Brits Under Attack In Basra

[Aaron]

CBC

BASRA, IRAQ - Gunmen loyal to Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr have attacked British patrols in the southern Iraqi city of Basra.

Coalition officials believe Saturday's attacks, carried out by several hundred members of the Mehdi Army, are aimed at diverting the attention from al-Sadr's base in nearby Najaf.

For al-Sadr's militia, this was its strongest show of force in Basra. Fighters armed with assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenades targeted British patrols and government buildings in Iraq's second-largest city.

They took over some of the buildings and intersections, setting fires to mark out territory.

At least two Iraqis were killed and one British soldier wounded in exchanges of gunfire.

The uprising was largely beaten back by British troops and Iraqi police.

Locals say the insurgents are vowing to drive the British out of Basra.

The violence comes a day after al-Sadr delivered a speech in the southern city of Kufa dismissing U.S. President George W. Bush's apology for the U.S. abuse of Iraqi prisoners.

An aide to al-Sadr, Sheik Abdul-Sattar al-Bahadli, called on worshippers at Friday prayers to launch a holy war against British troops in Basra.

He offered bounties for the killing of British troops and said captured female troops could be kept as slaves.

Looks like al-Sadr isn't content to cause trouble in Najaf only. I thought the US said that they intended to capture or kill this asswipe.

[Admiral Valdemar]

To catch this guy or kill him would make him, what?

a) A corpse.
b) A non-mission critical target.
c) A martyr.

The answer is... all of the above. But especially the last one. You then get a nice gathering of fanatics that you didn't kill and whom were relatively quiet before, that is until their religious leader was massacred by the Great Satan.

I doubt taking this guy out would help us, but having him around, as we see here, isn't going to help us either. Your classic Catch-22.

[Aaron]

To catch this guy or kill him would make him, what?

a) A corpse.
b) A non-mission critical target.
c) A martyr.

The answer is... all of the above. But especially the last one. You then get a nice gathering of fanatics that you didn't kill and whom were relatively quiet before, that is until their religious leader was massacred by the Great Satan.

I doubt taking this guy out would help us, but having him around, as we see here, isn't going to help us either. Your classic Catch-22.

No argument about the first two points. However killing him may make him a martyr but it also chops the head of the snake. His militia may not be able to function effectively with al-Sadr dead.

[Sea Skimmer]

I find it hard to believe that the attacks could involve several hundred people and only three casualties be known of.

[SirNitram]

I find it hard to believe that the attacks could involve several hundred people and only three casualties be known of.

Unless it's Ghurkas.

No, wouldn't work. The other guys would all be dead. Hrm. Something smells.

[Aaron]

He offered bounties for the killing of British troops and said captured female troops could be kept as slaves.

Do they really think that this shit is going to fly? The Brits would have an absolute fit if the rebels attempted to keep female soldiers as slaves. Or is this just rethoric to fire up the masses?

[Admiral Valdemar]

He offered bounties for the killing of British troops and said captured female troops could be kept as slaves.

Do they really think that this shit is going to fly? The Brits would have an absolute fit if the rebels attempted to keep female soldiers as slaves. Or is this just rethoric to fire up the masses?

That's why we should pull the tired grunts out and send in the Gurkhas and paras for that area given this is more than just peacekeeping now.

[Aaron]

Are there actually Gurkha's in Iraq?

[Admiral Valdemar]

Are there actually Gurkha's in Iraq?

There should be, they were an integral part of the invasion.

[Sarevok]

He offered bounties for the killing of British troops and said captured female troops could be kept as slaves.

Do they really think that this shit is going to fly? The Brits would have an absolute fit if the rebels attempted to keep female soldiers as slaves. Or is this just rethoric to fire up the masses?

This is just reheotic. The Coalition would go berserk if they kept female soldiers as slaves.

[Sea Skimmer]

There should be, they were an integral part of the invasion.

Not really, only a single 120 man company was deployed attached to first battalion, Royal Irish regiment as far as I'm aware, and that unit went home a year ago. Another company might have been rorated in, but it likely would have left by now. Occupation duty isn't somthing commando units are well used for, if the overstreched British special forces had any to sapre I'd expect them to be in Afghanistan were they might have a chance to get some real work done.

[Admiral Valdemar]

There should be, they were an integral part of the invasion.

Not really, only a single 120 man company was deployed attached to first battalion, Royal Irish regiment as far as I'm aware, and that unit went home a year ago. Another company might have been rorated in, but it likely would have left by now. Occupation duty isn't somthing commando units are well used for, if the overstreched British special forces had any to sapre I'd expect them to be in Afghanistan were they might have a chance to get some real work done.

Yeah, I meant to say they should be going there if trouble flares up that can't be controlled since basic peacekeeping isn't the daily work for special forces as you say.

Afghanistan would be a nice enough distance for a small detachment to be sent over if this cleric becomes too much, we'll have to see how this shitstorm turns out first (it had looked to be cooling off before).