Smart move by Blair

[Skyrad 0]

Most likely we'll be redeploying them to Afghanistan to fight the on coming Taliban spring offensive which is about to kick off. People have taken their eyes off Afghanistan which is a even bigger threat to the UK than the Iraqi insurgents. Heroin is wrecking havoc in the UK not just the inner cities. The Taliban have regrouped and are a serious threat to the British (and other) forces over there. We've seen the heaviest fighting since the Korean war there.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

So, the following question begs to be asked:

Is the UK military better at this than the US military, or are the Iraqis in Baghdad fiercer than those in Basra?

Or, is it due to Baghdad being bigger than Basra?

We've had thirty eight years of doing this shit here in Northern Ireland. Also we don't have the same level of issue with the Sunni insurgency (although there have been other players) and we also have a government that desperatly wants to be re-elected and a Prime Minister that is about to exit stage left who doesn't want to be remembered as the guy that led us into a 'war without end'
That said, from what I can tell the US forces in Bagdad have been doing some good work and with the change of tactics from the FOB mentality to the take control of policing out on the streets with area bases I think a real positive effect may result, although it will take years and dialouge to effect a lasting change.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[shropshire 0]

<> - That'll be the bird flu then

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Skyrad 0]

The bastard has had the fish out my pond twice now. Bloody Taliban bird!

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[shropshire 0]

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So, the following question begs to be asked:

Is the UK military better at this than the US military, or are the Iraqis in Baghdad fiercer than those in Basra?

Or, is it due to Baghdad being bigger than Basra?

According the news I heard today. the area was not in as much termoil as Bagdad. The US intentionaly kept the most hostile areas and

the Brits had a troop surge to clean up the area some time ago

Basra is also not quite as diverse, isn't the "hub" of the country, doesn't see as much traffic from neighboring (and meddling) countries.

That is true as well

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[NCclimber 0]

Apparently the news of this troop departure has created a stir.

Quote

An Iraqi security source said Thursday that two British military bases in Basra, which has a predominantly Shiite population, had been bombarded with rocket-propelled grenades in the past 24 hours.

The two British bases, located in downtown Basra and in the city's Shat al-Arab hotel, were bombed Wednesday night and early Thursday morning, the source added.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Apparently the news of this troop departure has created a stir.

Quote

An Iraqi security source said Thursday that two British military bases in Basra, which has a predominantly Shiite population, had been bombarded with rocket-propelled grenades in the past 24 hours.

The two British bases, located in downtown Basra and in the city's Shat al-Arab hotel, were bombed Wednesday night and early Thursday morning, the source added.

Hmm, seems like they would want to stay quite and let them leave??

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

Quote

Apparently the news of this troop departure has created a stir.

Quote

An Iraqi security source said Thursday that two British military bases in Basra, which has a predominantly Shiite population, had been bombarded with rocket-propelled grenades in the past 24 hours.

The two British bases, located in downtown Basra and in the city's Shat al-Arab hotel, were bombed Wednesday night and early Thursday morning, the source added.

Hmm, seems like they would want to stay quite and let them leave??

Depends who "they" are. I'm sure someone would benefit from the Brits staying.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,132]

>Hmm, seems like they would want to stay quite and let them leave??

One of the prime reasons to leave Basra is to REDUCE the number of incidents like this. Fewer targets = fewer attacks.

The only way such an attack makes sense is if they want to force the British troops to stay. Which some of the more organized terrorist organizations in Iraq no doubt want - the target practice, on-the-job training and recruitment tools the occupation provides are good for their cause.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

>Hmm, seems like they would want to stay quite and let them leave??

One of the prime reasons to leave Basra is to REDUCE the number of incidents like this. Fewer targets = fewer attacksin Iraq......fixed this one for you.

The only way such an attack makes sense is if they want to force the British troops to stay. Which some of the more organized terrorist organizations in Iraq no doubt want - the target practicewowm you must be a mind reader or in communication with the terrorist....I'm impressed, on-the-job training and recruitment tools the occupation provides are good for their cause.

I do enoy the same old same old.....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

I commend Tony Blair for having the courage to buck the US administration and do the right thing for Iraq and for the UK

What is the right thing being done? Is it bringing home their troops after victory? Is it accepting defeat so that the troops can be brought home? Is it bringing the troops home now and let the Iraqis sink or swim on their own?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[billvon 3,132]

>What is the right thing being done? Is it bringing home their troops after
> victory? Is it accepting defeat so that the troops can be brought home?

It is making decisions for the good of british troops and Iraqis instead of decisions to support one's ego. "Reducing an occupation to reduce violence" might well be a good decision. "We must have victory in Iraq; we will not accept defeat!" is an ego-based decision.

In the end it doesn't matter if the chickenhawks can claim victory or not. (Heck, they will anyway when the troops come home no matter what happens!) It DOES matter if our leaders make decisions that result in the fewest deaths in the civil war over there, and that result in the Iraqis getting their country back.

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

>What is the right thing being done? Is it bringing home their troops after
> victory? Is it accepting defeat so that the troops can be brought home?

It is making decisions for the good of british troops and Iraqis instead of decisions to support one's ego. "Reducing an occupation to reduce violence" might well be a good decision. "We must have victory in Iraq; we will not accept defeat!" is an ego-based decision.

In the end it doesn't matter if the chickenhawks can claim victory or not. (Heck, they will anyway when the troops come home no matter what happens!) It DOES matter if our leaders make decisions that result in the fewest deaths in the civil war over there, and that result in the Iraqis getting their country back.

Do you think reducing an occupation will certainly reduce violence? It didn't work that way in Vietnam, did it?

Do you suppose the British think they've been victorious and are getting out, given up and are getting out, or aren't sure - but getting out anyway?

