Article

2008-03-23 Iraq

US wants UK to lead surge in southern Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2008-03-23 00:48|| || Front Page|| [9 views ] Top
File under: Mahdi Army

#1 Well the bill is due ... America shouldn't have to cover the Brit's soft investment. Pony up Limeys the margins have been called and only hard coin of the British realm will do.

BTW CRUSH THEM PLZ! ~:")

Posted by RD">RD 2008-03-23 01:24|| 2008-03-23 01:24|| Front Page Top

#2 Well this is a nice proof that soft power and negotiation do not work in these situations. All they do is encourage the militia.

We told the Brits that but they were too busy crowing about how crude we were and how much more nuanced they were.

Now proven to be BS.

Posted by OldSpook 2008-03-23 01:34|| 2008-03-23 01:34|| Front Page Top

#3 If they had both they would have fixed Basra before pulling back.

I'm not so sure, Steve. I think many if not most of their commanders are wedded to the 'softly, softly' approach because it's become the default doctrine for the Brits.

America shouldn't have to cover the Brit's soft investment

From their point of view, Britain shouldn't have to take major casualties in a war they entered only because of US pressure.

Not saying that's a wise or long-term point of view for them to take, but it's pretty prevalent among Brits. And their huge welfare state is really straining to support even their current level of operations given how badly equipped many of their otherwise excellent troops are.

Posted by lotp 2008-03-23 07:25|| 2008-03-23 07:25|| Front Page Top

#4 From their point of view, Britain shouldn't have to take major casualties in a war they entered only because of US pressure.

I think the whole world should be involved in this struggle, but they are all hoping the US will pay for the bulk of it, both in treasure and blood.

And if you can get some other fool to carry your water for you by whatever means (including suicidal socialist apathy), then why not?

Posted by gorb 2008-03-23 08:33|| 2008-03-23 08:33|| Front Page Top

#5 How could anybody be so out of touch with British attitudes that they would propose this? I just hope they can defend heir island from the fifth columnists.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-03-23 08:40|| 2008-03-23 08:40|| Front Page Top

#6 "I think the whole world should be involved in this struggle, but they are all hoping the US will pay for the bulk of it, both in treasure and blood, AS USUAL."

Fixed that for ya', gorb.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2008-03-23 10:19|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/] 2008-03-23 10:19|| Front Page Top

#7 If all the Hope Mongers want to see the results of the Magic Man sitting down to talk with these jerks, they have the lesson plan readily available to peruse. Talking until you are out of breath is the name of their game. When you finally turn your back, they insert the long dagger. This, too, exposes the error in US policy. Unless we maintain occupation level forces, this hole will never be safe for the oil giants to extract the payload. What should have happened is massive supression until resistance was futile. Otherwise, let them fight it out for a few years. When the rubble subsides, deal with the victors. Even then, one must choose to deal with them, which may not be possible, or eliminate them. May be much wiser to pursue independent energy here. Then we simply starve these pests since they are not food sufficient. Would be much cheaper for us over the decades.

Posted by Woozle Elmeter 2700 2008-03-23 10:30|| 2008-03-23 10:30|| Front Page Top

#8 And I want Monty to whip Rommel's ass, but I think that time has passed.

Posted by regular joe 2008-03-23 14:31|| 2008-03-23 14:31|| Front Page Top

#9 Lotp, good point, soft power was indeed the order of the day initially for the Brits in Basra. But I think from the beginning that hard power wasn't an option because the Brits never had enough of it. If they had, they might have considered the option when things started getting sticky.

Gorb, getting us to pay and bleed for it is an extension of Euro policy towards NATO. Euro leaders were never willing, even after recovering completely from WWII, to pony up their share, preferring the US to stop the Roooskies in the Fulda Gap.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2008-03-23 15:53|| 2008-03-23 15:53|| Front Page Top

#10 For those who are unaware, political authority in Basra and surroundings is a monopoly of Shiite extremists. Southern Iraq is a province of Iran's Ayatollahs. Attacks are not being carried out by insurgents; they are being executed by militias which have the support of local government. Basra isn't like Baghdad, which had ethnic divisions; it is an integral whole, with politics being a battle between those who are prepared to attack Western troops now, or later.

Posted by McZoid 2008-03-23 19:00|| 2008-03-23 19:00|| Front Page Top

#11 To me soft power means "Speak softly and carry a big stick".

Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues 2008-03-23 19:25|| 2008-03-23 19:25|| Front Page Top

#12 LOL I see oil giants .

Posted by Zebulon Angavick7428 2008-03-23 23:21|| 2008-03-23 23:21|| Front Page Top

23:57 Woodrow Slusorong7967
23:49 Woodrow Slusorong7967
23:43 Woodrow Slusorong7967
23:30 Spike Uniter
23:25 Zebulon Angavick7428
23:23 Zebulon Angavick7428
23:22 swksvolFF
23:21 Zebulon Angavick7428
23:14 trailing wife
23:10 trailing wife
23:08 Cyber Sarge
22:57 Anonymoose
22:56 Muggsy Gling
22:51 Frank G
22:50 Anonymoose
22:46 Frank G
22:42 DMFD
22:39 Old Patriot
22:29 JosephMendiola
22:25 JosephMendiola
22:19 3dc
22:11 DMFD
21:55 Frank G
21:51 Old Patriot