More Troops to be Sent to Iraq

Tedminator · #1 (**permalink**) 08-09-2005, 12:28 PM

Quote:

More Troops to be Sent to Iraq

Associated Press | August 09, 2005

WASHINGTON - Anticipating a new burst of insurgent violence, the Pentagon plans to expand the U.S. force in Iraq to improve security for a planned October referendum and a December election.

Although much public attention has been focused recently on the prospect of reducing U.S. forces next spring and summer, defense officials foresee the likelihood of first increasing troop levels.

Lawrence Di Rita, spokesman for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, noted Monday that troop levels were raised last January during Iraq's first elections, and then returned to the current level of about 138,000 several weeks later.

"It's perfectly plausible to assume we'll do the same thing for this election," he said, while stressing that no decisions had been made. Di Rita said he did not know how many extra troops might be needed during the referendum and election period.

Other officials have said that once the election period has passed and the troop total recedes to the 138,000 level, a further reduction in the range of 20,000 to 30,000 is possible next spring and summer. That could change, however, if the insurgency intensifies or an insufficient number of U.S.-trained Iraqi security forces prove themselves battle ready.

Last January the U.S. troop level rose as high as 160,000. This was accomplished mainly by overlapping some units arriving in Iraq to begin a one-year tour with those who were ending their yearlong tours. In at least one case an Army brigade was kept a little longer than its scheduled 12 months in Iraq, and Di Rita said he could not rule out this happening again this fall, although the intention is to avoid tours longer than 12 months.

more: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...080905,00.html

Looks like the Pentagon is getting a handle on things.. Troop rotations like this seems to be the norm for the next year or two. Hopefully incidents like last week's ambush will lessen.

gkjjehunter · #2 (**permalink**) 08-09-2005, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tedminator";p=&quot

Quote:

More Troops to be Sent to Iraq

Associated Press | August 09, 2005

WASHINGTON - Anticipating a new burst of insurgent violence, the Pentagon plans to expand the U.S. force in Iraq to improve security for a planned October referendum and a December election.

Although much public attention has been focused recently on the prospect of reducing U.S. forces next spring and summer, defense officials foresee the likelihood of first increasing troop levels.

Lawrence Di Rita, spokesman for Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, noted Monday that troop levels were raised last January during Iraq's first elections, and then returned to the current level of about 138,000 several weeks later.

"It's perfectly plausible to assume we'll do the same thing for this election," he said, while stressing that no decisions had been made. Di Rita said he did not know how many extra troops might be needed during the referendum and election period.

more: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...080905,00.html

Looks like the Pentagon is getting a handle on things.. Troop rotations like this seems to be the norm for the next year or two. Hopefully incidents like last week's ambush will lessen.

I see it as the cycle of death. They want the US out and think blowing up things will make them leave. the US sees things blown up, but cannot accept the thought of leaving, so instead think that bringing more will prevent incidents. So they have more US soldiers to blow up. We send em over, they blow em up. Thankfully it's not many and hopefully the effect will be that fewer people die. But it seems like and endless cycle that cannot have and end. I wish the oil would dry up so we could end this. I think the world has suffered greatly becuse of oil and fighting over it.

Sadistic-Savior · #3 (**permalink**) 08-09-2005, 01:50 PM

Quote:

I see it as the cycle of death. They want the US out and think blowing up things will make them leave. the US sees things blown up, but cannot accept the thought of leaving, so instead think that bringing more will prevent incidents. So they have more US soldiers to blow up. We send em over, they blow em up.

The alternative is worse. If they believe their attempts at intimidation will work, they have more incentive to use terrorism in the future, not less.

Quote:

But it seems like and endless cycle that cannot have and end.

Only if you think in the short term. Compared to previous wars (Vietnam, Korea, and WWi and WWII), the losses we have suffered in Iraq and Afghanistan are very very small. So there is reason to believe we are making progress.

Quote:

I wish the oil would dry up so we could end this.

It would not end because Oil is not the issue. Bosnia/Kosovo did not have Oil, yet we still acted there.

Neonimbo · #4 (**permalink**) 08-09-2005, 02:04 PM

14 Permanant Military Bases.
We aren't going anywhere.

Iraq is too good of a strategic place to have armed personnel. We will not give up another strong foothold in the Middle East.

Just another sphere of influence to add to the pot!

Sadistic-Savior · #5 (**permalink**) 08-09-2005, 02:07 PM

If you really think we are going to have 170,000 troops permanently stationed in Iraq you are dreaming.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode