So, 'they' lied to us about Iraq. Again. Cameron in "son of Blair" shocker

David Cameron on the BBC on 18th August, referring to the situation in Iraq

Britain is not going to get involved in another war in Iraq. We are not going to be putting boots on the ground. We are not going to be sending in the British Army.

Sauce

In the news today:

Hundreds of British troops will be sent to Iraq in the New Year, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon has said.

The deployment – to help train local forces – will be in the “very low hundreds” but could also include a small protection force of combat-ready soldiers, he said.

Sauce

That’s going well then.

What flavour sauce?

What flavour sauce?

It’s called Mission Creep and it’s just the way the Americans got quagmired in Vietnam.

I don’t think OP is trolling.

However, IMO as a bystander*, Mr Cameron is facing a much different situation to Blair.

Due partly to the actions of Blair, he has all eyes on him and and any action other than do nothing, will result in comparisons as made in thread title.

I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.

*Non-political, don’t know what the answer is, person.

Is sending in military advisers to train troops “getting involved in a war” ?

In any case the emergence of ISIS in Iraq changes things and sending in troops seems totally appropriate to me. We’ve had SAS on the ground calling in air strikes for months anyway.

I for one have no issue with troops being used for this purpose. I’d want to see a very good reason for any significant escalation however.

Errr, didn’t we train them the last time we went on holiday there??

We’ve had SAS on the ground calling in air strikes for months anyway.

They never left. There has been an Iraq rotation since GW2 ended.

Is sending in military advisers to train troops “getting involved in a war”?

yeah, it pretty much is. “Advisor” has always been a fig leaf. Lets be honest here, it’s not like we’re any good at advising really, but we are pretty good at exporting warfare.

Since the war criminal Blair got us involved with his lies, the mess we helped leave now gives us a moral responsibility to help clear it up. It’s not nice, will not be easy and a real tough job but who else is going to go and help.
Cameron has no choice and has to work with the changing situation.

We could do the cowardly thing and walk away. ISIS need people like the OP supporting them and making sure those responsible stay away.

What we should have done is not got involved in GW2 but that’s all to late now.

Blair lied to get us to go to Iraq, and left a horrendous mess that made us too scared to act appropriately in Syria, and those two problems have created the vacuum that IS have taken over.

I agree with those above, we have an obligation to try and sort out the mess that we helped to create, and also to try and stifle the evil of IS before it’s poison spreads and becomes a greater threat to us here at home.

In practical terms, I don’t know how far our military involvement needs to go to achieve that. I suspect that at this moment, Cameron doesn’t really know the answer to that either. Taking a pop at him for it seems premature to me, if understandable.

Nah, forget it

The LORD is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.‘

That gives you a rough idea of how long we’re going to be stuck sorting out the mess left by Tony Blair’s mistakes.

the mess we helped leave now gives us a moral responsibility to help clear it up.

the overwhelming sentiment of Iraqis and Afghans over the last 12 years has been “stop ‘fixing’ things and please piss off”.

I am too late to call Bliar a ****?

I could be wrong, but if you halted all:

a) arms/ammo supply to the region

b) materials supply to arms/ammo manufacturers within the region

c) trade with ISIS or any of their affiliates in any other commodity

surely the situation would diffuse fairly swiftly?

It’s not lying. It’s changing your mind.

There’s a huge difference.

The most stupid thing he did was say ‘we’re not going to put troops in’. He should know that you can’t talk in absolutes if you’re prepared to respond to the situation. And he is – the question is, should he be?

Should the UK get involved in trying to stop tens of thousands suffer? Or should we not give a shit?

the overwhelming sentiment of Iraqis and Afghans over the last 12 years has been “stop ‘fixing’ things and please piss off”.

So we (Iraqis and Afghans) can suicide bomb each other is a civil war ? Taliban just killed a dozen Afgans (and 2 Americans I understand) who where clearing mines. There must have been 100,000 Iraqis killed in sectarian violence. Of course there are some who want to left to get on with that work without being threatened by the US, UK etc

Can someone help the Yazidis please …

Can we arm them with laser from the high ground to test them laser on the is-is zombies please.

😯

Edit: i-sis sounds too good for a zombies … ‘is – is’ sounds better. From now on they shall be called is-is (as in I “is” good innit!”).

the wise learn from other people’s mistakes.
Most are prepared to learn from their own mistakes.
Some never learn.

