Military Tells Bush of Troop Strains
March 26th, 2008 . by TexasFredWASHINGTON (AP) - Behind the Pentagon’s closed doors, U.S. military leaders told President Bush Wednesday they are worried about the Iraq war’s mounting strain on troops and their families. But they indicated they’d go along with a brief halt in pulling out troops this summer.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff did say senior commanders in Iraq should make more frequent assessments of security conditions, an idea that appeared aimed at increasing pressure for more rapid troop reductions.
The chiefs’ concern is that U.S. forces are being worn thin, compromising the Pentagon’s ability to handle crises elsewhere in the world.
In the war zone itself, two more American soldiers were killed Wednesday in separate attacks in Baghdad, raising the U.S. death toll to at least 4,003, according to an Associated Press count. Volleys of rockets also slammed into Baghdad’s Green Zone for the third day this week, and the U.S. Embassy said three Americans were seriously wounded. At least eight Iraqis were killed elsewhere in the capital by rounds that apparently fell short.
If past performance is any indicator, the Bush Bot sites will be posting how this story is likely nothing more than another lie designed to denigrate their god, The Bush, and his magnificent warfighting skills.
And those couldn’t have been real rockets hitting the Green Zone, it must have been explosive charges planted by the MSM because the news that’s been coming out of Iraq is just too good, and we all know that the MSM plants stories like this to demoralize the troops and to keep the Bush Bots screaming LIAR and TRAITOR as loud as they can when folks like me post these stories, not to mention, the reports of continues death and destruction show the public what is really going on in Iraq.
The Joint Chiefs are particularly concerned about Afghanistan and an increasingly active Taliban insurgency.
The United States has about 31,000 troops in Afghanistan and 156,000 in Iraq.
And IF we had a president that could actually put at least 2 cognizant thoughts together and not get tongue tied in the process, or commit some other obvious gaff, we might have actually stayed engaged IN Afghanistan and completed that job instead of traipsing off to Iraq on GW’s Big Adventure.
One of the leading advocates of Bush’s troop buildup last year, military historian Frederick Kagan of the American Enterprise Institute, said in an interview Wednesday that security conditions in Iraq, while better, are not good enough to justify any commitment to troop reductions beyond July.
“The military reality is that it’s virtually inconceivable that it will make sense to draw down below 15 brigades this year,” Kagan said.
Wait, what?? According to the Bush Bots that claim to be in the loop and have access to all sorts of glowing reports, and in some cases have made vague reference to being privy to classified information, everything is just rosy in Iraq and the world is a lovely place, everyone is ready for a group hug and a round of Kumbaya, so you just have to know that this can’t be an accurate story, the Bots have told us otherwise, our troops are being kept in Iraq to train the Iraqis and that’s all, the Surge was a glowing success and everything is just lovely, right??
Mullen and Gates have said repeatedly that in addition to reducing troop levels in Iraq, they want to shorten tour lengths for soldiers from 15 months to 12 months as soon as possible. A decision to do that is expected, perhaps shortly after Bush reaffirms that the number brigades in Iraq will be cut to 15 by July. The Army calculates that at that point it could drop tours to 12 months and still give units at least 12 months at home to recover, retrain and rearm before deploying again.
Former Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said it best, “You don’t go to war with the army you want, you go to war with the army you have” but what do you say about going to war when you don’t have to, and in the ensuing process, wearing your army down to a point where inefficiency is the order of the day and funding for that war is bleeding your citizens dry??
I also have to wonder, will the same people that blasted ME for saying things were NOT as advertised in Iraq do the same to Kagan for speaking the truth?? Will there be a cry that these people are traitors?? Are the DoD guys fake military officers?? Are the stories coming from the Pentagon coming from professional writers that are being paid by the word and only write in an effort to disrespect America??
Some people are so blinded by their desire to support The Bush that they just can’t look at any opposing opinion, they can’t stand it when their fantasy lover is shown as the lackluster, and less than desirable leader that he really is as we continue to be consumed by his Debacle in Iraq.
None of our leaders can agree on the best way to handle the Debacle in Iraq either, an all around consensus is needed but I seriously doubt that one will be reached, there are too many opinions and egos in play, and the most powerful, and possibly the most destructive ego is that of the president himself.
Ask yourself these questions and post your ideas and opinions in the comments section and tell me how, in your opinion, do we end the Debacle in Iraq, and do so with a victory for us and the Iraqi people, and end it while maintaining at least some honor. Do we send in more troops and just blast the hell out of anything that even remotely looks like an insurgent? Do we withdraw and leave Iraq on it’s own? Do we maintain a long term presence and carry on as we have, waiting, hoping and praying that the Iraqis will find the guts to stand on their own and stave off the insurgent hordes of radical Islam?
I have an idea that we’re going to be in Iraq for many years to come and we’ll spend countless more BILLIONS, perhaps even into the TRILLIONS of U.S. tax dollars on this ill-advised undertaking and we will likely lose many more fine young troops in this audacious adventure.
Full Story Here:
Military Tells Bush of Troop Strains
Trackback URL:
http://texasfred.net/archives/1040/trackback/
Authors Note: Bold and Italics in the original story were made by me to highlight certain words and/or phrases.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Fred, I have no doubt the “surge” is working..mostly because the NY Times and the rest of MSM only report when there is an attack on the green zone. The bloggers in and recently returned are reporting that the Iraqi government forces are starting to take over the fight..which is as it is supposed to be.
