British say that Americans are "too heavy-handed"

[ariweiner]

US 'too heavy-handed', says Foreign Office memo
By Andrew Clennell

23 May 2004

A leaked Foreign Office memo has revealed perceptions within the Blair administration that the Americans are being too "heavy-handed" in Iraq and have landed the coalition in trouble.

The memorandum was circulated to senior ministers and officials by the Iraq directorate of the Foreign Office last week and was entitled "Iraq: The Medium Term". It was dated 19 May.

Under a heading "Problems", the memo said: "We should not underestimate the present difficulties ... Heavy-handed US military tactics in Fallujah and Najaf some weeks ago have fuelled both Sunni and Shi'ite opposition to the coalition, and lost us much public support inside Iraq."

The memo talks of "the need to redouble our efforts to ensure a sensible and sensitive US approach to military operations", and says there is a need to stop the US doing anything to "jeopardise our objectives".

The six-page paper, reported in The Sunday Times, was accompanied by a one-page supplement of "public lines" for ministers. They were told to say nothing further than that "the security situation in Iraq is difficult".

The memo talked of the expansion of the deployment of British forces in southern Iraq, and possibly taking over responsibility for the American-controlled areas of Najaf and Quadisiyah, which were previously under Spanish command.

"We shall want to minimise the profile of coalition forces after 1 July and get the Iraqis out in front as much as possible, particularly in patrolling and policing."

Embarrassingly, the document suggested that the celebration on June 6 of the D-Day landings would "serve as some leverage on the French".

It also revealed Britain was pushing for an international conference on Iraq which has been requested by the Russians, French and Germans. [/quote]

[UkrainianAmerican]

TOO heavy handed?
Holy ****.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

link?

[Tane Angle]

I'd say that US forces have often been too heavy-handed, and sometimes been too light-handed. I'd also say that US forces, with all due respect and admiration for them, have sometimes acted with complete idiocy, ignorance, and intolerance.

For example: Stay the heck out of Najaf. I don't care if Sadrists are luring you in, stay the heck out, and the heck away from the Ali Shrine.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[Flagg]

On occasion police forces around the world have been accused of excessive force too, where the negative actions of a few can nullify the positive actions of many

"Use of force" isn't like the volume on a TV remote control that can be "locked in"...it's a fluid and nebulous environment where a relatively inexperienced junior officer can issue an order today that has global ramifications tomorrow.

[n4292936]

too heavy handed... nooo (insert emoticon expressing mock shock and sarcasm) p-)

[Gringo]

Nobody likes to wake to the sight of an occupying force outside, especially a large one.

[Frens]

how can Brits say that???? :bash:
Brits are the most heavy hand soldiers of the world (in my opinion)!!! woot

[Marmot1]

how can Brits say that???? :bash:
Brits are the most heavy hand soldiers of the world (in my opinion)!!! woot
Example?

[mack pl]

how can Brits say that???? :bash:
Brits are the most heavy hand soldiers of the world (in my opinion)!!! woot
Example?powstanie burów w pd.Afryce, przecież nawet obozy wymyślili :roll:

[Roger Rabbit]

^Would you be talking about the concentration camps in the Boer War by any chance? Come on now, speak in English so we can all read what you have to say.

[mack pl]

^Would you be talking about the concentration camps in the Boer War by any chance? Come on now, speak in English so we can all read what you have to say.sorry for polish, but you are correct, i was talking about Boer war and camps :|

[Sabre]

The concentration camps in the Boer War were not intended to be the last resting place of so many civilians that they became.

The deaths occured due to poor hygiene and the spread of disease. If you look at the british army of the time, there were more deaths and illness through disease than through combat. The population within the concentration camps were simply experiencing the same disease spread pattern as the british troops, who were also camped together in close proximity.

The concentration camps were a despirate idea that had disasterous consequences, not an intentional 'extermination camp' that the Nazis turned them into.

This was an example of poor planning by british commanders over 100 years ago, and has no bearing on the actions or attitudes of the modern british army.

[Roger Rabbit]

Excellent post Sabre.

As i understood the original intention of the British Concentration Camps was to 'concentrate' the local population into easily guarded areas so as to deny the Boer Guerillas food and shelter from the locals.

