US 'troop boost in Iraq likely

[mRx 16]

We would love to expedite the process but we have no firm dates for his next tour so we can't.

girlfrmoz,

When i submitted an expedite request, i had no firm dates either, just a time-frame. I strongly suggest that you have your fiance talk to his commander and do up a letter saying that he is deploying within such and such time-frame. Then submit that letter with your packet 3 submission requesting a quicker interview date. What could it hurt? It could easily allow you to be with your fiance a couple months earlier.

Matt

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You know both of you seem to miss the point that people like myself are actually impacted by this and people are actually dying needlessly.

You are quite right, my apologies. I hope things work out for you guys - none of this is a non-story to those in the thick of it.

Edited December 17, 2006 by erekose

[girlfrmoz 1]

Thanks Matt for the advice, hey and all the best for your new life.

What I meant is that my SO will go but they are not sure yet when, not even a range of probable dates, a decision will be made soon so I don't think that will be enough for Immigration.

Oh and Erikose thank you for your kind words.

[MichelleandCraig 1]

2 girls in my class...felt so bad for them. Last semester one got married 3 weeks before her husband was deployed to Iraq, and many of us were standing outside a couple of months ago comforting one who was crying because her fiance just found out he had to go for a year..he's there already now. I definitely feel for you, Girlfrmoz...hope he doesn't have to go again. M.

[girlfrmoz 1]

Thank you MichelleandCraig, I appreciate your kind thoughts.

[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.

here you go, erekose, same as what i was saying above......

Powell casts doubt on troop increase

WASHINGTON - Former Secretary of State Colin Powell is casting doubt on a plan under consideration by President Bush that would increase troops in Iraq, calling the U.S. Army overextended and "about broken."

The incoming Senate majority leader, however, offered qualified support for a troop surge, saying it would be acceptable for a few months as part of a broader strategy to bring combat forces home by 2008.

"If the commanders on the ground said this is just for a short period of time, we'll go along with that," said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., citing a time frame such as two months to three months. But a period of 18 months to 24 months would be too long, he said.

Bush is reviewing options for a change of course in Iraq and plans to address the nation in early January.

On Sunday, Iraq's Sunni vice president called for more American soldiers in Baghdad to quell sectarian violence — even though the Shiite-dominated government has proposed shifting U.S. troops to the capital's periphery and having Iraqis assume primary responsibility for security in the city.

"Who is going to replace the American troops?" asked Tariq al-Hashemi, who met with Bush in Washington last week. "Iraqi troops, across the board, they are insufficient, incompetent, and many of them corrupted."

There are about 140,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and about 5,000 advisers. Combat troops make up less than half of U.S. forces in Iraq.

Powell, the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman for the first President Bush during the 1991 Gulf War, said if more troops were proposed, commanders would have to make their mission clear, determine whether they can accomplish it and what size force is appropriate.

"I am not persuaded that another surge of troops into Baghdad for the purposes of suppressing this communitarian violence, this civil war, will work," said Powell, who was secretary of state from 2001 to 2005. "We have to be very, very careful in this instance not just to grab a number out of the air."

Increasing troops would run counter to recent recommendations by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, which set a goal of withdrawing combat troops by early 2008 in support of more aggressive regional diplomacy.

Powell said that U.S. troops should not act as policemen. He described the U.S. Army as "about broken," with a shortage of equipment, officers going on repetitive tours and gaps in military coverage elsewhere in the world.

"The current active Army is not large enough and the Marine Corps is not large enough for the kinds of missions they're being asked to perform," he said. "And the Congress has a serious task ahead of it, to make sure that the Army and the Marine Corps get the funds they need to sustain themselves and to sustain their equipment and their ammunition."

Reid, whose party campaigned this fall on changing course in Iraq, said he would be open only to a short-term troop increase.

"The American people will not allow this war to go on as it has. It simply is a war that will not be won militarily. It can only be won politically," he said.

At least three other Democrats did not support Reid's position on the additional troops.

Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said that if it were a short-term increase, "won't our adversaries simply adjust their tactics, wait us out and wait until we reduce again? So I think you'd have to ask very serious questions about the utility of this."

Added Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., "I respect Harry Reid on it, but that's not where I am."

Kennedy, like Reed a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said there would be widespread opposition by members of his committee if Bush proposed a troop increase.

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said any proposal to send more troops should only follow a political solution that will end civil unrest.

"The president and others who support the surge have it exactly backwards," he said.

Reid spoke on ABC's "This Week," Kennedy was on "Fox News Sunday," Powell appeared on CBS' "Face the Nation" and Reed and al-Hashemi were on "Late Edition" on CNN.

link

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

ah yes, you state "you and your bum-chums" so the personal attacks continue. is this what you mean by debate, you attack those who disagree with you?

Actually Charles - I have a hard time seeing where you have actually disagreed with me, other than that you reacted simply because I started a Iraq thread in which i posted a more or less neutral news article (which I commented on), which has direct relevance to a broader public discussion that is going on at the moment about the future of Iraq:

More troops?/less troops?/Cut and Run?/Segregate!

I guess you were sleeping over the last few weeks. Enough to trawl up months old articles which bear no direct relevance to the present. If you don't think a 25,000+ increase in existing troop levels amounts to a significant policy change - then frankly I give up.

As I said - you seem to get some sort of kick of turning the focus of these debates onto yourself, or otherwise simply sabotaging them with semantic garbage. BTW - it was personal for you a long time before it was for me And we all know that you can't handle your own medicine - in anything approaching good humour.

Time for bed anyway.

erekose, I learned a long time ago you are a self centered flannel mouth! You love to hear yourself talk so much, you fail to hear anything else. However it is fun to watch you slip and slide around a subject. Its people like you and others that keep us from winning this war by critisizing every little thing we do over there. If our military was able to use the same tactics the enemy uses, this thing might be over. Its always the united states thats the bad guy. Never have I heard critisizms for a car bomb or I.U.D. Insurgents kill more innocent people than anyone.

[peezey 0]

erekose, I learned a long time ago you are a self centered flannel mouth! You love to hear yourself talk so much, you fail to hear anything else. However it is fun to watch you slip and slide around a subject. Its people like you and others that keep us from winning this war by critisizing every little thing we do over there. If our military was able to use the same tactics the enemy uses, this thing might be over. Its always the united states thats the bad guy. Never have I heard critisizms for a car bomb or I.U.D. Insurgents kill more innocent people than anyone.

1st: IUD!!!! there are no criticisms of IUDs because they are perfectly decent birth control.

2nd: What in the he!l is "winning"?? The fuc!tard president can't even define this nebulous idea. Because it's such bul!sh!t, even the biggest b.s.'er on the planet can't even come up with something more than the scary "turrurists" hate freedom.

3rd: "Insurgents" isn't just one group, faction, sect. So because "they" kill more people that we do, we should just kill them all? Or, since we clearly can't figure out how to work out these arguments, we should send more troops there to potentially be killed themselves?

Edited December 18, 2006 by peezey

[mrc 0]

Less troops, more tactical munitions. Nothing says "let's be friends" like a cluster bomb.

[garya505 2]

Seems the lefties can't decide if sending more troops is a good idea or not (probably because they don't HAVE a plan). The only thing we can be sure of is that they will criticize whatever the President does.

[sharky 2]

nice to see Charles on the "ropes" on this one, what's it like to be the minority now that you don't have your Bushites/bomb anyone that disagrees with the USA/ friends with you anymore eh?

nothing changes in this forum........

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Seems the lefties can't decide if sending more troops is a good idea or not (probably because they don't HAVE a plan). The only thing we can be sure of is that they will criticize whatever the President does.

Interestingly there doesn't seem to be much of a plan at the moment, Rumsfeld's sacking was a direct indictment that the public at large have no confidence in a strategy that had become little more than a series of slogans and stale soundbites. I don't know about you but I hate the words "cut and run", not just because of how hackneyed the phrase has become but because it has become an excuse for doing and changing nothing.

We are currently waiting the "new plan", which the White House has yet to announce in the new year. Certainly there is an element of speculation and "wait and see" about that - and it will be on this new strategy that both the White House and the new Senate / Congress will be judged on. Bush has said that he will reject anything amounting to troop withdrawal - so what else can be done BUT find a way to increase troop levels, and extend

Similar is it that there is no plan, or that we have maneuvered ourselves in a situation with extremely limited options? There is a very loud chorus of opinion that is saying that we can't win this (and impose democracy) solely through military means. We are already hearing from the horse's mouth that our own troops don't trust the new Iraqi police and army, which by all accounts is shaping up to be a hotbed of corruption and rebel sympathisers.

IMO - we will still be stuck in this mess by the time the next presidential election comes around, with no end in sight.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

erekose, I learned a long time ago you are a self centered flannel mouth! You love to hear yourself talk so much, you fail to hear anything else. However it is fun to watch you slip and slide around a subject. Its people like you and others that keep us from winning this war by critisizing every little thing we do over there. If our military was able to use the same tactics the enemy uses, this thing might be over. Its always the united states thats the bad guy. Never have I heard critisizms for a car bomb or I.U.D. Insurgents kill more innocent people than anyone.

Ah... the "people like you..." routine. Speaking of Flannel mouths, considering you think that this statement is a "simple anti-american opinion" its safe to say that I'm quite happy where i am:

For me, American is not some thing that only lives in symbols, such as the flag, the pledge, the larger-than-life images of the founders (all of which are meaningless because they obscure the beauty with a bunch of empty phrases). No, America is the here and now, the blood spillled by those excluded from the political process, and the past which is rich and more than just a list of military victories.