I see the problem as two fold..first is that military planners have always planned for “the last war” and the planning for this one was of course inadequate.
The second is that the force drawdown of the Clinton years has come back to haunt us. Many of us warned that the drawdown would leave us undermanned for an extended war or undermanned to fight on two fronts. Both has happened and no doubt we are undermanned.
It is surprising to me that morale is good as reflected by reenlistment quotas being met or exceeded and the number of young officers staying on being about the same as before the war. But I can also understand the troops being “frayed” …many are now on their fourth deployment to the sand box.
I have some hopes that the next prez will recognize the fact that we do need a bigger military force..about twice what we now have. Expensive? Not any more expensive than the give away programs we have in place to pay people not to work.
As I have said here before we have gotten ourselves between the proverbial rock and the hard place..we cannot afford to have Iran fill a political vacuum in Iraq because Iraq is sitting on billions of barrels of crude oil that the rest of the earth needs and Iran leaders are bonifide Nazis.
As far as having troops in Iraq for 100 years? Hell they have been in Germany and Japan for over sixty and Korea for over fifty. At least Iraq has something we need…and if the Iraqis can support a government that will do what is needed to protect the country as well as pay for the USA military presence then I will support same.
I will not support a continuation of the Bush policy of redeployment after redeployment without a specific plan to win now a plan to increase the size of the force. And until the Iraqi government or Bush decides to take out the radical mullahs there will be no winning the peace.
Fred, I do not think the US will be leaving Iraq anytime soon. By soon, I mean anytime in the next 4 to 5 decades. We are busy building PERMANENT military bases there right now… and have been for some time.
The US has long wanted a military base of it’s own in the region and apparently the US government is willing to pay whatever the price to secure those bases.
It IS about oil. The US is the guarantor of a free flow of oil to the world. Actually, I don’t know how that happened! (And I don’t like it!) But there it is.
To do the job, and keep the oil flowing, the US must have forward bases, that are our own bases, run by us, and not subject to the laws of the nation within which those bases are located. To do that, it is necessary to occupy the country within which those bases are located.
In answer to your question, I see no way the US can disengage in Iraq. If we leave, we will leave with our tails between our legs and being fired at as we board the choppers. (The chopper lifting off the roof of the US embassy in Vietnam is forever seered into my mind.)
I think the US has won it’s last war. We haven’t the determination, nor the guts, to fight and win anymore. We have adopted the European style of feeding the alligator in the hope that he will eat us last.
What a sad commmentary on the fall of a once great nation.
Best regards, my friend!
Longstreet
So, does it boil down to this Guy and Longstreet?? The Dems and Libs said Iraq was the Bush War for Oil, right from the very start, were they correct in that assumption??
Bush: Best way to honor our fallen is to complete the mission
Agreed……but let me ask you Mr. Bush, what is your plan?
Keep going as we’re going? If this is your plan then I disagree.
What is your plan Mr. Bush for total victory? I think that’s a fair question and I don’t think he has an answer.
That troubles me and it should really trouble our troops. Why should they continue to put their lifes on the line and die for a cause when the leader doesn’t seem to have a plan for Victory?
100 years of this non-sense? No!
Our troops in Germany, Japan and Korea aren’t being shot at and killed on a daily bases.
There was an insurgency in Germany after the end of WWII but for crying out loud, it was put down and as you say, our troops ARE NOT being shot at and killed, in ANY of the nations you mentioned…
Insurgents bombed a police station, claiming the lives of five Americans and thirty-nine civilians.
Loosely organized terrorist cells plant mines, snipe at American occupation forces and assassinate mayors and officials collaborating with the occupying forces struggling to rebuild the country.
A quagmire? It might sound like it, but no. This is post-war Germany, not present-day Iraq.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/rubin082005.htm
Unfortunately the article doesn’t tell how they put this insurgency down but the History Channel did. It was done with shear brutality. Only one chance to surrender was given and then when the troops went in, NO prisoners were taken. All insurgents were killed.
And that is exactly how Iraqi insurgency needs to be dealt with, mess with the bull and you get the horn, ALL of it…
sure it was about oil..not to enrich Bush and Cheny nor the oil companies but to insure a supply of oil from the Persian gulf. Look there are atrocities commited everyday..hell in Africa there are Muslims commiting genocide..but there is not a massive invasion..no oil nor anything else that the country needs.
As I stated earlier, we are between a rock and a hard place without the political balls to try to fight our way out of it..a cut and run right now will create a political vacuum that Iran is sure to fill and will give them bonifide control over the gulf shipping…which will endanger crude oil supllies from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait…as well as give them a trillion bucks to arm the Palestinians who are dead set on taking Israel
I don’t know if McCain can rally support from allies or not..maybe. Bush tried but couldn’t get much help mostly because of the way he went about it..more like a cowboy in a Saturday night bar than using logic. But the our European allies are not famous for having much logic..
But more importantly, can McCain rally the American people to do what has to be done..again maybe. The left wing is entrenched in the schools and government and the media…and the left wing sees that the fall of the USA as a major player will bring about their coveted one world government.
I just bought another 300 rounds of ammo…
300 more rounds is a good start…