Bleeding the purse ?

Reckon somewhere in the Exchequer they can find a few more Bob to throw in the kitty?:{

I did wonder why an issue between a Brit tank and some locals in Basrah is somehow referenced to a notional US response. Short willy stndrome I suspect. Nope, this one was all yours to screw up or be a superhero. After the initial cockup, things seem to be on the right track.

I would have hoped that the US would have never turned the personal over to the Iraqis to begin with. Now who is in favor of turning over your boys to international courts?

"show more restraint"

Busting your lads out is showing restraint? It was the right thing to do after the screw up of giving them away to begin with, but I don't see any degree of restraint. Sounds like you're working off the initial info, not the more indepth reports now surfacing.

I was not referring to the tank v wall event as one of restraint, rather the events that led up to it.

"I was not referring to the tank v wall event as one of restraint, rather the events that led up to it"

Handing the soldiers over to begin with?

Wheres that coming from? Who handed them over? Are you on about the IP handing them to the militia?

There's two pieces here, and I hope for some clarification. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but it has been a long ugly software-bug-encrusted day... I am not trying to put words in anyone's mouth, but my understanding here is waaaay incomplete and I look forward to some dialogue.

Step (a): The Iraqi security forces/police arrested/detained/apprehended two undercover members of the British Military (allegedly hooligans from Hereford, but I guess we'll have to wait for "Andy McNab's" next book to be sure) who were involved in a spot of bother of some kind.

Step (b): The Iraqi security forces informed the British that they had caught a couple of their boys, as per the RoE between the Coalition and the Iraqis.
Question 1: Is it the case that WC and others on the US side feel that allowing the British soldiers to be apprehended by the Iraqis was "handing them over"? And that the RoE should not have supported such a case?

Step (c): For reasons not immediately clear, the Iraqi security forces released these British soldiers to the "custody" of the local insurgent militia.

Step (d): The British took immediate action to track down their errant soldiers (I agree with SASless, I would have paid serious money to see some poor Iraqi desk clerk looking down the end of the 30 mm gun trying to explain what had happened). Aforementioned soldiers were recovered, one assumes unharmed, and a quiet night was had by all.

Question 2: West Coast, you seem to have equated some aspect of this Iraqi cock-up to placing US soldiers under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, or the War Crimes Tribunal. I really don't see that connection, since I think an international organization like the ICC is somewhat different from the Basra Precinct of the Iraqi Police Force and Rifle Club.

And one final observation. It does not fill me with a warm fuzzy feeling that the local insurgent militia were strong enough to persuade the local Iraqi Police Force to hand these guys over. I'm not going to draw the conclusion that it's all a disaster because of this one incident, which was resolved in a very British way ("Send a gun-boat"), but there are distrubing indications of the power matrix in the Basra area... which might be why British Forces were operating in a somewhat clandestine fashion.

And I assume that the Americans also have undercover people out in the country doing things that we won't hear about. Again, I'm not trying to turn this into a Yank-bashing festival -- I'm curious for other peoples' thoughts.

Nigel

The entire thing is just a pathetic joke. Tanks burning, people shot dead, everyone finger pointing, pictures of sullen looking soldiers or spies or whatever they are chained up in their cell, tankcrews running about on fire, prison walls and cars smashed to bits, riots in the street, idiot politicians bulsh*tting about it on the TV ............... all in the full focus of the international media.

Everyone should have stayed in bed that day. What a joke. I'm not taking sides on it because I have no idea what the real story is but the whole saga has done nothing but damage the rebuilding process. Unfortunately we can all look forward to seeing much more of it for the next decade or two.

Pathetic.

It was my understanding that UK authorities handed the soldiers over to begin with. If this isn't correct then I am in error.

Either way, yes I am taking a swipe at the ICC.

The Times:

AN SAS team used the noise of armoured vehicles bulldozing their way through a nearby police compound to mask the raid that freed their comrades.

The rescuers, from the same squad as the captives, blew out the doors and windows of the smart suburban villa with plastic explosive and hurled stun grenades at the militiamen guarding the two undercover soldiers. A short, intense burst of automatic gunfire was heard before the men were freed and their captors were seen being dragged away, hoods over their heads and their hands tied behind their backs.

Neighbours said the entire operation took only a couple of minutes while attention was focused a hundred yards away on the army’s invasion of the main Jamiat police compound.......

The soldiers had been beaten and rogue policemen had been touring the area with loudhailers urging demonstrators on to the streets to protest that the “British saboteurs” had been planning explosions in the city which would be blamed on followers of Moqtada al-Sadr, the Shia cleric......

The two soldiers are believed to have been investigating a corrupt police unit in Basra who were colluding with Shia militia leaders. Some of the men who later interrogated them are believed to be part of this same unit.....

The Iraqis can´t even coordinate their story.

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -

Story 1:
Interior Minister Bayan Jabr disputed the British account. He told the British Broadcasting Corp. the two soldiers never left police custody or the jail, were not handed to militants, and that the British army acted on a "rumor'' when it stormed the jail.

Story 2:
The British said the soldiers had been handed over to a militia. The Basra governor confirmed the claim, saying the Britons were in the custody of the al-Mahdi Army, the militia controlled by radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. "The two British were being kept in a house controlled by militiamen when the rescue operation took place,'' said Gov. Mohammed al-Waili. "Police who are members of the militia group took them to a nearby house after jail authorities learned the facility was about to be stormed,'' he said.

Story 3:
CNN: [National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie] CNN in a phone interview, "The multinational forces said when they arrived at the police station the soldiers were moved to the private residence of a militia leader. Our story is that this is an annex to the police station and used for detaining people, hence the British troops went into that location and freed them."


:hmm: :hmm:

Which has absolutely nothing to do with this current adventure and is just a bunch of willy-waving.

Mines bigger than yours!!! :=

This Sunni and Shia show will run and run.

Time now for the UK to get out and leave Bush to his own Viet Nam.

Well said Beagle!! bushs' own vietnam which he will walk away from in 3 years(or so!)... we should get out now.... like i am doing!!

Please forgive a civvy coming in on your thread, but we have been here before:

http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Aden/mutiny.html

http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Palestine/kidnap.htm

I declare a personal interest: I was an Army child in Jerusalem 1946-7, and Shell's District Sales Manager in Aden 1964-67, when friends and staff of mine were murdered (and they tried to get me-but that's another story).

The common theme is that the politicians will always let you down.