Replies

In five whole years of being in charge down here the British did nothing. They took the most peaceful city in Iraq and allowed it to deteriorate into the most violent. On average, there were around 15 murders per day. Mostly doctors, teachers, and women. The British didn’t do a thing to stop it, they just sat back and tried to keep from getting involved. The Iraqis took it upon themselves to do what the British (supposedly the second most capable military in the world) refused to.

Bears repeating...loudly.

The Iraqis took it upon themselves to do what the British (supposedly the second most capable military in the world) refused to.

It only bears repeating if you're an ignorant flid.

Read up Michael Yon's dispatches from his time with 4 Rifles. Read up on Operation Arezzo. The Iraqis in Basra wouldn't be fighting today without the British MiTTs and embeds, and five years of mentoring and combined ops. Or do you think the Iraqi army just worked it all out for themselves?

Same MO in Afghanistan. Afghan artillery fighting alongside NATO forces in combined ops. How did that happen? Was it magic? Or was it the result of scrupulously careful formation by British forces?

The British have been training local forces to fight for themselves as far back as the Chindits. It's their country remember.

Hello again.

Just to state: Mosul was comparatively peaceful under US watch (Petraeus cut his teeth there) for a time, but is now the main bastion of Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Iraqi forces are leading the fight in retaking that city. Presumably US forces there had ‘refused’ to help? (Of course not) Sadr city etc (in the US sector) is currently witnessing higher levels of violence than Basra. Iraqis are leading the fight there too. Has the US ‘failed’ there? Of course not. To be quite frank, why shouldnt the Iraqis (30,000 of them) take it upon themselves to stabilise a city in their own country?

Just as a side note, on top of Special Forces, Britain has sent 150 advisors back into Basra to help the Iraqi forces there

“They took the most peaceful city in Iraq and allowed it to deteriorate into the most violent.” Not even the biggest cynic of UK policy in Iraq could argue that Basra was/is Iraq’s most violent city. Michael Yon was there in January and said it was peaceful. The place had a packed university and night life for goodness sake. Of course there were underlying militias tensions (and tragic assissinations), but this wasn’t Mogadishu. The main reason Maliki launched his rushed assault was because he did not like the authority wielded there by a rival shiite faction. The city had a murder rate 50% that of Washington DC when British forces relocated to the airport.