 H/T The Corner Michael Rubin. This is from IRNA: Islamic Republic News Agency
The US and the UK must "admit defeat" in Iraq and stop fighting "a hopeless war," according to one of Britain's most distinguished generals.
General Sir Michael Rose also controversially suggested that the insurgents in Iraq were right to try to force US troops out of their country. "I don't excuse them for some of the terrible things they do, but I do understand why they are resisting," Rose told BBC's Newsnight programme.
| "They just don't know any better. They aren't like us. We'd never do that." |
"It is the soldiers who have been telling me from the frontline that the war they have been fighting is a hopeless war, that they cannot possibly win it," he revealed.
| I'll bet they haven't said any such thing. |
"The sooner we start talking politics and not military solutions, the sooner they will come home and their lives will be preserved," said the general, who was commander of UN forces in Bosnia and head of Britain's elite SAS force.
| So goes the spirit of the Blitz, of Malaya, ... |
He suggested that it was time for Britain to bring its troops home from Iraq and said that this meant the UK government would have to admit defeat.
| Which he's salivating to do, since that would bring down Tony, who's leaving anyway. |
Last month, Rose said that Prime Minister Tony Blair must be impeached over the Iraq war before he leaves office because of the catastrophe it has caused to the country's armed forces. "Iraq has been such a serious setback to Britain's standing in the world, Blair should be held accountable in Parliament. He cannot just walk away from this in a few weeks' time," he said in an interview with the Daily Mail.
| Wonder why he hasn't appeared on The View? He and Rosie would get along quite well. |
In his latest interview with Newsnight, the general drew similarities between the tactics of the Iraqi insurgents, who he warned would not give up, and the US War of Independence against the British over 200 years ago.
| I'm just guessing that he doesn't understand the difference between al-Qaeda, an Anbar tribal chief, a Shi'a tribal chief, and a Sadrist. Just guessing. |
"If I was an American, as I am an Englishman, as long as one Englishman remained on American native soil, I would never, never, never lay down my arms," he quoted former Prime Minister Lord Chatham saying at the time. "The British admitted defeat in North America and the
catastrophes that were predicted at the time never happened," Rose said.
| Perhaps because the American rebels were different in a couple of ways from the Iraqi Sunni terrorists and Iranian-backed Sadrists? Could it possibly be that American rebels had expressed certain thoughts in the Declaration of Independence that are totally at odds with whatever al Qaeda and the Sadrists might believe? Anyone? Bueller? |
He also said that the catastrophes predicted after the US withdrawal from Vietnam in the 1960s never happened and that the "same thing will occur after we leave Iraq."
| Nope, nothing bad happened in Vietnam after we left. Except for the million boat people. And the half-million Vietnamese who were killed by the new regime. And the half-million Vietnamese tossed into concentration camps. Oh, and the Khmer Rouge. Something about 'killing fields' as I recall, but I'm sure the General must be right. He's a believer. |
In other news about this General:
Published: April 24, 1995
In his third and strongest hourlong report from Bosnia, Peter Jennings takes aim at Lieut. Gen. Sir Michael Rose, the former commander of the United Nations forces in that battered land. The specific charge of "The Peacekeepers: How the United Nations Failed in Bosnia" is that having declared the towns of Gorazde and Bihac to be safe havens, the United Nations, represented in the field by General Rose, allowed the Serbian aggressors to get away with murder.
General Rose, in the critical view of relief workers and military officers, played down the Serbian attacks and responded feebly or not at all despite his ability to direct NATO air power against the aggressors. General Rose's explanation, under the tough questioning of Mr. Jennings, that the United Nations and NATO are on a peacekeeping mission not a war mission, seems weak and evasive, especially when his words are accompanied by scenes of besieged civilians under incessant attack. |
