Brits leave Basra, violence plummets

[PressCoverage]

so much for "if we leave now, it will be a humanitarian disaster"... more evidence to the contrary...

British General: Our Presence ‘Instigated’ Violence In Iraq, ‘90 Percent’ Reduction After Withdrawal

After Britain partially withdrew forces from southern Iraq in September, the White House slandered its “closest ally,” claiming “British forces have performed poorly in Basra” and suggested “it’s best that they leave.”



The White House should take notice of what has happened in Basra as British troops have left. According to Maj. Gen. Graham Binns, commander of British forces in Basra, the presence of British troops instigated violence. Now, violence has reportedly dropped to one-tenth that of earlier levels:

The presence of British forces in downtown Basra, Iraq’s second-largest city, was the single largest instigator of violence, Maj. Gen. Graham Binns told reporters Thursday on a visit to Baghdad’s Green Zone.

Sectarian tensions in Basra, a predominantly Shiite city, are not as high in other parts of Iraq, but “it has seen major fighting between insurgents and coalition troops.” British Defense Secretary Des Browne observed last month:

The people of that city are no longer subject to the significant level of violence that was directed against the British forces and our allies.

[Real World]

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

so much for "if we leave now, it will be a humanitarian disaster"... more evidence to the contrary...

British General: Our Presence ‘Instigated’ Violence In Iraq, ‘90 Percent’ Reduction After Withdrawal

After Britain partially withdrew forces from southern Iraq in September, the White House slandered its “closest ally,” claiming “British forces have performed poorly in Basra” and suggested “it’s best that they leave.”



The White House should take notice of what has happened in Basra as British troops have left. According to Maj. Gen. Graham Binns, commander of British forces in Basra, the presence of British troops instigated violence. Now, violence has reportedly dropped to one-tenth that of earlier levels:

The presence of British forces in downtown Basra, Iraq’s second-largest city, was the single largest instigator of violence, Maj. Gen. Graham Binns told reporters Thursday on a visit to Baghdad’s Green Zone.

Sectarian tensions in Basra, a predominantly Shiite city, are not as high in other parts of Iraq, but “it has seen major fighting between insurgents and coalition troops.” British Defense Secretary Des Browne observed last month:

The people of that city are no longer subject to the significant level of violence that was directed against the British forces and our allies.

You need a clue actually. US troops aren't in the southern region. The south is entirely Shia and therefore, like Kurdistan, requires little coalition presence. When you get into the triangle, and into Anbar, that's where AQ is concentrated, and where the sectarian violence is centralized. Pull US troops outside of the regions they're stationed, and you'll have a mess. Look at the current surge, and its results.

[PressCoverage]

Originally Posted by Real World

You need a clue actually. US troops aren't in the southern region. The south is entirely Shia and therefore, like Kurdistan, requires little coalition presence. When you get into the triangle, and into Anbar, that's where AQ is concentrated, and where the sectarian violence is centralized. Pull US troops outside of the regions they're stationed, and you'll have a mess. Look at the current surge, and its results.

actually, you need a clue... nothing you told me is news to me.... but, the "results" up there have little to do with the any tactical gains from the surge... Petraeus' own advisor is even calling it "luck"...

Well what do you attribute this whole change on the ground to? Is this due to what is called “the surge,” or good diplomacy by the U.S. military, or just luck?

All of those things have some role but I would put “luck” as probably the biggest.

You mean the timing just happens to coincide with the Sunnis getting fed up with al-Qaeda?

Well, that’s a big part of it. I think there are about three or four major reasons for this. One of the principal factors is that the Sunnis lost the battle of Baghdad and understand that they lost it. Interestingly, most people look back at the Samara mosque bombing back in February 2006 and the subsequent sectarian violence as a great disaster. But one of the ironic features of that is that sectarian violence essentially resulted in the Sunnis getting kicked out of the capital city. They lost the fighting with the Jaish al Mahdi in the city of Baghdad and came to recognize that they were not going to win if this came to an all-out war with the United States gone from Iraq.

regardless, in Basra, violence was way down AFTER the brits pulled out... that is undeniable...

[patsfan13]

So Patraeus artciulates a plan to neutralize AO and drop the level of violence, the plan is decried by the left as failing before it is put in place, then the plan shows signs of succeeding, now the resuls are 'luck'.

Typical of the left, and of course Reagan had nothing top do with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

[PressCoverage]

Originally Posted by patsfan13

So Patraeus artciulates a plan to neutralize AO and drop the level of violence, the plan is decried by the left as failing before it is put in place, then the plan shows signs of succeeding, now the resuls are 'luck'.

Typical of the left, and of course Reagan had nothing top do with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

gosh... Patraeus' advisor is part of "the left"? who knew?

[PatsFanInEaglesLand]

More thinkprogress sh!t. Good info from a site run by an islamic terrorist sympathizer.

[PressCoverage]

Originally Posted by PatsFanInEaglesLand

More thinkprogress sh!t. Good info from a site run by an islamic terrorist sympathizer.

regardless of who presented it, do you deny it was ever said regarding the Brits' pulling out?

if not, what are you complaining about? just to hear yourself complain again? oh... that's right...

[Real World]

It's amazing how some people simply refuse to give credit where it's due.

[PressCoverage]

Originally Posted by Real World

It's amazing how some people simply refuse to give credit where it's due.

Almost as amazing as the mind-boggling timeline of denials, coincidences and excuses for lies the 24 percenters expect the rest of us to believe over the past 5 years... Almost...

If you're sitting here suggesting the "surge" and U.S. "tactical genius" is wholely responsible for declining violence in Iraq, you truly do live in a fantasy world...

[DarrylS]

Originally Posted by PatsFanInEaglesLand

More thinkprogress sh!t. Good info from a site run by an islamic terrorist sympathizer.

Actually it is from the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../nbrown603.xml

Operationally, British forces have performed poorly in Basra," said the official. "Maybe it's best that they leave. Now we will have a clear field in southern Iraq." Another White House official described Mr Brown as "challenging" and far less close to the US than Mr Blair.

There has been a notable reduction in contact between Downing Street and the White House since Mr Blair left and US officials have remarked on how few British ministers have visited Washington in recent months.

Mr Brown and Mr Bush are understood to have spoken twice by telephone in three months since they met at Camp David in June, whereas Mr Blair and Mr Bush held video-link conferences, often weekly