Get out now
Xinhua – English — The beginning of the end.
Britain’s chief of the general staff called for a withdrawal of British troops from Iraq, warning that British military presence there only exacerbates security problems.
General Sir Richard Dannatt said Britain should “get ourselves out sometime soon because our presence exacerbates the security problems.” Such unusually frank remarks from a serving soldier suggest that Sir Richard disagrees with government policy, which calls for troops to stay until Iraqi forces can take over, agaencies reported.
Well, there’s some good news, this morning. The poor buggers in the British Army might get to start heading home sooner than our lot.
Of course, even though Dannatt has been in the military for 35 years, serving all over the globe — American chickenhawks will still define his understanding as “cut-and-run”.
You’re in a country with a dozen factions trying to kill each other, and they all hate you. Even the so called friendlies are trying to milk you out of a dollar before they put a bullet in your back. It doesn’t exactly take a 30+ year Sandhurst graduate to come to that conclusion.
lol, so everyone pulls out, and what happens?
Things won’t calm down or stabalize as the peace-loving dreamers wish it would (I’m a peace-loving dreamer by the way, however I also have an ounce of common sense).
Someone worse than Hussein is going to get into power, genocide is most likely going to run rampant, and the conflict will probably spread.
I don’t see how else it could go, so one of you super-intelligent know-it-all armchair generals please enlighten me as to how pulling out is a good thing (when involved in military actions).
Simple Matt, it won’t be our guys dying and that’s a good thing. Let the muslims kill all the muslims they need to.
Don’t mean to dump on you Matt; but, let’s don’t avoid cause-and-effect relationships. Our government invaded Iraq. All this crap followed on as a result. Because our nation is led by dodos — and populated with lemmings — is no reason to continue participation and support for ignorance.
Sadly, Improbus, the same applies to your analysis. Muslims killing muslims is a result — not a cause. I wonder what would have happened if our Fearless Leader stepped before the trolls in Kongress before the invasion and requested cooperation in invading Iraq — admitting the possibility of the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, thousands of American and “coalition” soldiers, and years of ongoing murder and turmoil after “Mission Accomplished”?
Incidentally, Dannatt is already feeling the political heat for truth-telling. He’s issued one of those brief statements, this morning, about — “we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with our American bullshit, blah, blah, blah”. I guess he spent too much time being a soldier instead of politician — didn’t realize how much trouble he’d be in for telling the truth.
My only fear would be the perpetuation of the idea that we (we being the western world, ie the US and Britain) created the mess in the Middle East, which we most certainly did, and the creation of a more radical and fundamentalist state.
It’s easy to say let’s pull our guys out – I’m also tired of seeing all the death and destruction, as much as anyone else (plus I was in Iraq twice, 2003 and 2004, trust me I know firsthand how bad it is). Like I said, it’s easy to pull our guys out, but is it right? We’re all sort of reaping what our governments have sown. What’s going to happen in 10, 25, 50 years? If we don’t take care of this problem, what world issues will our children face?
Even the stupidest war has a time limit. Iraq has always lasted longer than US involvement in WW2. And to wage war on the other side of the globe is hideously expensive.
The saddest thing is the people who die while the idiot, poisonous US political class stumble blindly for months / years tying to find a politically expediant way to disengage.
Matt : “Someone worse than Hussein is going to get into power, genocide is most likely going to run rampant, and the conflict will probably spread.”
I remember hearing such talk after Vietnam, communism would spread like wildfire, the red hoards would be at our doorstep raping our women and children.
‘so one of you super-intelligent know-it-all armchair generals please enlighten me as to how pulling out is a good thing (when involved in military actions). ‘
Its you who is playing armchair general. The real General has spoken his piece. Did you read it?
I’m of a mind that we’ve accomplished much of what most Americans wanted done. Iraq/Saddam will not pose a threat of any kind for generations to come (I’ll not debate the severity of the original threat now), and the Arabs are determined to fight amongst each other instead of with us and our allies. Democracy and stability would be nice, but that was always up to them, not us.
However, too many people want to frame any withdrawl as a loss, which a bit idiotic and makes an honest discussion unworkable. Most countries around the world would love to ‘lose’ like that.
