Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Soldiers salute General's comments on web forum [British deserting Iraq.]
Times Online ^ | 13OCT06 | Devika Bhat

Posted on 10/13/2006 2:49:42 PM PDT by familyop

The call from General Sir Richard Dannatt that British forces should leave Iraq "sometime soon" has met with overwhelming support on the unofficial Army Rumour Service website, which includes forums where officers can air their views anonymously.

Many express shock about the frankness of his words and there are several references to Sir Richard’s "moral" courage in speaking his mind, as well as calls for the Prime Minister to take heed of his remarks.

"...I am thoroughly heartened by this and have the beginings [sic] of a thaw in the cynicism which has dogged my service thinking since 2003," admits Jim_P_Pulfrew.

"I hope Blair is listening," says user Nigegilb. "Sir Richard has made the call and said it how it is. Good on him. Stand by for incoming. Getting out of Iraq is essential if [Afghanistan] is going to work in the long run. God knows what will happen to Iraq, not sure it will be any worse though. He made the point that we were never invited in we kicked the door in.

Nigegilb asks: "Can someone close to Sir Richard tell him that if he gets sacked he should run for office against whoever is the PM at the time. He will win by a landslide."

"Sir Richard, I'm saluting you right now!," says Purple_Flash. "It's about time someone of your standing actually lived up the Values & Standards that we so often pay lip service to. They are what should make us a breed apart; thank you for walking the walk rather than talking the talk."

Some are less diplomatic in their praise for Sir Richard and criticism of the Government. "He's [Sir Richard] got a hell of a pair of moral b***s on him, I'll give him that! I imagine B'liar is in a bit of a cold sweat/hot rage now," says 303SMLE.

"Politicians can't grasp the idea of someone telling the truth, they'll all just assume he is chasing some kind of agenda. (Arguably, pursuing the truth and bringing the boys home is his agenda!) This might turn out to be one of those moments when the world turns and Governments fall; I certainly hope so!"

Brewmeister adds: "I think even Teflon Tony is going to find it difficult to weasel his way out of this. If Sir Richard goes it's time for a coup."

Stooge notes: "I don't think his comments will 'fall on deaf ears'. I'm pretty sure there are hundreds of people in Whitehall who have by now heard about his comments and panicing [sic]. At the very least some of them will have a sleepless night trying to make this seem less ‘bad’.

"Also, this isn't someone with a political agenda. He's looking out for his own men. Even the public will see that."

It is not just the Government which comes under criticism over Iraq. Hereward says: "A real leader of men has spoken for once. Forget the feeble Mr Cameron and the non-existent Mr Campbell, the general is indeed the true moral voice of opposition in this country."

Many say the comments were long overdue and call for the Army to gather in support of Sir Richard should his position come under threat. "After years and years, AT LAST someone at the top, who makes the headline on the news, has had the b***s to stand up and be counted," says Brandt. "If he gets the sack, watch out for fireworks- If he has had the balls to stand up for us, we should do the same."

DigitalGeek adds: "The General has laid down the gauntlet to the Government. It is now time that we stood behind him." Drop_Short adds: "It is about time that our senior generalship actually stopped being part of the government and stood up for what is in the best interests of the Service. Bring on the revolution"

Even the few users critical of Sir Richard are keen to acknowledge that they agree with his apparent stance on Iraq. PassingBells writes: "Accurate and welcome though these comments are, they are not the sort of remarks that should be made publically [sic]. They are exactly what the CGS [Chief of the General Staff] should be saying privately…I fear that this smacks of naivity [sic] of his behalf and a serious lapse on behalf of his minder(s)."

Most users though, are wholly supportive of the General’s comments. At the time of writing, an ongoing poll on the site claimed that of 126 users, 78 per cent think he is "absolutely right", while only three per cent voted "he had to resign first before making such a statement".


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: british; general; iraq; soldiers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-102 next last

1 posted on 10/13/2006 2:49:43 PM PDT by familyop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: familyop

Does anyone in the British military piss standing up anymore?


2 posted on 10/13/2006 2:51:23 PM PDT by Proud_USA_Republican (We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. - Hillary Clinton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop

The Times, BTW, is one of the more conservative and pro-American papers over there.


3 posted on 10/13/2006 2:51:59 PM PDT by familyop ("he died for rodeo horse on Jul 25, 1987." - - skanamaru)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
As Britain is close to becoming a Al-Britain this is a good move for them! /S
4 posted on 10/13/2006 2:52:18 PM PDT by rocksblues (Liberals will stop at nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican

I have heard more and more stories of how Politically Correct the British are becoming. I can see it with the French, Scandanavians, etc., but not the British. It's a shame.


