Bush could double (combat force in Iraq) by Christmas

[Newsjock]

Source: Hearst Newspapers

The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year, an analysis of Pentagon deployment orders showed Monday.

The little-noticed second surge, designed to reinforce U.S. troops in Iraq, is being executed by sending more combat brigades and extending tours of duty for troops already there.

The actions could boost the number of combat soldiers from 52,500 in early January to as many as 98,000 by the end of this year if the Pentagon overlaps arriving and departing combat brigades.

Separately, when additional support troops are included in this second troop increase, the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq could increase from 162,000 now to more than 200,000 -- a record-high number -- by the end of the year.

... "It doesn't surprise me that they're not talking about it," said retired Army Maj. Gen. William Nash, a former U.S. commander of NATO troops in Bosnia, referring to the Bush administration. "I think they would be very happy not to have any more attention paid to this."

Read more: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/05/22/MNG7QPV65N1.DTL

---

Tuesday front page of the SF Chronicle

[spotbird]

1. Where in the name of God

will these troops come from?

NPR had a story this am about Air Force troops forced into ground combat. There isn't going to be anything left before long.

[Tesha]

24. We're scraping barrel-bottoms all around the world...

> Where in the name of God will these troops come from?

We're scraping barrel-bottoms all around the world! ;)

Seriously, we have lots of troops, so long as you don't
care about any of our on-going missions or future pre-
paredness. Just pull the troops off of all of the other
missions around the world and send them into the Iraqi
meat grinder for 15 months (or 18 months, or 24 months,
or whatever General Scheisskopf decides he can get away
with next).

In another thread, someone describes how we're now re-
training our Air Force people to go fight on the ground
in Iraq.

Tesha

[truth2power]

39. "General Scheisskopf" Bwa hahaha...

Shithead! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[coalition_unwilling]

47. I believe that is an allusion to Joseph Heller's "Catch 22" altho I

can't remember if the Scheisskopf in "Catch 22" was a general or a colonel. Same principle, though (and sets up some extreme hilarity in the novel).

[truth2power]

55. Catch 22...I loved that book. Long time ago. I don't remember

Scheisskopf. Remember Major Major, tho'. Didn't he stay in his office and climb out the window when people came to see him?

[coalition_unwilling]

64. You could only see Major Major Major Major when he was out, one

of the on-going comic riffs in the novel. (The film version features Bob Newhart in the role, a hilarious performance that has gained Newhart some well-deserved immortality.)

[sanskritwarrior]

63. I love DU I really do, but sometimes people don't understand the troops numbers game

My brigade of 4,000 is deploying in December, part of this "2nd surge".........So we need 38,000 more to get to the 200K mark.

So my Brigade is 4,000

2nd Stryker Cav Regiment, a new American unit in Germany is 4,000 more
1st Brigade 4th ID 4,000 mord
a Brigade from 10th Mountain is 4,000 more all under the command of the 1st Armored Division based on the modularity concept.........

4 National Guard Brigades, 39th Infantry Brigade, 45th Infantry Brigade, 76th Infantry Brigade and 53rd Infantry Brigade under the command of an unnamed NG Division command post so there are 16,000 more add them to the 16,000 in our division chalk and you get 32,000 of the 38,000 you need

Add in one Combat Aviation Brigade and 2 Sustainment Brigades, one from Hawaii and one from Fort Campbell and you get over 38,000.......BTW I haven't even added the 3 Brigades from the 101st and another American Brigade from Germany under the command of 4th ID (modular design) add in all those boys and girls and you have closer to 60,000 more of us going in from now until the end of the year.

Let alone that another 200,000 soldiers (Army alone) are not deployed. The current Army size is just over 512,000, 160K in Iraq now, 60K getting ready for Iraq, 20K in Afghanistan, 20K in Korea, that is 260,000 troops (Army only) leaving 250,000 left, now of that 250K left about 40-80K are not available for deployment as they are strategic, non deployable due to mission, etc...........leaving roughly 170K-200K troops for any emergencies that occur.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying "we have plenty of troops YAAY WAR" but people don't understand the configuration changes we have undergone. This course of action is wrong and will get more of us killed, but to say the cupboard is bare is to not understand the way the Army is put together.

Bottom line when all troops are in country there are 6 Army Combat Brigades ready for duty that are not recovering from Iraq and 4 more that are brand new Brigades that will be on-line within 90 days.