You contend that the 'chickenhawks' claimed victory in Vietnam?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Do you think reducing an occupation will certainly reduce violence? It didn't work that way in Vietnam, did it?

Do you suppose the British think they've been victorious and are getting out, given up and are getting out, or aren't sure - but getting out anyway?

You contend that the 'chickenhawks' claimed victory in Vietnam?

None of that is important. What's important is that anyone that agrees with me just might be making a good decision and is sincere in their choices. AND, anyone that disagrees with me is wrong, but is doing it because of their ego or because they like exploiting and hurting puppies.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[shropshire 0]

Maybe... just maybe our government is thinking about our own people for a change and not pandering to external influence..


Nahhh.. fat chance.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Quote

Do you think reducing an occupation will certainly reduce violence? It didn't work that way in Vietnam, did it?

Do you suppose the British think they've been victorious and are getting out, given up and are getting out, or aren't sure - but getting out anyway?

You contend that the 'chickenhawks' claimed victory in Vietnam?

None of that is important. What's important is that anyone that agrees with me just might be making a good decision and is sincere in their choices. AND, anyone that disagrees with me is wrong, but is doing it because of their ego or because they like exploiting and hurting puppies.

Quite right!

According to Billvon, the only reason a person can have to 'not accept defeat' is because of ego. It just can't be that some judge the consequences of losing to be unacceptable. Another example of the moderator being able to read everyone's mind.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Maybe... just maybe our government is thinking about our own people for a change and not pandering to external influence..


Nahhh.. fat chance.

I don't doubt that the Brits are doing it for their own people. I am asking if they are getting out after they conclude they've won enough of a victory to hand over responsibility to the Iraqis, or if it is because they've concluded they can't win enough of a victory.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[shropshire 0]

There are possibly lots of reasons but as always, there so much spin one will never get to the real reasons.

My current pet theory, is that we just can't afford to be ther much longer. Apart from the non-trivial personal costs, It's costing an awfull lot of money. For a start, our Health Care system is on the ropes and needs a massive injection of cash very soon or it will crash.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quite right!

According to Billvon,

I only used BV's quotes because they were current. Never doubt I'm mocking more than just one side of the debate.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,132]

>Do you think reducing an occupation will certainly reduce violence?

If much of the violence is towards the occupiers - yes.

> It didn't work that way in Vietnam, did it?

Vietnam is pretty peaceful last time I checked. It took years - but then again, so has this war.

>Do you suppose the British think they've been victorious and are getting
>out, given up and are getting out, or aren't sure - but getting out anyway?

All I know for sure is that they are getting out and they think it is the right thing to do. I agree with them.

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

>Do you think reducing an occupation will certainly reduce violence?

If much of the violence is towards the occupiers - yes.

Lately it seems that most of it is not directed at the liberators, it is directed at civilians.

Quote

> It didn't work that way in Vietnam, did it?

Vietnam is pretty peaceful last time I checked. It took years - but then again, so has this war.

I was under the impression that genocide followed the withdrawal. Am I wrong, did you forget, or does it not matter - as long as decades later things settle down?

Quote

>Do you suppose the British think they've been victorious and are getting
>out, given up and are getting out, or aren't sure - but getting out anyway?

All I know for sure is that they are getting out and they think it is the right thing to do. I agree with them.

Thanks for making it clear that getting out no matter what the circumstances is all that matters to you.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[billvon 3,132]

>According to Billvon, the only reason a person can have to
>'not accept defeat' is because of ego. It just can't be that some judge
>the consequences of losing to be unacceptable.

I don't think you're wrong or right - I don't even think you're in the ballpark. You're asking the wrong question and labeling outcomes with meaningless terms.

This isn't about a "accepting defeat" or "ensuring victory." Those are bits of empty rhetoric to appeal to the sort of mindset that wants "our team to win." The terrorists will never win militarily, because they aren't strong/organized enough. Likewise, we will never win militarily; it's not a military battle we're fighting here, and you can't beat the shit out of someone until they stop hating you.

The only remaining question is how to get out with the minimum additional violence. If we do that, both sides have won. If we stay there until another hundred thousand Iraqis are dead, and another three thousand families will never see their family member come home to the US, everyone loses. Sure, perhaps then the pro-war types could claim "we won!" and make some people who value that feel good about themselves. But it would be a pyrrhic victory at best, one I would prefer to avoid.

I am glad Blair opted to not try for that pyrrhic victory. I hope we can do the same.

[billvon 3,132]

>Lately it seems that most of it is not directed at the liberators, it
>is directed at civilians.

Yep. Basra will not become peaceful after they leave; there will still be insurgent attacks. But they will decline, for the reasons I stated earlier. And again, that's our goal. Our goal is not to get a "win for our team." The goal is to end the violence, even if it means swallowing our pride and leaving. (After all, wasn't that the stated goal originally?)

>I was under the impression that genocide followed the withdrawal.

Yes. And that may happen here as well. We cannot hold the Islamic world together through violence. The difference in our opinions is that I think genocide is MORE likely if we stay long enough to grow the insurgency to the point where it can pull off those sorts of mass killings. (Unless we make Iraq a US territory and stay there forever - I assume not even the most pro-war types want that.)

>Thanks for making it clear that getting out no matter what the
>circumstances is all that matters to you.

Which is as accurate as claiming that you are happy as long as US troops are dying. Surely you can do better than that.

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

>Lately it seems that most of it is not directed at the liberators, it
>is directed at civilians.

Yep. Basra will not become peaceful after they leave; there will still be insurgent attacks. But they will decline, for the reasons I stated earlier. And again, that's our goal. Our goal is not to get a "win for our team." .

I was under the distinct impression that the goal was to enhance Bush's legacy and make sure he did not make the ranks of the three worst US presidents of all time.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.