Mark, I’m by far no expert, but I believe that Vietnam and Iraq are fairly different.
As far as the British General making that decision to pull troops out, I would say it is more of a political decision than a military decision – if you want to talk about numbers, the coalition is winning. I guess its all about what price you’re willing to pay to win.
Numbers? Like body counts? Great. We’ are winning? What the fuck are we winning? Oil? Democracy for Iraq? What? Name something.
The only people winning in this undeclared “war”, again are the arms dealers and military contractors, the Military Industrial Complex that President Eisenhower warned us about. But I guess thats just conspiarcy.
10. If you want talk about numbers, the U.S. also won the Vietnam conflict. It was never actually declared a war. There are differences between the two military actions, but there are also too many similarities. According to polls, most of the Iraqis want the U.S. to leave. What good is it really doing to stay there? It’s already out of control. Maybe we should leave, let them fight it out, then we can tell the winner that we will help them rebuild, if they want that help.
13. I hear you but it seems every time we back the “winner”, it comes back to bite us square in the ass. We certainly need to help them get the lights back on, but we havent been able to do that even.
So Matt, again, I want to know what the prize is buudy? What are we winning. Please name something?
Mark, you know, I’ve kept pretty civil in my thoughts on here. I would at least expect/appreciate you doing the same. My main point has been that when you have a choice to turn tail and run, or stay and try to clean up the mess you made, the right decision isn’t always the easiest decision.
The prize? If we accomplish what we’re supposed to accomplish, victory for us would be ending the insurgency and having the Iraqi people run a stable democratic government. Do I think that will happen? Probably not.
I’m not trying to convince anyone here that anything I believe is the right answer.
Part of me wants us to stay in the fight because I fought there, and people I served with left blood and died in that festering crap hole – for what? If the US abandons Iraq, any shred of reasoning for us to be there is going to be gone, and no one but soldiers, sailors, marines, and airman can know what it’s like to be trapped like that, trying to find reason or cause in the madness that our own government put us in. I mean, I know its pretty inevitable that we’re going to pull out once the Democrats get in charge, but until then, at least for me, I’ve got to believe that there were decent people there worth saving, a better future for the kids there, and a reason so many of our own gave so much.
Like I said, I don’t expect anyone besides folks who served there to understand what it means for us to see it through to the end, maybe it’s vindication for everything we’ve gone through, the light at the end of the tunnel so to speak. But, whatever.
Matt, I am a veteran also, and I appreciate anyone (you) who takes years out of their lives to serve. I served 8 years. Which is why I feel strongly about this issue. I’m much older now, hopefully a little wiser, and have studied history and the history of warfare for many years. The convoluted reasons we have intervened in the Middle East in the past and present. And I see no justification in what we are doing there, aside from the fact the your comrades and yourself are just being used, as mine were. I have seen reports on how returning vets (Gulf War Syndrome) are treated by a “grateful nation” who buy plastic stickers made in China by slave labor. So please, dont take my comments as an affront to yourself. I dont see where anyone but the arms dealers and Halliburtons (Cheneys) benefitting.
or..
reduce troups and go back to strategic bombing…
or..
reinstate the draft.. and win it WWII style..
i suppose there’s a middle ground.. but noone likes 3rd party politics
The British have approximatly 7000 troops in what is unargueably the safest part of Irag, outside the Kurdish run portion. They are having problems because they allowed themselves to get stupid and take sides in the local politics. That and the fact that Iran has been fermenting trouble in that area since not long after Baghdad fell. It is, after all the Shia area, and Iran has made itself protector of them.
This is just another nail in the coffin of a united Iraq. I’ll say it again….just pull back our people to Kuwait and the Kurdish areas, allow the Kurds to build up their local armed forces. Declare victory and leave. Iran will protect the Shia south, the Saudi’s will protect the Sunni middle and western parts and the Kurds will take care of themselves.
Of course this won’t happen, because the Sunni middle and west dosn’t have any oil, it’s all in the Kurdish and Shia areas.
Oh….and before we go….turn the lights out on Mutqar, the militia leader for killing so many Americans and others.
Leave, let them kill each other. Then we can come back and finish off whom ever is left.