Iraq Arrests Two British Soldiers: Britain Negotiates With Tanks

[CptStern]

Not in Southern Iraq. It's an entirely different climate, partially because we started in a completely different fashion the US. The population is different in ethnicity and how they conduct themselves.

yes but iraq was under british rule before ...people dont forget those things ...and besides ..they must have been angered if they threw fuel bombs at the british troops

 

[Solaris]

Stern, we've been dealing with this kind of stuff for decades in Northern Ireland. Unlike the US, we're experienced and we actually have a lot of respect with the citizens of Basra.

Oh yes, and a great job you did there.

 

[Jandor]

Originally Posted by BBC
UK soldiers 'freed from militia'


Two British soldiers whose imprisonment prompted UK troops to storm a Basra police station were later rescued from militia, the Ministry of Defence says.
Brigadier John Lorimer said it was of "deep concern" the men detained by police ended up held by Shia militia.

Basra governor Mohammed al-Waili said the men - possibly working undercover - were arrested for allegedly shooting dead a policeman and wounding another.

The arrests sparked unrest in which Army vehicles were attacked.

In a statement, Brig Lorimer said that under Iraqi law the soldiers should have been handed over to coalition authorities, but this failed to happen despite repeated requests.

"I had good reason to believe that the lives of the soldiers were at risk and troops were sent to the area of Basra near the police station to help ensure their safety by providing a cordon," Brig Lorimer said.

"As shown on television these troops were attacked with firebombs and rockets by a violent and determined crowd.

"Later in the day, however, I became more concerned about the safety of the two soldiers after we received information that they had been handed over to militia elements."

It is of deep concern that British soldiers held by the police should then end up being held by the militia.

Brigadier John Lorimer
After troops broke into the police station to confirm the men were not there, they staged a rescue from a house in Basra, said the commanding officer of 12 Mechanised Brigade in Basra.

"I'm delighted that the two British soldiers are back with British forces and are in good health," Brig Lorimer said.

But he added: "It is of deep concern that British solders held by the police should then end up being held by the militia. This is unacceptable."

BBC Defence Correspondent Paul Wood said local police revealed the whereabouts of the two men after the station was stormed.

"At the point of a 30mm cannon - no shots were fired - but at the point of this cannon, the Iraqi police gave away the location of where the two British soldiers had been taken," he said.

Vehicles set alight

A Ministry of Defence (MoD) spokesman earlier said a Warrior armoured vehicle had broken down the perimeter wall at the police station.

Mr al-Waili said more than 10 vehicles and helicopters had been used in an operation that was a "barbaric act of aggression".

We remain committed to helping the Iraqi government

Defence Secretary John Reid


What effect will unrest have?
The MoD denied witness reports to the Associated Press that about 150 prisoners escaped after the demolition of the wall.

Two British armoured vehicles earlier sent to the police station were set alight in clashes.

TV pictures showed crowds of angry protesters hurling petrol bombs and stones, and soldiers in combat gear clambering from one of the flaming vehicles and making their escape.

Reports said two Iraqi civilians were killed and three soldiers injured in the clashes.

In a statement, Defence Secretary John Reid said the soldiers were being treated for minor injuries.

'Police inflitrated'

The BBC's Paul Wood said none of Basra's 20,000 police officers had helped the UK troops "partly because of reticence by their commanders, partly because, I am afraid, they have been infiltrated by these militants".

He added: "Now we are in the situation where presumably revenge will be sought by relatives of the dead Iraqis - and our allies in the police, I think there has been a complete breakdown of trust and it's going to be very difficult for British troops to call on them."

Mr Reid said: "We remain committed to helping the Iraqi government for as long as they judge that a coalition presence is necessary to provide security."


British officials would not say if the two men were working undercover
But Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell said: "It is hard to see how relations between the British military and the civilian Iraqi authorities in Basra will ever be the same again.

"This is bound to be seen as a humiliation by many Iraqis - something the insurgents will use to their advantage."

Tensions have been running high in Basra since the arrest of a senior figure in the Shia Mehdi Army by UK troops.

But Colonel Tim Collins, the former commander of British troops in Iraq, described the Basra unrest as like a "busy night in Belfast".

Col Collins said it did not represent a breakdown of law and order in Basra, which was still a safer city than Baghdad.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mi...ast/4262336.stm


Just to clarify:

The Iraqi police failed to uphold there own laws.

They then handed over the Soldiers to a militia.

Then refused to tell British forces where they were.


