Posted on 04/29/2006 6:53:53 PM PDT by blam
British troops in Iraq are afraid to open fire, secret MoD report confirms
By Sean Rayment. Defence Correspondent
(Filed: 30/04/2006)
British troops in Iraq "lack the confidence to open fire" because of a "fear of prosecution", says a confidential Ministry of Defence (MoD) report seen by The Sunday Telegraph.
It confirms that soldiers believe that if they shoot dead insurgents they will become embroiled in a "protracted investigation" and if prosecuted will receive "no support from the chain of command".
British troops show restraint when attacked in Basra
The study into soldiers' confidence is understood to have been ordered by senior officers because of a growing belief that the fear of prosecution could result in a soldier being killed because he was too scared to open fire.
Senior officers from the Land Warfare Centre flew to Iraq to question dozens of soldiers from the 7th Armoured Brigade. The report's observations are "drawn solely from those discussions".
Under the heading "Confidence to Open Fire", the report says: "All agreed that there was a certain British reticence to open fire, and that this was largely a positive feature at the start of an operational deployment. Further, given that this reticence will be reduced as the tour continues there should be some caution in case it is reduced too much. However, there remained a common belief that many soldiers lack the confidence to initiate opening fire when it is tactically and legally sound to do so.
"There is a widespread fear of being investigated for having opened fire, and of a protracted prosecution system that might ensue. Some believe that individual soldiers would not open fire as a result of this fear."
In a section headed "Lack of Support from the Chain of Command", the report indicates "widespread feeling that whilst the battalion/regiment would support an individual, the wider chain of command (senior officers) provided insufficient support".
The report follows persistent denials by the MoD of claims made by senior officers to this newspaper that soldiers were becoming "over cautious" because they feared investigation and prosecution.
The Royal Military Police Special Investigation Branch has conducted more than 150 investigations in Iraq involving British soldiers, with more than 100 of these launched after troops opened fire when attacked by insurgents.
The report's findings come at the end of a three-year investigation into the death of Sgt Steven Roberts, who was killed in a friendly fire incident in the opening days of the Iraq war. Five soldiers, including an officer, faced a variety of charges including murder, manslaughter and negligence over the death of Sgt Roberts, a tank commander, who was shot dead by a soldier under his command. On Thursday, the Attorney General told Parliament that none of the soldiers would face charges because of a lack of evidence.
Patrick Mercer, the Tory spokesman on homeland security, who is a former infantry commanding officer, said last night: "We went through all of this in Northern Ireland 30 years ago and we arrived at rules of engagement that worked. The MoD has got to be held to blame for eroding a soldier's ability and willingness to defend himself. You can't send lads into action who are not completely confident that they will be backed to the hilt by the people who sent them to this war in the first place. The MoD has been consistently economical with the truth on this matter."
An MoD spokesman said: "Soldiers have nothing to fear from the investigation of incidents, so long as they act within their rules of engagement. The Armed Forces can also be certain that they will always receive the full support of the chain of command.
''The Land Warfare Centre's dialogue in Iraq, and their training recommendations, provides the Armed Forces with the reassurance needed to operate confidently within their rules of engagement, without fear of prosecution."
In what way?
FYI: The Black Watch hasn't been disbanded. The Army is undergoing an organisational change, and instead of having singular regiments whose capabilities vary somewhat, we now hve larger battelgroups which have incorporated a number of regiments into their makeup.
The history is still there. Badly reported here on FR, and I would have expected any fellow UK chaps to say as such.
Are you suggesting that the Russians have infiltrated the UK armed forces and are controlling the policy of it?
I think it was because everyone who was handed the L85A1 set personal bests on their markmanship test. This gun was so accurate that they had to redesign the test by moving the target distances out because too many people were scoring at or near perfect.
Thus, I can see why your experience with the gun shows reliability problems. Similar to why the AK is the worlds gun of choice for it's durability and simplicity when compared with the M-16.
Shouldn't that be: 'shoot insurgents dead'
If they are prosecuted for shooting dead insurgents, just imagine how much trouble they would be in if they shot the live insurgents dead. ;-)
I once had this conversation with an Englishman in the British Virgin Islands:
"How's Mike being doing?"
"Not well."
"Oh, that's too bad. What's wrong?"
"He's dead."
Blam,some armchair generals(and a couple of actual generals)may criticise American policy and tactics.
(and even then it is usually genuine disagreement on tactics)
BUT I know a few serving soldiers and not one has anything other than respect the horrible job your men and women are doing,as they are.
The problem is not the soldiers...
The British Army pound for pound is the equal of any on earth and superior to all but a very few.
It is the PC culture writ large now even affecting war.
God we need a Tory govt here...