When we invaded Iraq in 2003 we only took 8 Army Combat Brigades into the country, there were the 3 Brigades from 3rd ID, the 3 Brigades from 101st and one Brigade from 82nd Airborne and the 173rd Airborne in Italy. 4ID and 1st Armored did not show up until well after Baghdad had fallen.

Now each division has 4 Brigades for a total of 40 and there are 5 Separate Brigades not attached to a Division, not to mention the 4 other Brigades that are forming as we speak. So when all is said and done the ACTIVE DUTY ARMY will have 49 Combat Brigades and another 16 Combat Brigades in the National Guard. Add in the 10 Active Duty Combat Aviation Brigades and the 3 NG Combat Aviation Brigades to round out the picture. We're not doing well but it aint Fort Apache yet either............

I guess the short answer is we are getting the troops from the more than 25 Brigades that are not deployed.......

[msongs]

2. and why not. there is no political opposition that will stop him nt

[Le Taz Hot]

4. You got that right.

nt

[jonnyblitz]

6. my EXACT thoughts. they will probably actively ASSIST him

even.

[spotbird]

10. I'm going insane. nt

[Demeter]

31. You Are In Good Company n/t

[Botany]

3. more troops = more targets = more dead Americans

Can we impeach these bastards already?

The Iraqi war is a mistake based on lies that can not be made any better by
the use of U.S. military power.




Any doubt that they will protect the oil.

[ShortnFiery]

30. We have no TRUE opposition party. The Dems in Congress have seemingly sold their souls to

THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX

If Lockheed Martin, et. al., get their way we will have NEVER-ENDING WAR for the duration. :grr:

And our little "gutless wonder" democratic representatives seem to be playing the role of merely *the good cop.*

We've been punked (ALL Non-Investor Class Americans) by All Three Branches of Government.

Feel Better? :(

[jonnyblitz]

5. I wonder how the Democrats in Congress will deal with this. nt

[spotbird]

11. A strongly worded letter, no doubt.

followed by double secret probation.

I wonder if they laugh out loud at the WH when the letters arrive.

[Tesha]

25. As the Sargeant said in "Aliens", "harsh language". (NT)

[frylock]

15. threaten a non-binding resolution, then puss out at the last minute

[datahead]

29. They sissies folded.. They need to grow some balls. Check it out.

Here is a link from another post.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070521/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq

I was really hoping that the democrats would grow some balls, but it looks like the same old same old. Then again this war was totally manufactured by the powers that are really pulling the strings long before 9/11. Check this out, and look at the name on the bottom of the page.. Pretty Scary reading if you ask me. Take the time to read some of the letters, etc. and the dates they were written on the following site. Scared the hell out of me.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

I'm not sure how many of you watch LINK TV but I have over last two weeks been watching and there are several shows I highly recommend. They are as follows:

1. Manufacturing Consent
2. The Oil Factor
3. Breakdown Part 1
4. Breakdown Part 2

These show will enlighten those of you that are younger in years, and give you a perspective of whats been going on for the last 35 years. Also for us that are up there in years, (Me included) it was very educational TV, and really filled in the gaps of what is really going on with the USA on a global scale. I Highly recommend taking the time to watch these... Its the real reality TV..LOL

[leftchick]

35. lol! that is a joke right?

:eyes:

[ToeBot]

42. "...here's my proposal: "

"Let's get tough. The time for talking is over. Call it extreme if you like, but I propose we hit it hard and hit it fast with a major, "and I mean Major", leaflet campaign, and while it's reeling from that, we'd follow up with a wist drive, a car boot sale, some street theatre and possibly even some benefit concerts. OK? Now, if that's not enough, I'm sorry, it's time for the T-shirts..."
- AJ Rimmer BSC Red Dwarf

[mike_c]

7. where THE FUCK is the democratic congress...?!

They could stop this dead in its tracks if they'd get their collective heads out of the sand. Or out of Bush's butt.

[janetle]

17. Exactly!

What in the world do we have to do for the Dems to get our message that a majority of us want this war stopped immediately and that means defunding? It is not rocket science.

[TheWatcher]

50. One of these days you will figure it out

They aren't on your side either.

And unlike the monsters in power, they pretend to be your friends.

And you keep believing them.

America is suffering from a terminal case of BSS.

[NJCher]

8. proof this is a dictatorship

OK, if this actually happens, we can definitively say we're in a dictatorship.

The most unpopular president in history.

