Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

MI6 boss: US military's 'Darth Vadar kit and wraparound shades' alienated Iraqi locals after invasio

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:14 PM
Original message
MI6 boss: US military's 'Darth Vadar kit and wraparound shades' alienated Iraqi locals after invasio
Source: UK Daily Mail

The head of MI6 today attacked the US's use of 'Vietnam-era generals' and 'Darth Vader kit' for turning post-war Iraq into a shambles.

Sir John Sawers, who took over as spymaster 'C' last month, said the wraparound sunglasses and flak jackets used by rank-and-file American soldiers only served to distance themselves from the Iraqis.

Sir John also revealed he found 'serious disorder' when he was sent to Baghdad as the UK's special representative in 2003.

He told the Chilcot inquiry that the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Affairs (ORHA) was not well led by Jay Garner, a retired US Lieutenant General.

Sir John said: 'I was very disappointed by the quality of the senior figures who were mainly retired Vietnam-era generals.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234844/MI6-boss-US-militarys-Darth-Vadar-kit-alienated-Iraqi-locals-invasion.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. "Sneer." - xCommander AWOL (R)
Edited on Thu Dec-10-09 12:23 PM by SpiralHawk
"Screw the Eye-rackis, and all the rest of yas. We Republicons had Shock & Awe to doo doo, and war profits to make. Sneer. Smirk."

- xCommander AWOL (R)
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_35igJnloijA/RlStBlcwloI/AAAAAAAAAio/XDKEiB5Q5eA/s400/bush+sunglasses+aa.JPG
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. "Shades cover up the gleam in our eyes." - xVP Dickie 'Five-Military-Deferments' Cheney (R)
"You know how gleamy we republicons get when we are acting tuff n' stuff, and counting up our massive war profits n' stuff. Sneer."

- xVP Dickie 'Five-Military-Deferments' Cheney (R)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Threedifferentones Donating Member (820 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
38. Fuckinng smirker indeed.
This discussion about soldiers' appearance is absurd, how the fuck can you make friends while delivering "shocking" violence? Oh, just act like GWB, duh...or Obama?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. Guess they shouldn't have worn flak jackets?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. "Argumentum ad absurdum" is usually lame...
As in this case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Also, they tend to be pretty muscular from all that training...
that is ALWAYS intimidating. Look at soldiers from past wars, they tend to be slender.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Well, roids will do that
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. Link to evidence
that soldiers are given roids?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
28. The proof is in the neck...and there is a difference between "given"and "obtain"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. Yeah, that sounds like "proof"
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. Well, you fucking war cheerleaders wouldn't accept proof if it came up under...
that bridge where you dwell,
and smacked you
in your goddamn jingo, would you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. War cheerleader?
Claiming that soldiers aren't regularly taking steroids and being a war cheerleader are far apart on the spectrum.

Nice strawman though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. Much like the...
Much like the "proof" of skinny WWII, Korean, or Vietnam vets. Six of one, half a dozen of the other...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. So sunglasses in the desert are bad? As are flak jackets in a combat zone?
I knew the British hadn't had a real war in a long time, but sheesh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. If you cannot see the eyes of the people who have invaded your land
you might well have some questions about their intentions as they boss and bully you about in their Mythical Quest for WMD and stuff..

I believe Atilla the Hun was the first to learn this lesson about community relations in war zone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. Did Atilla wear RayBans, or Oakleys? Who knew they had sunglasses way back then! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. Way to deliberately miss the point /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
22. In a "real war" you kill everything that moves.

Iraq was a police action, not a war. And you do not want cops distancing themselves from the people they are supposed to serve and protect.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. That's why the Brits adopted a no-armor policy in Basra
Soft hats and no-armor can calm things down. Darth Vaderism always creates heat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. They had a story on the Brits riding around on bicycles and
befriending the locals. It was a good strategy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #22
39. No, that's a slaughter or a genocide
Wars are usually extremely violent but they aren't necessarily slaughters. My mother's brother was captured at Dunkirk and lived out WWII in a POW camp, for example.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boudica the Lyoness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
31. Real War?
Do you think the invasion of Iraq is a real war?

It sounds like you are calling Brits pussies who need to be in more wars. What was the last 'real' war the US was in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
5. "Darth Vader Kit"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zeemike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. This is a sexy look in our violent loving society.
We see it all the time....even the police dress this way.
But don't expect the world to fall in love with it when they know that all that crap they are holding is meant to kill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
7. I'm sure blowing up their homes had nothing to do with it.
Or killing their families.

And I heard that they really loved the white phosphorus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. My thoughts exactly, I have a feeling sunglasses were last on the list.
This is about on a par with McChrystal claiming we cannot win in Afghanistan without capturing or killing Bin Laden.

Stick to what you know, fellas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
8. So true
It was obvious from the outset that the whole outfit was intended to intimidate, not to ingratiate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
11. There were a lot better choices...
Personally, I prefer the Boer war. It doesn't offer you the eye and body protection of today's modern uniforms, but check out that hat!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #11
24. Didn't a "soft hats and no armor" approach work well for the Brits in Basra?
I thought it worked fine, at least until the Darth Vader brigades doomed everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
14. The shades certainly serve a purpose in protecting the eyesight
in potentially hostile situations, but it should be just common sense that when you are dealing with the public face to face that they should be able to actually SEE your face.

The eyes are the windows to the soul - and the shades separate the people from who they're talking to. They are meant to intimidate, not communicate - just as state troopers used to always wear those mirrored shades. I've not seen them so much recently - maybe they've figured out that people react more positively when they can see your eyes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proteus_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
16. I think soldiers should wear body armor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SIMPLYB1980 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Yep. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CrunchMaster Donating Member (308 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
20. Someone tell MI6 to STFU. We haven't forgotten their role in helping to lie the world into war
Edited on Thu Dec-10-09 01:54 PM by CrunchMaster
"Tony Blair was under mounting pressure yesterday after he refused to withdraw discredited claims by the secret intelligence service MI6 that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium to make nuclear weapons."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-niger-connection-tony-blair-forged-documents-and-the-case-for-war-539826.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zonkers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
21. Done in by a wardrobe malfunction. Curses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
23. that sounds more like blackwater's signature "look"


there are tons of photos like these out there....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
groundloop Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
29. We shoulda' handed out sunglasses to Iraqi teenagers
We could have started a fashion trend, been ahead of the times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
30. Do not post opinion pieces, editorials, frivolous items, or other stories that are not news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. I'd just say it belongs in the editorial forum or GD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #30
41. It's news
It's a direct quote from an official inquiry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Anarcho-Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
33. Daily Mail isn't a reliable source n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-10-09 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
40. That and that killing their kids thing.
I don't think the slaughtering of the babies and little kids was very popular, either.

Funny thing, the people of Iraq love their kids just as much as we love ours. Who coulda known.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lurks Often Donating Member (505 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-11-09 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
42. ugh
Do the sunglasses and body armor intimidate? I'm sure they do, but they also protect the troops from gunfire and IEDs which is the primary purpose.

The two choices (until our political leadership pulls the troops out) are either intimidate the Iraqi's or accept higher casualties.

And yes, I'm sure there will be an argument that if we weren't intimidating the Iraqi's, there might be fewer casualties, it might even be correct, but it might not be correct either. I don't know which way it would work out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC