US 'troop boost in Iraq likely

[mrc 0]

Hm. I don't like pedophiles, or NAMBLA members. Am I a bigot?

yes, you are

but then again, i'm a bigot too

Charles, now i think it is official.

Everyone on VJ must hate you...

Not true, I have no hatred toward Charles. Everyone hates him because they disagree with him? Ridiculous.

nothing to boast about if you ask me.........

you're still out of your cage?

I was just going to ask you were you've been all afternoon?? we've really missed you on the threads......care to comment on the other one about age gaps in relationships???

thought you would have LOTS of experience with that one

.............

I'm more annoyed with Sharky's incessant use of the ............. as punctuation than anything Charles has said.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

i don't think a 25k increase in troops is a policy change because it won't happen. we don't have that to spare - unless of course you'd prefer to strip troops from other locations around the world and ignore those treaties in place that require our troops. in short, the only way to get 25k more troops is increase the active duty force by a division's worth. ergo, just because such is printed in the papers that does not mean it's going to happen.

Do you have a hat you'd like to eat about now?

Senior White House officials said Wednesday that Bush wants to send 21,000 to 24,000 additional U.S. troops to Baghdad and Anbar province over the next few months, and the first of five U.S. Army brigades could leave within weeks.

According to Pentagon sources, the additional troops will come from a brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division from Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and the 4th Brigade based in Fort Riley, Kansas.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/10/iraq.bush/index.html

[Alex+R 0]

LOLOL Listening to that chopfcuk (the president) made me want to eat poison, but watching Charles eat his hat would make me feel better.

[Ban Hammer 14,674]

i don't think a 25k increase in troops is a policy change because it won't happen. we don't have that to spare - unless of course you'd prefer to strip troops from other locations around the world and ignore those treaties in place that require our troops. in short, the only way to get 25k more troops is increase the active duty force by a division's worth. ergo, just because such is printed in the papers that does not mean it's going to happen.

Do you have a hat you'd like to eat about now?

Senior White House officials said Wednesday that Bush wants to send 21,000 to 24,000 additional U.S. troops to Baghdad and Anbar province over the next few months, and the first of five U.S. Army brigades could leave within weeks.

According to Pentagon sources, the additional troops will come from a brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division from Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and the 4th Brigade based in Fort Riley, Kansas.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/10/iraq.bush/index.html

dream on, alex and erekose. would you like pepper and salt on your hat though?

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon has abandoned its limit on the time a citizen-soldier can be required to serve on active duty, officials said Thursday, a major change that reflects an Army stretched thin by longer-than-expected combat in Iraq.

The Pentagon also announced it is proposing to Congress that the size of the Army be increased by 65,000, to 547,000 and that the Marine Corps, the smallest of the services, grow by 27,000, to 202,000, over the next five years. No cost estimate was provided, but officials said it would be at least several billion dollars.

link

changing a major policy and increasing the total active duty force, that's how they will do it. i'm still expecting problems with this though.

and from that story - one commitment we made changes to:

Navy officials said the carrier heading to the Gulf region is the USS John C. Stennis, which previously had been in line to deploy to the Pacific

strip from other worldwide commitments........

Edited January 12, 2007 by charlesandnessa