British Shelve Plans To Cut Troop Numbers In Iraq

Financial Times:

Plans to reduce British troop numbers in Iraq to 2,500 this spring have been abandoned on the recommendation of military commanders, UK officials say.

Gordon Brown, prime minister, announced in October that from spring Britain would seek to cut the force to 2,500, but added the proviso that the final decision would be "guided as always by the advice of our military commanders". An announcement is expected from Mr Brown on Monday or Tuesday, officials say.

There are about 4,100 British troops in Iraq, with a further 500 personnel providing logistics and support from neighbouring Kuwait.

Senior officers have now recommended that reducing numbers sharply would leave the force unable to protect itself adequately.

Officials said the recommendation was made before the upsurge in violence this week in the southern city of Basra as Iraqi government forces seek to disarm Shia groups.

Britain withdrew from Basra city in September and its forces are essentially confined to Basra airport.

There they continue the training of Iraqi government troops and say they are ready to provide combat troops in support of the Iraqi government if called upon.

The Ministry of Defence said on Friday that there had been no such request from the Iraqi government to help with the latest operation.

UK support had been limited to providing air surveillance for Iraqi government troops, but no UK munitions had been dropped to back up the government's operations.

The shift on cutting troop numbers raises questions about whether the UK will be able to lower troop levels in Iraq much below 4,000 unless it pulls out completely, which is unlikely before next year at the earliest.

Keep reading.

Read the whole story: Financial Times

Comments

[TooLooze]

Why is pulling out about one percent of the combat troops news?

[Birdman]

I feel the US will be in a similar pickle regardless of who gets in to office, they will be unale to pull troops out. There is no stability (there was before we got there) and if we leave the potential to have an impact on the world is far more likely then if we stay. Of course I'm not too blind to see that it will destroy this country if we stay. So the real question is do we fix Bushes follie and save the mess from affecting the world, or do we engage in self preservation?

[lisakaz]

I think you have to get to the point where you let 'em fight it out -- or resolve their differences. The US and UK think they can work their will on Iraq. They can advise, cajole but they cannot dictate. How does one "dictate" democracy? Huh?

I think this is going to be a huge internal war regardless of when troops leave. They are only delaying the inevitable, so Bu$h can bogusly claim how close to "victory" he was before someone else "ruined" it.

[newshawk14]

lisakaz, I think you're missing a subtle point that both Birdman and I understand.
Birdman: There is no stability (there was before we got there) and if we leave the
potential to have an impact on the world is far more likely then if we stay.

Newshawk14: but what is needed is a strategy of how to get out, without setting
off a middle east powder keg.

The problem is setting off a regional war, involving Iran, Saudi Arabia, Jordan,
and perhaps Turkey.

[chirps]

If we stay, we lose. If we go, we lose. Thanks, Bush.

[oregonrain]

Havent seen any msn about the U.S sub that is in ,or headed to the persian gulf. Iran somehow comes to mind . Curious timing , but , not a surprise , but , pretty damn scary !Mccain getting an early start to "bomb , bomb , bomb iran ? This makes me sick . Is there nothing we can do to stop these war thirsty idiots ?

[newshawk14]

I'm surprised at the harshness of the criticism of Brown and the British Government. I'll certainly,
agree that the Iraq war was insane and immoral, but what is needed is a strategy of how to get
out, without setting off a middle east powder keg. I think McCain is off his rocker, Hillary strikes
me as dishonest, but Obama has said that we must have a strategy, and wants to work with the
generals and middle east partners, to come up with a plan to end the war in Iraq.

[speakingtruth2power]

The idea of pulling out when peace is attained is a fairy tale.

There will be no peace as long as the occupiers are there.

Any solution will be an Iraqi one that suits it's neighbors or

the civil war will continue to smoulder then rage on, again.

.

[TimmySlagle]

Then why were we able to find peace in occupied Germany, and occupied Japan?

[lisakaz]

There was existing ppl and government apparatus or institutions. Can't you see that stuff was removed and deemed inconsequential because it belonged to Saddam? Saddam may have been keeping a very tight lid on a very protracted civil war.

[TimmySlagle]

"reducing numbers sharply would leave the force unable to protect itself adequately"

Interesting. Now I'd love to hear someone explain to me, how the US can pull out entirely, without a blood bath.

[lisakaz]

They cannot. It is inevitable, hence I see no reason why troops stay to get picked off refereeing someone else's civil war.

[TimmySlagle]

Whatever happened to the policy of "You break it you bought it?"

I seem to remember a LOT of Democrats were chanting that one, right before the invasion.

[donjoe4]

Brits never knew when to pull out...ask Ireland

[ribe8g]

Brits go to hell, get out of Iraq along with u.s. troooops and puppets and quislings.
Maybe they'll send you the wmd's later.

[VictorLudorum]

Gaddafi and Musharaff . compete for Popes floor guide then..

[wmbear]

YOU DID A HECKUVA JOB, BROWNIE in securing Basra, which was supposed to be under the jurisdiction of British troops until you pulled them out. Now we find out it never was under British control. The insurgents controlled it for the past several years. Not that I wish you had secured Basra. What I wish is that you'd butted out a long time ago and deprived Bush of any support from allies for his creative excuses to stay in Iraq.

[springsm]

Gawd...bush's war keeps involving more people. Damn. Of course, now that we are funding France's economy for the next 20 years, France is sending troops to Aghanistan. Once that tanker was given to them...I knew that they had been blackmailed. Gawd damn gw bush and that cheney jerk. damn them damn them damn them. And that surge too..which of course, is working. Didn't Rummy say "there will be deaths"? Doesn't bush say every third week that "this is going to be hard".....ad nauseum. I am sick of this war, this economy, the bribing or bullying of so called friendly nations and I am sick of King George W. Bush..and his cabal.

[Irons]

The search for WMD continues.

[chirps]

Yes, of course, the WMD, that's what were fighting for! How can we ever thank Bush - and his Neocon handlers - for alerting us to and then acting to remove such an obvious threat to America? It just goes to show what an intelligent, well thought out plan can accomplish in the hands of real professionals dedicated to serving the best interests of the United States of America. Yes sir!

[Podewumun]

Gordon's not looking to score any extra "Brownie" points with his subjects, is he?

[lisakaz]

No, he's giving fuel to his opposition, though given it's a Tory, I wonder how the public thinks a Tory will end this occupation.