Would you like synthetic oil with your "slip and slide"?

Edited December 18, 2006 by erekose

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Seems the lefties can't decide if sending more troops is a good idea or not (probably because they don't HAVE a plan). The only thing we can be sure of is that they will criticize whatever the President does.

Interestingly there doesn't seem to be much of a plan at the moment, Rumsfeld's sacking was a direct indictment that the public at large have no confidence in a strategy that had become little more than a series of slogans and stale soundbites. I don't know about you but I hate the words "cut and run", not just because of how hackneyed the phrase has become but because it has become an excuse for doing and changing nothing.

We are currently waiting the "new plan", which the White House has yet to announce in the new year. Certainly there is an element of speculation and "wait and see" about that - and it will be on this new strategy that both the White House and the new Senate / Congress will be judged on. Bush has said that he will reject anything amounting to troop withdrawal - so what else can be done BUT find a way to increase troop levels, and extend

Similar is it that there is no plan, or that we have maneuvered ourselves in a situation with extremely limited options? There is a very loud chorus of opinion that is saying that we can't win this (and impose democracy) solely through military means. We are already hearing from the horse's mouth that our own troops don't trust the new Iraqi police and army, which by all accounts is shaping up to be a hotbed of corruption and rebel sympathisers.

IMO - we will still be stuck in this mess by the time the next presidential election comes around, with no end in sight.

MESS? ####### is the mess? anything you disagree with? RIGHT! The mess is whats comin outta your mouth! do you want a link to where you can bye a bib? I have yet to hear a remedy from you or anyone of your ILK. Get out of your Fkin arm chair, sittin on the PORCH bu!!shite! People like you ARE the problem. I can sit here all Fkin day long and CRITISIZE,and FEEL GOOD. Face it! there isnt a PLAN the man could come up with that would satisfy you, or any of your kind.

You sit here and argue the finer points of the situation. Got an answer HE!! NO! You should dig a DEEP HOLE, cuz when the SHITE hits the fan and your little tail is betwixed your legs and your SCREAMS for HELP are unanswered it will be way to late. How many need to DIE here or anywhere else to make you realize the fact that there is an enemy? and its not the right wingers. Some of you have taken your eye off of the true ENEMY and focused it within. Keep BASHIN, and put the focus on us, just dont forget to turn around and LOOK to watch where you have walked!

GOOD LUCK, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, You will need it!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Seems the lefties can't decide if sending more troops is a good idea or not (probably because they don't HAVE a plan). The only thing we can be sure of is that they will criticize whatever the President does.

Interestingly there doesn't seem to be much of a plan at the moment, Rumsfeld's sacking was a direct indictment that the public at large have no confidence in a strategy that had become little more than a series of slogans and stale soundbites. I don't know about you but I hate the words "cut and run", not just because of how hackneyed the phrase has become but because it has become an excuse for doing and changing nothing.

We are currently waiting the "new plan", which the White House has yet to announce in the new year. Certainly there is an element of speculation and "wait and see" about that - and it will be on this new strategy that both the White House and the new Senate / Congress will be judged on. Bush has said that he will reject anything amounting to troop withdrawal - so what else can be done BUT find a way to increase troop levels, and extend

Similar is it that there is no plan, or that we have maneuvered ourselves in a situation with extremely limited options? There is a very loud chorus of opinion that is saying that we can't win this (and impose democracy) solely through military means. We are already hearing from the horse's mouth that our own troops don't trust the new Iraqi police and army, which by all accounts is shaping up to be a hotbed of corruption and rebel sympathisers.

IMO - we will still be stuck in this mess by the time the next presidential election comes around, with no end in sight.

MESS? ####### is the mess? anything you disagree with? RIGHT! The mess is whats comin outta your mouth! do you want a link to where you can bye a bib? I have yet to hear a remedy from you or anyone of your ILK. Get out of your Fkin arm chair, sittin on the PORCH bu!!shite! People like you ARE the problem. I can sit here all Fkin day long and CRITISIZE,and FEEL GOOD. Face it! there isnt a PLAN the man could come up with that would satisfy you, or any of your kind.

You sit here and argue the finer points of the situation. Got an answer HE!! NO! You should dig a DEEP HOLE, cuz when the SHITE hits the fan and your little tail is betwixed your legs and your SCREAMS for HELP are unanswered it will be way to late. How many need to DIE here or anywhere else to make you realize the fact that there is an enemy? and its not the right wingers. Some of you have taken your eye off of the true ENEMY and focused it within. Keep BASHIN, and put the focus on us, just dont forget to turn around and LOOK to watch where you have walked!

GOOD LUCK, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, You will need it!

I wonder if anyone else thinks that what you just wrote is way crazy, or the result of too many bourbons at the midnight hour