The Light at the End of the Tunnel for UK

Quote:

---

Report: U.K. Troops May Leave Iraq by 2006

LONDON (AP) - British troops could leave Iraq by the end of 2006, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said in a television interview to be broadcast on Sunday. Britain's top soldier said this timetable was well within the realm of possibility.

Talabani said Iraqi troops should be ready to take over from British forces in the southern provinces around Basra by the end of next year, adding no Iraqis wanted foreign troops to remain indefinitely in their country.

But he warned that an immediate withdrawal of U.S.-led forces would be a catastrophe for Iraq and would lead to civil war, with harmful consequences for the entire Middle East.

``We don't want British forces forever in Iraq. Within one year - I think at the end of 2006 - Iraqi troops will be ready to replace British forces in the south,'' Talabani said in the interview with Jonathan Dimbleby for Independent Television. The station released details from the interview before it aired.

British army chief of staff Gen. Sir Mike Jackson, said Sunday that this timetable was ``well within the range of what is realistically possible.''

``The president has said that we could leave within year or so. I would agree - we most certainly could. But it's a question of achieving the right conditions,'' Jackson told the British Broadcasting Corp.'s Sunday A.M. program.

Pressed on whether the assessment amounted to a commitment, Talabani replied: ``Well, I haven't been in negotiations, but in my opinion and according to my study of the situation, I can say that it is the just estimation of the situation ... There is not one Iraqi that wants that forever the troops remain in the country.''

He said, however, that immediate withdrawal ``would lead to a kind of civil war and ... we will lose what we have done for liberating Iraq from worst kind of dictatorship.''

``Instead of having a democratic, stable Iraq, we will have a civil war in Iraq, we will have troubles in Iraq, (and they) will affect all the Middle East.''

Talabani called for a gradual pullout, with close coordination between coalition nations and the Iraqi authorities.

He acknowledged that an upsurge of violence could be expected in the run-up to National Assembly elections, scheduled for Dec. 15, but denied that insurgents would be able to influence the result of the ballot.

``I think they will fail, because the Iraqi people are now determined to participate in election,'' Talabani said. ``Even our Sunni Arab brothers are participating actively - they have many lists for election, and they want to be represented in the next parliament.''

Talabani denied there was any link between Britain's involvement in the war in Iraq and the July 7 terror attacks in London that killed 56 people, including the four suicide bombers.

``I cannot accept this,'' he said.

---

I too doubt it has anything to do with the bombings, but more with Blair's failing popularity at the polls.

ichi:bow:

Well now that theres a time table at least now the terrorists can take a year's hiatus, and will be fresh and ready to take down the new government the day coalition troops leave. ~:rolleyes:

Theres a difference between not having a plan and not revealing your plan to the enemy. Basic Military Strategy 101, man..

Nice dodge. :duel:

and there was I thinking the thread was named after that lying liar Bliar losing the crucial terrorism vote in the Commons, thus precipitating his downfall. The man should be put in front of a judge, the duplicitous, disingenuous charlatan....a bloody disgrace.

Quote:

---

Theres a difference between not having a plan and not revealing your plan to the enemy. Basic Military Strategy 101, man..

---

Under normal a military situation I agree, but in this case politics is involved and that cause military logic to fly out of the window.

To sum it up:
Military+Politics=Bad

I'll believe it when I see it ~;)

And since when are you a military strategist PJ, what did you expect to happen everyone gets out of bed one Thursday and decides to leave?

Quote:

---

Well now that theres a time table at least now the terrorists can take a year's hiatus, and will be fresh and ready to take down the new government the day coalition troops leave.

---

Here was me thinking that the idea was that when we leave that the Iraqis should be able to take care of themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

That has to be the crappiest excuse for not having a plan I have ever heard.

---

Agreed.

However much you (for whatever reasons) embrace and love American politicians, the planning for the Iraqi invasion was rather absent. "We'll shoot all their soldiers and then they will all shower us with flowers and dance in the streets in a new utopia" was a bit naive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinus

Under normal a military situation I agree, but in this case politics is involved and that cause military logic to fly out of the window.

To sum it up:
Military+Politics=Bad

---

Military + Politics = Vietnam

Bout Time....

all i can say is Finally!

we needed to get out of there months ago, we went in, did the job we needed to do then waited around getting shot at, pointless.

at least we're pulling out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Theres a difference between not having a plan and not revealing your plan to the enemy. Basic Military Strategy 101, man..

---

Well in this case I consider it quite hard to cover up your plan for the average Iraqi and if he know, the average terrorist know. Admittably not a year ahead, but probably a few month. So unless you do a statement in the style of: "we will withdraw this day, no matter what", that statement isn't going to do that much difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ja'chyra

Here was me thinking that the idea was that when we leave that the Iraqis should be able to take care of themselves.

---

That should be the plan.

I would love to see coalition forces leave and have the new Iraq military be attacked by “insurgents” hoping to take advantage of the situation and then see the Iraq’s kick their tails. And then having Iraq thank the coalition forces for sticking around until they were strong enough to take care of them selves with a tanker full of free oil. ~:cheers:

Not likely to happen, but that’s what I’d like to see.~D

You sure it's not an oncoming train?

Well now that theres a time table at least now the terrorists can take a year's hiatus, and will be fresh and ready to take down the new government the day coalition troops leave.
But in the British sector the terrorists are the new government Panzer ~:doh:

You sure it's not an oncoming train?
Would that oncoming train be the redeployment to Afghanistan .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

But in the British sector the terrorists are the new government Panzer ~:doh:

---

Not only there. It seems the new, democratically elected central government is taking a big leaf from its jailed predecessor.