A war for which there is no and I mean no support.

Yet he goes destructively on and no one stops him. The only place you can do that is in a dictatorship.




Cher

[atreides1]

9. This is in line with his latest stunt

To create a dictatorship!!!

This will effectively pull most of the combat troops out of the US. Does anyone know where his mercenary army is currently located?

George has nothing to look forward too once he leaves office, he's served his purpose and will be of no concern. But, if he can make sure that the US military is effectively stuck in Iraq, and not able to offer any resistance, his private army made up of mercs from Blackwater and Dyncorp to name just two can establish martial law and he can keep remain the President for as long as he pleases.

I know it's a tinfoil hat moment, but it's possible?

[reprobate]

61. Possible? yes, but remember this nation has the mostt heavily armed citizenry

in history. And Americans are historically suspicious of government.

Don't know how true it is, but I've heard that there are almost as many guns in the hands of civilians as there are citizens in the nation. I'd dare say that within a day or two Bush's private army would be history.

Not to mention the fact that military leadership would find it difficult to obey an uncostitutional order. Remember the Russian revolution? It didn't really get started until the army was ordered to fire on the rioting citizens AND THEY REFUSED.

On the other hand, it's quite possible that should the Little Chimp refuse to give up the White housse, the military leadership would simply arrest him. I'd LOVE to see that.

[silverojo]

62. Food for thought

<<but remember this nation has the most heavily armed citizenry in history>>

Not if the anti-gun idiots have anything to say about it....

And here's something else scary--our military blindly follows the President, obeying his orders (even those who object don't have the balls to say, "What you're doing is wrong!" and refuse orders, as only a few TRULY brave soldiers have done). So all the troops we're supporting will gladly follow the chimp's orders if he DOES decide to impose martial law, and destroy American democracy as we know it.

So be sure to "Support our troops", for they're the ones who will help Bush crush us all into submission. :mad:

[endarkenment]

12. By all means lets give these asshats all the money they want.

I am so sick of this shit. Congress, specifically our functional majority in the house, needs to say "NO" to war funding bills.

[Zodiak]

16. But they aren't

and they are telling their constituents to shut up and be patient.....for what?

What are we going to do about this? Elect them again and hope for different?

I know what I'm doing....yanking support from these cowards as a whole body and directing efforts to ousting cowardly incumbents and preseving the few lions we have. There is no difference between a Democratic and a Republican rubber-stamp and I'll be goddamned if I am going to work hard again for a rubber-stamp with a "D' on it.

Fuck loyalty to a party that has no loyalty to Americans. Blind loyalty is the charactieristic of a dog, not a fighter for change.

[ShortnFiery]

26. Then consider joining VOID? Help us to "vote these bums out" come 2008

It will take a generation, but let's get rid of these disgusting "political elites," BOTH Parties!

Being elected to Congress is an HONOR, not a time for these arrogant people to take money from corporations while ignoring their constituents. :grr:

We are staying in a state of PERPETUAL WAR because *IT'S GOOD FOR BUSINESS.*

Our gutless representatives don't give a damn about their constituents, only their personal and family wealth management. :puke:

VOTE OUT INCUMBENTS DEMOCRACY! http://voidnow.org

[Richard McBeef]

34. Absolutely right!

It will take a generation, but let's get rid of these disgusting "political elites," BOTH Parties!

Time for term limits in congress if our Democrat majority can't get things done. If it keeps them in their cushy jobs that they'll happily vote against what should be done. Shame.

Term limits and more localized political authority. I trust my state rep far more than even the most liberal US congressperson.

[Roland99]

13. Why not do away with tours of duty and just make them permanent citizens of Iraq?

:(

[rcdean]

14. Very misleading, exaggerated journalism.

I'm surprised because the Chronicle is generally an excellent paper. But this is close to a non-story.

The "Surge" was billed as a 30k person increase. This story says it may come to 38k.

The story attempts to wall off "support" troops from "combat" troops, a distinction that doesn't hold nearly to the extent suggested in Iraq. It counts all new "Surge" troops as combat forces, then marvels at the growth in that subcategory.

Total troop count is 162k before surge and will grow to 200k, according to the article, an increase of 38k -- instead of the 30k planned with the Surge.

Evidently some troops will be recategorized from "support" to "combat" in their duty assignments. We infer this because, according to the article, The "combat" troop count is 52.5k before Surge and will grow to 98k. That's an increase of 45.5k, or 7.5k more than the overall troop strength increase.

