My take on the brit situation

[whosinpower]

REgarding the two undercover brit soldiers who were captured and then rescued......

The iraqi authorities hesitated to release them as per the normal channels.....why? Because these two fellows were dressed in Arab dress, with wigs, had a cache of weapons, and bombs. By all immediate appearances - it appears that these guys are fomenting the revolution.

but, the iraqi's handed them over to a local militia, which housed them not in the police station, but at a nearby house. Perhaps they thought to ransom them? The brits reacted immediately and staged a rescue mission to extract their guys.

What were those guys doing dressed in Arab dress? Infiltrating the insurgency? Fomenting the insurgency? Or.....fomenting a crisis with Iran?

I doubt we will ever get the real truth. But, this little fiasco unmasks some ugly truths about war. War profiteers cannot make money if there is peace. There was peace in Basra.......something to make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm............

[madeline_con]

1. Why wigs?

Because they were blondes?

Because they think all Iraqis have long hair?

What gives on that little detail? :shrug:

[hootinholler]

6. Tactical.

Wear a wig when you do something bad, people are looking for a long hair. Trash the wig, change the jacket and you're much harder to spot.

-Hoot

[moodforaday]

2. Here's a suggestion:

Chris Floyd wrote in 2002 about Rumsfeld's plan for Pentagon special ops who would infiltrate terrorist cells and incite them to action - killing people. The idea is that thereby these cells would be brought out into the open, so they could more easily by eliminated. Of course in order for this to happen, you need people who'll not only participate in acts of terror, but will actually foment them.

My guess is the Brits have a similar plan of their own:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4832137

[ret5hd]

3. MY question is:

What's the difference between
1) undercover soldiers
2) enemy combatants

wasn't the definition of an enemy combatant the fact that, against the geneva conventions, they were soldiers that weren't wearing government uniforms?

just sayin'...

edit:typo

[mike_c]

4. wig or no wigs, they could not have possibly "infiltrated"...

...the insurgency. That's laughable. They could only have appeared to be arabs to outsiders or to Iraqis from a distance. In either event, their actions look highly suspect.

[The_Casual_Observer]

5. Those guys had the faces of leprechauns

There was no way they would have fooled anybody.