The Americans also had concentration camps during the American Civil War which was prior to the Boer War.


In addition to camps for captured soldiers, the North also established concentration camps for civilian populations considered hostile to the Federal government. Union General Thomas Ewing issued his infamous Order Number 11 in August 1863, whereby large numbers of civilians in Missouri were relocated into what were called "posts."

Source:http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v02/v02p137_Weber.html

[cut]

this is common knowledge here, everyone in government wants Blair to extend that discontent, to his chats with Bush.

[gorg]

The US is probably the best military machine in the world but also among the very worst western nations when it comes to peacekeeping missions.

[cbreedon]

The US is probably the best military machine in the world but also among the very worst western nations when it comes to peacekeeping missions.

I completely agree. I live in America but am originally from England. It's an attitude you can see in the way police behave in either country. American soldiers in a peacekeeping role act like American police and the same goes for British soldiers. The American army is aggressive and overpowering but I don't think the "American" personality lends itself very well to peacekeeping.

[martinexsquaddie]

peace support operations are some of the least glamerous side of military operations but done well means you don't have to go in guns blazing done badly you need to get out all the big guns.
:|
most of the people opting for the shoot them all let god sort them out would be a problem on the modern battlefield. it's unlikely there is going to be another all out shooting war with the US on one side and the Commies on the other :roll:
get over it and get with the programme royals got a couple of good book you ought to read :) and put the hypersonic stealth bomber back in the toybox :roll: its not needed. But a bit more money in basic training is LOAC and cultural training is. Lets face it with the net and cnn some PFC can make more problems than can be imagined by HQ :(

[Gordon]

peace support operations are some of the least glamerous side of military operations but done well means you don't have to go in guns blazing done badly you need to get out all the big guns.
:|
most of the people opting for the shoot them all let god sort them out would be a problem on the modern battlefield. it's unlikely there is going to be another all out shooting war with the US on one side and the Commies on the other :roll:
get over it and get with the programme royals got a couple of good book you ought to read :) and put the hypersonic stealth bomber back in the toybox :roll: its not needed. But a bit more money in basic training is LOAC and cultural training is. Lets face it with the net and cnn some PFC can make more problems than can be imagined by HQ :(

nice post martin ... hit the nail on the head.

[LordHalbert]

I don't think the US have been heavy handed in all cases - in some cases, they have been too timid.

Now in Fallujah, the US was too timid, they should have simply exterminated all the rebels in the city. This Al-Sadr guy should have been assasinated a month ago - Israeli style.

Sure, the Iraqis, coalition members, and the UN will be mad but I believe that sometimes extreme violence is better than being timid. The end result, I think, would have been better in the long run.

[Ian H]

peace support operations are some of the least glamerous side of military operations but done well means you don't have to go in guns blazing done badly you need to get out all the big guns.
:|
most of the people opting for the shoot them all let god sort them out would be a problem on the modern battlefield. it's unlikely there is going to be another all out shooting war with the US on one side and the Commies on the other :roll:
get over it and get with the programme royals got a couple of good book you ought to read :) and put the hypersonic stealth bomber back in the toybox :roll: its not needed. But a bit more money in basic training is LOAC and cultural training is. Lets face it with the net and cnn some PFC can make more problems than can be imagined by HQ :(

Fully agree, a bit more investment and variety in training can help solve a lot of problems out in the field, or prevent them coming up in the first place.
You don't happen to know the title of the books you mentioned Royal had do you?

[Yard Ape]

Sure, the Iraqis, coalition members, and the UN will be mad but I believe that sometimes extreme violence is better than being timid. The end result, I think, would have been better in the long run.Yes. More disgruntled Iraqis ready to pick-up a gun and fight US soldiers.

LOAC <- Yes.

For those with the peacekeeping comments, food for thought:

Although Peacekeeping is a fundamentally different occupation to the countering of subversion, there is a surprising similarity in the outward forms of many of the techniques involved . . . It is also important that those involved in countering subversion should realize that they are involved in this and not peacekeeping.

Low Intensity Operations: Subversion, Insurgency, and Peacekeeping. Harrisburg: Stackpole, 1971. pg 144

[martinexsquaddie]

sorry no but you could search his posts :lol:

[Ian H]

Is that working now then? Excellent.

