The United States dispatches 15,000 troops to Kuwait

[Cali_Democrat]

US stations 15,000 troops in Kuwait
Published: 13 January, 2012, 22:25

The United States is not at war with Iran yet, but just in case,the Pentagon says they want to be prepared. To do so, the Department of Defense has dispatched 15,000 troops to the neighboring nation of Kuwait.

Gen. James Mattis, the Marine Corps head that rules over the US Central Command, won approval late last year from the White House to deploy the massive surge to the tiny West Asian country Kuwait, which is separated from Iran by only a narrow span of the Persian Gulf.

The latest deployment, which was ushered in without much presentation to the public, adds a huge number of troops aligned with America’s arsenal that are now surrounding Iran on literally every front. In late 2011, the US equipped neighboring United Arab Emirates with advanced weaponry created to disrupt underground nuclear operations. In adjacent Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, American military presence has long been all but enormous.

<...>

In calling for the latest surge to Kuwait, Gen.Mattis said the deployment was necessary to keep Iran in check and keep America prepared for any other threats in the area. It comes only weeks after the last American troops vacated nearby Iraq, where the US still in actuality has an advance presence — the American embassy in Baghdad employs thousands of armed military contractors.

http://rt.com/usa/news/us-troops-kuwait-iran-741/

[Xipe Totec]

1. I'm Shocked! SHOCKED!!! nt

[Mojorabbit]

2. Is this the Russian news channel?

Have any other sites picked this up? Very unsettling.

[neverforget]

4. Here it is in the SF Chronicle

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/01/12/MNR11MOPB2.DTL

The Pentagon has quietly shifted combat troops and warships to the Middle East after the top American commander in the region warned that he needed additional forces to deal with Iran and other potential threats, U.S. officials said.

Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, who heads U.S. Central Command, won White House approval for the deployments late last year after talks with the government in Baghdad broke down over keeping U.S. troops in Iraq, but the extent of the Pentagon moves is only now becoming clear.

Officials said the deployments are not meant to suggest a buildup to war, but rather are intended as a quick-reaction and contingency force in case a military crisis erupts in the standoff with Tehran over its suspected nuclear weapons program.

The Pentagon has stationed nearly 15,000 troops in Kuwait, adding to a small contingent already there. The new units include two Army infantry brigades and a helicopter unit - a substantial increase in combat power after nearly a decade in which Kuwait chiefly served as a staging area for supplies and personnel heading to Iraq.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/01/12/MNR11MOPB2.DTL#ixzz1jflrNC5G

[Mojorabbit]

7. Thanks. I hope it is nothing and we are not getting ready for a big war. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Actually this is preparation for two things

Syria and Iran.

[Cali_Democrat]

5. From the Army Times:

They're calling it a "response force"

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2012/01/army-kuwait-mobile-response-force-011412w/

[Mojorabbit]

8. Thanks! nt

[ProSense]

14. The

article doesn't say anything about troops being dispatched to Kuwait:

In November, after the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq was announced and officials were trying to determine whether some forces should remain in the region, the defense minister for Kuwait was quoted as saying the Arab state would only be used as a transit point for troops.

A military official told Army Times that it’s likely the U.S. will have a “continued presence in Kuwait, similar to before 2003.”

Reuters:

<...>

The number of U.S. forces in Kuwait has grown to about 15,000 in recent weeks, including two combat brigades, as troops have withdrawn from Iraq following the end of the war there.

Navy Captain John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said he was not aware of any decision to permanently increase the number of troops based in Kuwait.

The U.S. force there has expanded temporarily because a brigade deployed to Iraq at the end of the war had been shifted to Kuwait to finish its deployment, he said.

Force numbers in any given location shift regularly depending on needs, Kirby said.

"I'm not aware of any plus-up that's been ordered into Kuwait. And I don't think the numbers would bear out that there is, in fact, a huge plus-up in Kuwait," he told reporters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/13/us-usa-defense-gulf-idUSTRE80C27L20120113

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. The Army Times?

Wow!

[treestar]

28. Thanks for the facts

Another attempt to spin ordinary day to day doings as some great drama proving the Obama Administration is the EVIL.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

17. The Army Times?

There may be a conflict of interest...

