It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
NEWS: New Zealand Pulls Out of Iraq
page: 1share:
It appears the NZ government has chosen to withdraw their troops as violence escalates in Iraq. The troops were there to help re build local
infrastructure.
www.stuff.co.nz
New Zealand's troops are pulling out of Iraq under a cloak of secrecy as security deteriorates in the battle to control the war-torn country.
The engineers have been in Basra since last September, mainly to help in civil reconstruction around the southern Iraqi city. The contingent was rotated in March and the commitment was scheduled to end this month, with the proviso they would come out earlier if they were no longer able to do their work.
Our troops were sent in a non-combatant role "but what's happening now is that everyone's a combatant whether they want to be one or not. As time has gone on the situation has become much more lethal and no one can guarantee their absolute safety."
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
It is a shame that troops that are there primarily to help rebuild are forced to leave.
[edit on 15-9-2004 by Nerdling]
www.stuff.co.nz
New Zealand's troops are pulling out of Iraq under a cloak of secrecy as security deteriorates in the battle to control the war-torn country.
The engineers have been in Basra since last September, mainly to help in civil reconstruction around the southern Iraqi city. The contingent was rotated in March and the commitment was scheduled to end this month, with the proviso they would come out earlier if they were no longer able to do their work.
Our troops were sent in a non-combatant role "but what's happening now is that everyone's a combatant whether they want to be one or not. As time has gone on the situation has become much more lethal and no one can guarantee their absolute safety."
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
It is a shame that troops that are there primarily to help rebuild are forced to leave.
[edit on 15-9-2004 by Nerdling]
Another victory for the terror brigade. When you go into a warzone your soldiers may get hurt even killed be it political or pacifist reasons if your
going to send troops at least have the backbone to see it out. The message you send to the terrorist is terror tactics work!
New Zealands troops are not cowards as you can find out reading their history so its obviously politics. Thank god for strong leaders in time of crisis.
New Zealands troops are not cowards as you can find out reading their history so its obviously politics. Thank god for strong leaders in time of crisis.
This is not only a victory for the terrorist but also another slap on the administration and his lies that Iraq is better off.
NZ has been neutral to the Iraq effort from the start, and has not engaged militarily or provided troops for that purpose, nor would it.
Deny Ignorance is the motto of this site.
Deny Ignorance is the motto of this site.
If you make the decision to send your people into a country to help them and they end up getting killed what would you do?
How will you explain to all the families that Daddy, or brother or Husband won't be coming home form the 'PEACEFUL assignment' they were on because they were killed in BATTLE?
It's one thing if you send your military into a war, but another when you send your military into what is thought to be a PEACEFUL situation to 'help out'.
How will you explain to all the families that Daddy, or brother or Husband won't be coming home form the 'PEACEFUL assignment' they were on because they were killed in BATTLE?
It's one thing if you send your military into a war, but another when you send your military into what is thought to be a PEACEFUL situation to 'help out'.
Thank God there are political leaders in this world with a scrap of common sense. Great to see NZ soldiers making it home in one piece.
It's not their war, it's Bush's war, after all.
If I was a NZ'er, I'd be proud.
[edit on 15-9-2004 by Aelita]
It's not their war, it's Bush's war, after all.
If I was a NZ'er, I'd be proud.
[edit on 15-9-2004 by Aelita]
Maybe i never explained myself correctly
I was saying NZ people (troops, men, women) were not cowards and that they if they said they were going to do something they would do it. Hence the withdrawal from iraq must be from a political stance. NZ citizen killed political suicide for the government. Hence the politicians have no backbone. And it sends a message to the terrorists, kidnap each nationality, threaten them, watch their country pull out. Or maybe the Australian embassy bombing worried the New Zealanders and being neutral pulls no strings with the terrorists.
I was saying NZ people (troops, men, women) were not cowards and that they if they said they were going to do something they would do it. Hence the withdrawal from iraq must be from a political stance. NZ citizen killed political suicide for the government. Hence the politicians have no backbone. And it sends a message to the terrorists, kidnap each nationality, threaten them, watch their country pull out. Or maybe the Australian embassy bombing worried the New Zealanders and being neutral pulls no strings with the terrorists.
The NZ government has never been in favor of the Iraq invasion.
The Prime Minister got into trouble when she told the media that "This would never have happened under Gore" (pissed of Bush a fair bit and lost us a trade deal).
So although its sad, its understandable.
The Prime Minister got into trouble when she told the media that "This would never have happened under Gore" (pissed of Bush a fair bit and lost us a trade deal).
So although its sad, its understandable.
Oh, BTW I was talking to a person, who'se friends had been in the Bali nightclub the week before the attack. The terrorists actually went there that
night, but left once they realised that only NZers were there and it wasn't worth the political statement. Shows how important NZ is in world
terrorism politics
Originally posted by Netchicken
Oh, BTW I was talking to a person, who'se friends had been in the Bali nightclub the week before the attack. The terrorists actually went there that night, but left once they realised that only NZers were there and it wasn't worth the political statement. Shows how important NZ is in world terrorism politics
Hmm, how can you tell a NZ from AU from a Scot in a dark nightclub?
They checked the feet to see who was wearing the jandles (thongs in aussie) No thongs, no aussies...
Originally posted by Munro_DreadGod
Maybe i never explained myself correctly
I was saying NZ people (troops, men, women) were not cowards and that they if they said they were going to do something they would do it. Hence the withdrawal from iraq must be from a political stance. NZ citizen killed political suicide for the government. Hence the politicians have no backbone. And it sends a message to the terrorists, kidnap each nationality, threaten them, watch their country pull out. Or maybe the Australian embassy bombing worried the New Zealanders and being neutral pulls no strings with the terrorists.
It says it quite clearly in the article:
""Our troops were sent in a non-combatant role "but what's happening now is that everyone's a combatant whether they want to be one or not. As time has gone on the situation has become much more lethal and no one can guarantee their absolute safety." "
The situation in Iraq is clearly deteriorating. The idea of a country staying there just to spite some faceless terrorists even when doing so is not in the interests of the individuals and nations involved is just ridiculous. The countries with nothing invested in Iraq have every right to pull out if their citizens come under threat. The only ones obliged to secure Iraq are the Americans. But in the long run, the only people in a position to actually create stability are the Iraqis. The mere presence of the United States there is enough to fuel worldwide terrorism (misguided as terrorists may be).
You have got to admit if countries pulled out of iraq because their guys might get hurt, well is it me or why did they send them there in the first
place. Iraq aint exactly a day at the beach. So whats your point caller?
And terrorists are not misguided anything but they are focused and in it for the long term.
And terrorists are not misguided anything but they are focused and in it for the long term.
To call a spade a spade, the countries that DID go initially were either bribed, cajoled, or threatened, or a combination of the three.
Under such a situation you really can't blame them for pulling out, afterall they didn't want to be there in the first place. Only England was in full support of the ettack. Even Australia got a free trade agreement out of it, and possibly some cheap missiles.
Under such a situation you really can't blame them for pulling out, afterall they didn't want to be there in the first place. Only England was in full support of the ettack. Even Australia got a free trade agreement out of it, and possibly some cheap missiles.
no UK lots of scottish troops in iraq many my friends.
Suppose you may be right but there always is a but.
Suppose you may be right but there always is a but.
Originally posted by helenheaven
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
It is a shame that troops that are there primarily to help rebuild are forced to leave.
[edit on 15-9-2004 by Nerdling]
You would think that the ignorant bastards would stand down after they saw that these Kiwi troops were in a non-combat role and were helping to rebuild. A little recon could have shown them that. They would rather have no running water or electricity than get help. Three cheers for ignorance.
But it is the Kiwi's choice to stay or leave and you have to respect the fact they feel it is in their own best interests. Before anyone slags the Kiwis(who are good folk), please remember why we pulled out of Lebannon.
[edit on 15-9-2004 by Facefirst]
Should they stay... should they go.. Hmm.. well, that is up to the country they belong to. I personally see nothing wrong with a country wanting to
send their troops there for Non-Combatant assistance. Someone needs to rebuild the country. I think the non-combatant roles have helped the image in
Iraq. Not all Iraqis will think the solders are just there to take over their land. It is up to the combatant forces in the country to protect them.
If done correctly, the PR would be great to show military troops fixing stuff instead of breaking them. When the Iraqi see civilians fixing stuff,
the figure it is a way for them to make money. Personally, I do like the idea of countries doing that. They know the NZ, Japanese, and probably
other military are there to help and not to destroy. You also have to remember that the leader of NZ as well as Japan have taken huge hits from
supporting this in the first place. The combatants that have agreed to that role are the ones that should be responsible for the safety. If they
cannot provide it, then the AGREED (by BOTH sides) on role cannot be full-filled and they have every right to leave.
We should be greatful for the help that they did provide. They at least saved some work, time, and money. Complaining that they are just leaving will leave a bad taste in everyones mouth and it will make it seem like their help was not appreciated. Now, what does that do? Well, when things quiet down there, NZ would not send help back there again. Second, other countries would be reluctant to send help out of fear of being ridiculed or not appreciated. Respect goes both ways.
We should be greatful for the help that they did provide. They at least saved some work, time, and money. Complaining that they are just leaving will leave a bad taste in everyones mouth and it will make it seem like their help was not appreciated. Now, what does that do? Well, when things quiet down there, NZ would not send help back there again. Second, other countries would be reluctant to send help out of fear of being ridiculed or not appreciated. Respect goes both ways.
Originally posted by Munro_DreadGod
Another victory for the terror brigade. When you go into a warzone your soldiers may get hurt even killed be it political or pacifist reasons if your going to send troops at least have the backbone to see it out. The message you send to the terrorist is terror tactics work!
New Zealands troops are not cowards as you can find out reading their history so its obviously politics. Thank god for strong leaders in time of crisis.
It has nothing to do with anyone not having a backbone, be it polititian or soldier.
They went there to take part in a non combatant role, to help rebuild. Thats it.
The situation has turned so they were forced in to a combat situation, so they are pulled out. They were never there to fight. Good common sense on the part of the polititians. NZ should be proud of its government.
Thanks to all the New Zealand troops who have been helping ou in Iraq, it's a shame they can't continue their duties uninterrupted.
Why can't the US send more troops. They obviously can't handle the fighting and won't be able to make inroads unless they have more troops over there.
Why can't the US send more troops. They obviously can't handle the fighting and won't be able to make inroads unless they have more troops over there.