Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Strains of war test the allies - British dismay at US checkpoint killings
The Times (UK) ^ | April 02, 2003 | David Charter, Tom Baldwin and Michael Evans

Posted on 04/01/2003 11:18:43 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

TENSIONS between Britain and the US over the conduct of the Iraq war were growing last night as British commanders voiced their dismay at American soldiers’ heavy-handed tactics.

The strains burst into the open after US troops fired on a civilian vehicle, killing the driver, hours after seven Iraqi women and children were shot dead at a checkpoint. An Apache helicopter was also said to have blown up a lorry, killing 15 members of a single family, yesterday.

Such killings highlighted a series of military and political differences that senior British government sources say are creating “hairline cracks in the relationship”.

The military relationship has been strained by “friendly fire” deaths, an incident in which a Royal Marine commander complained that US troops endangered his men, and the Americans’ general attitude to the Iraqi population.

Politically, the allies have been at odds over the treatment of prisoners of war, plans for postwar Iraq and the Middle East peace process. Britain has also been dismayed by Donald Rumsfeld’s threatening noises towards Iran and Syria.

Monday’s checkpoint shootings were seen as a disaster for the coalition’s efforts to win Iraqi hearts and minds. Asked if they undermined attempts to court the local population, Colonel Chris Vernon, a British army spokesman, replied: “It does indeed, and if you were a civilian watching that you would interpret it in that way.”

The difference in approach was epitomised yesterday when the Royal Marines in four southern Iraqi towns swapped their helmets for berets as a sign of goodwill. American troops wear helmets at all times and checkpoint troops cover their faces with goggles and scarves.

US commanders are also said to have instructed their troops to adopt tougher tactics to weed out militiamen. “Everyone is now seen as a combatant until proven otherwise,” one Pentagon official is reported as saying before Monday’s checkpoint shooting.

British military sources spoke at length about the hard-won experience of UK troops from manning checkpoints and policing in Northern Ireland. “There is no doubt that with that experience, as well as in peace support operations in countries such as Bosnia, Kosovo and Sierra Leone, the British have learnt the art of restraint,” one source said.

“The Americans have got a more blanket approach to things,” said another. “You will never see their Marines wandering around in berets. They still wear hard helmets in Bosnia. You have got to be very careful you do not win the battle and lose the war. We have to be sensitive and we do not want to build up any resentment in the country.”

A senior American officer involved in war planning acknowledged yesterday that the US had misjudged the mood of the Iraqi people. “There is the information/psychological front that we try to push but we are probably not as sophisticated about it as we want to be,” he said. “There is a big cultural difference between the United States and the Arab world that makes it hard.

“Are we getting the message across to the educated people? We are. But to the people that want to be moved by the emotion and believe that there are no good motives and think that the United States are here for oil and only for oil, we have got to get the message across better.”

Tensions between the two countries’ forces had already surfaced after the deaths of three British servicemen in two “friendly fire” incidents after which one survivor accused an American A10 pilot of showing no regard for human life. A Royal Marine commander also accused the Americans of abandoning his men during a joint operation in southern Iraq on the first night of the war.

Further differences have emerged over the treatment of prisoners of war — though government sources said last night that Washington had now promised that all would be given the protection of the Geneva Convention.

But the Middle East is potentially the most divisive issue. Tony Blair has staked huge amounts of political capital to secure President Bush’s reluctant backing for implementing a new “road map” for the peace process to rebuild relations with Arab countries.

A key prime ministerial adviser said yesterday that if Mr Bush failed to fulfil his promises, that would represent a “significant breach which would change things in the future”. He added: “There are always stresses and strains in the structure of this relationship. There is no rift, but we are beginning to see hairline cracks.”

 


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: beret; checkpoints; civiliancasualties; iraq; iraqifreedom; warlist

1 posted on 04/01/2003 11:18:43 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Guess they haven't heard of the Iraqi terror tactics!

