Channel 4 Political Slot – Menzies Cambell MP – Iraq

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by ABrighter2006, Jul 20, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Watched the five minute political slot at the end of last night’s Channel 4 News, which featured Menzies Cambell discussing the current situation in Iraq.

    Although the Lib Dems opposed military action in 2003, Cambell made very clear that the problems in Iraq were the responsibility of the US and UK Governments and not the soldiers sent out there. He was very vocal in his support of the excellent job carried out by British forces, and the almost impossible situation that the Army is now faced with in Iraq, due to HMG’s ineffectiveness in bringing about political and true economic reconstruction to Iraq.

    He went on to describe Iraq as standing at the 11th Hour, and that failure on the part of HMG to bring about beneficial change to the people of Iraq (referring to infrastructure / rebuilding), that the role of the British military force would effectively become that of standing between warring factions in an all out civil war.

    He finished his five minutes by stating that the current Israeli / Hamas / Hezbollah operation detracted the world’s leaders from the legacy of their’ involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and again called for a timetable for British troop involvement to end, based on clear milestones made clear by HMG.

    I know the political leaders take a lot of flack for their’ ignorance of military reality as opposed to political perception, but Cambell did seem to display a balanced view of how things really were – his praise of British troops was great and I applaud him for this.
  2. Sorry ABrighter2006 I have to strongly disagree. MC's observations about Iraq were largely true if obvious but his solution was a joke. He wanted British and American troops to withdraw but to be replaced by a UN force - FROM WHERE? The UN, as any fule kno, withdrew in 2003 after the attack on their Headquarters and show no inclination to return. I would also suggest that and nation with the slightest enthusiasm for committing military forces to Iraq are already there. The UN has failed in all but the most limited missions it has undertaken since Korea. The behaviour of UN soldiers in Africa is already in the spotlight. The list goes on.

    What grips me is that MC is probably one of Britain’s top foreign affairs experts yet he comes out with a plan which he knows would fail but equally knows he will never have to implement but will be extremely popular. This is about as dishonest as a politician can get.

    Homeopathic politics at its worst!
  3. Well I didn't see the prog.
    From comments made well said Sir Ming, Its certainly nots Toms fault for the political sh1t heap he's been thrown in, but in true British fashion he'll hunker down shed his blood and do his duty.
    The UN a pile of poo from top down. I have know a few who worked for them at low level, take the money and do the immidiate job, just too muh politics.
    Lifes rough, or so they tell me.
  4. Ming is a very strong supporter of British Forces. Ming's wife is too, for a very special reason. Is she an honorary Para. Colonel yet? ;)
  5. Lib Dem.... Strong Supporter of British Troops.... Sorry Pongo.... Does not compute.

  6. Fair comment Lasalle - the glories of ARRSE debate at it's best.

    I agree that the "get the UN in there" sentiment is overly simplistic, but equally, Bush and Blair embarked on a COA, which would only work in the long term (my humble opinion) if, the UN was forced / acknowledged itself, as supplying a multi-national force to work from Phase 4 onwards. The UN presence that was in Iraq, and withdrawn in 2003, was purely humanitarian, and not a military force. That the guarantees of safety for UN / IO /NGO pers in Iraq made by Bush and Blair could not be realised, tells it's own story.

    I agree with your observation that the UN has "failed" in all but the most limited missions. Equally, the UN is comprised of many nations, who have the ability to supply military resource, but choose not to, and the UN appears pretty powerless to pressure them otherwise.

    My "rose-tinted" view of this, was probably drawn more from the surprise at a leading figure in politics, stating that the British military had done a great job, but were now left between a rock and a hard place because of HMG's inability to progress the situation any further.
  7. Why don't you look up who Lady Elspeth Campbell is, before running your mouth?
  8. That's as maybe WP, but to date, I haven't seen Blair so clear in his support of the troops. Maybe if he had been / was, then the amount of time we devote to airing our feelings wouldn't be anywhere near as great.
  9. I have a problem with lack of support from all the main parties... as soon as they get in power they all f*ck us over and erode our terms and conditions of service. A pox on all their houses I say.