Posted on 08/05/2008 5:01:01 AM PDT by nuconvert
'Secret deal' with Iraqi militia kept British troops out of battle for Basra
Aug. 5, 2008
British forces were accused of staying on the sidelines during a battle in Iraq because of a "secret deal" between the UK and an Iranian-backed militia, it was reported today.
Four thousand British troops were unable to come to the aid of US and Iraqi soldiers for six days during the battle for Basra this year, reports said
But the Ministry of Defence denied there was any "accommodation" which prevented troops from entering Basra.
An MoD spokeswoman said British forces were not sent in immediately because there was "no structure in place" in the city for the units to go back and start mentoring the Iraqi troops.
Last summer an "accommodation" was made between British intelligence and elements of al-Mahdi Army, the militia linked to radical Shia Muslim cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, it was revealed.
Under the deal's terms, no British soldier could enter Basra without the permission of Defence Secretary Des Browne.
The deal was reportedly aimed at encouraging the Shia movement back into the political process, and by the time Mr Browne gave his approval, most of the fighting was already done, with 60 Iraqis killed or injured and one US Marine dead.
Colonel Imad, who heads the 2nd Battalion, 1st Brigade, 1st Iraqi Army Division, the most experienced division, commanded one of the quick-reaction battalions summoned to assist British-trained local forces, who faltered from the outset because of inexperience and lack of support.
Colonel Imad told the Times: "Without the support of the Americans we would not have accomplished the mission because the British Forces had done nothing there.
"I do not trust the British Forces. They did not want to lose any soldiers for the mission."
Lieutenant-Colonel Chuck Western, a senior US Marine advising the Iraqi Army, told the newspaper: "I was not happy.
"Everybody just assumed that because this deal was cut nobody was going in. Cutting a deal with the bad guys is generally not a good idea."
A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said: "The Charge of the Knights operation in Basra was planned, led and executed by the Iraqis.
"There was no 'accommodation' which prevented UK troops from entering Basra, the reason why troops were not sent in immediately was because there was no structure in place in the city for units to go back in to start mentoring the Iraqi troops.
"The success of the mission made it clear that to build on the confidence and experience gained by 14 Division a more specialised training approach could be delivered, out on the ground in Basra, and the UK Military Transition Teams (MiTTs) were introduced.
"This specialised training and mentoring continues today, building the Iraqi Security Forces capability so they can assume full responsibility in the future."
Sounds like the kind of deal Barrak would make.
“Sounds like the kind of deal Barrak would make.”
Yeah, or the “Germanifacation” of the Brits. It’s my guess that we are funding the German, French, and British troops. If they continue to be unwilling to engage the enemy I say send them home and use the money for something else...
...Without the support of the Americans we would not have accomplished the mission because the British Forces had done nothing there...
I’M SHOCKED !!!!
The British troops are great, and no doubt they expressed anger at not being able to help out in clearing Basra, but the MoD leadership is a disgrace, as are those in the political elite who arranged this.
It makes me wonder if they are willing to cut similar deals with the Taliban. Do they have our back, OR NOT?
It was an expensive but important lesson for the Iraqis. Experience under fire is most effective. They also learned who their real friends are.
This is kind of a mental masturbation. The title of the article is not substantiated by what is written. The reader goes aroung in a circle....
IIRC, the Brits were initially in Basra but after a brief period of training the Iraqis they pulled out to a nearby airbase or something and waited it out, letting the Iraqis handle the situation. After that the Brits were/are in Iraq in name only.
No fault of the troops on the ground but the liberal leadership wants no casualties because of the political backlash from the radicals at home. As is always the case, political cowards kill brave troops. Remember Vietnam? Same deal.
Thats a contradiction
...It’s my guess that we are funding the German, French, and British troops...
Really??? Thats amazing, and would certainly be the scoop of the century if its true!
but its not is it? No, its a wild guess, cos you’re all riled up about the story.
When your common sense returns, give me a shout!
...the Brits were initially in Basra but after a brief period of training the Iraqis they pulled out to a nearby airbase or something and waited it out...
Err, thats a little vague. Certainly for something that people will read and take a face value, you should have MUCH more care in what you type.
The facts:
British presence INSIDE Basra lastesd from;
19 March 2003(ish, thats the start date of hostilities)
to;
Mid-June, 2007. “1 Mechanised Brigade provided HQ and troops for Op TELIC 10, deploying to Iraq in June 2007. During that tour, both the PJCC and Basra Palace were handed back to Iraqi control.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op_Telic
So thats over 4 years of troops on the ground, inside Basra city, doing the dirty. 4+ years. Four. 1500 days, give or take a bit. Something like the length of the Great War (aka, WWI). Now, would you describe WWI as a ‘brief period’????? Is say, a four year commitment to the forces a ‘brief period’? Is say, the first 4 years of your childs life a ‘brief period’????? 4 years, not hours, weeks, or months. 4 years! So please, do a tiny bit of research before making such a claim, ok?
And why did the so called ‘brief period’ of ‘training’ cost us 176 deaths, and nearly 3000 wounded???? THAT, is some INTENSIVE training!
Honestly Mod’s, how can you let this post stand. Its got factual learning difficulties!
Oh, and you should know we ‘ARE’ still in Iraq (Baghdad and Basra), with 4000 troops (biggest allied contribution). ‘WERE’ suggests we left the country, which, clearly, sin’t the case.
Have a look through this, and follow all the links and such for a decent look at the British efforts in Iraq, aka, Operation Telic;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op_Telic
Tell that to the Para’s. The Royal Marines. The SBS. The SAS. To any single soldier who is sent through training into the British Army, Navy, or Air Force.
PS: Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule.
In the words of Liam Fox (I believe) :”We have not been given the full picture.”
Lol! When are we ever?!!
Firstly, you left off the very first thing I said, IIRC (If I recall Correctly.). That indicates I was not making a statement of known fact but was instead relying on a perhaps faulty memory.
However, to be fair and accurate I followed the links you provided and came away with a slightly different take than the one you presented.
This indicates that after the capture of Baghdad and the main fighting had ended the British greatly reduced their forces. We did not.
After the end of major operations, the main components of the British forces changed greatly. 3 Commando Brigade was withdrawn in early May and 16 Air Assault Brigade left later in the same month apart from a couple infantry battalions.
I frankly can't tell from the information provided whether Basra Airport, home of the main base of the Brits, is in or outside Basra but it seems they are stationed all around Basra instead of in the city itself. The following was written May 6, 2006.
Because of the distances between bases, and more importantly because of the dangers of bombs at the sides of roads, they fly in and out of the Army's main base at Basra airport constantly.
Patrols in armoured Land Rovers were welcomed with waves from children and soldiers walked through market places fully armed, but wearing their soft berets.
Now they cannot go to the toilet on their bases without carrying their helmet and flak jacket.
Once seen as the "safe zone" in Iraq, violence has escalated to such a point that a US Embassy report said Basra city is as dangerous now as any of the troubled northern cities.
If this British reporter is correct they seemed to have lost ground.
You said:
And why did the so called ‘brief period’ of ‘training’ cost us 176 deaths, and nearly 3000 wounded???? THAT, is some INTENSIVE training!
Two points=
If the Brits did such a fantastic job training the Iraqis over the four year period you mentioned why did the US Marines have to go in and rescue the Iraqis in the latest military action while the Brits dithered for days before deciding to go into the city after all the fighting was done? The Iraqis general had high praise for the Marines but little respect for the Brits. That is how I formed my opinion.
Point two:
From the information you provided:
Full non-fatal casualty records are currently only available for the period after 1 January 2006. Since that date, 2,943 British personnel have been wounded, injured or fallen ill (314 wounded in action); 1,485 of whom required aeromedical evacuation[8].
Only 10% were wounded in action. What happened to "wound" the rest of them? Maybe they tripped over their ditty bags.
However, as I originally said, I have the greatest admiration for the British troops but their leaders, like ours in times past, sometimes don't stand up for them. An example:
Telic means a purposeful or defined action, but unlike the United States who called their equivalent military deployment Operation Iraqi Freedom, the Ministry of Defence uses a computer to generate its names so that they carry no overtly political connotations.
I'll bet that makes you proud.
All of this information comes from the information you linked to. I just get a different picture from that information than you.
well, at least you read checked the links; so you’re slightly better informed, even if we have different views.
Close enough for me ;)
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.