[Argyll]

From what I've seen there's a definite distinction between regular units and reserve units.

I've had a .50 swung at me in my Armoured vehicle several times,not funny travelling at 80 Kmph!,what made it more annoying was we were inside BIAP at the time displaying out Recognition panels :(

There is at times an uneasy air on the ground,when the US Units debuss from their vehicles,I've seen a GI lose his cool ,and vent his frustration out on a nearby car and it's occupants........simply because he did not understand the problem...........long ques,extreme heat,and a language barrier,he started kicking the sides of the car ,it must've hurt him more than the occupants,but they were screaming in fear.
We were stuck in the same que,his buddies had to drag him away,as he was actuallly quite embarrasing,the other GI's who seen us apologised,they're having a tough time at that checkpoint,and I can sympathise having stagged on in a PVCP myself.

How do you define heavy handed?.........using a hammer to open a bag of crisps,or using 4 men without a hammer to open a bag of crisps?
Fallujah..........should have been Heavy handed........Najaf the opposite.
It's so easy to criticise from the comfort of your chair,but the temperature is rising quickly,and patience seems thinner.........not a good combo.

Sometimes when you carry the big stick you have to use it

[Kitsune]

There are those who think that the British did manage things much better than the Americans and that, if the US Forces had used an apporach more similiar to the British troops, the situation would be different.
It is interesting that the British had the situation pretty well under control in the south with just 11.000 soldiers (only 400 for the Baghdad area!), whereas the Americans did not in the north with much more soldiers.

Of course it is possible to ague that the situtation in the Sunni areas was so much different, that the more "soft" tactic her majesties forces used would not have worked there...anyones guess.

Wether all this matters now is also debatable. With the insurrections in quite a few cities there may be no turning back to a soft approach even if one wanted to.

[Fargin]

I'm just having increasing difficulties telling the extremeists appart and some of the rhetorics are almost identical.

[wiking]

How do you define heavy handed?.........using a hammer to open a bag of crisps,or using 4 men without a hammer to open a bag of crisps?
Fallujah..........should have been Heavy handed........Najaf the opposite.
It's so easy to criticise from the comfort of your chair,but the temperature is rising quickly,and patience seems thinner.........not a good combo.

Sometimes when you carry the big stick you have to use it

And it's easy for you to sit in your chair saying you should have been more heavy handed in Fallujah. How heavy handed exactly; like My Lai, or just carpet bomb the whole bloody thing.

[Argyll]

How do you define heavy handed?.........using a hammer to open a bag of crisps,or using 4 men without a hammer to open a bag of crisps?
Fallujah..........should have been Heavy handed........Najaf the opposite.
It's so easy to criticise from the comfort of your chair,but the temperature is rising quickly,and patience seems thinner.........not a good combo.

Sometimes when you carry the big stick you have to use it

And it's easy for you to sit in your chair saying you should have been more heavy handed in Fallujah. How heavy handed exactly; like My Lai, or just carpet bomb the whole bloody thing.

I'm not in my chair..........I'm on my way back to Iraq this week!
Tell me what do you know about Fallujah from Norway?........have you seen the GI's in action personally?
If you had actually read my post you would have seen I was talking through experience ie IN Iraq itself..... :cantbeli:

[Tane Angle]

Hope you're still getting a chance to rest your legs, Argyll. p-)

[Argyll]

Hope you're still getting a chance to rest your legs, Argyll. p-)
Just till Friday mate ;)

[wiking]

well sorry if you took offence but (nothing personal or against you) there are a few people on this forum who think all iraqi's should be lined up against a wall and shot. And unfortunatly (again nothing against you) a few have made it into their armed forces and to Iraq.

All I'm saying is that that attitude is something i can not agree with as a human beeing.

And good luck in Iraq mate, I really mean it.

And i haven't seen Fallujah or Iraq at all like you say, but if only people who've been there have a right to an oppinion then this wouldn't bee a discussion, it would mostly just be you talking to yourself. (As far as i know)

And even though i'm not a bloody yank (no offence and all that) i do actually have a relative in Iraq. (Allthough i spend much time denying I'm in any way related to yanks, i consider it my darkest secret ;) )
(Well thecnically they're related to norwegians)