The head of the Brit armed forces wants to retreat from Iraq because some Iraqis – the killers – oppose our presence there. A pacifist has no place leading men in battle and he should be replaced forthwith.
He says of Iraq:
“We are in a Muslim country and Muslims’ views of foreigners in their country are quite clear. As a foreigner you can be welcomed by being invited in a country but we weren’t invited, certainly by those in Iraq at the time. The military campaign we fought in 2003 effectively kicked the door in.”
Just as well his predecessors didn’t follow this line – imagine Eisenhower saying in 1945:
“We are in a Nazi country and Nazi’s views of foreigners in their country are quite clear. As a foreigner you can be welcomed by being invited in a country but we weren’t invited, certainly by those in Germany at the time. The military campaign we fought in 1944 effectively kicked the door in.”
And by applying his “invitation” criteria, the Brit army should not be engaged in Afghanistan, whose rulers “at the time” in 2001 objected most strongly when the US Army “effectively kicked their door in” – and continue to so object. In fact it’s hard to see what wars are available to a Brit Army whose leader restricts it to fighting enemies who invite it in.
What he’s actually doing is siding with the Iraqi killers against their victims. He wants to leave the Iraqi men and women struggling to rebuild their country at the mercy of death squads of Iran’s Shiite warlords and Saddam Hussein’s Sunni despots.
Blair should replace this fool with a smart general who is prepared to fight. If he does not, the Brit army is a worthless instrument of national policy and the money spent on it is better refunded to taxpayers.