I wasn't trying to say there is a 'right' way or a 'wrong' way. Both approaches are valid, but in different context of military conflict.
The US no doubt is about as close to 100% as you can get for the prosecution of War.
The British approach is better suited to a kind of policing operation, once 'major combat operations' are over and done with.
Its a trade off, but I would say a necessary one if we are to get the Iraqi's on board as a nation. This is now a policing role, where 'force' really must be used as a last resort. The faster the Iraqis are on board in heart and mind, then the faster all of our boys and girls can come home. It will save lives, on all sides, in the long run.
Look how long it took the UK army to get over the 'Bloody Sunday' massacre. That was a perfect recruiting tool for the IRA, and we learned that such acts are in the end counter-productive.
-- I wasn't trying to say there is a 'right' way or a 'wrong' way. Both approaches are valid, but in different context of military conflict.---
Totally agree. I was meaning the tone of the original article from the UK - with its "superior" attitude. And while I'm sure we've learned a lot from them on "policing" issues, I think we learned lots of lessons on our own as well.
What is the quote for the Marines? Something like "No better friend, no worse enemy"?