IRAQ-A LESSON OF HISTORY WHICH
POLITICIANS FAIL TO LEARN
A LESSON OF HISTORY
[Daily Mail- Saturday, August 18,2007]
Five years ago, I warned the
'shock and awe'
victory in Iraq would
end in bloody and
SO HOW DID I KNOW
NAPOLEON TAUGHT ME
FIVE LONG YEARS AGO this month, before
the Iraq war, I warned in an article in this newspaper that if Bush and
Blair were to attack Saddam Hussein, then Britain and America would
become embroiled in a protracted guerrilla war, and suffer a constant
drip of casualties'.
I predicted that every American
air-strike on civilians, whether deliberate or 'collateral', would prove
a propaganda gift to the Iraqi resistance, 'with global TV carrying
pictures of Iraqi women, children dead in their ruined homes or maimed
in hospital bed'.
And I was certain that, in consequence.
'body-bag anti-Bush disillusionment would grow in the U.S. and world
opinion would 'react to the human suffering and regional instability
caused by the American aggression'.
Just three weeks after I wrote this
article, Tony Blair published the now notorious
-unscrupulously sexing up the very
scanty available intelligence about Saddam's
Weapons of Mass Destruction
intended to persuade public opinion
that Saddam must be toppled from power, by force if necessary.
IN FACT BUSH AND BLAIR HAD ALREADY
SECRETLY DECIDED ON GOING TO WAR.
It is therefore clear that the grim
scenario of protracted conflict I outlined did not feature at all in the
minds of Bush and Blair and his advisers.
How was it that a military historian
without access to current secret intelligence could accurately predict
what would happen (and I am deeply sorry to have been proved right),
whereas Bush and Blair and their elaborate intelligence apparatus could
make such a catastrophically
This question is still deeply relevant,
because it relates to the soundness of any strategic judgments now being
LONDON and WASHINGTON
-for example, about Iran and her
alleged nuclear bomb programme, or her supposed support of the
insurgency in Iraq, or the threat she allegedly poses to the stability
There is one simple reason why I as a
historian got it right in 2002 with regard to the consequences of an
Anglo-American invasion of Iraq.
IT IS THAT I HAD STUDIED previous
military interventions which had all begun in sure hope of quick and
final success, only to end in protracted fighting and
The classic example is Napoleon in
Spain during the Peninsular War. In 1808, at the head of the Grande
Armee, the most formidable fighting machine of the era. Napoleon swiftly
smashed the Spanish army, entered Madrid, toppled the existing monarchy
and installed his brother, Jerome, as King.
'Shock and Awe'
But the French occupation ignited the
patriotic fury of the Spanish people. Soon, a protracted war of ambush
and assassination by guerrillas against the French Army began - a war
supported by British Forces under Sir Arthur Wellesley (later Duke of
With the French spread out across the
country vainly trying to crush the insurgency, Wellesley defeated their
weakened field army in the battles of Salamanca and Vittoria, and in
1813, finally drove it
OUT OF SPAIN.
The pattern of the French disaster in
Spain was broadly repeated by an American army
failed to crush the Vietcong insurgency
supported by the communist government in the North.
As American casualties mounted and
American front-line morale sank, Washington finally had to acknowledge
REALITY of FAILURE
and the American forces were
withdrawn in 1973.
Bush and Blair - both ignorant of
military history -couldn't care less about its lessons and, anyway, were
pigheadedly determined on war against Saddam out of sheer ideological
zealotry. Remember, Bush believes that Jesus Christ wanted him to
spread democracy round the world, while Blair stated that he was
'accountable only to God' for his warlike decisions. -[ a budding
convert to Rome he himself was destroying a unique parliamentary
democracy back home.]
YET BUSH ALSO GOT IT WRONG FOR
His military guru Donald Rumsfeld, the
then U.S. Secretary for defence believed that America's amazing
high-tech military capability rendered the lessons of history
Why take note of Napoleon's fate in
Spain when you have command and control by computer network; ,you have
satellite surveillance and target acquisition; cruise missiles with
pinpoint accuracy, and stunning firepower on land sea and air?
AND BUSH GOT IT WRONG
-in yet another way because influential
neocon advisers such as Paul Wolfowitz (then deputy U.S. defence
Secretary) were certain the fall of Saddam would be followed by the
spontaneous emergence of
-which in turn would allow a rapid
run-down of American occupation forces.
