Future Iraq Strategy - Dubya today at 1530

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by MrPVRd, Jan 3, 2007.

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. The Shaved Chimp will be revealing some of his thoughts as to the future direction of operations in Iraq.

    A "surge" of 13,000 troops is being touted as the most likely scenario, with Dubya sticking two fingers up to the Iraq Study Group.

    What will the UK do? I am sure that Bliar will be dragged along with Dubya (mainly due to the presence of his nose in the presidential posterior).

    This will be utter madness. UK troops should not be part of any Hitlerian Gotterdammerung on Bush's part. Bush may be happy to throw away US lives but Bliar must not be allowed to gamble any more UK lives. It is time to go. This last throw of the dice will see Bush impeached when it fails and could bring Bliar down within weeks.

    Bear in mind, the UN mandate on Iraq expires this summer.
  2. Petty much spot on their, i expect he will run too Swiss tony and ask him too open/find another bucket of soldiers.

    I miss serving but im so glad im civpop now, this goverment has almost managed to break the train set :x :x :x
  3. Heh. Now SF has agreed to support PSNI there's 15,000 troops in NI ready for deployment elsewhere...
  4. Heard on CNN yesterday 2/1/07, a senior American politician-sorry did not catch his name. Yet he said that Bush was going to try a 'seventy three yard pass'-using his quote from American football-in regard to sending in more troops as a last ditch attempt to 'save the game'. He said that this will fail and in six months to a year troops will be coming home from Iraq whatever the situation is out there.
  5. So all the lives given in this futile clusterfcuk will have been in vain. Thank you bliar for involving and wasting some of the nations finest in this centuries vietnam... :x :x :x
  6. DOnt get too complacent Whit_re the century is only seven years old. Plenty of time left to make an even bigger dogs breakfast of something.
  7. yeah, i suppose they can start concentrating on fcuking up afganistan now, maybe they can get some hints and tips off the russians...

    i need to stop biting about this... :oops:
  8. An extra 30,000 troops might have made all the difference in early 2003 but will make bugger-all difference now.
  9. Thirty thousand trigger pullers will make a big difference. Out of the 140,000 troops in Iraq the majority are support troops. If we had had 140,000 trigger pullers we would be in alot better position.
  10. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_headline=troop-top-up-&method=full&objectid=18372735&siteid=94762-name_page.html


    I smell a revolt.
  11. Gosh well that cleared everything up! The vision for Iraq is just so clear and precise! I have to admit I am just dumb struck with awe !
  12. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    According to the former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, it was Westmoreland's request for extra troops post Tet that triggered the US decision to leave Vietnam.

    To paraphrase him

    " Mister President , if you can't win this war with 140,000 men - what makes you think you can win it with 155,000 ? "

    The teeth to tail ratio has nothing to do with it.

    Whilst it may be a rarity in the US mil, if you think clerks and drivers don't pull triggers then you may wish to check out the experience of the guys and gals who deployed with the PWRR battlegroup to Al Amarah in Iraq in 2004 or the 3 Para battlegroup in Afghanistan in 2006.

    Le Chevre

    Postscript - ironic that one of the most emailed stories on the BBC website today contained this, in reference to Malakand, AFG:

    "No-one knew, though many were wise after the event, that these tribesmen were as well armed as our troops, and that they proved to be brave and formidable adversaries," Churchill wrote.

    "Never despise your enemy is an old lesson but it has to be learnt afresh, year after year, by every nation that is warlike and brave."
  13. Like any good project that's missing its milestones, throwing bodies at it is unlikely to improve the issue.

    Assuming that we are "out" within the next few years, will this country look back in 25 years and say that our mission was accomplished?
  14. Is the province of Basra still on course for being handed over later this year?

    Have the commanders on the ground asked for more troops?

    If the answers to the above are yes and no respectively, why on earth should Blair (or for that matter Bush) insist that the UK supplies extra troops - unless You also expect Bush istist that we help out in Bagdad and al Anbar