Gen. Abizaid seeks more combat troops

[MonstaThrilla]

Financial Times

General John Abizaid, the commander of US forces in the Middle East, has asked the Pentagon for two additional combat brigades in response to the widespread rebellion in Iraq, reversing a year-long trend of reducing the US military presence there.

The request for new troops highlights how the week-long revolt is forcing the US to rethink its security strategy.

Pentagon officials had been aiming to hand over an increasing share of security to Iraqi units and cut troop levels to 115,000 after the recent rotation of US forces. There are currently 135,000 American troops in Iraq.

But Gen Abizaid on Monday acknowledged that US-trained Iraqi security forces - including police, civil defence units and the new Iraqi army - had performed poorly. "That was a great disappointment to us," he said.

Amid the growing concerns over the US strategy in Iraq, as well as criticism of the White House over its posture on terrorism before the September 11 attacks, President George W. Bush said on Monday he would hold a press conference Tuesday evening to answer the questions now inundating his administration.

Gen Abizaid declined to comment on how many troops there would be in the new deployment, saying the details are still being discussed with the joint staff, the senior military leadership.

But he said the new forces he sought would have a "strong mobile combat arms capability" amounting to "two brigades of combat power, if not more".

A US army brigade is made up of 3,000 to 5,000 soldiers.

 

[charliebrown]

It is heartbreaking to see the families of American soldiers mourn their loved ones who were killed over there...

I just keep wondering - Is this America's war? Or is this just George Bush's war? What the hell is going on?

 

[girlgeek]

I just keep wondering - Is this America's war? Or is this just George Bush's war? What the hell is going on?

This had better be America's war, 'cause our people are dying under OUR flag. So, okay, the intelligence wasn't nearly up to snuff, that can't be disputed. But the fact remains, Saddam and his psycho sons have not killed one single person in quite some time, and won't be killing anyone in the future. How many lives have been saved by ending their reign of terror? Not having lived under it, it would be easy to say that doesn't matter.

After Clinton, I can see why a person would think the worst of any President. "Depends on what the definition of the word 'is' is." How dumb are we?

We are each responsible for educating ourselves. Ignorance is a choice, and as an American, you're free to make it. But pleeeease, if you like ignorance, don't vote.

 

[PainTrain]

Hell yeah we need more people there, I find it irresponsible to be spreading the military so thin in Iraq. The army was just told they may be facing an extension past the one year mark on their deployments, and I find that rediculous. Sure we want everyone to come home safely, but we absolutely cannot leave in any significant measure until we get a stronger coalition presence in there. Sadly, due to the way we pissed on everybody's shoes to invade Iraq in the manner we chose to that may be easier said than done. In the meantime, for the sake of our guys over there, we need more people. Period.

 

[DaFinn]

Originally posted by: girlgeek

I just keep wondering - Is this America's war? Or is this just George Bush's war? What the hell is going on?

This had better be America's war, 'cause our people are dying under OUR flag. So, okay, the intelligence wasn't nearly up to snuff, that can't be disputed. But the fact remains, Saddam and his psycho sons have not killed one single person in quite some time, and won't be killing anyone in the future. How many lives have been saved by ending their reign of terror? Not having lived under it, it would be easy to say that doesn't matter.

After Clinton, I can see why a person would think the worst of any President. "Depends on what the definition of the word 'is' is." How dumb are we?

We are each responsible for educating ourselves. Ignorance is a choice, and as an American, you're free to make it. But pleeeease, if you like ignorance, don't vote.

Saddams death count:
~???

Bush death count after invasion:
~??? ??? Iraqis and counting...

Yup, things are MUCH better now...

 

[girlgeek]

Where did you get those figures? I'd like some more education.

Thanx.

 

[DaFinn]

Originally posted by: girlgeek
Where did you get those figures? I'd like some more education.

Thanx.

They, and source were mentioned in another thread... trying to find it now.

 

[DaFinn]

Originally posted by: DaFinn

Originally posted by: girlgeek

I just keep wondering - Is this America's war? Or is this just George Bush's war? What the hell is going on?

This had better be America's war, 'cause our people are dying under OUR flag. So, okay, the intelligence wasn't nearly up to snuff, that can't be disputed. But the fact remains, Saddam and his psycho sons have not killed one single person in quite some time, and won't be killing anyone in the future. How many lives have been saved by ending their reign of terror? Not having lived under it, it would be easy to say that doesn't matter.

After Clinton, I can see why a person would think the worst of any President. "Depends on what the definition of the word 'is' is." How dumb are we?