[Robb]

27. As opposed to our unbiased observers over at RT.

I personally shall wait to hear what PressTV has to say before passing judgment.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

31. Me, on the other hand, will wait until I see it with my own eyes.

[orpupilofnature57]

3. How much did the United Arab Emirates pay,,

the United States of America?

[marmar]

6. It's like a rerun of a bad horror flick.

nt

[Fire Walk With Me]

9. So long as we remember not to go alone down into the unlit basement, we'll be okay.

No, we won't. Damn.

[barbtries]

10. good gawd i hate this.

why?! why can't we do PEACE?!

[Cali_Democrat]

15. Because apparently peace just isn't that profitable for the Military Industrial Complex.

At the end of the day, I'm a firm believer this is about enriching certain interests to the detriment of global security.

[barbtries]

18. me too.

it took a while, maybe until around 2005 to 2008. for some time now i am absolutely convinced that the incessant war is only to enrich powerful people who are already obscenely wealthy.
once upon a time i thought it was to spread freedom. wow those days are so long gone it's like they never happened at all. guess i grew up.

[ronnie624]

29. I think so too.

I think there is also a lot of fear of the U.S. losing the lion's share of power and influence in the world. Racism and other forms of bigotry are no doubt a part of the mix.

There's also the ideologues, like Newt Gingrich and other wingnuts, who are convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the U.S. has a moral imperative to force its will on other peoples. I think a good portion of the U.S. population, both on the right and what's considered the American 'left' have been imbued with this attitude through exposure to propaganda, which is why it is so easy to manufacture consent for U.S. aggression.

[kenny blankenship]

11. As most sentient observers agree, the winner of the Iraq War was Iran

Which wasn't even fighting.

Hence our real need to take down the Iranian state - and any pretext will suffice. Otherwise all our dead shall have died in vain, taking with them all the war effort's sunk dollar costs in vain, the opportunity costs in vain, our whole ME strategery in vain, etc. Iraq, which we have destroyed, was the west's bulwark against expanding Iranian influence regionally. Now Iraq - the surviving scraps of it - hates us, and forces which are naturally allied to Iran have ascendancy there.

Death to Iran!
Death to Iran!
Death to Iran!

Their capital offense was that they failed to stop us from making a horrible mistake in Iraq, but at this point in the distention and necropsy of the Empire, do our leaders even need to fake a reason?

(Oh but we ended the Iraq War, because it was stupid - riiiiight. The War rolls on to neighboring fronts, and nothing has been learned.)

[marasinghe]

19. true. and a couple more factors to the equation, as well.

still existent, buried in the halls of military & govt., are numbers of egotistical scum, who won't be happy & sated until they've taken down & massacred hordes of Iranians - for the perceived slur on the great white hope, the USA, for the US embassy hostage crisis; even if the US brought it on themselves by having the legitimately elected president of Iran assassinated, & replaced with the puppet who sat on the peacock throne. this desire propelled by an arrogance similar to that which ordained Saddam Hussein should be destroyed, for planning to have the guy he served & was betrayed by - George Walker Bush - assassinated.

then, there's all that glorious oil pooled under Iranian sand, which God manifestly destined for the US & its minions to have; & which destiny, the Iranians have so far thwarted twice. Refer again: the Iraqi adventure.

[IDemo]

13. So much for the "no boots on the ground" rhetoric

I loathe the smell of regime change in the morning. Or the evening.

[Arctic Dave]

20. LOL!

Obama would never shuffle the troops around! WE ARE LEAVING!

Wait...what?

Disregard my last statements.

[sarcasmo]

21. Spring time, get ready for a spring attack.

[BlueIris]

22. Awful. Truly obscene and just WRONG.

We cannot afford a war with Iran in any sense. I have no idea what the government is thinking.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. Not to worry. They're just there to freshen up their tans...like last time.

[bvar22]

24. The Beat Goes On.

Can you hear The Drums?

I can.

Something Evil This Way Comes.



You will know them by their WORKS.

[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Hell Hath No Fury]

25. And the beat goes on, indeed.

Covert war under a Democrat is SOOO much better, isn't it?

[xchrom]

26. $$$ how much is this 'not war' 'just in case' stand by build up costing? nt

[dreamnightwind]

30. McCain is singing his fav Beach Boys tune again

Bomb bomb bomb
Bomb bomb Iran

I'm pretty sure it echos through the remains of his mind while he sleeps.

I don't know what this troop movement is about, I just know I don't like it.