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

To: EaglesUpForever
"The British pussyfooted around Basra for two full weeks, scared to venture into battle. The US surged towards Baghdad at full speed in a sandstorm, and conquered Baghdad at darn near the same exact time that Basra truly fell. Good that the Brits are so good at peace, because they are certainly no USA when it comes to war, however imperial their heritage."

The Brits had a different mission in Basrah than the 3rd ID had at Baghdad. Both the US and the UK stayed *out* of the southern cities. We stayed out of al Nasaryah much as the Brits stayed out of Basrah, and for pretty much the same reason. We realized that those cities were Saddam's tarbabies, intended to get us into bloody street fighting. So both countries "pussyfooted" around those cities for a couple of weeks, softening up the defenders.

The original plan -- from what I have inferred -- called for us to do much the same in Baghdad. However, the US battalion commanders on the spot sensed that Baghdad was ready to fold up. So they tried the first "thunder run" through the western city to the airport.

That gave the brigade commanders the confidence to do the second run to the Presidential Palace, at the end of which they called up division and said "can we stay?" Division agreed, and we pretty well junked the original plan and began running through Baghdad like we owned the place. That provided the tipping point.

The Brits in Basrah -- and our troops covering the southern cities -- danced to the tune that Tommy Franks played. Stay out of the cities until the tipping point was reached. The inference that the Brits were too scared to go in but the US wasn't is a bogus as the inference that the Brits have what it takes to garrison a country, but the US don't.

My point is don't let a mutual enemy (the press) break up a beautiful friendship, O. K?
64 posted on 05/04/2003 4:09:52 PM PDT by No Truce With Kings (The opinions expressed are mine! Mine! MINE! All Mine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]


To: No Truce With Kings
Agree.We have our differences but we also stood together.Please leave this writer's piece in the round file.
70 posted on 05/04/2003 4:21:25 PM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

To: No Truce With Kings
Don't get me wrong, I love the Brits. But their press has bashed America this way and that the whole time... it was particularly sickening when they would imply we were inflicting civilian casualties willy-nilly, but by contrast that was "not the British way." Sure we both stayed out of the south for good reason, but the US took more risks as a result.

I very much appreciate Britain as an ally, but I hope they (including their general population, which like here has far too many leftists) are as true an ally as possible, and don't slide towards the french way of hating us while playing the role of "ally" when it's expedient.

80 posted on 05/04/2003 4:37:39 PM PDT by EaglesUpForever (Boycott france and russia for at least 20 years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

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