Also, from what I've read British forces do not appear to have fired any shots, and the Iraqi civilians where most likely killed by petrol bombs and exploding army vehicles.

The British Army was completely right to take this course of action.

Oh yes, and a great job you did there.

The British forces have made a much better job of Basra than other occupying forces have in the rest of Iraq.

Northern Ireland is for the most part peacefull nowadays, with the IRA moving more towards diplomacy than violence. Although I must admit, I'm not entirely informed on the current state of affairs in NI.

"the troubles" is a cake walk compared to Iraq

When Western Europeans blow each other up it's a "cake walk". When Iraqis blow each other it's much harder?

yes but iraq was under british rule before ...people dont forget those things ...

Yes, but it was over a century ago, people die and new generations are born.

and besides ..they must have been angered if they threw fuel bombs at the british troops

Maybe some people where angry. Out of a city of 1.3m how many do you think that crowd was representing? 90%? 75%? 50%? 0.5%?

 

[Murray_H]

I think the only reason they went in there so forcefully was because they were SAS soldiers. If they were killed/imprisoned, that is a shitload of training and money down the drain. Although they have probably been compramised fully now because of their faces being shown on TV (although they were blanked out in the UK, I don't know about anywhere else).

 

[Feath]

yes but iraq was under british rule before ...people dont forget those things ...and besides ..they must have been angered if they threw fuel bombs at the british troops

Tensions have been running a bit higher because of an arrest of a cleric that was organising attacks on British Forces.

Are you kidding me? The right wing is getting insane, when I heard this yesterday I didn't think anyone would support what the british did. Then I see you among with others here prasing it so I decided to check Free Republic and all those right wing nut cases support it too. If anything you guys should be the last to support anything like this, aren't you the same guys that claim Iraq is its own free country? If what you claim is true this would mean that the british attacked a federal building belonging to a sovereign country, aka an act of war.

I also find it odd that you guys are quick to attack any muslim that is a "terrorist" yet these guys were caught with a car load full of explosives, they were shooting at Iraqi police officers, and you don't see this as a problem? Honestly, is there a low you guys wont reach?

Oh for ****'s sake. "The right wing". The right wing of what? Stop being so ****ing small minded you petty ****. I voted for Lib Dem in the last General election. So I'm not right wing. I just don't agree with you. And that's not because you're left wing. It's because your opinions are rather ignorant and foolish. And you are a petty and small minded person who can't see past some party colours. Grow some political sense, I've had enough of reading crap, stupid posts from you. This forum was far better off when you were banned.

So you don't support a rescue opertion to rescue two British soliders? Would you have prefered them to die? Just so you can gloat and say "Oh look how bad it is, I'm so right. Look at me, aren't I class?". The Iraqi police were in the wrong, because they were told by the Iraqi Government to hand the soldiers over and this was ignored. And then they handed them over to some militiamen. It's not as if we just barged in beause we were ****ing bored.

 

[Jandor]

I think the only reason they went in there so forcefully was because they were SAS soldiers. If they were killed/imprisoned, that is a shitload of training and money down the drain. Although they have probably been compramised fully now because of their faces being shown on TV (although they were blanked out in the UK, I don't know about anywhere else).

Commanders arn't Accountants.

 

[No Limit]

Tensions have been running a bit higher because of an arrest of a cleric that was organising attacks on British Forces.



Oh for ****'s sake. "The right wing". The right wing of what? Stop being so ****ing small minded you petty ****. I voted for Lib Dem in the last General election. So I'm not right wing.

From what I've seen of you on this board I consider you leaning to the right. I don't know much about British politics and don't know what your vote for lib dem means but for world wide issues if I remember correctly you have a tendency to lean slightly to the right, especially on issues dealing with Iraq.

I just don't agree with you. And that's not because you're left wing. It's because your opinions are rather ignorant and foolish. And you are a petty and small minded person who can't see past some party colours. Grow some political sense, I've had enough of reading crap, stupid posts from you. This forum was far better off when you were banned.

Stupid posts from me? I love how you always come out of the blue and attack me personally (something I don't ever recall doing to you) but you always fail to address my points. We were talking about Downing Street Memo, I bring up a point you can't refute and you disappear. If you are going to address my points feel free, I respect your opinions when you respect mine. But if you are going to reply to me once in a blue moon with a personal attack don't bother.