What's more important, but not focussed upon in the piece, is that much of the "Surge" is planned to come after Sep, meaning the Sep time period benchmark the admin has discussed is simply another Vietnam style mirage.

The "Surge" is nothing more than doing the same things more so and hoping for a different outcome; e.g. insanity.

[BootinUp]

18. I seem to recall

the surge was supposed to be 20,000.

[inchhigh]

19. Not nearly so misleading and exaggerated as your response.....

Since troop levels stood at about 144,000 at the end of last year. So the total increase will be in the neighborhood of 56,000, nearly triple the "original" surge number that was tossed about last year and almost double the "final" surge number of 30,000 announced in January.

Seems like pretty spot on journalism to me.

Foreign Policy
from the November 20, 2006 edition

HEADED TO IRAQ: As part of their second deployment to Iraq, soldiers boarded a plane last month at Fort Hood, Texas.
STEVE TRAYNOR/KILLEEN DAILY HERALD/AP

US troop levels in Iraq may rise, then decline The White House appears to be leaning toward an increase of 20,000 troops in Iraq.
By Howard LaFranchi | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor WASHINGTON – It's being dubbed by some as the "last big push" option, and it appears increasingly to be what President Bush favors on Iraq.

Despite growing expectations of a troop withdrawal from Iraq in the wake of Democratic gains in Congress, the White House appears to be leaning in a different direction: at least a temporary rise in US troop levels.


The numbers would not be huge, perhaps 20,000 on top of the 144,000 US soldiers already fighting the war. But the idea would be to stabilize Baghdad - a priority that has proved dishearteningly elusive since September - and to allow for a major diplomatic push aimed at drawing Iraq's neighbors into resolving the spiraling violence.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1120/p01s01-usfp.html

[rcdean]

46. That's even more of an exaggeration than the article!

The very article you complain about my criticism of says we're starting from a count of 162k. But you use 144k instead, so as to to stretch your assertion that the relative number is really much higher.

The article says "Bush could double force by Christmas," and the first sentence says "The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year..." Even by your counts that is an extraordinary exaggeration. It clearly suggests--to the average cursory reading Joe 6-Pack--that we're doubling the number of troops altogether. But that would mean between 288,000 and 300,000 troops altogether, and that's not what we're doing.

Your focus is on the current number of troops comprising the Surge vs. the original number. You may have a valid point. But that's not what the piece is about.

[xxqqqzme]

20. could? now that's a funny word choice,

A better choice is WILL!

[BikeWriter]

21. We will be left with an exhausted Army.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

22. Upside: Venezuela and others can do whatever the hell they want. -nt

[BikeWriter]

52. True, but so can China.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

66. That's the downside. -nt

[BrotherBuzz]

32. NEWSFLASH: the Army is already exhausted...

treading down this path will likely break it; repairing it may take decades.

[BikeWriter]

53. Fuck'n VietNam.

[BrotherBuzz]

54. Yep

[acmavm]

23. Like I said a while back, the 'surge' is his sneaky cowardly way of

sending in the number of troops that they were told they would need in the beginning.

[LynnTheDem]

27. Vietnam all over again.

WELCOME BACK TO VIETRAQ.

[femrap]

28. This war is the only thing keeping our

nation out of severe economic downturn....which can lead to We, The People hitting the Streets. IMHO, the Dems don't want to face We, The People anymore than W does.

And it's interesting to note that the Powers That Be (PTB) are now introducing a new scapegoat...immigrants. Make sure that We, The People don't direct their anger at Washington....direct it at farmers from Mexico who have been put out of business due to NAFTA. These farmers have no jobs in Mexico, so they come here.

If we don't Impeach these criminals, we're done. I'm losing any faith I had in the Dem Congress...they are voting with the damn repugnants. SICKENING.

[diamidue]

51. Your analysis is spot on!

On all counts...

The Dems are totally aware of the economic necessity of continuing this war. They know how desperately we need this war, and how desperately we need ME oil. But, it's not going well in Iraq and our leaders can only prop up a dying economy for so long. No one will want to be caught in power when it comes tumbling down. So they will blame immigrants, or "terrorists", or they will manufacture another 9/11 type event that they can point to as causing the collapse.

The Democrats will continue to work to insure that we have bases, an embassy and soldiers/personnel in Iraq. I just wish that they had the guts to tell it like it is - rather than posing and posturing and submitting lame legislation in an attempt to stall things..

