British soldiers dying in Iraq

[skelly]

British soldiers are now being killed in enemy fire in Iraq. Two of them were apparently tortured and executed and their bodies shown to the world. The Probabilty is that many more will dye before this thing is over. Does this show that we made a mistake getting involved in this war and that we should now rethink our strategy, or, should these killings make our boys more determined to advance and push harder to take out their targets?

[comloulou]

I think the fact that youre asking this question says something very important about the way people view this war. They forget that war means more than advances, shelling and surrenders, it is essentially a game of 'we kill your people and you kill ours and whoever has most standing at the end wins'. People are going to die. It happens and soldiers are aware of this when the join up. If you go to war, youre going to get shot at. It should in no way mean we stop, these guys died because they put their faith in our leaders to push them in the right direction Im afraid we're all going to have to have a little faith and a little patience. Its going to be a long bloody war but maybe the reward will be a people liberated from the torture, rape murder and starvation theyve endured for 30 odd years...IMHO

[rekstout]

Anyone who was pro-war and is now anti-war because a few men have died was incredibly naive in the first place. It is a tragedy when a life is lost; but I fully support the causes for which the allies are fighting and understand that the reality of war is that people, civilian and military, die - on both sides.

I am humbled by those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for this cause and believe it would be a great insult to them and their families and loved ones to pull out simply because of their deaths - it would make their sacrifice worthless.

By all means pull out when the job is done but not before.

[Miss Zippy]

I'm against this war, but, for want of a better phrase, we've started, so we've got to finish. At least our soldiers are as well equipped as they can be to help ensure they survive, which is more than can be said for the poor Iraqi civilians. This isn't meant to sound harsh, but our boys and girls knew the risks they could face when they signed up to serve for queen and country.

[simon_says]

In human evolution, certain things happen to control population. Disease is one, war is another. War is a natural consequence of humans living together, ie we are going to argue over land and resources. Whether or not Saddam has WOMD, I don't know, but we are now embedded in Iraq, so stop the bickering. All the, to quote a Pink Floyd song, "Bleeding hearts and artists", should, maybe, get a job instead of demonstrating against the War. I don't know if it is a "just" War, but I think Iraq would be a better place without Saddam. It will be a long fight.

[map08]

I agree with Miss Zippy. We need to get it done with as quickly as possible, with keeping casualties for ALL sides a minimum. I've got News 24 on at the moment, and the Arab protests could spill over into something much worse. This war should never have started - but now it has, the only possible action is to deal with it. Protests should not be aimed at stopping the war, but instead waiting for the end of it, then asking why we were in a war. My great worry is that people are going to develop great apathy towards the political situation, ignoring the questions that need to be asked of our government. So if anyone is reading this and agrees, save your anger, don't burn it out yet. There needs to be a real dialogue on the matter without nationalist, patriotic hype, or fairly disorganised pacifist shouting.

[mikewith]

ned flanders - just a thought, but maybe tartanwizard is a little more advanced down the evolutionary path than you?

[mikewith]

I'd better leave it there, ned flanders -- don't want the wrath of the site's Scotish contingent coming down on me ;-)