Replies

"Just one small comment basra did actually fall just before bagdhad. (Official dates are the 7th and 9th respectively"

I don't doubt your official dates, but I was watching Fox News very early on Saturday Morning when their embedded reporter was driving in the armored column that drove through Baghdad, blasting anything and everything that threatened them. For all intents and purposes, everyone knew the jig was up from that point on. That was April 5th.

well the column didnt stay in bagdhad, it went in and sharply turned before leaving again. The UK 1st armoured division and the black watch were in the centre of basra on the 2nd day after surrounding it, they were ordered to withdraw. Personally for 25k soldiers on the ground, including engineers etc i cant see how such a small force could have possibly achieved more objectives than it did.

As mentioned, the uk is not happy about casualties, but it has served throughout our history to make people more determined to see it through to the end.The largest initial casualties were to the UK when the sea knight crashed. It had no effect on public opinion.
If centcom had been trying to keep the uk out of "fierce fighting" the initial risky operation (airborne insertion and amhipious assault are high risk) would have been assigned to navy seals.
IMHO the jobs were assigned where the forces were most suitable. Amphibious assaults are a royal speciality, the US had far superior logistics, and basra was not considered a strategic objective for the first week of the war.
So with this in mind, NOT fear of casualties on the part of the uk the objectives were assigned.

Hope that all makes sense im feeding my daughter at the same time