Up to 650 members of the Black Watch are about to be moved to Najaf. This would put them under direct control of the US Army in an area the US Army has made a real mess of.

In just about any newspaper online or on your kitchen table you can read complaint from all ranks of US soldiers about the handling of this war. Plus, if you hit the archives, you can find ****ing reports from UK soldiers from when they were actually fighting side-by-side, before the command had the prudence to split them up.

The problems;

1) Half-hearted campaigns:

For example, the first Falluja campaign, abandoned half-way through for political expediency by Bush and his cronies. It put hundreds of US soldiers at risk; the objectives weren't clear and the objective of 'removing terrorists from Falluja' shows such an ignorance of the situation, started as a a rallying call to patriotism from the US people; it raised civilian casualties, animosity and potential terrorists, and in the process conveniently further blurred any distinction between civilian and combatant casualties.

Eg 2; the fighting in Najaf. Ostensibly to capture Moqtada al Sadr, a man who on scores of occasions offered to give himself up under the proviso that he be allowed to negotiate, a man who started his campaigning career in Iraq by recommending that his people collaborate with the occupying forces, but due to a lack of dialogue started to allow his people to fight, and then started actively supporting them for political reasons... ALL because (a) the US high command (in this case the highest - Bush, Rumsfeld et al) didn't want him to stand as a legitimate politician.

This campaign lost a potential strong political ally, and further marginalized a volatile Sunni population, causing needless bloodshed among Iraqi people fighting for their homeland (in this case epecially, these people do not see themselves as terrorists or insurgents... they see themselves as protectors of a shrine, their homes and their political leader) and putting countless US soldiers in a shooting alley with an impossible objective, no way out and no recourse to negotiations at a higher level, when that option had been available since the start.

These two camaigns (not to mention at a higher level the disappearance of Colin Powell from the political scene at a crucial time - a tried and tested general, a Secretary of State, a proven negotiator, an honest straightforward man, whose opinions have been ignored and spun till the cows come home) point to a gulf between US Army commanders and the politicians back home that is now going to result in 650 men of our overstretched army going into a blood bath to clear up George Bush's mess.

2) Private contractors;

One in ten of the US army in Iraq comes from corporate armies... mostly Dyncorp and Blackwaters, and although Halliburton and KBR supposedly don't have any soldiers some of their 'defense contractor' roles must come pretty close. This is according to Fortune Magazine, no lefty whine-rag, but a magazine for big business, the magazine of Fortune 500 companies.

And again, according to just about everyone else in Iraq, these mercenaries are not directly answerable to the US army command. Of course, if they refuse/ignore/disobey too many orders they won't get their contracts renewed but there are far too many grey areas and lapses of responsibility and accountability for this to be a safe area on a modern battlefield of multinational forces yet.

3) Ignoring advice;

This whole campaign has been based on the top guys in Washington (Bush and his war cabinet) ignoring advice from their own army, their own contractors, Middle East diplomatic experts, Chalabi and countless other Iraqi would-be puppets and high-ups, community leaders, and most importantly for the 650 from the Black Watch, the UK armed forces.

This is why the UK forces, although in a marked flashpoint themselves, have sustained a lower casualty rate, a better morale, a better dedication to the job, and a far better relationship with the people in the areas they are occupying, with many of the soldiers speaking basic Arabic. Whereas, the American grunts, if you read their letters, are consistantly questioning why they are there (despite having more support from back home than the UK soldiers) and consistently wondering why they can't just go and shoot things (through inadequate training in sensitive issues).

4) Falluja;

In an amazing U-turn again by the Bush admin, the reason the Black Watch are going to have to go and wipe the US army's arses in Najaf, is according to the US army, to free up the US army to go and kick some more ass in Falluja. This is the same Falluja that the army didn't want to go into, but Rumsfeld did, and the same Falluja that the army then didn't want to pull out of, but Rumsfeld did. And now, quite frankly I've no idea why they're going back or who wants to and who doesn't but you're talking about a large city with a delicate mix of genuine insurgents, genuine terrorists, civilians, and genuine people worried about their homes and families, and the first attempt to take it resulted in enormous casualties on both sides and a huge upsurge in anti-occupier support through the whole country.

5) Friendly fire;

Are we the only ones who remember the A10 tankbuster bombing the convoy of British army vehicles on TWO runs? The US army do not seem to put much stead in educating their soldiers even as to their allies equipment (not to mention a ****ing huge Union Jack or two). What is there to suggest that under US command they can guarantee any safety from their 'go-pill'ed up army anyway? There haven't been any friendly fire incidents recently... but maybe that's because they've been cities apart!

What you can do:

1) Please telephone your MP today (Monday). Don't just write, it'll take a while and this is the kind of decision made overnight.
2) Please write to your MP today. Support what you're saying in the phone call.
3) Please write or cut n paste this letter to other forums you are a member of.
4) Please write or use this letter to newspapers you read.

Don't go overboard, use what you know... my objections are in order of importance;

1) The UK army going into Najaf, a badly mismanaged area, completely out of line with the successful management of UK army-controlled areas;
2) The UK army going under US army command.

and of lesser importance;

3) The US army going back into Falluja.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_ne...329369,00.html