Head of the British Army seeks UK withdrawal from Iraq

[afleitch]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6046332.stm

The head of the British Army has said the presence of UK armed forces in Iraq "exacerbates the security problems". In an interview in the Daily Mail, Sir Richard Dannatt, Chief of the General Staff, is quoted as saying the British should "get out some time soon".

He also said: "Let's face it, the military campaign we fought in 2003, effectively kicked the door in."

There are currently more than 7,000 British soldiers in Iraq, based largely in Basra in the south of the country.

 
BBC political editor Nick Robinson described Sir Richard's remarks as "quite extraordinary".

He said the new head of British army was "effectively saying we are making the situation worse in Iraq and worse for ourselves around the world by being in Iraq".

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He gave an interview to the Daily Blackmail? Clearly not someone worthy of respect

What should be noted IMO isn't what he said (Iraq is exactly the sort of low-intensity and "unglorious" (if that's the best way of putting it) sort of conflict that military types have always hated), but the Govt. reactions to it:

The MoD hath said: "We have a clear strategy in Iraq. We are there with our international partners, in support of the democratically elected Government of Iraq, under a clear UN mandate."

No.10 hath said: "It's important that people remember that we are in Iraq at the express wish of the democratically elected Iraqi government, to support them under the mandate of a UN resolution."

The key thing here isn't the re-statement of their general positions on the conflict, but the apparent refusal to rule out the idea of pulling out "soon". No mention of future plans there at all.

[Angel of Death]

There's simply no way to spin this. History has already made its judgement on the Iraq War.

[Colin]

There's simply no way to spin this. History has already made its judgement on the Iraq War.

I wouldn't exactly say that. History is a hard thing to predict and can really only be deserned in future times when the generation that had lived through the events passes or the events that came from the event fully play out.

Who knew that a small tiff between Napoleon III and King Wilhelm of Prussia could have led to the Holocaust? Or that Woodrow Wilson's rebuff of Ho Chi Minhs calls for an independent Vietnam at the Treaty of Versailles would have caused a disasterous war for America and a country turning to communism?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There's simply no way to spin this. History has already made its judgement on the Iraq War.

"History" means Historians and they never, entirely, agree on anything. I don't think many will write that Iraq was the greatest war ever (or something similer), but I suspect that a lot will be very critical of Western policy towards Iraq from the end of the first war onwards, rather than being specifically critical of the 2003 invasion and it's aftermath.

But you should be careful of making predictions as to how future historians will write of current events.

[Joe Republic]

Who knew that a small tiff between Napoleon III and King Wilhelm of Prussia could have led to the Holocaust? Or that Woodrow Wilson's rebuff of Ho Chi Minhs calls for an independent Vietnam at the Treaty of Versailles would have caused a disasterous war for America and a country turning to communism?

...or that Darth Vader's decision to not have C3PO and R2D2's escape pod shot down would lead to the collapse of the Galactic Empire?

[Colin]

Who knew that a small tiff between Napoleon III and King Wilhelm of Prussia could have led to the Holocaust? Or that Woodrow Wilson's rebuff of Ho Chi Minhs calls for an independent Vietnam at the Treaty of Versailles would have caused a disasterous war for America and a country turning to communism?

...or that Darth Vader's decision to not have C3PO and R2D2's escape pod shot down would lead to the collapse of the Galactic Empire?

Exactly.

[Michael Z]

Who knew that a small tiff between Napoleon III and King Wilhelm of Prussia could have led to the Holocaust?

That's a bit of a leap. It's like saying Who knew that the Boston Tea Party would lead to the American civil war.

[Silent Hunter]

See my blog.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Some updates...

Dannatt, slightly, changed his position on an interiew on the radio this morning.
And Blair has said that he agrees with "every word" that Dannatt has said on Iraq.

[Colin]

Who knew that a small tiff between Napoleon III and King Wilhelm of Prussia could have led to the Holocaust?

That's a bit of a leap. It's like saying Who knew that the Boston Tea Party would lead to the American civil war.

Well then that it would lead to World War I, you happy? Or even German Unification since that wasn't an assured fact until after the conflict.