Iraqi general claims British troops allow insurgents to rule

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by western, Nov 26, 2008.

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. From last Saturday's Telegraph

     
  2. I think we did to be honest

    Every time there was a ding-dong on T3 and T4 , we were ordered to fck off and hide in the Palace
     
  3. Maybe we did, but we are only following the Goberments policy............ they allow it in UK!

    ....and stand by!
     
  4. BrunoNoMedals

    BrunoNoMedals LE Reviewer

    I get the impression there's a hell of a lot of word-twisting and exaggeration on the part of the journalist in that report. I can tell, because he typed something.
     
  5. It would be a fair criticism had we been ruling Iraq during this time. But we weren't - our ability to go into Govt departments and remove people with militia ties was around zero, and had we done so, Basra would have been in even more chaos.
    Militia affiliation was a fact of life then - it was how most people survived, and there was hardly anyone who didnt have links to some militia or another. To blame HMG for not removing people from their positions, when the IA itself was one large militia organisation in places is a classic example of the Iraqis refusing to accept responsibility for their own problems.
     
  6. msr

    msr LE

    "We had to rebuild the Iraqi army from scratch but we were let down by other Government agencies who allowed the militias to take the civilian positions," a Ministry of Defence source said. "

    Come on Jim, do tell us about the great long list of successes that DFID et al have had?

    On TELIC6 they sat around, waiting for the Wr convoys to deliver their drinks from the APOD, whilst trousering hundreds of pounds per day to sit by the swimming pool.

    Until one large scouse woman was sent home for not wearing her body armour...

    msr
     
  7. We tried to do a Division- or Corps-size occupation task with a Brigade group (as we are in Afghanistan). Today's situation was entirely predictable from D-1 on Telic 1.

    Tom Harding is ok - for a journo. At least he did wear green for a while.
     
  8. Don't get me wrong - I'm not defending DFID - I've seen how they work, and frankly I think basket weaving with natural yoghurt courses aren't the best way forward.

    Its a bit of a chicken and egg scenario though - they couldnt go out till security improved (due to their HR rules), and security wasn't going to improve until the general life got better. The motivation for many of the junior militia men was more that of bored young men seeking work , than of die hard opposition to the occupation.

    The problem wasn't helped by the PC sulking every time we did a snatch on someone and then refusing to have all contact with us. If we sent people out to meet with representatives, they'd be turned back - if the locals don't want to meet us, because they are having yet another hissy fit, while plotting to get rid of the Governor, then what can OGDs do?
     
  9. It is a well known fact that the coalition had clearly formulated objectives:

    1. To make Iraq free from the WMD. Freed.
    2. To remove the dictator Saddam Hussein from the power. Removed.
    3. To bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqis. Brought.

    It is an internal business of Iraqis whom to elect, whom to appoint. The coalition respects the right of Iraqis to have rulers they wish.

    Also, I would like to note incorrect terminology used by the general. Insurgent sare those who fight with or confront with existing authorities. Authorities can not be insurgents by definition.