Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush caved to pressure on troops

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:29 AM
Original message
Bush caved to pressure on troops

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20061222-121151-3086r.htm

Bush caved to pressure on troops
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

President Bush only acceded to a jump in the number of U.S. Army and Marine Corps ground troops after intense pressure from senior officers, active and retired, including the Joint Chiefs, defense sources said.

...

But the deal-clincher came when he traveled to the Pentagon and met with the six-member Joint Chiefs inside the super-secret "tank."
There, the commander in chief listened to a request for more combat forces from Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, and Gen. James T. Conway, the Marine commandant, said defense sources briefed on the meeting.

The Army, with a little more than 500,000 active soldiers, is pulling the brunt of the war on terror both in Afghanistan and Iraq. Army combat brigade teams only receive about a 13-month home-base stay before deploying again. What's more, the Army is fast wearing out its inventory of armored vehicles and weapons and needs replacements fast, Gen. Schoomaker has said.

The Marines, who patrol the al Qaeda-infested al Anbar province, west of Baghdad, send 1st and 2nd expeditionary forces on seven-month rotations. Marine officers have complained of insufficient troop numbers to control the Sunni Muslim province.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. You give me the surge troops and I will play ball (request military troop
buildup overall).


yup, it is game
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. And pure gold to defense contractors
Now all they have to do is recruit thousands more toothless rustics

To play the part of clay pigeons in the "shooting gallery"

LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. in the noisy background...the chug of oil wells--why we fight
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 06:51 AM
Response to Reply #8
19. Pumping out the "Black Gold = Texas Tea"
The Beverly Hillbillies revisited
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
3. Self delete
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 09:37 AM by MasonJar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. I wonder what Abizaid had to say. n/t
MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. From the sound of it ...
... "Goodbye"
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. LOL. n/t
:hi: MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
5. So what is the real story? I'd read the Joint Chiefs are opposed to
this 'surge'. How are we supposed to form an opinion if we keep getting mixed signals/stories?:banghead:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2658008
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #5
13. I think the Generals would to increase the total size of the military, but opposed to more troop in
Iraq :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Your shrug says it all. What's the real story? It's be nice if we
could trust a source, any source!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #13
18. The generals who are actually aware of the situation
are aware of the fact that the armed forces have not been able to meet current troop authorization levels and that consequently additional troop authorization levels are BULLSHIT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #5
15. this story in NOT about the surge--but is about the Build up Reg. Milartary
over time. Rummy is gone now----he is one who put in place the small, lean clean fighting machine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patricia92243 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
6. Tweety, Joe, et al were all saying that the Joint Chiefs said they did NOT want more soldiers. Whic...
Which is right - they either do or don't want more soldiers - can't be both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
7. propaganda to justify the escalation/expansion of the war nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
9. Why doesn't Bush just draft
the 100,000 private 'security' personal who are already in Iraq and then we might actually be able to get the security situation under control.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Good idea!
Not only get the extra troops but reduce the cost to the defence budget
by paying them standard US Army rates (+ barracks instead of hotels, etc.).
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonescrat Donating Member (227 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #11
21. And many if not most are former military anyway...
Not much additional training required...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
12. Commander AWOL = Clueless
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 09:56 AM by SpiralHawk
He usually only take advice from his expert, Dick 'Five Deferments" Cheney.

What a disgrace to have these two AWOL chumps leading America's armed forces.

A disgrace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
17. Hmmm... "THE WASHINGTON TIMES"
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 10:15 AM by Warren Stupidity
My bullshit meter is on high alert. This is about as credible as the staged grunts-want-more-grunts bullshit held for the new toady Gates in Baghdad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 07:39 AM
Response to Original message
20. The Moonie Times!?
Since when do we give any credence to reports from the Washington Times?

It is clear that shrub's talk about increasing the overall size of the military, something that all branches of the armed forces are in favor of (always have been) at the same time that he's looking for some (any) support for sending more kids into Iraq should make it clear..

They are muddying the water of discussion.

The Joint Chiefs do not support a "surge" (escalation in real language).. They would, however, like more personnel available for any and everything else.

Don't let them confuse you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
22. What a con job this is. And everyone will go along with it once again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC