[Epapazian]

Did anyone notice the recent CNN" talking head" coverage of Great Britain's latest plans for troop reductions in Iraq? According to CNN, The Brits will soon have only 2,500 troops stationed at an airbase outside of Basra, which is down from a high of 46,000 troops sent to Iraq in 2003. Huh? Maybe I missed something, but didn't the Brits send one division, or about 12,000 soldiers, not 46,000?Perhaps CNN is emulating the cable documentary makers and doing its research online rather than really checking the facts. Or maybe they are trying to make Bush look bad by greatly exaggerating the size of the British pullback.

[tank nut]

l love news networks, like the old saying don't belive everything your read.

[ZS-VAN]

Originally Posted by tank nut

l love news networks, like the old saying don't believe everything your read.

You got that right! Even if you watch BBC, CNN, SKY and Aljazeera the perspectives can be very different. Yes, we now have Aljazeera here in English on satellite. Most interesting.

[1250ships]

Perhaps 46,000 is what they sent for the intial invasion?

OK- just checked Wikipedia which says 45,000 British troops in the initial attack. Some of the units mentioned are: 3rd Commando Brigade Royal Marines, Special Boat Service, 16th Air Assault Brigrade, 7th Armoured Brigade, the Parachute Regiment, Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, and Royal Engineer detactments.

More digging- here is the breakdown: 26,000 British Army solider, 4,000 Royal Marines, 5,000 Royal Navy sailors, and 8,100 RAF personnel.

My take- using 46,000 is a bit deceptive- a more accurate number would be the level of troops used for garrison duty after the invasion.

[Epapazian]

Originally Posted by 1250ships

Perhaps 46,000 is what they sent for the intial invasion?

OK- just checked Wikipedia which says 45,000 British troops in the initial attack. Some of the units mentioned are: 3rd Commando Brigade Royal Marines, Special Boat Service, 16th Air Assault Brigrade, 7th Armoured Brigade, the Parachute Regiment, Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, and Royal Engineer detactments.

More digging- here is the breakdown: 26,000 British Army solider, 4,000 Royal Marines, 5,000 Royal Navy sailors, and 8,100 RAF personnel.

My take- using 46,000 is a bit deceptive- a more accurate number would be the level of troops used for garrison duty after the invasion.

Interesting information. The CNN piece gave the impression that it was the British Army that they were talking about, not the navy, RAF etc. My impression has been that after the initial invasion, the British army contingent was about 12,000 in Iraq. This level has been pared down several times already, prior to the last planned reduction, but I agree with you that the 46,000 down to 2,500 comparison made by CNN is overdone, possibly to hype the story.

[1250ships]

Originally Posted by Epapazian

Interesting information. The CNN piece gave the impression that it was the British Army that they were talking about, not the navy, RAF etc. My impression has been that after the initial invasion, the British army contingent was about 12,000 in Iraq. This level has been pared down several times already, prior to the last planned reduction, but I agree with you that the 46,000 down to 2,500 comparison made by CNN is overdone, possibly to hype the story.

Almost certainly they are not counting RAF and RN deployments in the area in the 2,500 figure but they are counting them in the 46,000 number. Not really apples to apples in this case.