We are each responsible for educating ourselves. Ignorance is a choice, and as an American, you're free to make it. But pleeeease, if you like ignorance, don't vote.

EDIT:

can't find source for numbers, so I'll remove them for now. Point was, US has caused a LOT more deaths in Iraq already, than Saddam ever did...
Maybe someone can find info...

Saddams death count:
~???

Bush death count after invasion:
~???????????

Yup, things are MUCH better now...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: girlgeek

I just keep wondering - Is this America's war? Or is this just George Bush's war? What the hell is going on?

This had better be America's war, 'cause our people are dying under OUR flag. So, okay, the intelligence wasn't nearly up to snuff, that can't be disputed. But the fact remains, Saddam and his psycho sons have not killed one single person in quite some time, and won't be killing anyone in the future. How many lives have been saved by ending their reign of terror? Not having lived under it, it would be easy to say that doesn't matter.

After Clinton, I can see why a person would think the worst of any President. "Depends on what the definition of the word 'is' is." How dumb are we?

We are each responsible for educating ourselves. Ignorance is a choice, and as an American, you're free to make it. But pleeeease, if you like ignorance, don't vote.

So you are going to refrain from voting this year?

 

[girlgeek]

Here are a couple of things I found via Google:

iraqbodycount.net/ - reports between 8 and 11 thousand civilians killed since the beginning of the war in Iraq
mykeru.com/bodycount.html - similar numbers to above
iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/27_saddam.html - reports approx 1.1 million killed by Saddam and co.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: girlgeek
Here are a couple of things I found via Google:

iraqbodycount.net/ - reports between 8 and 11 thousand civilians killed since the beginning of the war in Iraq
mykeru.com/bodycount.html - similar numbers to above
iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/27_saddam.html - reports approx 1.1 million killed by Saddam and co.

Too bad the Dub didn't use the "Save the Iraqi People" as his argument for invading Iraq. At least he wouldn't have been accused of using the terror, sorrow and shock of 9/11 to deceive the American Public into supporting his excellent adventure into Iraq. Of course if he hadn't it's very likely he wouldn't have gotten the American Public's support for his excellent adventure there.

 

[girlgeek]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: girlgeek
Here are a couple of things I found via Google:

iraqbodycount.net/ - reports between 8 and 11 thousand civilians killed since the beginning of the war in Iraq
mykeru.com/bodycount.html - similar numbers to above
iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/27_saddam.html - reports approx 1.1 million killed by Saddam and co.

Too bad the Dub didn't use the "Save the Iraqi People" as his argument for invading Iraq. At least he wouldn't have been accused of using the terror, sorrow and shock of 9/11 to deceive the American Public into supporting his excellent adventure into Iraq. Of course if he hadn't it's very likely he wouldn't have gotten the American Public's support for his excellent adventure there.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: girlgeek

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: girlgeek
Here are a couple of things I found via Google:

iraqbodycount.net/ - reports between 8 and 11 thousand civilians killed since the beginning of the war in Iraq
mykeru.com/bodycount.html - similar numbers to above
iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/27_saddam.html - reports approx 1.1 million killed by Saddam and co.

Too bad the Dub didn't use the "Save the Iraqi People" as his argument for invading Iraq. At least he wouldn't have been accused of using the terror, sorrow and shock of 9/11 to deceive the American Public into supporting his excellent adventure into Iraq. Of course if he hadn't it's very likely he wouldn't have gotten the American Public's support for his excellent adventure there.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Yep blind trust in ones leader can be disaterous.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: girlgeek
Here are a couple of things I found via Google:

iraqbodycount.net/ - reports between 8 and 11 thousand civilians killed since the beginning of the war in Iraq
mykeru.com/bodycount.html - similar numbers to above
iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/27_saddam.html - reports approx 1.1 million killed by Saddam and co.

Too bad the Dub didn't use the "Save the Iraqi People" as his argument for invading Iraq. At least he wouldn't have been accused of using the terror, sorrow and shock of 9/11 to deceive the American Public into supporting his excellent adventure into Iraq. Of course if he hadn't it's very likely he wouldn't have gotten the American Public's support for his excellent adventure there.

It was one of many reasons cited. It seems his oppenents keep forgetting that.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
Financial Times

General John Abizaid, the commander of US forces in the Middle East, has asked the Pentagon for two additional combat brigades in response to the widespread rebellion in Iraq, reversing a year-long trend of reducing the US military presence there.

