The UK will move to withdraw troops from Iraq over the coming months, the prime minister confirmed today.
Speaking before MPs, Tony Blair indicated that more than 1,600 British troops could leave Basra by the end of the year.
Following his earlier statement that UK troops have transferred frontline security duties to the Iraqi army, Mr Blair said that the UK would continue to reduce its military presence. However, he maintained that the government is not mapping out a total withdrawal and that troops will stay in Iraq "as long as we are wanted and have a job to do".
Full article (http://www.politics.co.uk/news/foreign-policy/middle-east/iraq/blair-confirms-troop-withdrawal-$466552.htm)
------------------------------------------------------
US is planning to increase the troops & UK wants the opposite
Why is that?
Also from your link..
"Nevertheless, some 1,600 troops could return home by May, followed by further troops by November. Mr Blair stressed that any withdrawal would be "over time and dependent naturally on progress".
Mr Blair explained that British troops would remain to secure the Iraq-Iran border and supply routes and support Iraqi forces.
The prime minister stressed that the scale and speed of UK withdrawal would be dependent on the actions of the insurgency. He denied the suggestion that insurgents are fighting for Iraqi liberty, maintaining that militia groups are fully aware that the UK is committed in Iraq until the security situation has been secured.
Admitting that the situation in Basra remains "formidable", Mr Blair nevertheless said that reconstruction is underway and levels of murders and kidnappings have fallen.
"What all of this means is not that Basra is how we want it to be but the next chapter in Basra's history can be written by the Iraqis," said Mr Blair. "
I think so far, this is one of the best steps for Iraq. Once all the troops have left, the world will know what the insurgents' interests REALLY were and are.
Desert_Sloath
21-02-07, 10:02 PM
[B]
US is planning to increase the troops & UK wants the opposite
Why is that?
I only wish i knew :-
1) why they are there in the first place ?
2) how many Iraqis they killed or murdered and why ?
3) why Britons lost their lives not only in Iraq but back home the likes of Dr Kelly the nuclea physicist :cry: ?
4) last but not the least; why that big smile on Blair is no longer painted on his face :lift: As seen here on this link showing Blair who looks tired.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17246357/
.
1) why they are there in the first place ?
It's about time you give up asking that question
They will not answer it
Jihad4Truth
22-02-07, 04:14 AM
It's about time you give up asking that question
They will not answer it
Nor will you accept the answer that it was to remove Saddam Hussein. That is what happened.
shamsery
22-02-07, 08:58 AM
I only wish i knew :-
1) why they are there in the first place ?
To grab Arabs.
Primary object accomplished.
Sadly, majority Arabs learn nothing out of this aggression.
The damage is done. This withdrawal is just as unnecessary as it is silly.
Mr Tickle
23-02-07, 01:18 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6388717.stm
Pinno, more troops for Afghanistan, so why not more troops for the more unstable Iraq?
sheik-al-Tort
25-02-07, 07:16 PM
the area supported by Britian is now stable and the Iraqis are capable of looking after things themselves, therefore British troops are moving out.
The area under US control is full of massive car bombings which are killing thousands of iraqis each month. The idea is to flood the area with US troops and root out the killers who think nothing of killing their own people.
Maybe it's an Arab thing - this complete lack of care regarding life
the area supported by Britian is now stable and the Iraqis are capable of looking after things themselves, therefore British troops are moving out.
That is something new to me, you mind providing a source of that information