So what lessons do historical examples
such as Napoleon's campaign in Spain or America's intervention in
Vietnam teach us with regard to our present and future strategy in Iraq?
THE FIRST LESSON is that we
should admit that Britain and the United States have decisively failed
to achieve the objectives agreed by Bush and Blair five years ago.
Instead of the hoped-for strong
democracy ruling a peaceful, prosperous and unified Iraq, we have
created a failed state with a feeble and faction-ridden government, and
a country driven by ferocious communal violence.
THIS WEEK witnessed the worst
terrorist outrage since the Anglo-American invasion, with more than 250
men women and children killed by four car bombs.
Although the American occupation force
has now swollen to
-it is failing to crush the insurgency
while the tally of American body-bags now stands at nearly
with more than
Our own garrison troops in Iraq, far
from acting as a stabilising force welcomed by the local population, are
now subject to increasing lethal ambush while on [patrol and to sporadic
bombardment while inside their fortress bases.
They are indeed, as General Sir Richard
Dannatt (Chief of the General Staff) has said,
NOW PART OF THE PROBLEM
Back in 2002, I wrote that an eventual
military and political stalemate in Iraq would ultimately constitute a
victory for Iraqi resistance.
THAT STALEMATE HAS SURELY COME ABOUT
So now, more than ever before, it is
time to heed the
DUKE of WELLINGTON'S
dictum that the real test of a
was to know
WHEN TO RETREAT
DARE TO DO IT!
Will our new Prime Minister Gordon
Brown, pass the test?
He has spoken of our duties and
responsibilities in Iraq, but surely the overriding
DUTY and RESPONSIBILITY
BRITISH PRIME MINISTER
MUST BE TO THE
VALIANT SERVICEMEN AND WOMEN.
As he ponders what course to take,
Brown could do worse than learn from the example of Clem Attlee's
post-war Labour Government when it faced with the intractable problem of
the future of
-after the end of
From 1945 to 1947, the Labour
Government tried hard to negotiate a compromise settlement between
Pandit Nehru's Hindu dominated Congress Party and the Mohammed Ali
Jinnah's Muslim League that would enable the British to hand over the
whole country to a single
OF COURSE IT ALL CAME TO NOTHING.
[This reminds us in 2007 of the
recent meeting of an
where there was a great deal of talk
and in the end what it amounted to was that the Iraqi representatives
were adamant that our troops must stay to keep order -however long it
takes. This shows that little has been learnt in the past 60 years.]
COMMUNAL violence between Hindu, Muslim
and Sikh was instead growing ever more wide-spread and out of control,
with whole districts torched and their inhabitants slaughtered. The
British troops in India were too few to keep the peace and ,in any case,
there was a danger that they too might be engulfed in the violence with
resulting heavy casualties.
So Attlee's Cabinet decided that the
only solution must be to partition the India of the Raj between a new
Muslim state of Pakistan and a diminished India largely Hindu in
More to the point, Attlee appointed a
ruthlessly decisive leader Admiral of the Fleet Mountbatten, as the last
British Viceroy of India. he was instructed that if last-minute attempts
at a compromise between Nehru and Jinnah failed, he was to enforce
partition and wind up British rule.
In short, he was told to extricate
Britain from a horrendous mess-regardless of the consequences for India
or the Indians. In the event. Mountbatten brought forward the date for
the ending of the Raj from June 1948 to August 1947, complete with a
published time table which wonderfully concentrated everyone's minds.
It is true that before, and after the
handover to the successor states of India and Pakistan communal violence
degenerated into haste-fuelled mass madness with
14 million refuges on the move.
YET BRITAIN WAS WELL OUT OF IT.
-and the loss of life among British
servicemen was minimal.
[There is a small section on the
French in Algeria in the 1950's to follow shortly]
[What is so ironic is that the
British having seen at close quarters the dangers of communal violence
between the different religious groups did not heed that terrible lesson
in ensuring that a careful cultural mix in a small island like Britain
was always borne in mind. Regrettably starting over 40 years ago
governments DID NOT restrict the numbers of those from the Asian
continent particularly those who had no intention of integrating into
the island culture and instead when the evidence was before their eyes
the leftist do-gooders who had encouraged the mass immigration in
desperation decided to call the home indigenous population
with the consequence that stupid and
unlearnt lessons of the past ignored by governments were replaced
with many mantra such as
which has since been at long last
disowned by the very people who jumped with joy at the blame game to
hide their many mistakes of the past four decades.
