It's official: No military action against Iraq (beyond the usual perpetual bombing)

[Carl Remick]

>From: Cian <cian_oconnor at yahoo.co.uk>
>
>For what its worth, the British army and navy didn't
>hold the US armed forces in terribly high regard. They
>see them as far too dependant upon technology. Not
>that that matters too much in Iraq (Afghanistan is a
>different story though).

[It would seem the Brits could learn a thing or two from Americans about 
military campaign *branding* though.  This is from the Telegraph:]

Footnote

By Alexander Chancellor

(Filed: 20/03/2002)

The name chosen for the British military operation against the re-grouped 
al-Qa'eda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan is so self-deprecatory as to 
seem almost pathetic.

While the American operation is code-named Anaconda after the terrifying boa 
(1ft thick and up to 29ft long) that lurks in wait for animals in South 
American swamps, the British one is named after the jacana or "lily-trotter" 
- a little wading bird that minces daintily across floating vegetation in 
search of insects and molluscs.

[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;$sessionid$XSPZZUAAABSZFQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0?xml=/opinion/2002/03/20/do2005.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2002/03/20/ixop.html]

Carl

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com