WAR: Britain may reduce combat troops in Iraq by a third, page 1

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 01:08 AM

link

Great Britain, one the biggest allies in the war in Iraq, may reduce the number of combat troops during a routine troop rotation over the next few weeks.
Great Britain currently has 8,000 troops in Iraq, 5,000 of those are infantry and armored brigade and are committed to the provinces of Basra and Maysan.

Guardian - Britain to cut troop levels in Iraq:
The British Army is to start pulling troops out of Iraq next month despite the deteriorating security situation in much of the country, The Observer has learnt.

The main British combat force in Iraq, about 5,000-strong, will be reduced by around a third by the end of October during a routine rotation of units...

Troop numbers are being finalised, but, military sources in Iraq and in Whitehall say, they are likely to be 'substantially less' than the current total in Basra: the new combat brigade will have five or even four battle groups, against its current strength of six battle groups of around 800 men.

A military spokesman in Basra confirmed the scaling back of the British commitment.

Currently there are 8,000 British troops in the 14,000-strong 'multinational division' in southern Iraq, which has responsibility for about 4.5 million people.

The cuts will occur in the combat elements of the deployment - the 5,000-strong infantry and armoured brigade that is committed to the provinces of Basra and Maysan. Four Royal Navy ships will remain in the Gulf.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

So far, Britain has managed to avoid a high number of fatalities, losing only 66 troops during the war. Almost half of the deaths the British troops suffered occurred during the first month of the war, March 2003.

The reduction of British troops could result in other coalition members also reducing their troops.

Related News Links:

Thousands of UK troops may be sent to Afghanistan next year
Officer who rallied UK troops condemns 'cynical' Iraq war
(Australian) Troops may leave Iraq next year: Hill
Iraq Coalition Casualties

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Bush Warns of Worsening Violence in Iraq, Afghanistan

[edit on 19-9-2004 by AceOfBase]

Big_Bad_FO_Man

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 01:38 AM

link

You will never here me say a bad thing about the brittish. they have stood by us in the war in iraq(which i believe was unjus btw) so they have the right to decline the number of troops unlike spain who cowered to the terrorists b/c they got attacked. So basically what i am saying is that brittain always has Americas back when it comes to wars and vice versa

AceOfBase

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 01:44 AM

link

The British aren't exactly pulling out of the war on terror either, as the news link at the bottom of my article shows.

While they have plans to reduce troops in Iraq, they also have plans to increase troop levels in Afghanistan.

A far bigger British deployment is being mooted, meanwhile, to take place early in 2005, a critical time when a series of dangerous security problems are expected to converge. The Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Mike Jackson, says plans have been made to send a headquarters staff and a brigade-sized force of around 8,000 peacekeeping soldiers to Afghanistan.

[edit on 19-9-2004 by AceOfBase]

surfup

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 02:04 AM

link

Better to pull out and have their soldiers walking than to stay in and let them come home in coffins.

Janus

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 07:00 AM

link

Our Army is very small in relation to the US for instance, and are stretched very thin. Im sure that there is a very good reason for the reduction in numbers in Southern Iraq and the shift towards Afganistan.
Seeing as the US has its hands full in the North it wouldnt be too much to ask a few other Countries to increase thier troop numbers in the south to compensate.

marg6043

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 08:46 AM

link

I don't blame the UK for taking some of it's troops back home they have done enought helping already I wish US will do the same.

This morning Blair is coming clean and obviously he warn bush of chaos on post war Iraq.

I think Blair is getting in a lot of heat for supporting bush on Iraqi invation, not for war on terror but the invation.

rustiswordz

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 09:13 AM

link

us British have a tiny military compared with the US. So we have to be more careful and more decerning where we place our troops. Us brits wont pull out of Iraq whether its justified or not, not because of politics but because of pride and stubborness. once we commit ourselfes to a task we like to see it through.

We will only pull out if: We are seriously getting our arses kicked. Asked to leave/ or due to numerical reasons we cant afford to keep troops there anymore.

mattpryor

posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 03:22 AM

link

Seems to be some confusion here. According to the Times on Saturday our (British) troop numbers are going to increase in the near future to help with election security in Jan, not decrease.

Don't have the article to hand but I'll post a follow up tomorrow if anyone's interested.

[edit on 20-9-2004 by mattpryor]

surfup

posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 03:31 AM

link

Originally posted by mattpryor
but I'll post a follow up tomorrow if anyone's interested.

That is a no brainer, we sure are interested.

AceOfBase

posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 03:37 AM

link

Originally posted by mattpryor
Seems to be some confusion here. According to the Times on Saturday our (British) troop numbers are going to increase in the near future to help with election security in Jan, not decrease.

Don't have the article to hand but I'll post a follow up tomorrow if anyone's interested.

This is from the news article I posted:

Last week Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, said that more troops could be sent to safeguard the polls if necessary, although Whitehall sources said there was no guarantee that they would be British.