New Labour spin on Iraq
 

Non-Private Eye readers may be interested in this piece from the latest issue (30 Sep – 13 Oct 2005):

“We will not cut and run when faced with this violence,” announced defence secretary John Reid, trying to turn the successful rescue of two British soldiers from an Iranian-backed militia in Basra into a handy “Zulu moment” just before the Labour party conference.

In fact neither he nor anyone else at the Ministry of Defence had anything to do with the rescue. The decision to go was taken by Brigadier John Lorimer, acting without any support, his own commanding officer being away on holiday at the time.

The MoD had very little to say about the action for a full 24 hours, denying key details of the breaking story until convinced that it had been a success. Meanwhile Lorimer was acting on his own initiative, fully aware that he would have been the fall guy if the operation had gone “belly-up”.

Once it was clear that there had been no mass casualties and no footage of SAS hostages being beheaded live on video, however, the MoD re-assumed control of the story.

It announced grandly that our lads had shown “restraint” in their limited use of fire power. In fact squaddies in Basra say they are now so terrified of the possible legal consequences of using their weapons that they hesitate to do so, allowing the mob in this case to get close enough to shower them with petrol bombs.

The MoD also announced that the British had been attacked by “a small but violent crowd”. But those on the ground say the police station in question was home to hundreds of militia men, who fled only when British armour arrived. They left behind looted Mercedes and Lexus cars – all gleefully crushed under the tracks of British tanks.

The MoD also said that “the situation in Basra is now calm” but the problem is actually that the British army has been involved in a major operation for some time now not just against Iranian-backed insurgents but also Iranian militia themselves.

Presumably we can shortly expect to see Brigadier Lorimer (Age 42, late of the Parachute Regiment, Cambridge degree in Islamic Studies, Arabic speaker – Weekly Telegraph 28 Sept – 4 Oct 2005), who is quoted in that newspaper as saying “he would do the same again”, receive the same stab in the back as Col Tim Collins, late of the Royal Irish Regiment or Col. Jorge Emmanuel Mendoca of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment, currently facing charges of negligently performing his duty in Iraq alongside his NCOs and men, concurrently facing war crimes charges?

Would there be any chance of the present group, loosely known as the loyal parliamentary opposition, making continued and forceful demands for explanations from the present government of liars and shysters as to what on earth our armed forces can possibly achieve in-country given such "support" from New Labour? Or are such questions posed only by the likes of Collins, Mendoca and Lorimer?

Not to mention the way Bliar's fascist bully boys went about stifling dissent against Little Straw Jack's speech at the Noo Labia conference by throwing out an 82 year old long time Labour member.

There was a "Hi - I'm Tone" piece on TV at around 1900 the other night - but not one single word about the UK's presence in Iraq, of course.

He is quite desperate to avoid any mention of the I-word. When interviewed, he squirms noticeably and gives a "Look - OK - I made the decision. Now let's talk about me" impression.

How lucky that there was no one worth bothering with to ask and the commander on the ground could make his own decisions.
How different from that time in Aden when, after a major ambush in Crater, Harold Wilson, no less, was requested to give permission for the Saladin Armoured Cars to fire their main armament and Wilson refused. Net result, twenty one British soldiers killed that day.

Yes, quite. A commander in the field making a decision.

Anyone care to open a book on how long Brigadier Lorimer's career will last in the NuLabour Model Army? Do we measure it in months or weeks?

So a chain of command where middle ranking officers feel empowered to take decisions, restraint exercised in a volatile situation and an apology for the ejection of a party activist by poorly trained stewards.
Does everything have to attributable to new labour mal-governance?
Where's proone when you need him to provide some balance?

No Captain Peacock, but this does:

"In fact squaddies in Basra say....... "

Anecdotal?

Quite possibly. Does anecdotal = invalid?

Of course it will be anecdotal Peacock, I can't see anyone in the Army putting their name to a quote like that, given the probable "career implications".

Sad to see the Iraq situation going the same way as virtually every other new labour enterprise. Misguided, poorly conceived, executed with little or no reference to the House and regardless of public opinion, pushed through with misinformation, funded by the taxpayer and doomed to failure.

Get out of this one Tony - if George will let you.

I suspect it makes not a blind bit of difference whether we stay there for 5 years or 50. Without a dictator, the ludicrous artificial construct that is Iraq will shatter into civil war as soon as we leave.

Leaders lead and followers follow.

We can be thankfuk that there are still leaders of our troops such as this Brigadier around. Assess the situation, make a plan and execute it. The further up the chain that decisions are passed the greater the chance that considerations outside the operational requirement will be brought to bear.

I wonder how many others are around, like this officer, prepared to put their head above the parapet.

All fair comments. I just get a little bit worn down by perpetual New Labour bashing.
As I said, this site is usually unbalanced; a little asymmetric on the starboard wing side.
Perhaps some of us have short memories.

"thankfuk" ? Freudian slip or what?!! :D

No Freudian slip or anything else intended - simply a typo.

Oldfella's got it dead right - too much political rubbish and not enough evaluation of further down the chain (which is where this thread started.)

I can wager that even if a Conservative government were in power that the same kind of responses would have been made.

The fact remains; someone not terribly high up the food chain appears to have made a sh1t or bust decision which has gone his way, which, whether right or wrong should have the backing all the way to the top. According to public release, the ROE to which they operate has no consequence in Iraqi law so, as one of the coalition partners involved in Iraq, any commander who has acted correctly should be backed up by any government which is in power and not made to wait until his actions appear to have "come good".

Hooray to the guy who had the cojones to make the "get `em out" call - I live for the day that I work for someone like that.

Olly

Why are our labour leaders so keen to take the credit from our commanders when an operation goes ok, yet so keen to slope shoulders of any responsibility when it comes to trying our commanders for war crimes etc.

Politions- those willing to lay down your life for their country. Without forethought, rational thinking or common sense.

“We will not cut and run when faced with this violence,” announced defence secretary John Reid”

I now feel very confident that our forces will be out of Iraq in pretty short order, following the Defence Secretary's recent statement to the contrary.

Who is this 'we' John Reid refers to? The poor bloody infantry that are so valued they are cut in numbers and given a pay increase of 0.1% above RPI (don't tell me, the pay was awarded by an 'independent' body - but one that admits it took the governments target figure into account!). I don't see many politicians or labour officials doing more than 'visit' Iraq!

Rant over.....


By the way, O O'Leg, since this thread is entitled 'New Labour spin on Iraq' (which is actually how it started), it is hardly surprising it has a political content!