12-03-2003 18:39									#1
	Hperthetical (Uk vs Iraq) Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Could the UK mount a successful lone invasion of Iraq with a) the 35,000 men it aleready has in theatre, if not b) if we geared up to wholesale a unilateral offensive. Would you think UK has the military might to succeed in such an operation?

	12-03-2003 18:40									#2
	Tired of ads?

No. We simply don't have the power projection capabilities to mount a successful lone invasion of Iraq.

	12-03-2003 18:45									#3
	Inflate your Upload Space

It would take about 3 years to build up enough forces and men to do it form the base we have.

ONTOH the UK forces could proably defend Kuwait from any Iraqi attack

	12-03-2003 19:02									#4
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Probably not. A more interesting question is, could the US invade the UK successfully given that the US goes all out and that nobody else is involved?

	12-03-2003 19:07									#5
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Probably not. A more interesting question is, could the US invade the UK successfully given that the US goes all out and that nobody else is involved?

It could do it but the casualties would make Vitenam look like a holiday.

	12-03-2003 19:08									#6
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

We should just nuke em.

	12-03-2003 19:11									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Probably not. A more interesting question is, could the US invade the UK successfully given that the US goes all out and that nobody else is involved?

They'd win eventually, but they'd give the term "Phyrric victory" a whole new meaning in the process.

	12-03-2003 19:19									#8
	Increase the size of your Attachments

You have to decide what the objective of the war would be in order to answer the question.

Could 35K troops 'conquer' and hold Iraq. No

Could 35K professional troops kick butt against waves of Iraqi amateurs? The British empire was built on just that superiority and the Falklands and Desert storm re-iterated that point. So a short term engagement to achieve a specific objective such as driving Iraqi troops in the south back to Baghdad. Yes.

Two factors would decide a conventional war. Could the UK maintain air superiority without losing too many aircraft? Could the UK keep their forces supplied for enough time to achieve their objectives?

	12-03-2003 20:54									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

No, the UK forces could win battles but not a protracted war.

The UK armed forces were largely changed from a global to a european capability in the 80's and early 90's so the infrastructure and numbers to conquer a country like Iraq simply don't exist.

The new carriers just ordered for the Royal Navy may mark the start of a reversal of that trend but it is too early to say. There probably isn't the money for a significant global capability anyway. Only the US has the economic muscle to support that kind of capability at present.

It is usually easier to defend than attack though, especially given similar levels of military technology (which the Iraqis don't have).

	12-03-2003 21:08									#10
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Based on the film "The Full monty" I have concluded that all British people are fat lamers, and that we could therefore invade successfully.

However "lock stock and two smocking barrels" seems to indicate that there are some violent people in the UK - we might lose a few dozen soldiers, I guess.

	12-03-2003 21:12									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

You might not have too much trouble taking England and Wales, but if you've seen "Braveheart" you ought to be aware that Scotland wouldn't be a pushover.

	12-03-2003 21:15									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

We don't want scotland anyway... Bunch a dress wearin haggis eatin bagpipe playin fools! We could team up with them actually, to free them from english oppression!

	12-03-2003 21:18									#13
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by monolith94 We don't want scotland anyway... Bunch a dress wearin haggis eatin bagpipe playin fools!

Try going to Scotland and saying that. Go on, I dare ya...

	12-03-2003 21:22									#14
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

There are plenty of places in Scotland with no Scottish people in listening distance so yes, ok, I will...
[/point taken]

	12-03-2003 21:52									#15
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by monolith94 Based on the film "The Full monty" I have concluded that all British people are fat lamers, and that we could therefore invade successfully.

How ironic, a citizen of the fatest country in the world calling the brits fat.

	12-03-2003 22:20									#16
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH How ironic, a citizen of the fatest country in the world calling the brits fat.

Fattest people in the world gets quick laughs anywhere in the world (even here), but it's not accurate. Ever been to Germany? Whoa! ease up on the sausage intake.

Actually, pacific islanders are the fattest.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/as...fic/1681297.stm

But, we in the US are doing our part to keep the waistlines expanding, mostly because we go to work and sit for 8-10 hours and then go home and sit for a few before going to bed. That's why we freak out Europeans with jogging when we visit. It's the only exercise we ever get.


As to the original question: The UK could succesfully invade the country -- anybody who can get there can invade, succeed is trickier. How long are we allowing for success? 1 month, 1 year, 5 years?

	12-03-2003 23:07									#17
	Put an end to popups!

Wandering a little off topic I think guys.

Spencer you made a good point and I completely agree with you. I dont think Uk would have the resources to facilitate a protracted occupation where the public were aggressive just look at the resources it took to occupy Northern Island.