5 posted on 10/13/2006 2:55:09 PM PDT by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rocksblues

We'll be bleeding again for Europe in the near future...


6 posted on 10/13/2006 2:57:08 PM PDT by MNlurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: familyop

Imagine joining the limey army and getting sent to a war! Jeeze! No wonder they're pissing their pants.


7 posted on 10/13/2006 2:58:37 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop

The British "Army" has ALWAYS been an elitest POS.


8 posted on 10/13/2006 3:01:26 PM PDT by US Navy guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNlurker

No... not this time. Never again. If I could send the last two years worth of information back in time to a pre-WWII US Congress I would.

All this time the US protected Europe from Communism and they all want to go "Communist Lite". Let Europe rot in its socialist malaise. I could care less.


9 posted on 10/13/2006 3:01:26 PM PDT by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MNlurker

And me and you will be called all kinds of names by the Liberals calling for our intervention in Europe's demise.


10 posted on 10/13/2006 3:01:44 PM PDT by rocksblues (Liberals will stop at nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: familyop

Well, everyone has to make the choice of where they want to stand in this war on terror. The Brits are about to make theirs. We shouldn't be too hard on them. After all we, too, have about 50% of our population who are traitors. I just pray that we have the will and courage to deal with ours and not allow them make the wrong decision for us, as it appears poor England will with theirs.


11 posted on 10/13/2006 3:03:03 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred

Socialism breeds mediocrity and nihilism.

But I doubt this is an accurate picture.


12 posted on 10/13/2006 3:07:38 PM PDT by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: familyop

Blair will be leaving soon. I wonder whether General Sir Richard cleared this with Gordon Brown before making his statement? If so, I would have thought they would at least have waited for Blair to leave office.


13 posted on 10/13/2006 3:07:53 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

If anyone cares to read what he says - he wants more people in Afghanistan to destroy Al Qaeda, rather than prop up a three sided civil war with our own dead.


14 posted on 10/13/2006 3:09:48 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: US Navy guy

Does POS mean what I think it does?


15 posted on 10/13/2006 3:11:31 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Getting out of Iraq is essential if [Afghanistan] is going to work in the long run.

We throw in the towel in Iraq, how long does anybody think we'll stand the gaff in Afghanistan?

16 posted on 10/13/2006 3:13:24 PM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red6
"Socialism breeds mediocrity and nihilism."

...related? And actually, the English girl was arrested for only asking the teacher if she could sit with other English-speaking students.

Schoolgirl arrested for refusing to study with non-English pupils
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1718345/posts
17 posted on 10/13/2006 3:16:45 PM PDT by familyop ("he died for rodeo horse on Jul 25, 1987." - - skanamaru)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: familyop

...initial story (before newer details).

(British) General Seeks UK Iraq Withdrawal
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1718406/posts

...and politically related.

Brit foreign secretary slams terror suspects' detention
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1718407/posts


18 posted on 10/13/2006 3:19:23 PM PDT by familyop ("he died for rodeo horse on Jul 25, 1987." - - skanamaru)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
Yes it does. The British Army AND The French Army was directly responsible for the WASTE of human live in Battle after Battle in WW1(US Army Gen Pershing's was responsible for saying the the British HELL NO) AND there was Gen Montgomery who was responsible for the FAILED Battle at Arnhem. At least we (sometimes) learn lessons from past mistakes.
19 posted on 10/13/2006 3:23:33 PM PDT by US Navy guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: US Navy guy

To call the British Army POS is simply disgusting and urinates on the memory of all the young men and women who have given their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq.


20 posted on 10/13/2006 3:25:56 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
And what about this Brit "General" who is calling for pulling out before the job is complete doesn't THAT Piss on ALL of his own soldiers and our who have given this lives for both our countries.
21 posted on 10/13/2006 3:33:11 PM PDT by US Navy guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Image hosted by Photobucket.com what ever you say there Monty, you bloody wanker you...
22 posted on 10/13/2006 3:38:53 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican

Anyone can round of a bunch of malcontents and make a story about it.


23 posted on 10/13/2006 3:40:20 PM PDT by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: familyop
What goes around has a way of coming around. I can see in the not too distant future the U.S. will once again be asked to shed the blood of their finest in order to bail these European girlyboys out of trouble they could have easily avoided if they could but be honest with themselves.

Islam, just like Hitler before, is gunning for them, and will continue to gunning for them as long as they remain non-assimiltated....no matter how much they may wish otherwise.
24 posted on 10/13/2006 3:40:49 PM PDT by kimoajax (Rack'em & Stack'em)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: US Navy guy

If you actually read more than headlines and soundbites you would know he said we should get out any area that the job is done as soon as possible.

In his words: "when the mission is substantially done, we should leave."


