Tough choice:
Or....
Posted on 09/11/2006 9:23:52 PM PDT by pissant
We are at a crucial moment in Iraq. Supporters of the war, like us, have in the past differed over tactics. But at this urgent pass, there can be no doubt that we need to stop the downward slide in Iraq by securing Baghdad.
There is no mystery as to what can make the crucial difference in the battle of Baghdad: American troops. A few thousand U.S. troops have already been transferred to Baghdad from elsewhere in Iraq. Where more U.S. troops have been deployed, the situation has gotten better. Those neighborhoods intensively patrolled by Americans are safer and more secure. But it is by no means clear that overall troop numbers in Baghdad are enough to do the job. And it is clear that stripping troops from other fronts risks progress elsewhere in the country.
The bottom line is this: More U.S. troops in Iraq would improve our chances of winning a decisive battle at a decisive moment. This means the ability to succeed in Iraq is, to some significant degree, within our control. The president should therefore order a substantial surge in overall troop levels in Iraq, with the additional forces focused on securing Baghdad.
There is now no good argument for not sending more troops. The administration often says that it doesn't want to foster Iraqi dependency. This is a legitimate concern, but it is a second-order and long-term one. Iraq is a young democracy and a weak state facing a vicious insurgency and sectarian violence. The Iraqis are going to be dependent on us for some time. We can worry about weaning Iraq from reliance on our forces after the security crisis in Baghdad has passed.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Tough choice:
Or....
Why is this a bad idea?
I would like to know from those FReepers who have some military background. Is this a good or a bad idea?
We do need more US troops - in Tehran.
America is truly an amazen place. Every single newscritter seems to be a General too!
Not needed. Kristol has been barking up the same tree for years, while on his knees in front of John psycho McCain. Lowry is going along for the ride as his boyfriend, most likely.
Did you watch Rummy, Pace's and Abazaid's testimony in front of the Senate Panel last month. They said it would do more harm than good, and if they did not think that, they have full authority to bring in more. BTW, the numbers have creeped up in recent months. At the levels they wanted.
And FWIW, we are cleaning the streets of Baghdad just fine, with the Iraqi army's assistance. This Mf'n "we are losing...quagmire, civil war on the horizon" is getting old. I don't care if it comes from the freepers whith their heads up their asses and not paying attention or from the MSM itself.
AMEN. Soon hopefully.
Funny. These limpwrists know better than the real generals, huh.
I don't think it's a bad idea, but I dont think its the best idea...
The best idea is to have MORE TRAINED IRAQI TROOPS DOING THE JOB. We shouldnt be doing the job that the Iraqis should do.
They have 277,000 Iraqi secruity forces. If its not enough, train more.
Thanks for the response. I have to say, as someone with no military experience, when I hear about troop strength increases, I think "Let me get this straight--the Democrats are screaming because the Republicans AREN'T sending more of 'our boys' to fight?" Seems to me that if Bush wanted more, he'd send them, and there would be support for that across the board if he said it would help speed up the process.
look:
it took us over 20 years to secure berlin from the nazis and and commies and they are still there.
whats the problem if it takes us a few more years to clear baghdad?
the most important thing is that when we fight them there we dont fight them here.
we need to trust our leaders now so the dummiecrats dont take over and let the muslims take us over
These guys (term used loosely) are GOPers screaming for more troops. The Dims want us out of there to collpse the tremendous work done by our warriors, which will give Bush a real legacy.
No problem. Idiots like Lowry think they know how to pacify a insurgency. Thye have no clue.
Sure, but I was thinking about various columnists who have called for more troops, too.
I think the GOPers you talk about are the ones who think you can just blow everything up and then the problem's solved. More troops = Success doesn't seem like too sophisticated a philosophy of war. It's not the same as Powell's "overwhelming strength," which worked during the actual invasion.
We won the damn war. Now it's up to the generals and Bush to figure out the best way to cripple the inusrgency. And if you have been reading up on it over the last months, we are proving to be very good at it.
Lowry, Kristol, Ricks, Burn, Peters or whatever journalist is free to give his opinion, and I'm free to call them idiots, when warranted.
double ping
Often wondered why a war monger like Bush wasn`t sending more troops.
If you really buy that, Im surprised you dont own the Brooklyn Bridge or even more surprised that you havent bought liberal ideology foot, line, and sinker. They believe whatever their bosses tell them.
We need to get our troops out of the country, and have the Iraqi troops and police hold their country together.
I have no doubt we could put a half-million troops on the ground and there would be no violence -- until we tried to leave. We can't disarm the insurgents if we are too strong, they will just hide. Eventually we need to draw down, and when we reach the point we are at now, the insurgents would just come back
At least, that's an argument I could make. If Bush tomorrow announced another 50,000 troops, I wouldn't object to that either. I figure there are some really smart people who know a lot more than I do about the situation, and I trust Bush to listen to them and do the right thing.
If Kristol was in the Navy. he'd be a Rear Admiral.
But they can spell. Instead of calling them idiots how about you General Pissant tell us why they are wrong, other than Rummy, never made a mistake, says we dont need them.
Bingo
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.