We now hear in August 2007 from the
American black leader Jesse Jackson that the ethnic population
of the UK need to get together to form their own power base and fight
for their separate political future.
Haven't we had enough of
It is time everyone whatever their skin
colour stopped dividing instead of uniting a population on such a small
Politicians failed to observe the
lessons of history and the indigenous population are having to pay the
price of being under a constant barrage of demands for special treatment
of a sector of the population.
In 2004 alone 350,000 people left
the UK to find a life somewhere else where they would not be under a
constant attack in protecting their life style and culture and having to
be told that they were racist because they objected to the flood of
immigration that took no notice of their needs. Ironically even those
who settled here decades ago see themselves as also being swamped in
cities up and down the country.
There is a well known saying:
'United we stand-Divided we fall.'
The politicians got us into the mess
and NOW it is for them to GET US OUT OF IT before we too in the future
have to witness a bloodbath because everyone wanted to be treated
Whether we live in
England -Scotland or Wales
let us ALL be islanders and those who
think otherwise should take the first ship/train HOME.]
So the lessons of history are harsh
ONE: recognise when the moment
has come to abandon a failed enterprise.
TWO: have the courage to accept
the inevitable costs of retreat, whether human or in loss of national
Now is therefore the time to set a firm
date for British withdrawal from Iraq, even if that date is at present
kept secret. But it must be up to us and not the Iraqi government to fix
that date, just as it was up to us and NOT Indian politicians to fix the
date for the end of the British Raj in India.
What about history's lessons for the
FIRST, never expect an intervention in
a foreign country will prove an easy in-and-out-job. Instead, count on
it that there will be unexpected and unwelcome complications and
SECOND, the most important lesson of
all: stay out of other people's troubles and mind your own business.
Never resort to arms, except in the face of a direct threat
TO NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE.
[We ASK THE QUESTION- if in 1946 the
government of the day decided that it was more important to protect our
way-of-life and restrict the number of immigrants to those who would
integrate into our society and put the emphasise on a healthier and less
crowded environment rather than allow unlimited immigration which
over the past ten years has completely changed the pattern of living in
our country to make the indigenous population uneasy and though it is
true we are a richer country we are in the main a most unhappy and
gridlocked people. We are now faced with a situation of not only
being second to Holland as one of the most crowded places on the planet
but now having to concrete over acres of English countryside to
accommodate the millions of newcomers who economically it is said will
contribute just 45p to our economy as they in the main send their saving
back to their own country.
How ironic it is to hear that we would
have been a happier and more healthy people if we had restricted our
immigration and we would have had more room around us in the villages
-towns and even cities in our country and our roads quieter and in the
main the language we would hear would be the familiar one. Governments
would have less money to waste and people would certainly be fitter and
inclined to more outside pursuits.
We have over 60 years become one of the
richest countries in the world but as UNESCO has stated one of the most
unhappy people in the world. What if we could go back those years and
recover the spirit and the sense of space we all enjoyed and tell the
government we might not be one of the richest countries in the world but
we are one of the happiest. The beneficiaries in the main in our society
particularly over the past few decades are the rich who have got richer
but the mainstream population is much poorer not only in wealth but in a
shrinking countryside and the intensity of life which has made our lives
so materialistic and unfulfilled.
It is still not to late to reverse the
clock and for politicians to put the emphasis on space and less
motorways-vehicles less housing and infrastructure - to a smaller
population but one which being healthier and more versatile because
unless there is a dramatic change the 1 in 4 with some kind of mental
illness will include everyone that lives in our over-crowded-over-taxed
and over-watched and over -governed island will all join the exodus to a
more sane and less crowded living environment. ]
In the Daily Mail of Tuesday , August
21, 2007 the following article was timely, as a survey by
the Financial Times admitted we are :
Nearly half of the population think
Muslims have too much political power, a poll has found.
And more than four out of ten think it
is impossible to be Muslim and a responsible citizen, according to the
survey published yesterday.
