Political Crossfire Forums

[DSwain]

Ssushi wrote: DSwain wrote: Yes - the right thing to do. Saddam breached the 1991 ceasefire by obstructing UNSCOM inspectors. He repeatedly ignored the UNSC and only acquiesced somehwat when there were a quarter of a million troops on his borders. Even then he continued to obstruct UNSCOM. That's it. Nothing about sticking in with the Americans or any of that tired and hackneyed nonsense - just the facts of what actually happened.

I really don't want to turn this into another rerun of 2003 arguments about Iraq and I accept that you will disagree with me - but I'm not just saying that I think it was 'the right thing to do' to be contrary - I sincerely believe it to have been the case.

(NB I'm certainly not afraid of having the argument again, however! I just don't want to bore people with it.)

I also don't want a return of that old dog of an argument, though suspect you're a little scared to take me on *jokes* :-D

My point is regarding the original question, I say do less following America and instead partner the UN. With the UN, there is a larger share of responsibility amoungst countries, hence we shouldn't be as needed. When we follow the US into one of its wars, we stand as the no.2 partner in it. We do not have the luxury that other US allies/partners in war have, in that we do not leave until the job's done (which is good). Unfortunately it s*cks us into situations which other countries are not involved and we get stuck...

I also don't want to rehash Iraq but am not scared to do so! :wink: But as we're experiencing the curse of living in interesting times, there are lots of other things to debate!

I have no particular problem with UK Forces participating in UN operations so long as those operations have robust Rules of Engagement, a strong command structure and clear goals.


Antonio - six battalions is a minimum deployment for NI at the moment. The Troubles as a terror experience is history - but the civil authority still needs military assistance. The infantry reorganisation is predicated on being able to 'draw down' the deployment in NI - and we've already seen the garrison reduce from 9 to 6 battalions. I think over the next few years we will see the number reduce further, to 4 or 5 battalions. But nothing substantive enough in the foreseeable future to allow the British Army to think about taking on additional substantial commitments. Remember, one of the prime roles of the Army in NI has been supporting the police on riot duty and crowd control; thankfully this year's parades season has been remarkably quiet but as prior experience tells us, that can change.