Brit Terrorist Ops in Iraq Revealed

6 Comments

1. 

   BooMan on February 6, 2007 at 11:33 am

   they work so hard to get a mole into the network that they don’t want to blow their cover for anything, even to stop a bomb.  It’s tough work, making those types of decisions.

   • 

     soj on February 6, 2007 at 7:32 pm

     No it’s not.  You stop the bomb just like they should’ve stopped the 93 WTC bombing.

     It isn’t La Cosa Nostra running the show in Iraq.  There’s absolutely no need for British troops to infiltrate the insurgents in Iraq.  Classic counter-insurgency technique dictates that you befriend the local powerbrokers and pay them heavily for accurate information.  Quite simply put, pay for snitches.

     It’s exactly what the two Gary’s did in Afghanistan in October 2001 and it worked perfectly.  They had thousands of Taliban defect and the bought-off NA knew exactly where the Talib were.  THAT is how you do it.  Bricks of cash.

     Sounds ridiculous until you see Paul Bremer weaseling his way through testimony on C-Span 2 this afternoon while you’re trying to choke down some rice and beans.  Cash is cheaper, more effective and far, far less bloody in the long run.

     Pax

     • 

       esquimaux on February 6, 2007 at 8:23 pm

       Cash is cheaper, more effective and far, far less bloody in the long run.

       or put another way

       It is cheaper to pay the best spies lavishly than even a small army poorly.

       Sun Tzu

2. 

   Oui on February 6, 2007 at 4:14 pm

   .

   “As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time.”

   — Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld

   “Since the Iraq conflict began, the Army has been pressing ahead to produce the armor necessary at a rate that they believe — it’s a greatly expanded rate from what existed previously, but a rate that they believe is the rate that is all that can be accomplished at this moment. I can assure you that General Schoomaker and the leadership in the Army and certainly General Whitcomb are sensitive to the fact that not every vehicle has the degree of armor that would be desirable for it to have, but that they’re working at it at a good clip.”

   There have been 3,354 coalition deaths — 3,100 Americans, two Australians, 131 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, six Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, one Hungarian, 32 Italians, one Kazakh, three Latvian, 18 Poles, two Romanians, five Salvadoran, four Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians — in the war in Iraq.

   
   February 2007 - The upgraded FV430 Mk3 Bulldog
vehicles on patrol in Basra City, Iraq

   ≈ Cross-posted from Jeff Huber’s diary — Groundhog Day in Iraq ≈

   "But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

3. 

   idredit on February 6, 2007 at 4:24 pm

   In tomorrow’s NYT via Steve Clemons, the Saudis, it is revealed, will play a more “Overt, Active Role in Middle East Affairs….that could complicate American interests”

   a teaser:

   “In recent months, Saudi Arabia has also increased its public involvement in Iraq and its support of the Sunni-led government in Lebanon. The process is shaping up as a counteroffensive to efforts by Iran to establish itself as the regional superpower, according to diplomats, analysts and officials here and throughout the region. Some even say that the recent Saudi commitment to temper the price of oil is aimed at undermining Iran’s economy, although officials here deny that.[.]

   The United States, which is pushing the Saudis to take on this role, is alarmed at rising Iranian influence in Iraq and Lebanon, and with the Palestinian government of Hamas.

   But the two countries, though sharing broad goals, have different views of the players in each conflict. For example, while the Bush administration sees the conflict in Iraq as one between allies and terrorists, the Saudis tend to see it as Sunnis versus Shiites — and they favor the Sunnis, while the Americans back the Shiite-led government. And while Saudi Arabia wants to lure Hamas away from Iran’s influence and back into the Arab fold, the United States views Hamas as a terrorist organization.

   • 

     idredit on February 6, 2007 at 5:33 pm

     Here’s a most interesting article out of Israel:

     ‘Riyadh informs Washington that a Palestinian unity government under its auspices will not uphold previous agreements with Israel.’

     The Saudis notified the Bush administration ahead of the Mecca reconciliation summit Tuesday, Feb. 6, that the Palestinian accord for a coalition government sponsored by Riyadh will not meet a key Middle East Quartet condition for its recognition: The new government will not accept past accords, including peace agreements the Palestinian Liberation Organization signed with Israel. DEBKAfile’s Washington sources report: The new Palestinian government initiated in Mecca will only “respect” past accords – not accept them.

     Nonetheless, the US and Europe were expected by Riyadh to lift the international embargo and economic siege imposed on the Hamas government.[.]

     The Saudi government is ready to go with a huge campaign to sell the Mecca accords in Europe and Israel. It will aim to persuade the European Union to remove its economic embargo against the Palestinian government, without waiting for Washington, while also stirring up domestic pressure in Israel for acceptance of the Mecca agreement and consent to start negotiations with Hamas. The Saudis hope this campaign in Israel will be more effective than the drive for talks with Syria.[.]