Around 40 per cent also dismiss the
idea that Muslims suffer unjustified criticism or prejudice.
The poll showed that suspicion of the
political face of Islam is tempered by tolerance and openness towards
Muslims by the majority of adults.
Non-Muslim British families are nearly
twice as likely as their counterparts in France and Spain to accept the
marriage of a child to a Muslim, according to the survey for the
Financial Times. professor Anthony Glees, director of the Centre for
Intelligence and Security Studies at Brunel University, said:
'This is fresh evidence that the
majority of British people are fair-minded and welcoming'
'But what they don't want is the
development of separate societies, a Muslim Britain and a Christian
They are opposed to the way some
Muslim radicals have interpreted Britain's liberal attitudes as a
licence to set up a separate state within a state.'
[We have been saying the same thing for
years. The refusal of the authorities to proceed further into the
controversial Muslim mosque utterings and their obvious
softly-softly attitude whenever there may be a case to answer does no
favours for the Muslim community because it further reinforces the
conception of the majority in the country that the Muslim population are
allowed a greater freedom of expression than any others in our
Correlli Barnett is author of The
Verdict of Peace: Britain Between Her Yesterday And The Future.
[Font Altered-Bolding & Underlining
Used-Comments in Brackets]
THE PEOPLE HAVE
SPOKEN-IS THE EU COMMISSION LISTENING?
Ditch the EU TREATY after IRISH
[Daily Mail-Wednesday, June
MORE THAN HALF of voters believe Britain should
drop the controversial European Treaty in the wake of its
rejection in last week's
The poll comes as the Tories launch a last-ditch
bid in the
HOUSE of LORDS
today to delay the
have signed a
within the past few days
, calling on the
NOT TO RATIFY THE BILL
[WHY DON'T YOU?]
IF YOU CAN SAY
'WE WANT OUT-WITHOUT
[Only an ultimatum by millions of
subjects that the new EU TREATY can never be accepted such as signing
RENUNCIATION of EU CITIZENSHIP
Details from petition creator
With the signing of the Maastricht
Treaty the people of Britain were given
EUROPEAN and BRITISH
The extra tier of citizenship was
thrust upon the people without their consent -and in many cases
The PEOPLE of GREAT BRITAIN should be
allowed the option of opting out of the EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP if they so
wish. The GOVERNMENT will then be able to provide those who have opted
-only such as British (not EU)
passports, driving licences and other national documents.
EU laws will also NOT APPLY to those who
HAVE OPTED OUT OF EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP
Let the people speak!
[Latest Addition - June07]
Daniel Hannan - Forming an OPPOSITION
to the EU
GORDON BROWN WANTS TRUST-BUT WHY WON'T
HE TRUST YOU?
HELL ON EARTH IN IRAQ
67% want powers back from
EU-ICM poll-June 21-2007-95%
of British people want a
SIGN TODAY ON LINE
JOIN THE 10 DOWNING
Readers can add
their support to the growing clamour for a
REFERENDUM on the '"REFORM TREATY" by signing up to
a 10 Downing Street 0n-line petition
reads as follows:
undersigned petition the Prime Minister to guarantee
that the British people will be permitted a binding
REFERENDUM on any and all attempts to resurrect the
EU " CONSTITUTION" (and any or all of its content)
regardless of nomenclature."
Deadline for the
PETITION is 31st January,2008
'The Spirit of England'
In London on
St.George's Day -1953
WITH THE ONLY PARTY WITH A MANDATE
TO SET YOU
THE QUESTION THAT THE
VOTER MUST ANSWER
YOU WISH TO BE GOVERNED BY YOUR OWN PEOPLE, LAW AND CUSTOM OR BY THE
CORRUPT ,EXPENSIVE UNACCOUNTABLE AND CORRUPT ALIEN BUSYBODY BRUSSELS’
-SIMPLE IS IT NOT?
TO RECLAIM YOUR DEMOCRACY DON'T VOTE
FOR THE TRIPARTITE PARTIES IN WESTMINSTER
SMALL PARTIES THAT SPEAK THEIR MINDS
WITHOUT SPIN AND LIES.
-ITS PARLIAMENT -WALES-ITS
AWAITS ITS PARLIAMENT-WHY?
[All underlined words have a