So you don't support a rescue opertion to rescue two British soliders? Would you have prefered them to die? Just so you can gloat and say "Oh look how bad it is, I'm so right. Look at me, aren't I class?". The Iraqi police were in the wrong, because they were told by the Iraqi Government to hand the soldiers over and this was ignored. And then they handed them over to some militiamen. It's not as if we just barged in beause we were ****ing bored.

Two british soldiers that had Arabic disguise and were loaded with RPGs and a car load of expolsives shooting (and killing 1) at officers of a sovereign country deserve to be arrested. You are also completely missing the main point, British forces did not barge in to the militia area, they broke in to a prison where those soldiers were not held anymore from what I've read.

Now as far as did I want those soldiers to die? Hell no. But I also didn't want them running around with enough weaponry to start WWIII killing police officers.

 

[Murray_H]

Commanders arn't Accountants.

A figure I read puts training for an idividual SAS soldier at roughly $2million, so over a million pounds. That is a lot of money to lose (doubled in this case), and that doesn't take into account the actual soldier, who would be extremely hard to replace, especially if they are experienced.

So you don't need to be an accountant really when millions of pounds are being talked about

Edit - for comparison

http://www.philipjohnston.com/news/ti050999.htm

$40,000 for each solider, or about £20,000

 

[Jandor]

From what I've seen of you on this board I consider you leaning to the right. I don't know much about British politics and don't know what your vote for lib dem means but for world wide issues if I remember correctly you have a tendency to lean slightly to the right, especially on issues dealing with Iraq.

Lib Dems are the most left leaning mainstream party in the U.K.
Labour are slightly right nowadays
Tories are ever so slightly more right.

This is on the British Left/Right scale though .

Two british soldiers that had Arabic disguise and were loaded with RPGs and a car load of expolsives shooting (and killing 1) at officers of a sovereign country deserve to be arrested. You are also completely missing the main point, British forces did not barge in to the militia area, they broke in to a prison where those soldiers were not held anymore from what I've read.

Source?

They broke into the prison, because that is where they should have been. The police broke the law, they broke the law because many of them are insurgents.

A figure I read puts training for an idividual SAS soldier at roughly $2million, so over a million pounds. That is a lot of money to lose (doubled in this case), and that doesn't take into account the actual soldier, who would be extremely hard to replace, especially if they are experienced.

So you don't need to be an accountant really when millions of pounds are being talked about

Edit - for comparison

http://www.philipjohnston.com/news/ti050999.htm

$40,000 for each solider, or about £20,000

I was suggesting that the commanders ordered/wanted them saved, because they were 'there' men, rather than they cost a lot of money to train. .

 

[No Limit]

Lib Dems are the most left leaning mainstream party in the U.K.
Labour are slightly right nowadays
Tories are ever so slightly more right.

This is on the British Left/Right scale though .

Like I said, I really don't know much about politics out side of this country. I was refering to his foreign policy views, mostly on Iraq.

Source?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=1142658

Iraqi television on Tuesday showed footage of the two soldiers, unshaven and looking nervous as Iraqi police looked over wigs, Arab headresses, an anti-tank missile and communications equipment, all apparently used in their mission.

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/nm/20050920/2005_09_20t104655_450x372_us_iraq.jpg

They broke into the prison, because that is where they should have been. The police broke the law, they broke the law because many of them are insurgents.

you are missing my point. If the brits knew they were taken away from the prison why the hell would they break in to the prison since they clearly wouldn't have been there?

 

[Feath]

From what I've seen of you on this board I consider you leaning to the right. I don't know much about British politics and don't know what your vote for lib dem means but for world wide issues if I remember correctly you have a tendency to lean slightly to the right, especially on issues dealing with Iraq.

Well, I'm not right wing. I just disagree with you. And I don't believe that Iraq is a left or right wing issue.

Stupid posts from me? I love how you always come out of the blue and attack me personally (something I don't ever recall doing to you)

You have repeated called me "right wing". Such petty mindiness pisses me off. Whilst you may not consider these 'personal attacks'; I really don't like my opinions relegated to just some 'right-wing' comment that you can disregard.

but you always fail to address my points. We were talking about Downing Street Memo, I bring up a point you can't refute and you disappear. If you are going to address my points feel free, I respect your opinions when you respect mine. But if you are going to reply to me once in a blue moon with a personal attack don't bother.

Your point about the Memo was bascially that it was proof that Brush was a liar. I said I disagreed and that it's ambiguous whether it's proof about lying or not. There's nothing more to say about it. Although it would've been lovely to just go "is too" and "is not" for several hours, I didn't bothered.

