Unless the poor fellow didn't have a flame retardent suit on that is.oisleep said:said on the itv news that none were seriously hurt
Lets not forget that there are reports of four Iraqi demonstrators being killed in this incident.
Unless the poor fellow didn't have a flame retardent suit on that is.oisleep said:said on the itv news that none were seriously hurt
oi2002 said:Special as in special needs perhaps. They left just one corpse behind and the Badr cops caught them; I smell an amateur night cock up.
What were a couple of unsupported poorly armed white guys with towels wrapped round their heads doing driving round Basra? Ones wearing army boots and dessert camoflage trousers which does not suggest he was going to be walking about much. My guess is survellance at a distance and putting a rifle mike on somebody. Signals did it all the time in Belfast and got killed occasionally for their trouble.
They probably wouldn't have lived till morning by the sound of it. Unusual they went and got them. The British military generally isn't so caring.
Bigdavalad said:I am Royal Signals mate, trust me - that is not what the regular Royal Signals soldiers in Iraq do.
. they have two modes ineffectual due to tribal or politcal affilations or murderous thats it 
Yeah, who exactly is in charge in Iraq now?.bolshiebhoy said:Spin it how they like Blair et al can't hide from ordinary Iraqis the fact that their new 'democracy' is a thin veneer for occupation.

it may be that signals is intensely boring, and he didn't want to leave you in tears of ennui.laptop said:On the other hand, Signals has often been used as a cover for spookdom. I know this from the career of the late Colonel Hugh Anthony Johnstone, a.k.a. "Colonel B" in the Aubrey-Berry-Campbell Official Secrets trial. His attachment to Signals in Cyprus was a cover for GCHQ there.
And I wonder about my late father, too... his refusal to discuss what he was doing with Signals in Burma may have been his generation's reticence or his own wish to forget an extremely nasty war. But after he died we discovered he'd had a place in a nuclear bunker...
I think you're right. And they must have known how this would look to the Arab world. Which makes you wonder why it was worth it even in their own terms. What exactly were these two characters up to?Pickman's model said:1-0 to the resistance, i suspect.
That's the spin isn't it, I wonder if the covert operation was carried out with the permission of the locals?. Actually, silly question.bolshiebhoy said:Amazing listening to the radio on the way to work this morning. A jail break from legal custody becomes a rescue when it's carried out by the British Army.
i very much doubt they were two corporals from the signals regiment, lost nr a funeral - they've done that one, in't it.bolshiebhoy said:I think you're right. And they must have known how this would look to the Arab world. Which makes you wonder why it was worth it even in their own terms. What exactly were these two characters up to?

Don't know about that but it would have been fun seeing them storm into Guantanamo to release British Muslims held captive by the Yanks.james_walsh said:I wish the british sate was as robust at defending the rest of its 'citizens' when held kidnapped by dodgy gangs specially in saudi arabia.
Was there really no option but to destroy the building with fucking tanks? Even assuming they had good reason to get the men out, isn't this the kind of thing the SAS would be able to do - without, say, releasing 150 prisoners at the same time?
The whole thing stinks of stupidity and ineptness.
Aye a law written by yourselves and forced on the new regime. So Reid no matter what your guys do, shoot up and kill Iraqi police checkpoints, you have the right to then smash up Iraqi police stations to 'rescue' them from Iraqi justice. 'Enshrine' isn't the word I'd use to describe this relatrionship.What we do know is that under the law they should have been handed back to the British forces themselves. That is the law which enshrines our presence there.
The British Defence Ministry has admitted troops used an armoured vehicle to smash down a prison wall in a bid to free two undercover soldiers in southern Iraq overnight.
A ministry spokesman in London says the prison wall in Basra was breached without shots being fired, but the two soldiers were not found inside the jail.
The spokesman says the soldiers had instead been taken to a house in the town, from which they were later released.
"A Warrior (armoured vehicle) was sent through the perimeter wall of the jail (in Basra)," the spokesman said.
"No shots were fired."
The two undercover soldiers had been seized after a day of rioting sparked, according to police and local officials, when the soldiers fired on an Iraqi police patrol.
You belive that? That they were moved to prevent a coverup or the local milita getting hold of them.bolshiebhoy said:Another way of describing events is that fearing the British army would rescue two men who had just shot Iraqi police officers the Basra authorities moved the men to a safer location in order to prevent a cover up. And who would blame them when these soldiers' commander, rather than promising they would be dealt with if it turns out they were trigger happy, is praising them for their fortitude!
Oh no this sort of thing only happens in American controlled areas. The British army has years of solid policing experience from Northern Ireland blah blah blah.
bolshiebhoy said:Another way of describing events is that fearing the British army would rescue two men who had just shot Iraqi police officers the Basra authorities moved the men to a safer location in order to prevent a cover up. And who would blame them when these soldiers' commander, rather than promising they would be dealt with if it turns out they were trigger happy, is praising them for their fortitude!
Oh no this sort of thing only happens in American controlled areas. The British army has years of solid policing experience from Northern Ireland blah blah blah.
). The next force turn up and rescue the men involved.MikeMcc said:If the ambushed Warriors were there to 'storm the place', then why didn't the embussed infantry get out to help - unless there weren't any in there to start with? Seems like a pretty pathetic 'rescue attempt by force' - two vehicles, each with a three man crew.

Because the average Iraqi doesn't see these squaddies as their 'mates'. And having been told they now run their own country they need a little of explanation when the real masters of the situation start smash and grab operations on the civilian administration's buildings!FifthFromFront said:why spin it?