Are the Brits being able to pull out of Iraq proof GWB re-enforcing troops a huge success?

Answer 1

It's showing that there are successes going on in Iraq. Of course the media and Democrats will try to protray this as a defeat.

Answer 2

Blair planned Iraq war from start. Blair was right from the outset committed to “regime change” in Iraq.
Inside Downing Street Tony Blair had gathered some of his senior ministers and advisers for a pivotal meeting in the build-up to the Iraq war. It was 9am on July 23, 2002, eight months before the invasion began.

The discussion that morning was highly confidential. As minutes of the proceedings, headed “Secret and strictly personal —
UK eyes only”, state: “This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.”

In the room were the prime minister, Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, Geoff Hoon, the defence secretary, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, and military and intelligence chiefs. Also listed on the minutes are Alastair Campbell, then Blair’s director of strategy, Jonathan Powell, his chief of staff, and Sally Morgan, director of government relations.

What they were about to discuss would dominate the political agenda for years to come.
For the secret documents — now seen by the public— reveal that on that Tuesday in 2002: Blair said
“If the political context were right,” “people would support regime change.” Straightforward regime change, though, was illegal. They needed another reason.
By the end of the meeting, a possible path to invasion was agreed and it was noted that Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, chief of the defence staff, “would send the prime minister full details of the proposed military campaign by the end of the week”.

Outside Downing Street, in the rest of Britain, tensions were running high, and fears of terrorism were widespread. But Blair’s constant refrain was that “no decisions” had been taken about what to do with Iraq.
The following day in the House of Commons, Blair told MPs: “We have not got to the stage of military action . . . we have not yet reached the point of decision.”

It was typical lawyer’s cleverness, if not dissembling: while no actual order had been given to invade, Blair already knew Saddam Hussein was going to be removed, sooner or later. Plans were in motion. The justification would come later.

As a civil service briefing paper specifically prepared for the July meeting reveals, Blair had made his fundamental decision on Saddam when he met President George W Bush in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002.

Now with Saddam Hussein removed for good and Iraq forces taking over in the South, the British are reducing their troops in the South of Iraq.
For the British the job in Iraq has been completed.

Answer 3

Its proof they have more sense than we do. GWBs additional troops the so-called surge, only brings troop strength up to what it was four months ago, and they aren't in yet.
The Brits also had a much less strife torn area to train and we have a hotbed of sectarian warfare that will never be tamed, I don't say this because I hate Bush, I say this because they engage in revenge killings that can go back generations.

Answer 4

No. The Brits being able to pull out of Iraq is proof that Blair has finally rediscovered his sanity.

Answer 5

How is iraq a success ?

its a CIVIL WAR ........clown

a ha ha ha a h ah ah


BLARE is just saving face and his arssse
geting out of a failed bush illegal war

Answer 6

No, it proves that Basra is a totally different situation than Baghdad.

Answer 7

Since the surge hasn't really happened yet, this question is bogus. Thanks for the Faux sheeple spin.

Answer 8

I think they are being cowards. Bush will be the ONLY hero when it is over.