# British Troops Arrested while "undercover", Freed **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 20, 2005, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506 "2005-09-20T06:03:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/1 "2005-09-20T06:03:40Z")
[CNN Link](http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/09/19/iraq.main/index.html) Huh? Two “undercover” British troopers are broken out of an Iraqi **police** gaol, by British forces. The kicker: they were arrested forshooting up civilians: > [@](#): > > The official said two unknown gunmen in full Arabic dress began firing on civilians in central Basra, wounding several, including a traffic police officer. There were no fatalities, the official said. > The two gunmen fled the scene but were captured and taken in for questioning, admitting they were British marines carrying out a “special security task,” the official said. That shot of the burning Brit - those two must have really been worth it, to lose an APC, a tank and probably at least one one badly burned tank crewman out of it - against the **Iraqi police** , who’d themselves _informed the Brits that they had their guys_. There will probably be Pit threads on this, but this is not those threads. My Great Debate: is it possible that more (than just this one incident) of the “insurgent” violence is done by such undercover troops? And if so, is it done with the purpose of increasing lawlessness to justify a Coalition presence? ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/2 "2005-09-20T08:07:08Z")
[QUOTE=MrDibble My Great Debate: is it possible that more (than just this one incident) of the “insurgent” violence is done by such undercover troops?[QUOTE] Doubtful. This incident has all the earmarks of an intel operation gone horribly, grotesquely wrong, nothing more (although if you care about the state of the British army, the level of amateurism displayed should be cause for worry). I know how military organiations work, and given the choice between malice and incompetance I’ll always choose incompetance - unless I’m presented with extraordinary evidence to the contrary. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/3 "2005-09-20T12:24:28Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Doubtful. This incident has all the earmarks of an intel operation gone horribly, grotesquely wrong, nothing more I’m curious as to what kind of “intel op” requires British Marines (not SAS or intel operatives, marines) to dress in native garb (doesn’t that make them unlawful combatants as per the coalition’s rules) and shoot up civilians, including a member of the Iraqi police force. Please enlighten me. I put a lot of what the coalition does down to malice, actually, but not malice of the soldiers on the ground. I’m sure these two were only obeying orders. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/4 "2005-09-20T12:38:42Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > I’m curious as to what kind of “intel op” requires British Marines (not SAS or intel operatives, marines) to dress in native garb (doesn’t that make them unlawful combatants as per the coalition’s rules) and shoot up civilians, including a member of the Iraqi police force. Please enlighten me. > . A few guesses: 1. They were out gathering intellegence or providing backup, someone blew their cover and they panicked. 2. They were following a suspected terrorist, he looked like he was getting away, and they made the extremely poor judgement call to open fire with automatic weapons in the presence of civilians. 3. They were drunk. Any of those options is more plausable than the idea that the Royal Marines are deliberately posing as terrorists in order to cause chaos, which they themselves would later have to quell. It doesn’t make sense, and it would be impossible to pull off. Besides, if you want terrorist attacks, why not just hire locals? ---
**Author:** ![RTA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b4bc9f/32.png) [@RTA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTA)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/5 "2005-09-20T12:48:17Z")
“Keeni-Meeni” tactics are absolutely business as usual for British forces throughout the Middle East ever since the 60s, and US forces also use them in Iraq today. It is certainly possible that certain firefights which were reported as having been provoked by the insurgents were not, also that certain insurgent attacks were a direct response to certain keeni-meeni operations successful or otherwise. (I would also not be surprised if individuals unfriendly to the US, in the long-term economic or military-basing sense, were being identified, targeted & whacked.) To suggest that instability is being intentionally exacerbated by coalition forces in order to justify their continued presence, I don’t see it. Firstly the actual professionals on the ground (i.e. the soldiers); would they not quickly identify the flaws in that plan out of pure self-interest? Second, when good news out of Iraq is so rare, why would the “higher-ups” want even more bloodshed in the news? Lastly the risk of being found out. If that sort of policy were ever made public, would every US and UK troop not have to drop what they were doing and make a run for the border? (Not that I put aggravating a conflict past the Rumsfelds and Cheneys and Bushes of the world, ethically or morally speaking - I believe they have neither - just that the negatives seem to outweigh the positives.) ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/6 "2005-09-20T13:21:20Z")
A botched operation is part of life… no group no matter how professional will never have problems. So they panicked and made some bad decisions… but were thankfully taken alive by the police. What is REALLY incredible and sad is British troops getting them out by force… that is TOTALLY unacceptable and moral breaking for Iraqi policemen. Giving even more points to insurgents and AQ types about “western” occupation and thus endangering their own mates. Heads should roll… and badly… ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/7 "2005-09-20T13:50:28Z")
