Results 1 to 20 of 63

Thread: The British In Iraq (merged thread)

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member Chris jM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    176

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    Thus my question still stands. We all know we got it wrong. Why has never been explained.
    Does the common perception of neo-con strategy explain the lack of boots-on-ground? As in, does:

    a) the preponderance of technology and air-power, network-ified forces and the understanding of manoeuvrist doctrine amongst the military was such that they were so 'force multiplied' that they didn't need to obey conventional principles such as mass and concentration, and

    b) the inevitable march of democracy ensuring a liberated Iraqi population would embrace the concept of a post-Saddam elected government,

    explain the why?

    I've heard this touted as the key reasons behind American mis-calculations and I wonder if this extended to the British High Command as well.

    Or c), was this a hypothetical question casting a wry and cynical view upon the ability of the modern military to apply history and common sense to the contemporary environment, which I have subsequently proceeded to completely misconstrue?
    '...the gods of war are capricious, and boldness often brings better results than reason would predict.'
    Donald Kagan

  2. #2
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default A point of view

    Why did the UK fail in southern Iraq, an area dominated by the city of Basra?

    I shall leave alone the in country military strategy and tactics followed.

    What puzzled me and I suspect others was why the UK stayed in Iraq after Tony Blair handed the Prime Minister's job to Gordon Brown in June 2007 (after winning an election in 2005), who we are told was never enthusiastic IIRC on the intervention. The war was unpopular across the UK, notably, but not exclusively in the traditional areas of Labour Party electoral support. Politically IMHO it would have made political sense - electorally - for Gordon Brown to exit quickly and this was - allegedly - discussed.

    The UK in Southern Iraq sat astride the MSR from Kuwait and such announced exit would have alarmed the USA, being polite. The 'surge' was announced in January 2007 and major operations started in June 2007. Not a time for redeploying US forces to replace the UK.

    The UK government decided it was necessary to stay, but without a commitment to allocate a level of resources to do more than the minimum and secure the MSR. The price of the 'special relationship' I suggest?

    Note in June 2006 the UK decided to deploy for the first time to Helmand Province, which became unpopular at home too.
    davidbfpo

Similar Threads

  1. The argument to partition Iraq
    By SWJED in forum Iraqi Governance
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 03-10-2008, 05:18 PM
  2. US Senator's Iraq Trip Comments: WSJ 15 June 07
    By TROUFION in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-2007, 04:26 PM
  3. Roggio Interview on the Media and Iraq
    By phil b in forum The Information War
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-23-2007, 03:10 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-20-2006, 07:14 PM
  5. Demographics of Service in Iraq
    By SWJED in forum The Whole News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-26-2006, 10:52 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •