The British leave Basra, handover or retreat?

The beginning of September 2007 saw the British troops that were formally based in the centre of Basra relocate to the airbase outside the city.

The official view from the Ministry of Defence was that the action was one of a number of "successful handovers" and that the troops were to remain on hand in the wings to support Iraq's most senior army officer in Basra, General Mohan al-Fireji, in his attempts to persuade Shia militias to lay down their arms.

British forces had first entered Basra on April 6 2003 and in an attempt to put the locals at ease and in stark contrast to their American colleagues patrolled the streets wearing soft berets and not hard helmets.

Their Northern Ireland experience may have better prepared the British troops over the American GI, but the 'hearts and minds' policy that was initiated from the off appears to have been far from an overwhelming success.

Many critics would argue that if Basra is considered calm today it is only because the religious parties in Basra now control the city. Only while the local militia can protect their own individual interests will the status quo be maintained, but once those interests are threatened the city is ready to burn.

Having been given a poison chalice by the politicians, the British army may have assessed that they are in a no-win situation and that a dignified withdrawal is better than perpetuating a myth that peace in Iraq will eventually prevail.

We ask if the handover is an inevitable step in a war that many would argue was ill-conceived right from the very start? Will the Americans have to sooner or later face reality and follow suit? Have the British cut and run leaving even more death, destruction and hardship for the average Iraqi?

Participate in this weeks open survey The British leave Basra, handover or retreat?

What will British Prime Minister Tony Blair's Legacy be?

After 10 years as prime minister and 13 as Labour leader Tony Blair has announced that he will tender his resignation to the Queen on June 27.

In a 17-minute speech in front of a handpicked group of supporters he said the judgement on his 10-year administration was "for you, the people, to make".

He apologised for "the times I have fallen short" but stated that "Hand on heart, I did what I thought was right. I may have been wrong - that's your call. But I did what I thought was right for our country.

Many critics have suggested that Mr Blair's exit was forced upon him and that his party were keen to see him go.

How do you rate Mr Blair's performance, what do you think will be his legacy and what do you think he will do in future?

Participate in this weeks open survey What will British Prime Minister Tony Blair's Legacy be?

Should Prince Harry be sent to Iraq?

Prince Henry of Wales, more commonly known as Prince Harry, is the younger son of Charles, Prince of Wales and his first wife, the late Diana, Princess of Wales. Prince Harry is third in the line of succession to the British Throne, behind his father, and his older brother Prince William.

Following the royal families tradition Prince Harry joined the British Army and after training is now an officer in the Blues and Royals regiment of the Household Cavalry.

The British Ministry of Defence recently confirmed that Prince Harry would be deployed with his regiment in Iraq where he will serve as part of the 1st Mechanised Brigade of the 3rd (UK) Mechanised Division.

It is believed that the Blues and Royals are expected to form part of the force patrolling the Iran-Iraq border with the prince leading a small force tasked with reconnaissance duties using Scimitar tanks.

The last member of the British Royal Family to serve in a war zone was the Prince's uncle, Prince Andrew, Duke of York, who flew helicopters during the Falklands War in 1982 who at the time would have been second in line to the British Throne.

In interviews Prince Harry had made it clear that he would leave the army if he was left in safety while his regiment was sent to a war zone.

However, some sources have sought to prevent Prince Harry from serving, often claiming that his presence there would put at risk those that severed with him.

Should Prince Harry serve in Iraq, and if he does, should he be given more protection than would normally be expected for any other serving officer of similar rank?

Participate in this weeks open survey Should Prince Harry be sent to Iraq?

Should Service Personnel be Allowed to Sell Their Stories?

In March 2007 15 British navy personnel were detained in Iran for 13 days after being seized by the Iran Revolutionary Guard in the Shatt al-Arab waterway between Iran and Iraq for allegedly trespassing into Iranian territorial waters. The British government said they were in Iraqi waters.

While in Iranian custody some of the personnel where seen on Iranian television apologising for their action and in interviews stated that they were being treated well by their Iranian hosts. Some of those in custody wrote published statements that criticised the British involvement in Iraq.

On the navy personnel's release six members of the group attended a press conference arranged by the Navy and said they were kept in solitary confinement for much of the time and that they were at times fearful that they would be executed.

With media interest growing the navy was authorised by the Government to allow the naval personnel to sell their individual stories to the press. There was severe criticism from within and outside the armed forces for allowing the service personnel to benefit financially. Some argued that it would undermine the reputation of the British Armed Forces at home and Britain's standing abroad and that it would also set a dangerous precedent for whenever military actions are the subject of intensive media coverage in the future. Many argued that it was unfair to other service personnel who were serving in in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Defence Secretary, Des Browne, first denied involvement but eventually admitted that it was he who first authorised the service personnel to sell their stories and then later reversed his decision when he announced that Service personnel will not 'be allowed to talk to the media about their experiences in return for payment' until the review is complete.

Relationships between the government and the British armed services have been strained as the government have been slow to admit their involvement.

Should a country's military personnel be allowed to discuss their experiences with the press and if so should they be entitled to some financial reward?

Do you believe that the British personnel had wandered into Iranian territorial waters?

Participate in this weeks open survey Should Service Personnel be Allowed to Sell Their Stories?

President Bush the Joker or a Joke?

President Bush attended the US Radio and Television Correspondents' Association 2007 dinner where not for the first time and in keeping with the events traditions he made a speech that poked fun at himself and a few others and his remarks drew laughter and applause from the Washington Hilton Hotel audience.

He made light of the poor ratings he is experiencing due to his handling of Iraq and he tongue in cheek suggested that the Vice President was on vacation in Afghanistan where people liked him. He also touched on the controversy over the Justice Department's firing of eight federal prosecutors, by saying: "I have to admit we really blew the way we let those attorneys go. You know you've botched it when people sympathise with lawyers."

The full speech can be seen at Bush Address at Radio and Television Correspondents' Association Dinner.

Even the most ardent of Bush supporters have now accepted that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq and there was no link between Saddam Hussein and global terrorists. The Bush action that was launched based on that misinformation has cost over 3,500 American, UK and other military lives and over 20,00 wounded (January 2003 to April 2007), with an untold number of civilian deaths which even the most conservative estimate puts at over 24,000 and is more likely to be much higher.

Considering the serious consequences of his action should the US president be making light of any part of his administration?

Is his ability to make jokes at his own expense an attempt to reverse his unpopularity?

Should George Bush resign or see out the rest of his presidential term?

Participate in this weeks open survey President Bush the Joker or a Joke?

Is Iraq in Civil War?

Speaking at the White House in March, his second major news conference of 2006, US President George W Bush said that he did not believe Iraq has descended into civil war.

Mr Bush said Iraqis had "had a chance to fall apart and they didn't".

Iraq's former interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi however a few days earlier told the BBC 50 to 60 people were dying every day and that the country was in civil war.

Do you think Iraq is currently in a civil war?

Participate in this weeks free survey Is Iraq in Civil War?

Iraq Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari & President Bush

Is the US at a critical moment in Iraq?

On the first anniversary of Iraq's sovereignty President Bush gave an address to the American people from Fort Bragg the home of the Army's elite 82nd Airborne Division.

President Bush argued that there is no need to change course in Iraq despite the upsetting images produced by daily insurgent attacks.

What are your views on a conflict that has cost the lives of more than 1,740 U.S. troops and has no end in sight?

Participate in this weeks Survey Galaxy Public Survey:-

Is the US at a critical moment in Iraq Survey

George Galloway v US Sub-Committee on Investigations

George Galloway was little known outside the United Kingdom but had his day in front of the worlds press when he appeared before the US Senate Sub-Committee on investigations.

The United Nations-backed oil-for-food scheme enabled Saddam Hussein to export oil to pay for essential humanitarian aid to help the Iraqi people cope with UN sanctions imposed in 1991.

The Senate sub-committee on investigations publicly alleged that Mr Galloway received options to buy barrels of Iraqi oil as a reward for supporting Saddam Hussein by selling the vouchers at below market prices to favoured parties, who were able to sell them on at profit.

The Senate committee's report also accused former French minister Charles Pasqua of receiving oil rights from Iraq, something he also has vehemently denied.

Mr Galloway is a controversial British Member of Parliament and flew to Washington to appear before the Senate committee to answer their accusations.

Take part in this weeks public survey to register your view of Mr Galloway

http://www.surveygalaxy.com/surPublishes.asp?survey_id=1735