Posted on 12/13/2006 12:12:43 AM PST by jmc1969
Boosting presence and aid, and an anti-Sadr offensive, carry risks but offer the best path to victory, military officials say.
As President Bush weighs new policy options for Iraq, strong support has coalesced in the Pentagon behind a military plan to "double down" in the country with a substantial buildup in American troops, an increase in industrial aid and a major combat offensive against Muqtada Sadr, the radical Shiite leader impeding development of the Iraqi government.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff will present their assessment and recommendations to Bush at the Pentagon today. Military officials, including some advising the chiefs, have argued that an intensified effort may be the only way to get the counterinsurgency strategy right and provide a chance for victory.
The approach overlaps somewhat a course promoted by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz). But the Pentagon proposals add several features, including the confrontation with Sadr, a possible renewed offensive in the Sunni stronghold of Al Anbar province, a large Iraqi jobs program and a proposal for a long-term increase in the size of the military.
Such an option would appear to satisfy Bush's demand for a strategy focused on victory rather than disengagement. It would disregard key recommendations and warnings of the Iraq Study Group, however, and provide little comfort for those fearful of a long, open-ended U.S. commitment in the country. Only 12% of Americans support a troop increase, whereas 52% prefer a fixed timetable for withdrawal, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found.
"I think it is worth trying," a defense official said. "But you can't have the rhetoric without the resources. This is a double down" — the gambling term for upping a bet.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
They God they don't rule the country!
Time for sleep!
Twenty thousand or 40,000, I don't see it happening any time soon. If we're talking about just putting bodies in Iraq, that's one thing, but I assume what is needed are 'point of the spear' units - - Army and Marine combat units. If those types of units were readily available, the 172nd Stryker and the 1st ABCT, 1st AD would not have been extended in country earlier this year.
If we are going to take on the Madhi Army we are going to need extra troops, unless we are willing to plow Sadr City under with bombs.
I think the question is do we want to win a war or win a peace. We won the war in two months, we are loosing the peace.
Perhaps we should just concentrate on what we do best.
Sounds better than pulling out and letting our victory over Saddam mean nothing. Those soldiers who died, and the victims of 9/11, deserve better than that. We need to start addressing the psychological aspect a lot more to influence world opinion...especially in the muslim world. Al Qaeda has slaughtered countless Iraqis simply to spite us and provoke a civil war. We need to constantly drive this in the minds of muslims around the world, hoping that that more and more muslims will stand up and fight al qaeda. What's going on now...bombing markets, schools, and hospitals...is nothing more than terrorism. It's sad other countries won't oppose what they would unequivically fight in their own respective countries.
How about non-stop overwhelming force with everything we've got. Planes bombing 12 hours a day, drop the leaflets, tell the civilians they have 72 hours to get out of dodge because of the terrorists in their midst, if you don't leave we will assume you side with the terrorists.
Thank you and goodnight, you've been warned.
I assume we are not going to carpet bomb Sadr City or anywhere else in Iraq. From what I can tell, you'd have to assign combat units 'for the duration.' Much of the cadre (NCOs and 03s and above) of those units have already served one or more tours. At some point you have to be concerned about fatigue, effectiveness and overall morale.
I left Vietnam during the first week of 68 and returned in mid November of 69. Things can go south very fast. I saw it for myself. No two conflicts are the same but soldiers never change.
I've always hated that "winning the peace" saying. If you have to "win the peace" you haven't won the war.
We occupied Germany until 1958, and, there was the Marshall Plan. We won the war and we had to win the peace.
There's a difference between rebuilding and "winning the peace". Next war, we need to beat their armies and their people, both have to surrender.
Why didn't Sadr die?
Because we are fighting a Politically-Correct War guided by compassionate conservative politicians with the street-wise sense of ivory tower academics trying to appease Katie Couric.
Public Relations debacles led the decline from swift early victory.
Several debates which could have easily been defused with effective dialogue were allowed to carry the day with the American and world masses. WMD. Torture.
By failing to directly confront Democrats and the Media, the Bush administration allowed every chump Lib to take free potshots without penalty or rebuttal, and we lost every newscycle time after time.
Ball-less, Brain-less, Bumbling fools who failed us in every way.
Scott McLellan was a Public Relations disaster through the worst of times.
And Bush, the pious and good man, let it happen.
Ping
Jotting it down now for future reference. ;)
"Planes bombing 12 hours a day, drop the leaflets, tell the civilians they have 72 hours to get out of dodge because of the terrorists in their midst, if you don't leave we will assume you side with the terrorists."
While I like that idea, it would never work since the NYT and all the major media would have 72 hours to campaign against the 'brutal escalation of the war against innocents'. Give 'em six hours and drop the leaflets at 9PM EST.
Isreal must be watching this, and planning their hit on Iran to be executed before we exit Iraq. The closer we get to an exit strategy, the higher the odds of an Isreali attack on Iran. They need our cover to get a good hit in on Tehran.
Sadr is feeling mighty lonely right about now. He has witnessed all is sworn enemies pay a visit to the White House....he has read and heard how a new alliance of Kurds and Sunni's and Shia have formed to take him on. And now this report of additional US troops. As you know the Kurds have a ready reserve just sitting up north 100,000 or so LOYAL troops that could be called upon.
I think we may never see a shot fired here....we are witnessing someone being shown all the cards...and being told ...this round is for all the marbles.
Look for Sadr to flee..to Iran.
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.