Two british soldiers that had Arabic disguise and were loaded with RPGs and a car load of expolsives shooting (and killing 1) at officers of a sovereign country deserve to be arrested. You are also completely missing the main point, British forces did not barge in to the militia area, they broke in to a prison where those soldiers were not held anymore from what I've read.

Now as far as did I want those soldiers to die? Hell no. But I also didn't want them running around with enough weaponry to start WWIII killing police officers.

That was standard issue for SAS soldiers, apparently. And the Army broke into the prison in order to get information about the prisioners because they feared for their safety. Especially since the police were ignoring Governmental orders to release the prisoners. It was a final option in order to ensure the safety of British personel.

As for the Soldiers firing on policemen, I'm not going to comment on that until more details are known. I obviously can't defend it if I dont' know what happened. They could be completely in the wrong, I accept that. I'm just to say that according to Iraqi law they had to had them over to the British Army, and the police failed to do that.

 

[No Limit]

Well, I'm not right wing. I just disagree with you. And I don't believe that Iraq is a left or right wing issue.

And you might not be a right winger. But you have to understand the political atmosphere in this country (I don't blame you for not understanding it much like I don't understand yours). The right wing here is all the same when it comes to Iraq and this "war on terror". Your views on it are similar, though you are not nearly as extreme and because of that I feel like you are one of the few that I can actually debate with. I am simply sick of all the personal attacks around here.

You have repeated called me "right wing". Such petty mindiness pisses me off. Whilst you may not consider these 'personal attacks'; I really don't like my opinions relegated to just some 'right-wing' comment that you can disregard.

I will admit the label was probably out of line, as I said, I think you lean to the right on your views but you are fairly moderate.

Your point about the Memo was bascially that it was proof that Brush was a liar. I said I disagreed and that it's ambiguous whether it's proof about lying or not. There's nothing more to say about it. Although it would've been lovely to just go "is too" and "is not" for several hours, I didn't bothered.

No, my view said that the memo proved Bush was set on invading Iraq in 2002, long before he asked congress. This would also make him a liar as he said in 2003 he hasn't made up his mind. What you addressed was a completely different point, you ignored that one. But lets forget that, no point of bringing it up in here. If you feel like responding to the other thread feel free.

That was standard issue for SAS soldiers, apparently. And the Army broke into the prison in order to get information about the prisioners because they feared for their safety. Especially since the police were ignoring Governmental orders to release the prisoners. It was a final option in order to ensure the safety of British personel.

But I simply don't see how you have to bust open a prison to get information when the 2 clearly weren't there.

As for the Soldiers firing on policemen, I'm not going to comment on that until more details are known. I obviously can't defend it if I dont' know what happened. They could be completely in the wrong, I accept that. I'm just to say that according to Iraqi law they had to had them over to the British Army, and the police failed to do that.

And I admit I don't know the full details. The official report claims they fired on the police station and today I read they killed one officer. These soldiers were not following law and they looked like nothing more than terrorists; especially with all that weaponry. This should never had happened in the first place.

The British had full authority to get their soldiers back if those soldiers were at risk,m yes. And it seems the Iraq officials were breaking the law, yes. But what I don't understand is why they would attack a federal building with tanks and helicopters when they clearly knew the 2 were not there. This not only makes no sense but it also undermines the argument that Iraq is no its own nation and not a puppet government set up by the US. What will happen now is you will see more deaths in south Iraq as a direct result of this.

 

[Jandor]

But I simply don't see how you have to bust open a prison to get information when the 2 clearly weren't there.

From what I have read, the British Army had not been allowed to see the Soldiers. It would not have been obvious till they went in, that they weren't there.

And I admit I don't know the full details. The official report claims they fired on the police station and today I read they killed one officer. These soldiers were not following law and they looked like nothing more than terrorists; especially with all that weaponry. This should never had happened in the first place.

Unfortunately, because of the level to which the Police forces in Iraq have been infiltrated by Insurgents, you can't carry out covert operations in Iraq and let the police know, because then the Insurgents will know as well.

The British had full authority to get their soldiers back if those soldiers were at risk,m yes. And it seems the Iraq officials were breaking the law, yes. But what I don't understand is why they would attack a federal building with tanks and helicopters when they clearly knew the 2 were not there.

The Tanks will have been used because there was an angry and violent mob outside, it would have been risking more soldiers to send them in on foot or in Jeeps.