[femrap]

59. It's so damn depressing....I worked very

hard for the '06 Election so we could get subpoena power...and now PUFF! Nothing.

I'm even pissed at my avatar...Conyers! Damn.

[19jet54]

33. Current events...

Current Lebanon conflict; Palestine escalation; recient Turkish violence - Iraq may have already spread the violence out of control to neighboring nations. Iraq may only be part of the big picture? Thanks Curious George :sarcasm:

Who knows what this will all lead to by Christmas? :shrug:

[bobbie]

36. If only there was an opposition party in this country

But that is not the form of government we have, not since November 22, 1963 anyway.

[MGKrebs]

37. How do you say " all your base are belong to us" in Persian?

Iraqi insurgents holding out until September, when most US troops will be moving on to other targets.

Oops, did I say that out loud?

[NastyDiaper]

38. NSPD 51 + HSPD20 + Gonzo = Draft. Worse?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=936590&mesg_id=936590

I'm not normally the takeover conspiracy type. I think mostly the wingers are numb-nutted bigots and the war is largely a treasury heist.

But * is in a corner, and there is a lot going on in legal. Here we have, in current affairs, a politically and physically impossible troop escalation. All they need is a big event.

[Heywood J]

40. We should be thinking about serious

primary challenges for any damned fool on our side who voted to continue this war.

In the meantime, we need some VoteVets-style ads prominently featuring their vote and the consequences to try and rile their constituents onto their backs. "Representative _______ is complicit in the continued murder of American troops by voting to keep them in Iraq. If you don't like him/her attracting terrorists to strike on this continent and sacrificing your sons and daughters on the altar of Bush, please write or visit him/her at ___________ and remember to vote in 2008."

[FVZA_Colonel]

41. In all seriousness, will this do anything, and how will it do... that?

As the article says, right now we have 162,000, and there has been virtualy no decrease (if any) in the bloodshed. What will (say) 40,000 (to reach the "over 200,000" figure) accomplish?

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

43. This is a Rovian Maneuver

Gut the troops. Democrats will be faced with a Draft to replenish the forces and, in the 1.8 years left of Bush fuck ups and human disasters, increase our readiness to respond. This is an Evil political endeavor that is costing lives, treasure, our security in the world, security at home, and a legacy for Bush and Company I hope has them impeached, indicted, imprisoned.

[moodforaday]

58. Not draft, but privatized military

Google for Jeremy Scahill if you're not familiar with him yet, or check out his book, "Blackwater". It adds up pretty neatly: exhaust the military so that you need more and more mercenaries. When Blackwater needs troops, they put **Chileans** on their payroll and send them off to Iraq.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

60. Sorry, my point was

Democrats being faced with replenishing the Military. You weren't inferring a Democrat as president would continue Blackwater as the shadow military, are you?

[paparush]

44. More Troops by Xmas will mean Lots of Dems LOSE their seats and NEW Dems get elected!

Period!

If Pelosi, et al, cannot lead then get the f#ck out of the way.

MSNBC poll running today has 88% of respondents saying that there is plenty of evidence to Impeach Bush.

88 FRIGGIN PERCENT!!


ARRRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!

[depakid]

48. Time to start recruiting primary opponents

Too bad several of the usual suspects in the Senate were just re-elected.

Every far right enabler needs to be challenged by a credible and well funded opponent.

Here's a place for us to start holding them accountable: http://www.workingforuspac.org/

[madrchsod]

45. could? he will

who`s going to stop him? the house or/and the senate? ya right.

[Kelvin Mace]

49. Here's 2.9 million recruits not doing anything useful

http://www.scouting.org/nav/enter.jsp?s=mc&c=fs

They can be drafted after the Air Force, Navy and Coast Guard run out of people for Bush to kill.

Of course, we could start drafting these people, after all they "support the troops". It says so right on their web site.

http://www.yrnf.com/

[ohio2007]

56. is there a 'draft' in the room or is it just me ?

Or are we going to redeploy troops out of Germany and S.Korea for good?

[MLFerrell]

57. Let me fix that headline for you...

"Bush WILL double (combat force in Iraq) by Christmas, CONSEQUENCES BE DAMNED."

There you are, much better. Well, not better, but certainly more accurate!

[lpbk2713]

65. No big deal as far as AWOL Monkey-Boy is concerned ....

HIS kids won't be going.