but it listened and learnt. It did a better job in the South and will be more effective in Helmand. I hope British Military Chiefs recognise the volte face and do something about it. Gordon Brown has now scuppered any chance of UK reasserting our authority in Afg.
I agree with the above poster though, it wasn't worth it.
No disrespect to anyone who has served in either s**t hole.
US tactics were quicker to change because their equipment was updated more quickly than ours was. Tactics have to be dictated by the available firepower and vehicles so we ended up using outdated tactics because we only had outdated equipment and a Government who had no interest in properly supporting the Army in Iraq. That's the trouble when you govern by soundbite the situations you land in need more attention that a quick piece to camera provides.
Problem is MT, British Govt and British Army pointedly refuses to deal robustly with the drug problem in Afg. Softly softly approach that failed in Iraq.
I reckon the US will go at this one in a different way now that they are about to assume control of Helmand. They will also hold friendly ground. I was against the Afg deployment in 2006, but I see the military sense of the request for another 2000 troops.
Part of the blame HAS to be apportioned to British Military Chiefs who went along with the war on two fronts, because they were too weak to say NO.
They deployed their troops in reduced numbers, with poor equipment and miniscule helo support. It surprised nobody with an objective view that the deployment ran into difficulty almost immediately.
Now troops have been freed up for Afg Ops, the Treasury has pulled the plug.
I hope the Generals and Air Marshals have learned a bit of political common sense over the disaster of Iraq and the woeful 2006 deployment to Afg.
At one hell of a cost - mind. Pity they didn't think of their men, first and last, rather than play at New Labour Politics.
Agree with a lot of what you say Nige but Military Chiefs can raise objections, they can resign in protest but the cannot say no.
Today's Scotsman has a short trawl of one of these threads, quoting Alvin, jonwilly, Joker and Garwhal under the headline "Website Tributes".
A BAFF spokesman was on BBC Radio Wales this morning.
Hmm. When militia leaders praise you for letting them get on with things, that's not really a good thing, is it?
Was the UK mission a success? Depends on its objectives. Why did we join this party in the first place, when our military assistance was not needed or even necessarily wanted? Only once we know the reasons for that can we assess whether our mission succeeded or failed. Whether or not the USA succeeded or will succeed is an entirely different analysis.
Separate names with a comma.