I do agree that the professionalism of our troops and technological advantage could achieve victory in many limited scenario's and that would include taking and holding Bagdad or the main oil fields. Though if we geared up for war there is no reason we could not increase the size of the army from say 175000 present to a million (that should do the trick).

I like the thought of us trying to defend against a conventional US attack against mainland UK. Even thugh im immensly patriotic I dont think we could last very long. US would obviously have a problem with sustained occupation (once the main fighting stopped) because as W Churchill said "We will fight them on the beaches, we will fight them on the landing grounds, we will never surrender"

	13-03-2003 00:07									#18
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Barley Wandering a little off topic I think guys. I like the thought of us trying to defend against a conventional US attack against mainland UK. Even thugh im immensly patriotic I dont think we could last very long. US would obviously have a problem with sustained occupation (once the main fighting stopped) because as W Churchill said "We will fight them on the beaches, we will fight them on the landing grounds, we will never surrender"

Fortunately, this will never happen. But as to occupation, the US doesn't occupy anything for long, it cost too much. Better to get rid of the thugs running the place, build up an economy, keep the locals from each others throats, split as soon as we can and trade like hell with the place from a safe distance.

	13-03-2003 00:24									#19
	Remove this text

a) Probably, but it would have to be a slower attack, taking cities one by one, repulsing Iraqi counter-attacks along the way. The Iraqis used to have a positive opinion of Britain, and feel betrayed, but they'd probably put up with us more than the Americans.

b) Definitely. No question about it.

	13-03-2003 00:32									#20
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by monolith94 Based on the film "The Full monty" I have concluded that all British people are fat lamers, and that we could therefore invade successfully. However "lock stock and two smocking barrels" seems to indicate that there are some violent people in the UK - we might lose a few dozen soldiers, I guess.

lol

yeah but did you see the scenes from euro 98? All the british public need is some garden furniture and you wouldn't stand a chance.

Could the US seize power in the UK probably
Would anyone notice and difference probably not.

	13-03-2003 00:40									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

There wasn't a Euro 98. I take it you're refering to the World Cup?

	13-03-2003 00:56									#22
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Yeah
France 98 I mean.

	13-03-2003 01:03									#23
	Suffering from ads?

No, you mean Freedom 98.

	13-03-2003 09:19									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Will the fight be much tougher if Turks won't let the US to attack from their country?

	13-03-2003 09:36									#26
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Barley Wandering a little off topic I think guys. Spencer you made a good point and I completely agree with you. I dont think Uk would have the resources to facilitate a protracted occupation where the public were aggressive just look at the resources it took to occupy Northern Island. I do agree that the professionalism of our troops and technological advantage could achieve victory in many limited scenario's and that would include taking and holding Bagdad or the main oil fields. Though if we geared up for war there is no reason we could not increase the size of the army from say 175000 present to a million (that should do the trick). I like the thought of us trying to defend against a conventional US attack against mainland UK. Even thugh im immensly patriotic I dont think we could last very long. US would obviously have a problem with sustained occupation (once the main fighting stopped) because as W Churchill said "We will fight them on the beaches, we will fight them on the landing grounds, we will never surrender"

I think Britain could beat Iraq all by itself. It would have to commit, though, its entire army and some reserves.

As to a fight between the US and Britain in the UK - this would almost be like the Revolutionary War in reverse. It would be real strange.

No, I am one American who hopes that some day, long in the future or whatever, that we reunite - but under the American constitution. We could do something about keeping the monarchy as a symbolic institution. There are a lot of Americans who have real affection for British monarchy.

Do you Brits want your colonies back? We could call the new nation the United States of Great Britain and America!

	13-03-2003 09:45									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

maybe britain could rebuild the empire in full, and also get back the land in france that it used to own (as england rahter than britain)

doubt they would allow it though

	13-03-2003 10:23									#28
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

a recent war games by britain in Oman had interesting results

the rotor blades of their helicopters had a reduced lifespan to 50 hours
the engine filters in the tanks had a reduced lifespan to 4 hours
the soldiers boots melted with the heat
the standard issue rifle got clogged with sand after every clip
the tarmigan communication system didnt work

this equipment was made to work in northern europe, and so doesnt work well in the desert.

------
on the net

http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z...place/part4.ram

	13-03-2003 10:37									#29
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Might be hard for Britain to actually go into a foreign country and place it under total occupation. Britain however could give one side a victory if two countries were fighting- for instance if India and Pakistan went to war and Britain sided with a country, that country would win if nobody used nukes.