--this is confusing to me; sounds like you're saying it's the "Americans'" lack of "skill" which caused this; but then you're saying you don't want them to get any better at it?

Back to the "irony" thread Peg!!!
--what, exactly, was ironic about McGrath's statement? And ironic in what way? Are you saying that Americans ARE good at imperialistic actions? or that their actions in Baghdad, in imperialistic terms, were successful?
I found it confusing (or perhaps just awkwardly worded); he seems to be pitting two incompatible ideas against one another.
And why are you speaking for him?


The British were not in Baghdad because the Americans wouldn't let them. Basra was the British zone alloted.
--what do you mean by "the Americans wouldn't let them?" Which Americans? soldiers? officers? politicians? And what does "wouldn't let them" mean, anyway? How was this preventive action carried out exactly?

I just want a straightforward answer, if it's not too much trouble. Please just don't tell me I don't understand because I don't get the irony...explain what you mean, so that I *can* understand it.