Our Army failed its test in Iraq

#1
Cue much rustling...

As we enter the year when the last British troops leave Iraq, further evidence is emerging of just what an abject failure Britain’s military intervention in Iraq has been. Despite the bravery of many individual soldiers, the only real success of the Government has been the extent to which it has managed to hide from view how, thanks to its catastrophic misjudgements, this has been the one of the most humiliating chapters in the history of the British Army.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/...4092439/Our-Army-failed-its-test-in-Iraq.html

msr
 
#3
I think the failure lays with the people who sent the troops there and their complete refusal to accept that it was never going to work.

Those people have the blood of decent men and women and friends of us all on their hands.
 
#5
It continues:

"In recent weeks, drawing on a wealth of published and unpublished sources, my colleague Dr Richard North..."

Oh dear...
 
#6
Mighty_doh_nut said:
I think the failure lays with the people who sent the troops there and their complete refusal to accept that it was never going to work.

Those people have the blood of decent men and women and friends of us all on their hands.
Agreed wholeheartedly.

It was mistake compound upon mistake. Starting with the refusal of GB Snr to finish GWI the right way.
 
#7
Sounds like what would be expected from any modern European army...

From this part of the world the British in the South are viewed in similar terms to what the British thought of many weak European contingents in FRY
 
B

BambiBasher

Guest
#8
Hairy_Fairy said:
It was mistake compound upon mistake. Starting with the refusal of GB Snr to finish GWI the right way.
There I would disagree. George I had the wit to just chase the Iraqi Army back across its own borders and then stop, for fear of stirring up trouble with the Arabs generally, and of an ongoing asymmetric war in Iraq specifically.
 
#9
Still annoyed at this.

Allowing the Army to carry the blame for the failures of the gutless turds that sent them is insulting in the extreme.

the army were comitted to remove Saddam and his 40 minute capability of hurling a nuclear device. It turned out that there was never an ability to throw anything more sinister than an angry Badger and Saddam was way down the list of evil dictators of the planet.

Bush and Blair are responsible for the failings, failings that were blatantly obvious six years ago.

They and they alone are accountable...... War criminals, the pair of them. Try them in the Hague then hang them, I bet neither of them go with the dignity and self belief that Sadadam Hussein showed in his final moments.
 
#10
BambiBasher said:
Hairy_Fairy said:
It was mistake compound upon mistake. Starting with the refusal of GB Snr to finish GWI the right way.
There I would disagree. George I had the wit to just chase the Iraqi Army back across its own borders and then stop, for fear of stirring up trouble with the Arabs generally, and of an ongoing asymmetric war in Iraq specifically.


Absolutely right; remember the coalition in 1991 included many Arab countries and it would have fallen apart if the US had gone any further. The elder Bush was a wiser president with wiser advisers.
 
#11
"The fault for this lies almost entirely with Tony Blair, abetted by one or two very senior military commanders, who failed at any point after the invasion to provide the men and equipment needed to carry out the task to which Blair had vaingloriously agreed. The price paid has been measured partly in the deaths and injuries of our men – but above all it has been in that destruction of the Army’s reputation which will be one of the most painful and lasting legacies of the Blair era."

Er Lions lead by Doonkeys
AGAIN.
Don't blame Tom on the ground but just look where the blame should lie, Politico's and self serving very senior Generals, ya know like the one who gave up 4 infantary battalions because Gerry Adams said so.
john
 
#12
Also, although I often disagree with Booker, who's an opinionated columnist rather than a journalist, I think he's broadly right. But it's too easy just to blame the political leadership (although of course they are ultimately responsible), the Army failed at many levels despite individual courage and hard work.
 
B

BambiBasher

Guest
#13
Mighty_doh_nut said:
Still annoyed at this.

Allowing the Army to carry the blame for the failures of the gutless turds that sent them is insulting in the extreme.
To be fair, Booker does conclude by saying that it's all Blair's fault.
 

Nehustan

On ROPS
On ROPs
#14
As has been said 'ouch'. Good to see the responses akin to holding the line...'The army fights enemies, it doesn't designate them'.
 

Bowmore_Assassin

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#16
I do not agree with the title of the article.

The Army did not fail in Iraq - the strategy was wrong and the Army was not given the right tools until the damage was done and was not ever given enough manpower to see the job through once we drew down from the original invasion force.

War does not come cheap but Labour made that happen and there is blood on the sand instead of them having a smaller bank account. They should be ashamed.

Edited to add: some ex-senior leadership should perhaps be taking a long hard look at themselves in the mirror as well.
 
#17
The last article this guy wrote stated that '2008 was the year that proved global warming didn't exist'. This article had about as much credability. Fail in our objectives? Saddam gone and Iraqi security forces trained. Job done.

The manner in which we went about it was a catalogue of failures, but I'd question whether the apparent fixation with properly armoured vehicles was the main issue, as it would have only addressed the symptom of the problem, rather than the problem itself. The US hasn't won because won because it hid in IED proof trucks, it won because it got out there and killed the people who were laying the IED's. The blame doesn't lie with the political leadership, it primarly lies with the commanders on the ground who though there were policing some colony as opposed to doing nation building. The suicidle program to recruit the local police force based on taking recruits from whatever local polictial group shouted the loudest should have seen someone taken out to the wood shed.
 
#18
Firstly, its an outrage article

Secondly, its written with hind-sight and a huge degree of simplicity

Thirdly, he recycles other peoples conclusions and gathers them as his own*.

* For example, it bugs me that these Journo-Cretins have not once ever said why Snatch is a poor vehicle for these operations?

Lastly, I genuinely hope someone tops Blair and Brown for their fcking disastrous ambitions
 
S

Screw_The_Nut

Guest
#19
parapauk said:
The last article this guy wrote stated that '2008 was the year that proved global warming didn't exist'. This article had about as much credability. Fail in our objectives? Saddam gone and Iraqi security forces trained. Job done.

The manner in which we went about it was a catalogue of failures, but I'd question whether the apparent fixation with properly armoured vehicles was the main issue, as it would have only addressed the symptom of the problem, rather than the problem itself. The US hasn't won because won because it hid in IED proof trucks, it won because it got out there and killed the people who were laying the IED's. The blame doesn't lie with the political leadership, it primarly lies with the commanders on the ground who though there were policing some colony as opposed to doing nation building. The suicidle program to recruit the local police force based on taking recruits from whatever local polictial group shouted the loudest should have seen someone taken out to the wood shed.
Policing is much easier than nation building, the former requires more risk taking. I don't think we had the back wheels to take heavier casualties.
 
#20
Mighty_doh_nut said:
I think the failure lays with the people who sent the troops there and their complete refusal to accept that it was never going to work.

Those people have the blood of decent men and women and friends of us all on their hands.
Fully agree with the above.

Does anyone know what the author of the articles credentials are? I suspect that Mr Booker has never got his hands dirty and therefore has not earned the right to suggest that "our army failed its test in Iraq"

Our forces did not fail. We carried out a deeply flawed mission with unswerving dedication doing all that the politicians asked us to do. The Govt have abused our honour and professionalism.

BIG BLAME must also be directed at the CPA who let the rot set in. Next time let the military run a conflict.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top