 

[Bob_Marley]

The British forces reacted like this for a number of reasons.
1. The lives of 2 british servicemen were in danger.
2. These servicemen happened to be SAS operators and thus may be in possesion of sensitive information.
3. The Iraqi police failed to carry out a lawful order from their commanders.
4. The soldiers had been handed over to milita men.
5. They are showing that any messing around with British forces will not be tolerated. The same kind of thing that 'Mad Mich' did during the pull out from Aden.
6. According to some sources the Iraqi police have 75% infiltration of militants.

I'm not saying that this was a acceptibale to behave like this, I am merely presenting the facts of why they would have done this.

Also It wasnt over a century ago that the british were in control of Iraq, it was since the end of the 1st world war to the 1950's. Iraq as a nation did not exist as a nation until some time inthe 1920's.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

you guys cant be serious:

Official Iraqi sources say British tanks stormed the city's jail, but the Ministry of Defence says the men's release was negotiated."

Have you ever heard of Hostile Negotiations, this is pretty standard procedure

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

The British had full authority to get their soldiers back if those soldiers were at risk,m yes. And it seems the Iraq officials were breaking the law, yes. But what I don't understand is why they would attack a federal building with tanks and helicopters when they clearly knew the 2 were not there.

They didn't know they weren't there. They had recieved information that the two were about to be handed over to the militia, and so broke into the prison to prevent this from occurring. They weren't aware that the prisoners were already being held in a militia "safe house"

 

[CptStern]

They didn't know they weren't there. They had recieved information that the two were about to be handed over to the militia, and so broke into the prison to prevent this from occurring. They weren't aware that the prisoners were already being held in a militia "safe house"

not really:


"BBC Defence Correspondent Paul Wood said local police revealed the whereabouts of the two men after the station was stormed.

"At the point of a 30mm cannon - no shots were fired - but at the point of this cannon, the Iraqi police gave away the location of where the two British soldiers had been taken," he said."

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

That's not contradicting what I said..

 

[No Limit]

That's not contradicting what I said..

The point is they didn't have to storm in there with helicopters and tanks, the police would have given them the location without all that force.

 

[CptStern]

That's not contradicting what I said..

admittedly it's a small point but yes what I posted didnt contradict your post ..it clarified :E

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

The point is they didn't have to storm in there with helicopters and tanks, the police would have given them the location without all that force.

That's a rather large assumption on your part. The fact that the Interior Ministry sanctioned the release of the soldiers to the MOD (as is the law) and the police refused to hand them over would suggest otherwise.

 

[Razor]

The point is they didn't have to storm in there with helicopters and tanks, the police would have given them the location without all that force.

Would these be the same people that handed them over to terrorists and radicals and militia?

Anyone who disagreed with this tactic i would love to hear what you would do in the same situation.

You have 2 of your serviceman being held captive by Iraqi police, who refuse to hand them over and then reports say that they are going to be handed over to militia where they will be tortured and most probably killed. What do you do? negotiate more?

 

[Sulkdodds]

Kangy's very first post in this thread made me think "what the ****? Two servicement got arrested...so they rolled into the prison?" It didn't make any sense. But if the police are as full of traitors, undercover insurgents and as likely to get the two killed as is suggested then I think the action was somewhat justified.

I can't help thinking there might have been a better way though.

 

[Solaris]

The soldiers shot at Iraqi Police, for doing something which if the soldiers had seen someone else do they would have shot at them.

They killed a police man, and are liable to the Iraqi justice system.

 

[Razor]

The soldiers shot at Iraqi Police, for doing something which if the soldiers had seen someone else do they would have shot at them.

They killed a police man, and are liable to the Iraqi justice system.

We don't know the situation though as to why they were arrested, if that is so, then they should stand trial and justice served.

But if you have 2 sas men, if they are members of the sas which it seems they are, and they are undercover and shoot a policeman in a policeforce that is proven to have had close links with militia and been infested by militia and insurgent members, i would rather believe the 2 sas men acted in accordance with their training and moral thoughts then Iraqi police. The sas men would of gone through the toughest situations that hell could throw at them, and that was just in training, they would of been to the worst parts the world has to offer, and that is just in training, and they would of fought against inconceivable odds, and that is just in training, and then they suddenly pick up their rifles and for no reason at all decide to shoot a policeman? Fine, it may have been a dreadful accident, but if they did knowingly pick up their gun and shoot the policeman, there must of been a reason to do it.

 

[Solaris]

Look, the police men stopped them at a checkpoint, as they should, the SBS (special boat service) men didnt stop and gunfire was exchanged, its not sure who shot first, but either way the Police were in the right.

