U.S. Planning Troop Buildup in Gulf After Exit From Iraq

The New York Times ^ | October 30th, 2011 | Thom Shanker

[KantianBurke]

MacDILL AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. — The Obama administration plans to bolster the American military presence in the Persian Gulf after it withdraws the remaining troops from Iraq this year, according to officials and diplomats. That repositioning could include new combat forces in Kuwait able to respond to a collapse of security in Iraq or a military confrontation with Iran.

[KantianBurke]

We need oil. The Gulf States need protection from the Iranians. I just hope we're not going to be footing the bill to keep our troops over there.

[NCDave]

I was hoping the Gulf of Mexico :(

[Perdogg]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2799891/posts

[KantianBurke]

I searched prior to posting and no results popped up.

[airborne]

That repositioning could include new combat forces in Kuwait able to respond to a collapse of security in Iraq or a military confrontation with Iran.

Or give Iran a large target to hit if (when) they start a war with Israel.

[silverleaf]

Any “build up” in the “Persian Gulf” is just going to become the bullseye as a new target

Now a team of foreign policy amateurs and clueless lberals, want to establishing a fortress in the heart of “Injun
country”, constrain our troops to be “respectful” to islam by suppressing our own values, and will be “hamstrung” on what they are “permitted” to do by the fears and arrogance of the host government

Did they mention Kuwait will be the next huge money pit to build endless “infrastructure”??? What happens when the emir faces his own arab spring?

Yeah we need oil and we have oil- here in North America

[onedoug]

Setting them to hit Israel is more likely of barry.

[KantianBurke]

We also have NIMBYs.

[DJ MacWoW]

Click The Pic

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible: avoiding occasions of expence by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it; avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expence, but by vigorous exertions in time of Peace to discharge the Debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burthen which we ourselves ought to bear.
George Washington

[DManA]

Right. Build up troops in the gulf and slash the defense budget.

Just shows you what a fraud this B.S. about cutting the defense budget is. It’s all a Kabuki dance to give republicans political cover to raise taxes.

[independent in tx]

They are also trying to push a Syrian war. Looks like they are desperate to try and spend the huge defense budget.

[Iscool]

Or, to help prevent Israeli military hardware from reaching Iran...

[blueunicorn6]

Harder to vote over there, it seems.

[Texas Fossil]

Harder to vote over there, it seems.

Yep. And by keeping them in the military and out of the country he will not add to his unemployment figures. It is all about making Obozo look better for 2012. And of course propping up his true masters in Saudi Arabia.

[Amerikan_Samurai]

All these wars in the middle east, and yet we’re still getting raped by paying $4.00 for gas.

[Shadow44]

All of the expenses could be avoided if the US actually was serious about regime change in Iran. There’s plenty of discontents who aren’t Islamists, but the government gives them no support at all.

For some perverse reason, the West wants to keep the mullahs in power.

[Sola Veritas]

“We need oil. The Gulf States need protection from the Iranians. I just hope we’re not going to be footing the bill to keep our troops over there.”

It is this simple....OUR interests need protection from the Iranians. IF we do not maintain a credible quick reaction force in the region, we invite Iranian interference in Iraq and elsewhere. This is NOT coming from Mr. Obama....it is coming from military planners that can read a map and intelligence indicators. It is NOT in Mr. Obama’s interest to maintain forces there, but it is for our nation’s security.

Besides, I have only read that they are planning of keeping a Brigade Combat Team (BCT) in Kuwait and some more ships in the Gulf. That really isn’t that large of a force. To provide a trully credible threat to Iraq, the force needs to be much larger. I would prefere to see 3 BCTs with supporting Aviation, Artillery, and Logistics brigades....basically a Division. I would disperse them throughout Kuwait and possible Saudi Arabia so a single nuclear strike could not take out the entire force. Yes, it would be expensive...just as maintaining an occupation army in Germany for so many years was. Freedom isn’t free on many levels...to include one’s pocketbook.

[KantianBurke]

"And of course propping up his true masters in Saudi Arabia."

Whose? His?

[Brad from Tennessee]

[Any “build up” in the “Persian Gulf” is just going to become the bullseye as a new target. . .]

Absolutely. The true rationale is protecting the oil of the Gulf states and their rulers. Physicist Edward Teller warned Washington in 1972 that without the large-scale development of nuclear power the U.S. would be forced to invade the Middle East within 20 years to seize control of the oil.

[Stymee]

Must see: Early Muslim Extremists In American History

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=UlT1IXSv830#!