25 posted on 10/13/2006 3:42:14 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006

Wasn't there another story going around that the gentleman's remarks were taken somewhat out of context, and that he was complaining more about the army being overextended than about the mission in general? Or did I imagine that?

I'm still shocked that a serving officer would come out and say something like that publicly.

}:-)4


26 posted on 10/13/2006 3:43:22 PM PDT by Moose4 (They caught me white and nerdy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
Hey, save yourself the grief. Why don't you just pull them out of both theaters. What do you have in Iraq, 6,000 men? And Afghanistan... What, about 1,000? Why send another 200 to Afghanistan to bolster that token force? Just get both token forces out of theater.

But do try to understand, we love our British friends dearly but our plate may be rather full when you come crying to us for help this time. No hard feelings, though. We do appreciate all you've done for us in the two world wars, even if it turns out you lacked the starch to stick it out this time around.

27 posted on 10/13/2006 3:44:33 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Argus
"We throw in the towel in Iraq, how long does anybody think we'll stand the gaff in Afghanistan?"

Not long. It will become the focal point for the now confident and victorious AQ. All the terrorist from Iraq will join the Taliban in attacking US and NATO forces. NATO will surrender and the US will too if the dems win in Nov. Not a pretty picture. Once we surrender in Afghanistan the mooslims will set their sights on the EU and USA.

But then again, I'm not some brilliant analyst from CATO.
28 posted on 10/13/2006 3:45:35 PM PDT by MPJackal ("If you are not with us, you are against us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Is there anyone willing to actually read what anyone says anymore, without coming out with tired cliches and old hatreds?

The UK has not sent a token force. In fact the UK forces are close to breaking point, there is that many around the world. (You have to take into account the proportions of the Army.)

As for the General and the rest of the British Army, they are screaming for much more troops in Afghanistan where the focus should be anyway.


29 posted on 10/13/2006 3:47:56 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006

Iraq's no mistake. Just take your boys and go home. We understand. Believe me, we do understand. And we hope you'll understand, too, when later we're fighting tooth and nail for our own survival and can't do much more than wish you well. At least that'll be more than Britain apparently wants to do for us at the moment. Just go home. No hard feelings.


30 posted on 10/13/2006 4:06:54 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006

The total military strength of the UK is about 250,000 including reserve components (Territorial Army and the like).


31 posted on 10/13/2006 4:08:01 PM PDT by familyop ("he died for rodeo horse on Jul 25, 1987." - - skanamaru)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Once again you seem to read something not on the screen. Who said Iraq was a mistake?

As for the rest you sound a little childish.


32 posted on 10/13/2006 4:08:31 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: familyop

The sun has set on the British Empire...


33 posted on 10/13/2006 4:09:45 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop

Yes but the Army is around 105,000 with around 20-25% on active duty in operatonal zones like Afghanistan, Iraq, Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Georgia and Ethiopia.


34 posted on 10/13/2006 4:13:04 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
The sun has set on the British Empire...

Did you know a guy called Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon? :)

35 posted on 10/13/2006 4:14:04 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Proud_USA_Republican
Does anyone in the British military piss standing up anymore?

Is the queen considered to be "in the military"?

36 posted on 10/13/2006 4:15:07 PM PDT by bannie (HILLARY: Not all perversions are sexual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
Yes, he had the courage to complete his mission and not falter.
37 posted on 10/13/2006 4:15:50 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

That's because of his British roots.


38 posted on 10/13/2006 4:17:11 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
"That's because of his British roots."

No, it's because America threw those roots off twice in it's history.

39 posted on 10/13/2006 4:18:28 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
You did.

Seems we're all in agreement. There's no mistaking what you sound like.

40 posted on 10/13/2006 4:18:31 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

It should be easy to prove then?


41 posted on 10/13/2006 4:19:51 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
I agree that we should be looking for solutions instead of cliches, condescensions or name calling. An author with a US philanthropic organization recently addressed British perceptions of the USA. Hopefully, constructive action will start with that. How can we improve quality (honesty) of information for a population?

British Conservatives Must Defend the U.S.–U.K. Special Relationship"
The Heritage Foundation ^ | 28AUG06 | Nile Gardiner, Ph.D.

Excerpted footnotes:


[1] YouGov/Spectator Survey, August 14-15, 2006, at
http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/SpectatorPollResults.pdf.


[2] ICM/Guardian Poll, July 21-23, 2006, at
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2006/Guardian%20-%20July/guardian
-july-2006.asp
.


[3] YouGov/Daily Telegraph Survey, June 26-28, 2006, at

http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/TEL060101010_3.pdf#search=%22
you%20gov%20daily%20telegraph%2026th-28th%20june%202006%22
;
Anthony King, “Britain Falls Out of Love with America,” The Daily Telegraph, July 3, 2006, at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/07/03
/nyank103.xml
.