The request for new troops highlights how the week-long revolt is forcing the US to rethink its security strategy.

Pentagon officials had been aiming to hand over an increasing share of security to Iraqi units and cut troop levels to 115,000 after the recent rotation of US forces. There are currently 135,000 American troops in Iraq.

But Gen Abizaid on Monday acknowledged that US-trained Iraqi security forces - including police, civil defence units and the new Iraqi army - had performed poorly. "That was a great disappointment to us," he said.

Amid the growing concerns over the US strategy in Iraq, as well as criticism of the White House over its posture on terrorism before the September 11 attacks, President George W. Bush said on Monday he would hold a press conference Tuesday evening to answer the questions now inundating his administration.

Gen Abizaid declined to comment on how many troops there would be in the new deployment, saying the details are still being discussed with the joint staff, the senior military leadership.

But he said the new forces he sought would have a "strong mobile combat arms capability" amounting to "two brigades of combat power, if not more".

A US army brigade is made up of 3,000 to 5,000 soldiers.

Due to the current troop rotations, those extra forces for the most are already there.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: girlgeek
Here are a couple of things I found via Google:

iraqbodycount.net/ - reports between 8 and 11 thousand civilians killed since the beginning of the war in Iraq
mykeru.com/bodycount.html - similar numbers to above
iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/27_saddam.html - reports approx 1.1 million killed by Saddam and co.

Too bad the Dub didn't use the "Save the Iraqi People" as his argument for invading Iraq. At least he wouldn't have been accused of using the terror, sorrow and shock of 9/11 to deceive the American Public into supporting his excellent adventure into Iraq. Of course if he hadn't it's very likely he wouldn't have gotten the American Public's support for his excellent adventure there.

It was one of many reasons cited. It seems his oppenents keep forgetting that.

It was almost an aside. Without the BS about the vast quantities of WMDs, alleged ties with Al Qaeda and an alleged advanced Nuclear Weapons Program the American People would have not supported the invasion and would have insisted that we concentrate on the War against Terrorism istead of creating more terrorist by the Dub's myopic and ill conceived invasion and occupation of Iraq!

 

[girlgeek]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: girlgeek
Here are a couple of things I found via Google:

iraqbodycount.net/ - reports between 8 and 11 thousand civilians killed since the beginning of the war in Iraq
mykeru.com/bodycount.html - similar numbers to above
iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/27_saddam.html - reports approx 1.1 million killed by Saddam and co.

Too bad the Dub didn't use the "Save the Iraqi People" as his argument for invading Iraq. At least he wouldn't have been accused of using the terror, sorrow and shock of 9/11 to deceive the American Public into supporting his excellent adventure into Iraq. Of course if he hadn't it's very likely he wouldn't have gotten the American Public's support for his excellent adventure there.

It was one of many reasons cited. It seems his oppenents keep forgetting that.

It was almost an aside. Without the BS about the vast quantities of WMDs, alleged ties with Al Qaeda and an alleged advanced Nuclear Weapons Program the American People would have not supported the invasion and would have insisted that we concentrate on the War against Terrorism istead of creating more terrorist by the Dub's myopic and ill conceived invasion and occupation of Iraq!

I wish our intelligence had been better. We were obviously lied to by people who wanted us to come in and depose Hussein. If I was in their shoes, I'd have lied my ass off, too.

It's easy to sit over here, BSing about how cool my rig is and politicians are fricking liars and should I pay $600 more in taxes next year, while people over there were, are suffering or dying for no other reason than that some a-holes get their jollies inflicting torture. It's too bad that we can sit on this side of the world, and say that helping people out isn't a good enough reason to get in there and put a stop to it.

It doesn't matter why we went in. It was and is the right thing to do, unless the screaming meemies keep us from getting the job done. So it won't be perfect, we're not gonna get every single thing we want. Life ain't like that for normal people.

 

[InfectedMushroom]

Originally posted by: girlgeek
Here are a couple of things I found via Google:

iraqbodycount.net/ - reports between 8 and 11 thousand civilians killed since the beginning of the war in Iraq
mykeru.com/bodycount.html - similar numbers to above
iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/ajan/27_saddam.html - reports approx 1.1 million killed by Saddam and co.

well, sadam had 30 years to kill 1.1 million. bush excelent adventure has been going on for 1 year. let's give him more time to "pacify" those iraqis as they are putting it.

and who the hell supported and put sadam in power?

what exactly is the US doing there now? installing another puppet goverment that will turn into a dictatorship. but hey, at least it's favorable to us, right?