> [@Rashak Mani](#): > > A botched operation is part of life… no group no matter how professional will never have problems. So they panicked and made some bad decisions… but were thankfully taken alive by the police. > > What is REALLY incredible and sad is British troops getting them out by force… that is TOTALLY unacceptable and moral breaking for Iraqi policemen. Giving even more points to insurgents and AQ types about “western” occupation and thus endangering their own mates. **Heads should roll** … and badly… Perhaps not the best choice of words there, given the preferred method of killing hostages… Seriously, though, is everyone else in agreement that this was some normal mission that went wrong, and everyone’s cool with the original mission? Because to me it sounds like these Marines were doing exactly what the coalition defines as unlawful combat (assuming the description is accurate and they were outwardly wearing civvies) - doesn’t that hipocracy get to anyone else? **Alessan** , the use of your own troops and the hiring of locals are not mutually exclusive. I have no doubt that money finds its way to militia groups for purposes of dirty tricks. Why would Iraq be any different from other Western theatres of operation in the past. I admit, your own no. 1) (covert op. gone wrong) sounds most likely, but that raises whole issues. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/8 "2005-09-20T13:54:25Z")
> [@Rashak Mani](#): > > What is REALLY incredible and sad is British troops getting them out by force… that is TOTALLY unacceptable and moral breaking for Iraqi policemen. Not to mention giving the lie to claims of Iraqi sovereignity. ---
**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/9 "2005-09-20T14:14:56Z")
1. Troops arrested by Iraqi Police are meant to be handed over to the US/UK army depending on who they are. 2. It seems the guys didn’t stay in the Police station and ended up being held by the militia. > [@](#): > > Brigadier John Lorimer said it was of “deep concern” the men detained by police ended up held by Shia militia. > [@](#): > > “Later in the day, however, I became more concerned about the safety of the two soldiers after we received information that they had been handed over to militia elements.” > > After troops broke into the police station to confirm the men were not there, they staged a rescue from a house in Basra, said the commanding officer of 12 Mechanised Brigade in Basra. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle\_east/4262336.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4262336.stm) So it seems that while the Bris have seemed to fuck up somewhere along the line there was also a problem with how the Iraqi authorities dealt with it. For the podcasters out there there’s a pretty good discussion of this event on the latest (20/09) podcast on the today show ([http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/](http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/)) site. Podcast link: 15 mins long [http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rmhttp/downloadtrial/radio4/today/rss.xml](http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/rmhttp/downloadtrial/radio4/today/rss.xml) ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/10 "2005-09-20T14:21:07Z")
Look, a steady stream of “he said, she said” updates are nice and all, but what happened to these guys after they were captured **is not the point of my OP**. I want to talk about _what they were up to_ out there in the first place. Your cooperation will be much appreciated. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/11 "2005-09-20T14:23:59Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Seriously, though, is everyone else in agreement that this was some normal mission that went wrong, and everyone’s cool with the original mission? Because to me it sounds like these Marines were doing exactly what the coalition defines as unlawful combat (assuming the description is accurate and they were outwardly wearing civvies) - doesn’t that hipocracy get to anyone else? Hadn’t thought about it that way… Its kind of normal for special ops to act in this way. If we consider these troops as “police forces” then legally it might be ok. Police do work undercover. As military troops certainly you are right in saying they are “unlawful”. I still doubt they were raising a ruckus on purpose… that is dangerous and silly. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/12 "2005-09-20T14:26:25Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > I want to talk about _what they were up to_ out there in the first place. Your cooperation will be much appreciated. Surveillance and information gathering for sure. Maybe like someone said following a suspect. Its hard to keep the peace if you don’t know whats happening on the streets when the tanks and humvees aren’t rolling by. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/13 "2005-09-20T14:28:45Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Look, a steady stream of “he said, she said” updates are nice and all, but what happened to these guys after they were captured **is not the point of my OP**. I want to talk about _what they were up to_ out there in the first place. Your cooperation will be much appreciated. But nobody knows what they were up to, and we likely never will. Is it certain that the soldiers captured were Royal Marines, and not, say, the SAS? Is it absolutely certain that the two men captured were the same two who were doing the shooting? ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/14 "2005-09-20T14:38:26Z")