[4] Financial Times/Harris Poll of Adults in Five European Countries, August 21, 2006, at http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=1081.


[5] Liam Fox MP, “Security and Defense: Making Sense of the Special Relationship,” Heritage Lecture No. 939, April 27, 2006, at http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/hl939.cfm.


[6] Julian Glover, “Tories Open Nine-Point Lead as Labour Drops to 19-Year Low,” The Guardian, August 22, 2006, at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,
1855567,00.html
.


[7] “Built to Last: The Aims and Values of the Conservative Party,” Conservative Party, August 2006, at http://www.conservatives.com/pdf/BuiltToLast-AimsandValues.pdf.
42 posted on 10/13/2006 4:19:54 PM PDT by familyop ("he died for rodeo horse on Jul 25, 1987." - - skanamaru)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006

Indeed.


43 posted on 10/13/2006 4:22:46 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

America didn't pre-exist before the British people. It is great because it took the best of Britain and started afresh, without any baggage.

Why do you think you speak English and that you hear of Italian-Americans, African-Americans ad infinitum but no British-Americans?

America was not conquered - it was created by and for Britain, until those British people decided, quite rightly, to throw off the old cr@p. It was the British who beat the British. The settlers didn't come from mars.

That is why, to many American's surprise, American Independence is seen as a great part of British history and why after 9/11 it was possible for Buckingham Palace to play the star spangled banner. No other country would have that right, except maybe Canada, Australia or New Zealand. See the link?


44 posted on 10/13/2006 4:28:26 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
"America didn't pre-exist before the British people."

You seem to be forgetting the French and Dutch...and by extension the Spanish. I guess you're not aware that while the first English settlers in the America's were struggling to make it through their first winter, a feat many of them did not master, there was already a well established community in St. Augustine (Florida) that featured roads and schools. But in the so-called original colonies, the English only made up a portion of the colonists.

"It is great because it took the best of Britain and started afresh, without any baggage."

LOL! Yes, we did start afresh by declaring ourselves free of the oppressive British government and monarchy and forming our own nation built on our ideals.

45 posted on 10/13/2006 4:36:38 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006

Agreed. There are few folks I'd rather have nearby in a fight than the British Army.


46 posted on 10/13/2006 4:41:05 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (I'm agnostic on evolution, but sit ups are from Hell!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
LOL! Yes, we did start afresh by declaring ourselves free of the oppressive British government and monarchy and forming our own nation built on our ideals.

And who were those people of the thirteen colonies if not predominantly British people?

I think many Americans today think Britain conquered America and don't realise that those saw themselves as British-Americans or the British of America

Here is the flag George Washington flew in 1776. Here is how he saw himself and his people best represented.

(At the time of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776, this was the most commonly flown flag, and was present at the naming of the country, "the United States of America," on September 9, 1776. The flag was the official flag for the beginning of the American Revolution.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Union_Flag


47 posted on 10/13/2006 4:49:08 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
"And who were those people of the thirteen colonies if not predominantly British people?"

French, Dutch and English in what is commonly referred to as the colonies, but also Spanish in what would become Amercia...England was only one element in the early days.

"I think many Americans today think Britain conquered America and don't realise that those saw themselves as British-Americans or the British of America."

Hardly. Many American's know that the English were one of four major nationalities that first came to these shores, but it was the united movement to throw off British tyranny in it's colonies that established what would later become these United States.

We liberated ourselves from England, totally. That is why America evolved into the nation it is rather then becoming a nation such as Canada or Australia...we are our own nation.

Nothing demonstrates that better then visiting a Provincial Capital in Canada and a State Capital in the U.S. The State Capital has a grand front entrance, through which all may enter. The Provincial Capital has a grand entrance...reserved for the "Royal Family"...it's own citizens must use a lesser entrance.

That is what made America great.

48 posted on 10/13/2006 4:57:38 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

So George Washington and those at the birth of the USA put the British flag happily as part of their own and you can't see that significance?

But to be honest, If you personally can't even get the difference between England and Britain right, then what hope the rest of your personal pop history?


49 posted on 10/13/2006 5:04:17 PM PDT by Jack2006
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Jack2006
"So George Washington and those at the birth of the USA put the British flag happily as part of their own and you can't see that significance?"

There were many individual flags in use initially, but by the time we took the Union Jack at Yorktown our armies marched under the Stars and Stripes...and I do see the significance in that.

"But to be honest, If you personally can't even get the difference between England and Britain right, then what hope the rest of your personal pop history?"

LOL! I'm sure your grasp of pop history is far superior to the grasp your nation retains over all it's many colonies.

50 posted on 10/13/2006 5:09:36 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson