Mary Posted May 22, 2011 Report Share Posted May 22, 2011 The last of Britain's military forces in Iraq pulled up anchor Sunday, ending more than eight years of fighting militants and training security forces since invading in 2003. Eighty-one Royal Navy sailors turned over the task of patrolling waters off the southern port city of Umm Qasr on the Persian Gulf to Iraq's fledgling navy. It was the last hands-on mission that British troops had in Iraq since combat forces pulled out of the southern city of Basra in July 2009. Brig. Gen. Max Marriner, commander of British forces in Iraq, cited dramatic security gains across the country, and particularly in the south, that he said British troops helped make happen. "Security has fundamentally improved and as a consequence, the social and economic development of the south has dramatically changed for the better, as too have people's lives," Marriner said in a statement. He said the Iraqi Navy is ready to go the mission alone, "so now is the time for the UK to dress back and let them complete the mission they were created for." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 So ends Blair's little adventure; which together with Afghanistan has contributed ?billions to the deficit. Now Cameron has got the toy box out to play at wargames in Libya, using aircraft and ships that have already (theoretically) been de-commissioned due to the cuts, at an estimated cost (if it goes on for up to six months) ?1.5billion. These so-called Leaders, who've never worn the Queen's uniform in their lives, appear to be drawn to spending money we don't have on some warped idea of Britain "punching above it's weight" - which translates into insufficient troops with inadequate equipment being sacrificed at the alter of political egos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 Personally Obs, I would rather we had a hand in getting rid of someone who kills his own people than paying multi-multi-billions to Ireland, Portugal, Greece and probably Spain just to rescue a bankrupt currency Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 If we proceed on the principle of "taking a hand" - where would it stop? Bahrain, Yemen, Syria etc etc. Basically, we can't afford it, either financially or with the blood of our soldiers - time to start looking after our own interests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 What do you recommend Obs do nothing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 A lot of "our own interests" are influenced by these rogue countries. The 7/7 bombers had all been to the Jihad camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan.... these are dangerous places filled with crackpot dangerous Muslim terrorists who are just waiting for an opportunity to kill Westerners. They should not be getting anymore of our money and we should not be letting groups of young men go there to be brainwashed..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 I agree , Pakistan is a failed state and should be treated as such Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 I agree , Pakistan is a failed state and should be treated as such The Pakistanis I know, who actually live there, don't share your opinion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 Do you think Pakistan is not failing then Asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 26, 2011 Report Share Posted May 26, 2011 Britain and the other modern "crusader" States have this arrogant attitude that they can "control" events and developments in third world Countries; such an attitude is inconsistent in application and thus hypocritical; and merely fosters the kind of anti-Western resentment that fosters resentment and ultimately terrorism in the first place. Until and unless a global system of democratic governance and law is properly established (which the UN clearly isn't providing); we should restrict our interventions to economic and diplomatic means and stop pretending that we're still some kind of later day Imperial power, with a monopoly on morality. We gave money to all these dictator States, and are still giving to some; we still give money to Pakistan, Sri Lanka etc; failed or criminal States. Repression exists in China, but apart from some muted expressions about "human rights" nothing will ever be done militarily - why - cos we'd get a drubbing; so our selective interventions merely exposes us as bullies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted May 27, 2011 Report Share Posted May 27, 2011 Do you think Pakistan is not failing then Asp I repeat, the Pakistanis that I know, who actually live there, do not share your opinion. I think you are making the mistake of thinking that everywhere in the world is the same as good old Blighty. As you've just been to Goa, I would have thought you might have noticed it's not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 27, 2011 Report Share Posted May 27, 2011 Pakistani public opinion is distinctly anti-US, which is understandable when an "ally" regularly breaches your sovereignty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.