Iraqis Running Check Points were "Forced to do so" ^

2 posted on 04/01/2003 11:22:56 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Nuke Saddam and his Baby Milk Factories!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *war_list; W.O.T.; 11th_VA; Libertarianize the GOP; Free the USA; knak; MadIvan; PhiKapMom; ...
OFFICIAL BUMP(TOPIC)LIST
3 posted on 04/01/2003 11:23:32 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Nuke Saddam and his Baby Milk Factories!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Divisive BS from the Times...what a surprise.
4 posted on 04/01/2003 11:24:50 PM PST by servantoftheservant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
We savages, we cowboys,we ,who let the Jews run the country, will try to carefully consider adjusting to the ideals of the all knowing.
5 posted on 04/01/2003 11:25:06 PM PST by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The difference in approach was epitomised yesterday when the Royal Marines in four southern Iraqi towns swapped their helmets for berets as a sign of goodwill. American troops wear helmets at all times and checkpoint troops cover their faces with goggles and scarves.

Maybe they should have swapped them for turbans, and really give the Iraqis that warm and fuzzy feeling......

I guess they missed the photo of one of their own bloody limys showing off his helmet that deflected four bullets, saving his life.

6 posted on 04/01/2003 11:27:26 PM PST by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Actually, The UK has learned the hard way in terms of deploying troops into civilian areas. Although Northern Ireland was a different type of conflict, incidents like Bloody Sunday and others involving the death of civilians bolstered IRA recruitment in the 70s.

The US forces are seen as 'jittery' by the UK because of the recent UK fatalities due to friendly fire and also those involving civilian casualities.
7 posted on 04/02/2003 12:06:49 AM PST by jerej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
The turban idea is a good one. The Brits have a rep for being whiners. Something I learned when I was in Australia, they can't stand the Limys. Maybe we should let the Brits take over this check point business since they think their experience in dealing with the Irish is so similar.
8 posted on 04/02/2003 12:07:13 AM PST by Wifky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
No need to post this kind of crap,Ernie. This kind of writing is what got Peter Arnett fired. Pure liberal droll and how much of it is true???? who knows.
9 posted on 04/02/2003 12:18:24 AM PST by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The US and UK forces are doing great. The article IMO seems to be overly negative. There are some major differences tho' in how the each country's troops handle civilian populations and that is where the UK soldiers do have more experience. There is better/less biased article in the paper which illustrates this.

I think it is much harder for the US forces at this time to make a positive impression on iraqi civilians and doing this, whilst keeping up momentum towards Bahgdad remains one of the hardest aspects of this action.
10 posted on 04/02/2003 12:33:05 AM PST by Forceful1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

The Times (UK)

that's all I need to see to know the intent of this article

11 posted on 04/02/2003 12:56:19 AM PST by ibme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk
Arnett was probably the one who really wrote this article.
12 posted on 04/02/2003 1:09:26 AM PST by vnix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jerej
Am I imagining things, but does anyone else get the feeling that the US is always getting accused of being sloppy and brutish? Why does it seem that we are the only ones who are responsible for the 'friendly fire' incidents, or 'accidentally' firing on civilians?

This does happen to others forces from other countries too, doesn't it? It seems that the media, or someone is always implying that we, and we alone, are clumsy and brutish in warfare! We have had some unfortunate incidents, but our military is very professional as a whole. We couldn't be that accident-prone!
13 posted on 04/02/2003 1:35:04 AM PST by dsutah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dsutah
If you look at the statistics (Vietnam 58,000 US troops vs 1,000,000 vietnamese and in the battle of Mogadishu 18 Americans were killed and 100 wounded vs 1,500 somalis were dead and wounded) it is difficult to draw the conclusion that there wasn't at least some sloppy-ness. But then the whole 'clean war' thing is a bit of a myth, smart bombs are not that smart, etc.

The incidents in Iraqi are related to the fact that the US have more troops and more firepower than the other coalition forces and so US troops/arms are more likely to be involves in these incidents.

Nonetheless, running around with fancy hats on is not going to win hearts and minds. :)
14 posted on 04/02/2003 5:16:44 AM PST by jerej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jerej
Welcome to FR.
15 posted on 04/02/2003 5:19:23 AM PST by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dsutah
"Why does it seem that we are the only ones who are responsible for the 'friendly fire' incidents, or 'accidentally' firing on civilians?"

Well, considering the fact that two British tanks fired at each other during an operation near Basrah, I'd say that the Brits have a very limited memory with respect to such things.

16 posted on 04/02/2003 5:23:12 AM PST by BlueLancer (Der Elite Møøsenspåånkængruppen ØberKømmååndø (EMØØK))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson