How the British lost Basra

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#2
I think it is The Last Post you should be hearing.
 
#3
Been a journalist long have we? What sort of pay do you get for trawling military website a passing off opinion as fact?

Why are you worried about losing Basra did you sign for it? Just in case you worried I have just looked out side and Basra seems to be still therebut i would Keep better care of it I were you the storeman will want it back one day
 
#4
There are some damm good points here....I'd say Div HQ had a somewhat righteous air of smugness about the place as regards the Septics problems in their AO. I'd argue that some more aggressive Ops earlier on to make it clear the the Brits were in charge would have been of some benefit, jsut not as messyly done as the Yanks. The wilful blindness at DIV HQ to patrol reports of obvious IPS support for various Political groups was deeply annoying and scary.
 
#5
#7
#8
Kitmarlowe said:
There are some damm good points here....I'd say Div HQ had a somewhat righteous air of smugness about the place as regards the Septics problems in their AO. I'd argue that some more aggressive Ops earlier on to make it clear the the Brits were in charge would have been of some benefit, jsut not as messyly done as the Yanks. The wilful blindness at DIV HQ to patrol reports of obvious IPS support for various Political groups was deeply annoying and scary.


. I think you will find that Div is well aware of the problem within the IPS to the extent it is heavily covered during OP tag training for all troops deploying onto the ground.
 
#9
post deleted
 
#10
Here's some debate for you.. Your article is a crock of sh1t. You notice that Basra is in chaos, that we are not widely loved by the people and that the Basra police is filled with religious fundamentalists and loyal to various militias. So far so good.

You then draw the "obvious (!)" conclusion that this is because we have attempted to create links and common feeling with the people and what we really should be doing is brassing the place up and killing everyone who shows any sign of not embracing western democracy. You will note that the basic premise of the argument being slightly false, in that Baghdad (ruled by the Americans) is also in chaos, that they also are not widely loved and that the Baghdad police is also of dubious legitimacy.

I am the last to state that we (UK Plc) have done a good job, however I have yet to see anyone come up with a coherent strategy (other than carping from the sidelines) as to what we should do about these two key points:

1. The Basra police is filled with religious fundamentalists and loyal to various militias. What do we do? Sack them? No, we don't own them. Kill them? There are 14,000 of them and they are all armed. Work with them and try to minimise their excesses?

2. Every time you kill (take a robust approach is what you call it - but it pans out the same) a Mahdi Army bloke, you alienate his family and friends, who then take up arms against you. Plus, moderate opinion, ie the people we have to work with if we want to make the Province work, are appalled by the idea and won't condone anything other than basic self-defence.
 
#11
Post deleted for offensive content - apologies.
 
#12
Journalists critcising military commanders for being smug? Hello kettle this is pot.

Failure to fight for key buildings in 2004? What, like CIMIC House in Al Amarah throughout Aug? Or the raid on the OMS building in Basrah in Sep?

'Heavily defended barracks'? Repetition of cliches gleaned from other articles. Ever heard of the OSB?

US 'face many more attacks'? Why are casualties proportionate, then?

'Controversial story'? Well, it is certainly a story of a kind. Like the one you read to your children at bed time. Unfortunately, controversy appears to be journalistic slang for 'incorrect and provocative crap'.

Can't be bothered saying more - it will only encourage you.
 
#13
You write that drivel then come to a forces website so you can get Quotes on what serving and ex serving people think and then print them?
Question for you
Have you seen this first hand in the American and British TAOR?

Get your quotes elsewhere you Mong!!
 
#14
TFP. As a former member of the British Army having been subjected to the same political constraints in various parts of the world as the troops in Basra so obviously are let me assure you British soldiers would only be too happy to get out kick ass and restore order. Unfortunately doing so would only further alienate them from the population (the vast majority of whom do not now want 'foreign occupation forces' in their country). I'm sure if the Brits did, as you suggest, follow the American's lead you would criticise them for being too brutal etc.

Only smugness I detect is from you.
 
#15
Greengrass said:
Kitmarlowe said:
There are some damm good points here....I'd say Div HQ had a somewhat righteous air of smugness about the place as regards the Septics problems in their AO. I'd argue that some more aggressive Ops earlier on to make it clear the the Brits were in charge would have been of some benefit, jsut not as messyly done as the Yanks. The wilful blindness at DIV HQ to patrol reports of obvious IPS support for various Political groups was deeply annoying and scary.


. I think you will find that Div is well aware of the problem within the IPS to the extent it is heavily covered during OP tag training for all troops deploying onto the ground.
Oh really...Was this after Op.Telc 5 Optag training then...? 6 weeks predeployment training included one Brief of about 40 minutes.....Heavily covered then was it...?
 
#17
Dilfor said:
Journalists critcising military commanders for being smug? Hello kettle this is pot.

Failure to fight for key buildings in 2004? What, like CIMIC House in Al Amarah throughout Aug? Or the raid on the OMS building in Basrah in Sep?

'Heavily defended barracks'? Repetition of cliches gleaned from other articles. Ever heard of the OSB?

US 'face many more attacks'? Why are casualties proportionate, then?

'Controversial story'? Well, it is certainly a story of a kind. Like the one you read to your children at bed time. Unfortunately, controversy appears to be journalistic slang for 'incorrect and provocative crap'.

Can't be bothered saying more - it will only encourage you.
So whay were we banned from going near the Madhi Offices in 2004-2005...?
 
#18
Oh, and CaptainPlume - please take your offensive and racist views and burn them in a diesel-filled pit with you in it.

If sub-sixth form standard journalists weren't bad enough for a hot day in the office, we have to endure Bernard Manning-esque responses from some idiot.
 
#19
Dilfor-

I apologise if I've caused offence. I was referring to a nickname given to the PWRR. Post deleted.

Plume.
 
#20
Kitmarlowe said:
Greengrass said:
Kitmarlowe said:
There are some damm good points here....I'd say Div HQ had a somewhat righteous air of smugness about the place as regards the Septics problems in their AO. I'd argue that some more aggressive Ops earlier on to make it clear the the Brits were in charge would have been of some benefit, jsut not as messyly done as the Yanks. The wilful blindness at DIV HQ to patrol reports of obvious IPS support for various Political groups was deeply annoying and scary.


. I think you will find that Div is well aware of the problem within the IPS to the extent it is heavily covered during OP tag training for all troops deploying onto the ground.
Oh really...Was this after Op.Telc 5 Optag training then...? 6 weeks predeployment training included one Brief of about 40 minutes.....Heavily covered then was it...?


I was on Telic 5 and am now on Telic 8 on both OP tag trainings packages there was a lecture of about an hour on how the police were heavily infiltrated and could not be trusted as far as you could throw them How much more do you need to know I fail to see how much further depth the could have gone into.
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top