Posted on 11/28/2006 6:09:38 PM PST by George W. Bush
EXCLUSIVE: Pentagon Considers Moving Troops From al-Anbar Province to Baghdad
Major Strategic Shift Considered to Secure Iraqi Capital
By JONATHAN KARL
Nov. 28, 2006 - ABC News has learned that Pentagon officials are considering a major strategic shift in Iraq, to move U.S. forces out of the dangerous Sunni-dominated al-Anbar province and join the fight to secure Baghdad.
The news comes as President Bush prepares to meet with Iraq's president to discuss the growing sectarian violence.
There are now 30,000 U.S. troops in al-Anbar, mainly Marines, braving some of the fiercest fighting in Iraq. At least 1,055 Americans have been killed in this region, making al-Anbar the deadliest province for American troops.
The region is a Sunni stronghold and the main base of operations for al Qaeda in Iraq and has been a place of increasing frustration to U.S. commanders.
In a recent intelligence assessment, top Marine in al-Anbar, Col. Peter Devlin, concluded that without a massive infusement of more troops, the battle in al-Anbar is unwinnable.
In the memo, first reported by the Washington Post, Devlin writes, "Despite the success of the December elections, nearly all government institutions from the village to provincial levels have disintegrated or have been thoroughly corrupted and infiltrated by al Qaeda in Iraq."
Faced with that situation in al-Anbar, and the desperate need to control Iraq's capital, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace is considering turning al-Anbar over to Iraqi security forces and moving U.S. troops from there into Baghdad.
"If we are not going to do a better job doing what we are doing out [in al-Anbar], what's the point of having them out there?" said a senior military official.
Another option under consideration is to increase the overall U.S. troop level in Iraq by two to five brigades (that's about 7,000 to 18,000 troops).
Generals Casey and Abizaid, however, have both weighed in against this idea. And such an increase would only be sustainable for six to eight months. Far more likely, the official says, will be a repositioning of forces currently in Iraq. "There is a push for a change of footprint, not more combat power."
As dire as the situation is, officials say they expect no decisions on any change in military strategy for at least another two or three weeks, until incoming Defense Secretary Robert Gates is sworn in and given a chance to weigh in on the various options under consideration.
So, Devlin is a cut and runner?
I'd say pull them all out of al-Anbar Province, carpet bomb the whole place, then bring them back in to monitor the ashes.
I would add to your guess that since the center of attention is Baghdad they see the need to completely control it. Not too much attention gets payed to Anbar province unless Americans are dying there. Pacify Baghdad and leave Anbar for another day?
Learned from whom? Pentagon officials CONSIDER every possible strategy. This is just another DBM guess.
I concur.
Seal the border and THEN carpet bomb the place
I concur again.
your right. possible pentagon shell game also.
Thats exactly what SHOULD be done. Stop with the PC Crap pull out of this nest of killers and wipe the place out.
makes a good lesson for the next place we are forced to pull out of.
Long past time to carpet-bomb Anbar province.
Should be round-the-clock bombing aids, non-stop, so that any semblance of normal life cannot be conducted.
Bombings should be preceded by leafleting advising the people to kill the local al-Quaeda operatives if they want the bombing to stop.
Once the population of a given city or area drops below a certain level, due to evacuation or death from the bombing, send in the tanks followed by giant earth moving equipment to level the place and move on to the next city.
.
I like the way you think.
What better reason do we need that that--to just LEVEL THE AREA???
We should've done that to Fallujah 3 years ago.
Team Bush doesn't have the political will to carpet bomb anything right now. And, if we do give up Anbar al-Qaeda will have a base in the heart of the Middle East.
Thanks.
Too bad the president doesn't think that way.
In fact, because he does not think that way, he should never have invaded Iraq.
Because if you do NOT think that way, there is NO WAY you can win ANY war.
My question is, so are we there to win or just to provide targets for the MoHamHead savages?
.
everything we do, has to be cleared with the "iraqi democracy". we gave them their precious friggin democracy way too soon, and its come back to bite us bigtime.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.