The raid was at a building in central Baghdad. Men armed with automatic rifles burst in and made their way to a set of underground cells where they found 175 people huddled together. They had been captured by paramilitaries and tortured. The terrified, mainly Sunni, captives had been held in an office of the Iraqi interior ministry, and the rescue party were Iraqi police and American soldiers.

Yesterday, 24 hours later, the Prime Minister, Ibrahim Jaafari, promised an investigation after the shocking demonstration of how paramilitary units working for the government, and death squads allegedly linked to it, are waging a savage war in the shadows.

People are arrested and disappear for months. Bodies appear every week of men, and sometimes women, executed with their hands tied behind their backs. Some have been grotesquely mutilated with knives and electric drills before their deaths.

The Independent

Not only there. It seems the new, democratically elected central government is taking a big leaf from its jailed predecessor.
No that cannot be true Adrian because .....well because ....
In a free Iraq, there will be no more wars of aggression against your neighbors, no more poison factories, no more executions of dissidents, no more torture chambers and rape rooms. The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near.

See , there cannot be torture or execution of dissidents , and certainly not death squads or tyrany .

So lets recap , we have terrorists running things down South and a vile regime in the central government .
So at least we have the North eh . Well apart from the rapes , murder , looting , arson , political assasinations , torture and terrorists in the Northern government .
Hoo-bloody-ray everthings coming up roses .

The light at the end of the tunnel is Afghanistan by the looks of things.

Deja vu from colonial times here...

So, basically, now the Shi'ite majority has started getting nasty on the Sunnis with at least tacit governement approval. And the Sunni strongholds in central and western Iraq have even more reason to make allies of circumstance out of the foreign jihadists. The Kurdish north is apparently relatively stable, but it wasn't that long ago that there were odd skirmishes with Turkey...

Oh yeah, and wasn't that half-baked draft of a constitution they ratified recently basically a blueprint for a federation ?

I'm starting to see why the Brits would want to pull out. It's not too fancy of a risks-rewards assessement really, and that's long before domestic politics come in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

I'm starting to see why the Brits would want to pull out.

---

A little history couldn't hurt.

The British occupied Iraq almost one hundred years ago, in 1917. They came as 'liberators', they said; the British commander in Baghdad, Lieutenant-General Stanley Maude, issued a proclamation to that effect in English and Arabic.

Your citizens have been subject to the tyranny of strangers (..) and your fathers and yourselves have groaned in bondage. Your sons have been carried off to wars not of your seeking, your wealth has been stripped from you by unjust men and squandered in different places. It is the wish not only of my King and his peoples, but it is also the wish of the great Nations with whom he is in alliance, that you should prosper even as in the past when your lands were fertile. It is the hope and desire of the British people (..) that the Arab race may rise once more to greatness and renown amongst the peoples of the Earth. Therefore I am commanded to invite you, through your Nobles and Elders and Representatives, to participate in the management of your civil affairs in collaboration with the Political Representative of Great Britain.

Within a couple of years the British occupiers were facing a serious guerilla which they tried to counter with punitive expeditions. Because they were afraid to engage in house to house combat (even though the British invading army counted 600.000 men) they decided to bomb towns from the air. The first town they bombed to smithereens was Fallujah.

In the end they couldn't 'pacify' the country, so they withdrew and left a monarch behind who would hopefully do their bidding. This monarchy was later toppled by nationalist officers who despised outside influences and wanted to unite the Arab and Muslim world against western imperialism.

Sound familiar?

A little history couldn't hurt.

Why not give a little history on Britains involvement in their next destination while you are at it Adrian .~;)

You forgot that they happily mustard gassed a few rebellious villages from the air or something along those lines, or that their local puppet ruler at one point at least suggested they at least try to avoid constantly snubbing him in public, it being damaging for what little authority he had and detrimental for them both...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

A little history couldn't hurt.

Why not give a little history on Britains involvement in their next destination while you are at it Adrian .~;)

---

I gave it some thought, but we don't want to frighten our soon-to-be-enlisted friends too much, do we?

You forgot that they happily mustard gassed a few rebellious villages from the air or something along those lines
NO no no , they were Kurds , Kurds are terrorists , just ask Saddam .~;)

Plus the "old treacherous tribal riff-raff, enemies of the British Raj," (to paraphrase a Giles cartoon from 1980) seem to have been relatively unimpressive as of late...

Plus the "old treacherous tribal riff-raff, enemies of the British Raj," (to paraphrase a Giles cartoon from 1980) seem to have been relatively unimpressive as of late...
Nope , its just that the majority of the media are not bothering to report it much at the moment .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

(..) that their local puppet ruler at one point at least suggested they at least try to avoid constantly snubbing him in public, it being damaging for what little authority he had and detrimental for them both...

---

They made poor Faisal sign up to the Balfour Declaration. Here he is, together with Chaim Weizmann, in 1918.

https://img188.imageshack.us/img188/...eizmann8hs.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Plus the "old treacherous tribal riff-raff, enemies of the British Raj," (to paraphrase a Giles cartoon from 1980) seem to have been relatively unimpressive as of late...

---

Basically the Brits have been there, done that, and they all have the T-shirt to show for it -- all except Tony of course.

What the Brits are leaving!!!!????!!!!! no tea no crumpets aw christ the whole war is going to get deralied. they were they did what they said theyd do and they may leave.