A police man was killed, what do you expect the Police to do, shake the soldiers hand for shooting there freind, no put them in jail, as they did.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

Yes, they were right to be arrested. However, Iraqi law states that they, as soldiers, should be handed back to the MOD. The police refused to do this.
Also, it's not mentioned anywhere that they were SAS or SBS.

 

[Solaris]

I read that in the mirror.

People are right to be angry, they shot the people of Iraq, and destroyed a police station.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

I believe that even Iraqi law operates under the "innocent until proven guilty" assumption, so how about we wait for some facts before leaping to conclusions about what the soldiers actually did/didn't do?
Also, knocking down part of a perimeter wall isn't really the same as destroying a police station.

 

[Jandor]

For all we know, the "Police officer" in question could have been running towards the car yelling "For Allah" and trying to find his detonator.

We don't know the full facts.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Apparently the riots and firebombings were unrelated, instead provoked by an incident the previous day.

 

[Jandor]

Source?

What was speak like a pirate day?

 

[Sulkdodds]

Source:

Senior British officials said the Iraqis who attacked the Warrior armoured vehicle had prepared their petol bomb attack before the incident involving the two undercover soldiers. The origins of the attack on the Warrior, they say, lay in events the previous day when about 200 members of the al-Mahdi Army, a militia headed by the radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, made a show of force in Basra, blocking roads in the city and demanding the release of their local commanders.

 

[Solaris]

I saw the pictures in todays papers.

Theres a picture of a police building, completly demolished.

 

[Razor]

I read that in the mirror.

People are right to be angry, they shot the people of Iraq, and destroyed a police station.

Don't read the tabloid newspapers as it is all rubbish.

 

[KoreBolteR]

well done for saving those sas fighters! weyhey

 

[CptStern]

well done for saving those sas fighters! weyhey

you wouldnt say that if an insurgent/iraqi/militan/etc had broken into the coalition camp to rescue someone on their way to gitmo

 

[Griz]

you wouldnt say that if an insurgent/iraqi/militan/etc had broken into the coalition camp to rescue someone on their way to gitmo

I fail to see the comparison. These British soldiers were being held illegally which would not be the case for an "insurgent/militant".

I believe a closer comparison would be to compare this incident with the scenario that occupying forces would carry out a similar operation to rescue someone like Ken Bigley - in either case i believe the actions of the British forces to be right and just.

The fact is that the so-called Iraqi police failed their lawful duties on two counts - in both failing to hand over the detainees to the MOD (despite repeated requests) and also for handing them over to shia militia thereby endangering their lives. Incidentally, this also raises the issue that the police knew of these militia and their whereabouts and yet failed to arrest any of them for their illegal activities, suggesting (to me at least) that those particular police weren't exactly working with the occupying forces (more likely they were/are assisting or at least supporting the insurgents).

 

[No Limit]

I fail to see the comparison. These British soldiers were being held illegally which would not be the case for an "insurgent/militant".

Illegal? You want to talk about legality? Gitmo, along with many other US military prisons, are considered illegal by internation law.

I believe a closer comparison would be to compare this incident with the scenario that occupying forces would carry out a similar operation to rescue someone like Ken Bigley - in either case i believe the actions of the British forces to be right and just.

Occupying forces? Bush has made it clear that we are not a occupying force any more.

The fact is that the so-called Iraqi police failed their lawful duties on two counts - in both failing to hand over the detainees to the MOD (despite repeated requests) and also for handing them over to shia militia thereby endangering their lives. Incidentally, this also raises the issue that the police knew of these militia and their whereabouts and yet failed to arrest any of them for their illegal activities, suggesting (to me at least) that those particular police weren't exactly working with the occupying forces (more likely they were/are assisting or at least supporting the insurgents).

And I agree, I think these man should have been rescued if their life was truly in danger. I am simply simply pointing out the hypocracy of the occupying forces in Iraq and that Iraq is not really a real sovereign country like Bush and Blair continually claim. This is a clear example that things are still not going well in that country and won't for a very long time, it would have been much better to stay the hell out in the first place. And guess what, people were telling you this before we went to war.

 

[CptStern]

I fail to see the comparison. These British soldiers were being held illegally which would not be the case for an "insurgent/militant".

so then every person at gitmo is guilty? then why havent any of them been charged with anything? regardless if justified or not the militants would think the imprisonment is unjustified ..same goes for the british troops ...doesnt mean the iraqi police felt it was unjustified