Taking Basra

[WHISTLED]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/200803...h-43a8d4f.html

I suspect a lot more British soldiers will be killed or injured if they try to re-take the city.. The locals have had a lot of time to prepare and re group.

Im sure they have had special forces ilay up in the city for ages though, they had been providing 'intelligence' to the local forces recently but had not been involved in military operations.

[papa smurf]

they should imo pack up and come home this is all pointless.

[WHISTLED]

Or level it - We still need the oil ha

[BBKing]

We haven't got the forces to go back in and take it, so it won't happen. A few artillery shells won't take a city, merely wee off the locals, who seem to have won, in the sense of still being intact as a force and in charge of territory (see Lebanon 2006 for details of this strategy). Anyway, what on earth's the point of supporting Iranian-backed Shia paramilitaries against Iraqi nationalist paramilitaries? The whole thing stinks, but if the reports that KBR are building US Army standard catering facilities at Basra airport the end-game may be, as a US official says:

"American blood is going to have to buy off the British failure in Basra."

Well, there's gratitude, you septic git. Troops Home Now, I say.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by WHISTLED

Or level it - We still need the oil ha

not putting any of that foreign muck in my car ,i only buy British petroleum

[frogstamper]

Originally Posted by BBKing

We haven't got the forces to go back in and take it, so it won't happen. A few artillery shells won't take a city, merely wee off the locals, who seem to have won, in the sense of still being intact as a force and in charge of territory (see Lebanon 2006 for details of this strategy). Anyway, what on earth's the point of supporting Iranian-backed Shia paramilitaries against Iraqi nationalist paramilitaries? The whole thing stinks, but if the reports that KBR are building US Army standard catering facilities at Basra airport the end-game may be, as a US official says:



Well, there's gratitude, you septic git. Troops Home Now, I say.

Our troops have more than done their bit, in fact as far as I can see the only reason we are still there is to keep the Americans happy, because if we were to leave now the calls in America to withdraw also would be overwhelming, especially in an election year.
As regards "the British have failed in Basra" what more were our soldiers supposed to do, after handing over control of the city to the Iraqis, did the US expect our Army to stay at Basra palace getting mortared everyday? I predict the same thing will happen in Baghdad when the US pulls back, this country like any other, will stand or fall because of what the Iraqi people do, not what the US or Brits or anyone does, and this is whats going on in Basra now.

[Zee]

All this crap wouldn't be happening if they didn't get rid of Saddam, 20% or more of the population has left Iraq now because of all this crap.

What good have they done? Nothing.

Saddam may have been many things but at least he had control over his country, at least people had their own businesses and a good life, now look at the country.

Attacking it for oil, makes me sick.

[Derek S]

Originally Posted by Zee

Saddam may have been many things but at least he had control over his country, at least people had their own businesses and a good life, now look at the country.

A good life?

Ok. I'd hate to see what you think a bad life is.

[BBKing]

Saddam may have been many things but at least he had control over his country,

You know it's bad when the people of Basra, who have more reasons than almost anyone (except the Kurds) to hate Saddam, are apparently remembering the old sod with a degree of nostalgia.

Ok. I'd hate to see what you think a bad life is.

Compared to the current mess there* life under a deeply unpleasant dictator who could be relied upon mostly to leave you alone unless you got in his way (in which case bad luck) must seem positively idyllic.

* in no particular order; unemployment, a moribund economy, poor schools, under-fire universities, overworked medical facilities, being bombed by the Americans, being blown up by Sunni nutters, being shot by Shia nutters, being shelled by the British, being shelled by the Turks, being mortared by the Mahdi Army, paying for fuel on the black market in a country with huge oil reserves, having no power, no water and sewage in the street, cholera and if you manage to escape and get to the UK we deport you because it's 'safe' to return you to Iraq. Oh, and having prominent US politicians come over and tell you how great your life is now they kicked Saddam outta power. That must have them rolling in the aisles.

[frogstamper]

Its not often Id agree with something coming out of the Bush administration, but Colin Powell's warning does seem very prophetic now, "if you break it you own it". No matter how awful Saddam's Iraq was the one thing the majority of the people had was security, granted due to the fear of stepping out of line, but Id bet a lot of Iraqis would trade that against their current situation.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by BBKing

Compared to the current mess there* life under a deeply unpleasant dictator who could be relied upon mostly to leave you alone unless you got in his way (in which case bad luck) must seem positively idyllic.

How exactly did 10 year old Shia boys get in the way of Saddam to warrant being dragged from their beds at night and shot in the backs of their heads?

[BBKing]

How exactly is it in anyone's interest for Maliki to attempt to start a civil war which has been ended when al-Sadr, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Maliki's own party, our allies met in Iran to sort it out?

Xac - what's your actual position on the recent Iraq events, rather than just dredging up what happened 20 years and a million deaths ago in order to set up yet another in a long line of straw men in an attempt to distract us? I could mention all the children killed in US air strikes or the civilians killed in the civil war started by our ally using the army we trained*, but it makes me feel slightly dirty. I'm not actually sure you have a viable position and arguing over the deaths of children attempts to hide this.

* apart from those bits that sensibly deserted or changed sides or refused to fight their fellow countrymen.

[LemmyP]

As I understand it the current move is not into the city but to establish control around it while the Iraqi army take action against the militias inside. I see this not as an extra burden on our troops but as a chance to see that the hard work they have previously done is now bearing fruit as the Iraqi's start taking control of their own security. Unless this is successful Colin Powell is, regrettably, right; we can't just leave and dump the Iraqi's into a civil war on top of all the damage we have already done.

And no, I wasn't in favour of the war, but I think that having gone in it is our responsibility to try and sort out the mess. If we were to leave now it would get much worse.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by BBKing

How exactly is it in anyone's interest for Maliki to attempt to start a civil war which has been ended when al-Sadr, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Maliki's own party, our allies met in Iran to sort it out?

Xac - what's your actual position on the recent Iraq events, rather than just dredging up what happened 20 years and a million deaths ago in order to set up yet another in a long line of straw men in an attempt to distract us? I could mention all the children killed in US air strikes or the civilians killed in the civil war started by our ally using the army we trained*, but it makes me feel slightly dirty. I'm not actually sure you have a viable position and arguing over the deaths of children attempts to hide this.

* apart from those bits that sensibly deserted or changed sides or refused to fight their fellow countrymen.

My post was in response to your suggestion that Saddam was mostly only a problem to those who "got in his way (in which case bad luck)" when clearly that was not the case.
Under Saddam, millions who had not "got in his way" were killed or left to die.
I know in the past you've dismissed the mass graves simply because the numbers found are lower than what was first reported, as though even just one mass grave is somehow not worth speaking ill of Saddam.

[tweetypie/8]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

they should imo pack up and come home this is all pointless.

true words papa,shouldnt have been there in the first place.