Having been TA,I can tell you that the FLN,though not perfect,was superior to the SA80 monstrosity that replaced it...
'British Unwarranted Cultural Superiority syndrome'?...
Nah,just cost cutting by successive govts who think that they know best for the military than the military...
"Could the phrase "'shoot dead insurgents" be referring to the practice of shooting seemingly dead terrorists to avoid surprise attacks?"
I'm sure its a typo or "Brit Speak" - but I thought of our poor soldier that shot the guy faking it (and caught on video) and was brought up on charges. I'm embarassed to say that I don't recall what our brave soldier's final fate was.
You are badly misinformed regarding the Al-Sadr uprising or you are forgetting that the uprising took place not just in US areas but across Iraq.
Sorry,Robby,but AlSadr's attacks came also against we British...
5th Aug 2004: Militants linked to the firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr declared holy war on British forces(in Basra, British forces had arrested four Sadr supporters on 3 Aug)
5th to 12th August 2004:
British troops fight fierce battles with militants in Amara and Basra.
British troops launched an offensive overnight on Tuesday [10 Aug.] against Shia fighters in the southern town of Amara, killing 10 of them.
'The purpose was to regain control of al-Amarah,' said Squadron Leader Spike Wilson, British forces spokesperson. 'Control is what it's all about.'
--('British troops kill 10', The Times, 12 Aug.)
The Black Watch have been reduced from a regiment to a battalion as part of the new Royal Regiment of Scotland.
They have NOT been 'disbanded'...
"Having been TA,I can tell you that the FLN,though not perfect,was superior to the SA80 monstrosity that replaced it..."
Could you please translate the abbreviations?
"I'm sure its a typo or "Brit Speak" - but I thought of our poor soldier that shot the guy faking it (and caught on video) and was brought up on charges. I'm embarassed to say that I don't recall what our brave soldier's final fate was."
I am pretty sure he got off---but not positive.
"The history is still there. Badly reported here on FR, and I would have expected any fellow UK chaps to say as such."
Glad to hear it.
"Are you suggesting that the Russians have infiltrated the UK armed forces and are controlling the policy of it?"
I am suggesting that leftists have infiltrated the UK Armed Forces (and the US Armed Forces) and are sometimes influencing specific policies---this would be one of them. I believe the Russians exert control over left-wing organizations in the upper level and exert considerable influence on the thinking that goes on throughout those organizations.
I believe the Russians have achieved certain amounts of penetration in most institutions in Western societies. The amounts of penetration vary widely, and I know very little about what is going on in Great Britain (but overall, it does not look good).
What I'm saying, in a general sense, is that the coordination of the different forces in the Left around the world is too great to be explained by a anything but that they are following central leadership.
We know that the Russians founded International Communism in the first half of the 20th century. In the US, communism faded, but something called the New Left rose to prominence. Now, a large number of the leaders of the Democratic Party are people who used to be in the New Left.
I maintain that the Russians continued their penetration of Western societies in the second half of the 20th century---but they just developed a technique that was so careful that it has not been detected. in addition, Russian influence over the mainstream media and in academia helps blind people to what is going on.
In the US, for example, it has been observed that the State Department operates as a unit in service of enemies of the United States quite consistently(Dangerous Diplomacy, How the State Department Undermines Americans Security, by Joel Mowbray, 2003, Regnery Publishing. He is a writer for National Review Online.) The US State Department is a fairly extreme example, in my opinion, of Russian penetration.
This policy that has developed in the British army in Iraq strikes me as the kind of thing that is the product of Russian penetration. It is an example of people inside an army---it seems to me---serving the enemy.
I don't mean to imply tight Russian control over the personnel in question. If you talked to them, they would probably espouse a variety of leftist ideas to support their actions. But I am saying that the Russians are directly controlling the Worldwide Left, albeit they hold the reins somewhat loosely---because their absolutely prime rule is to avoid detection---everything else is secondary.
"Standard infantry weapon for UK Army is the SA80A. Modified for desert use, it has proven very reliable in combat this time round. It more accurate than the M16 given to bullpup design which allows for better weight distribution and handling.
Very good rifles."
Thanks.
" I think it was because everyone who was handed the L85A1 set personal bests on their markmanship test. This gun was so accurate that they had to redesign the test by moving the target distances out because too many people were scoring at or near perfect.
Thus, I can see why your experience with the gun shows reliability problems. Similar to why the AK is the worlds gun of choice for it's durability and simplicity when compared with the M-16."
Woah, you're getting mixed up about me. I've never been a soldier, I've just been trying to find out what's going on.
"BUT I know a few serving soldiers and not one has anything other than respect the horrible job your men and women are doing,as they are."
We're running into language problems again. In American, a "horrible job" is a job very poorly done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.