> [@](#): > > doesn’t that make them unlawful combatants as per the coalition’s rules Do you really think we obey our own rules? I think we’ve more than demonstrated to the world that the rules are merely what we demand on point of force that other nations adhere to. We’re always a special case. BBC has this interesting tidbit: [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle\_east/4262336.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4262336.stm) > [@](#): > > The MoD denied witness reports to the Associated Press that about 150 prisoners escaped after the demolition of the wall. Oy. My GUESS here would be this: these two men were undercover, trying to infiltrate what the British fear are insurgents in the local militias. Something went wrong, they were found out, and there was a gun battle in the street. Subsequent angry crowds got pissed at British people shooting up the public, and the local police/militia didn’t want to just let these two guys disappear after they shot up a crowd and before they figured out what the he. So they resisted British requests, and this led to the confrontations. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/15 "2005-09-20T14:40:42Z")
> [@Rashak Mani](#): > > Hadn’t thought about it that way… Its kind of normal for special ops to act in this way. Normal, yes. Legal, by our own Western rules of war, I doubt it. > [@Rashak Mani](#): > > If we consider these troops as “police forces” then legally it might be ok. Police do work undercover. But Iraq has its own police, surely better able to conduct undercover work in as ethnically distinct an area as Iraq. These are military occupation forces, soldiers in the Army (well, Marines) of another country. While they may be doing “police work”, they are still military personnel. The rules should still apply to them, I think. > [@Rashak Mani](#): > > I still doubt they were raising a ruckus on purpose… that is dangerous and silly. Dangerous, yes. Silly, I’m not so sure. Already the attention is being diverted to the militia involvement in this, which diverts attention away from why they were arrested in the first place. I understand that people believe it would be **stupid** to conduct this sort of operation. My point is twofold: 1. They’ve been this stupid before - stupid enough to torture people and take happy snaps of it. 2. They may be that desperate - desperation breed stupidity, I’ve found. The Occupation isn’t going well, and that may lead to all sorts of missteps. Hypothetically : Like trying to assasinate someone you want out of the way (say, a civilian you suspect is Iranian agent), and blaming it on the insurgency (since the Sunnis are killing Shiites anyway). These guys were armed, in the city, in civvies. They were clearly up to no good. If this sort of thing had happened during our liberation struggle, they’d probably have found them necklaced several hours later. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/16 "2005-09-20T14:42:43Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Seriously, though, is everyone else in agreement that this was some normal mission that went wrong, and everyone’s cool with the original mission?. No. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were doing exactly what they seemed to be doing : posing as insurgents killing people. Not to justify the presence of the british/american troops but in order to fuel the population’s resentment against the insurgents. It isn’t an unheard of tactic, and western countries aren’t above doing this kind of things. Not that I believe it was the case. I’m equally willing to believe it was a case of major blunder during an otherwise perfectly respectable mission, or an assassination attempt disguised as an insurgent operation, or whatever else. In any case, using brute force to free the marines was perfectly unnacceptable. Actually, freeing them, even in a more diplomatic way, isn’t acceptable. If they were shooting at civilians and police officers, and in civilian attire to boot, they should have been prosecuted and tried, even if it was an accident rather than a deliberate action. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/17 "2005-09-20T14:43:53Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > Do you really think we obey our own rules? I don’t think I’ve ever been that naive. Well, not since the 70s ---
**Author:** ![BadBadger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@BadBadger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BadBadger)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/18 "2005-09-20T14:47:08Z")
The retrieval was “a last resort”, quoted in the Times but can’t be bothered to look for it. The problem was that the British forces felt that they could not leave the guys in the prison overnight. Crowds were getting far too big and a real risk that the prison would be overrun. It’ll be interesting to see how this develops. I’m avoiding the whole what were they doing thing for the mo. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/19 "2005-09-20T14:49:47Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > Not that I believe it was the case. I’m equally willing to believe it was a case of major blunder during an **otherwise perfectly respectable mission** , or an assassination attempt disguised as an insurgent operation, or whatever else. If it was perfectly repectable, theyd’ve worn their uniforms, IMHO. Or, in other words, undercover military ops have no place in a legal battlefield. They _will_ happen, but if caught, well, it _should_ be plausible deniable time, not “send in an armoured division” stupid time. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2005, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506/20 "2005-09-20T14:49:49Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > My GUESS here would be this: these two men were undercover, trying to infiltrate what the British fear are insurgents in the local militias. . I don’t buy this. I strongly doubt british soldiers could pass as arab insurgents. Just wearing the local attire might be enough to avoid being spotted in the streets, but certainly not to infiltrate a secret network. You’d need locals to do such a thing. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-troops-arrested-while-undercover-freed/322506.md?page=2)