Edukator – Troll

the wise learn from other people’s mistakes.
Most are prepared to learn from their own mistakes.
Some never learn.

There is no such thing as learning … 🙄

You only pretend you have learned well but in actual fact you are re-recording your own experience so long as it fits you. Learning never takes place as it is nothing but a concept.

When is this war gonna end… So sick of it..!!!!! 👿

Having been sold us Bachar Al-Assad as blood-thirsty tyrant for months we are now being told that troops will be sent to support him. Go figure.

molgrips – Member
It’s not lying. It’s changing your mind….

It’s doing what he’s told by his best buddy Uncle Sam.

Meanwhile people here starve to death and foodbanks proliferate.

Saw Blair recently telling us that we should have expected this following the downfall of Hussein. He did not expect this, and is a lying b*****d. I know this is not news. Most politicians being liars does not normally bother me, however I am saddened as Blair could have been a decent PM.

I am no fan of CMD but he is dealing with a “do I, don’t I scenario”. At least he listened to the public initially on Syria.

So, what should he do?

Anyone see any flaws in this solution?

(other than lack of profits for the lucrative arms trade; of which (serial beheaders and significant stakeholder in Murdochs media empire) Saudi Arabi are the UKs #1 customer )

I could be wrong, but if you halted all:

a) arms/ammo supply to the region

b) materials supply to arms/ammo manufacturers within the region

c) trade with ISIS or any of their affiliates in any other commodity

surely the situation would diffuse fairly swiftly?

How would you do that lot? Cut our allies off?

So, what should he do?

I think the UK should stay out at least from a “boots on the ground” point of view. I don’t know how useful air strikes in Iraq are either, however they are a good way of saying you are doing something without really doing something.
Molgrips, you talk of tens of thousands suffering if we don’t intervene. The thing about the Middle East is tens of thousands suffer if we intervene. It is difficult I admit, that is why I do not judge CMD too harshly on this.

Its a mistake

Despite promises that this time it would be different
The new Iraqi government seems set on relying on the same sectarian supporters to keep themselves in power

Once again we are allying ourselves with people not much better than our enemies
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11282285/Well-continue-using-Shia-militias-despite-massacre-claims-says-Iraqi-government.html

It is difficult I admit, that is why I do not judge CMD too harshly on this.

Absolutely, and that’s my point.

Cut our allies off?

If they were supplying ISIS with weapons, or indeed trading with ISIS, would they truly be allies?

you know that ISIS wants to overthrow the Saudi regime, right?

So we (Iraqis and Afghans) can suicide bomb each other is a civil war ? Taliban just killed a dozen Afgans (and 2 Americans I understand) who where clearing mines. There must have been 100,000 Iraqis killed in sectarian violence. Of course there are some who want to left to get on with that work without being threatened by the US, UK etc

so far UK/US “fixing” of Afghans’ oppression under the Taleban and the Hussein regime’s crimes against humanity in Iraq have resumed in the deaths of 100,000+ people. that’s a track record of being not very good in the “fixing” business. when there’s no clear idea of how to “fix” things and no popular will to have you “fix” things, I think it’s a good idea not to start “fixing” things again.

when get the bull out of the china shop, you don’t invite it back in to fix the china, especially when the only tools the bull proposes to use for fixing is an airborne exploding laser guided mallet.

I’m with jivehoneyjive on this one, but sadly that doesn’t appear to be good for business.

There must have been 100,000 Iraqis killed in sectarian violence.

The responsibility of a situation that can be wholly laid at the feet of the US and UK govts.

What to do?

Negotiate. Talk to the combatants (all of them, Al Shahbab, Al Queda, Boko Harram, ISIS all of them), and first of all get them to stop fighting on their terms, not trying to enforce “not fighting” by us. Second, probably re-arrange these ‘countries’ so that they more accurately reflect tribal and religious needs. Accept the fact that both Saudi Arabia and Iran are the local power-brokers and get them involved in constructive dialogues. Above all else, security for civilians and the end of violence.

Rather than export violence, export knowledge, schooling, power, time…

Is what I’d do for a kick off.

probably re-arrange these ‘countries’ so that they more accurately reflect tribal and religious needs.

Which I think is their fight not ours.