|
|
March 28, 2003
Britain may slash Gulf troops if war "drags on"
From News.com.au: THE number of British troops serving in the Gulf could be cut dramatically from 45,000 to 5,000 if the US-led war against Iraq drags on for at least six months, according to a senior government official quoted by a British newspaper today. Posted By Alan at March 28, 2003 11:08 PM | TrackBackComments
quoted by a "senior govt official" don't mean diddly. Posted by: The Mullet at March 28, 2003 11:10 PMWTF is this. ok lets go home now...shit well if you leave dont come back and take your tails with you....what kinda donkey shit is this it should be if it lasts that long will send more..... Posted by: aby normal at March 28, 2003 11:12 PMCool all I have to do is go underground a little while and the Brits will pull out. Thanks for the time table. Posted by: Saddam Hussy at March 28, 2003 11:17 PMThere are plenty of anti-war "senior government officials" in Britain. Posted by: John Moore (Useful Fools) at March 28, 2003 11:19 PMSomeone is deliberately trying to sabotage the liberation of Iraq, by undermining Iraqi belief that we will see the job through. Whoever it is should be tried for treason, this is a deliberate attack on Britain's war effort. Posted by: Michael Levy at March 28, 2003 11:20 PM"We will fight them on the shores, we will fight them on the beaches, and we will NEVER surrender." Unless it goes past 6 months, of course. Posted by: Mr_Sarcasm at March 28, 2003 11:22 PMA soon to be former senior government official. Posted by: Hermetic at March 28, 2003 11:24 PMThe British newspaper in question is the Daily Mirror, which is a tabloid, and anti-war (go to www.mirror.co.uk and visit the Front Pages section for an idea of their slant). Therefore treat story as extremely suspect and hold the Brit-bashing. Posted by: Toby at March 28, 2003 11:52 PMWell considering the vast majority of Brits are against this war, it sounds like a valid move to me. And, Mr. Sarcasm, if I remember correctly (and I do), your quote comes from a time when England was under attack and nearly invasion. Now the situation is reversed, and it looks like a fair number of Iraqis have taken up that credo. Posted by: Hegel at March 29, 2003 12:58 AMHegel - moral equivalencing BS. Posted by: Reid at March 29, 2003 01:10 AMHow's that, Reid? Posted by: Hegel at March 29, 2003 01:16 AMPerhaps the Brits are angry at the Pentagon technocrats who decided to go with half the troops that the warriors requested. It is the Brits who have been saddled with dealing with the urban warfare and had the most close contact with the enemy and the population. It is feasble that they are seeng the surprising resistance in both the civil population and troops that US forces inside of tanks and planes are not seeing up close. Posted by: Lor at March 29, 2003 01:44 AMActually, the latest polls show an absolute majority of Brits support the war effort to topple Saddam and liberate Iraq. Some "officials" are of course in the minority and committing treason -- happened also during WW II, sometimes. Not everyone is honourable. War has the uncanny tendency to bring out the cockroaches. Usual treatment was a one way ticket to jail, the firing squad, or suicide. Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) at March 29, 2003 03:01 AMThe latest poll shows 60% of Brits support the war in Iraq. And note where this story comes from - the Daily Mirror, which has been vehemently anti-Blair for months now. This story should be totally diregarded. The UK has relatively limited armed forces and has contributed relatively heavily. It will stand by the US fully, and fight this thing through to the end. Posted by: JohninLondon at March 29, 2003 06:30 AMPost a comment
|