Posted on 01/10/2007 2:30:20 PM PST by STARWISE
Unswayed by anti-war passions, President Bush will send 21,500 additional U.S. troops to Iraq and build the American presence there toward its highest level to quell worsening bloodshed. The move puts Bush on a collision course with the new Democratic Congress and runs counter to advice from some senior generals.
Set to announce his decisions in a prime-time speech Wednesday night, Bush was to acknowledge making major mistakes in Iraq, primarily failing to deploy enough U.S. soldiers and demand more Iraqi troops and cooperation to confront the country's near-anarchy.
In advance of Bush's address, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said U.S. military operations have been "handcuffed by political interference by Iraqi leadership" but now will proceed under rules allowing troops to confront Shiite militias as well as Sunni insurgents.
(snip)
The new Democratic leaders of Congress met with Bush and complained afterward that their opposition to a buildup had been ignored. "This is the third time we are going down this path. Two times this has not worked," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "Why are they doing this now? That question remains."
Senate and House Democrats are arranging votes urging the president not to send more troops. While lacking the force of law, the measures would compel Republicans to go on record as either bucking the president or supporting an escalation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Carried live online by: C-span
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I have heard that from several sources. I am much relieved.
Hopefully, Sadr will get caught in that sweep... that's if the gloves really come off.
The general said Kurds, who are Sunni but not Arab, were being used against the Shiite Mahdi Army to overcome the predicted refusal by soldiers from other Iraqi units to fight fellow Shiites
Bringing in the Peshmerga....no loyalty problem here.
I just want to comment that I'm getting confused on what thread I'm on .. there too much news going on *L*
The Peshmerga to go after the Sadr forces...this will be something to see.
You might be interested in this
Tell me about it...I took the itty bitty one for a walk...and I fell overwhelmed with news!!!
Tonight is Bush's night to shine if ever we needed a leader the most
Are you SERIOUS? They're going to let them FIGHT? Wow. This is the best news for our GI's in a month of Sunday's...
HOOOAH!!!
"Al-Maliki has named an Iraqi general who was taken as prisoner of war by U.S. troops during the 1991 Gulf war as the overall commander of the new security operation.
Lt.-Gen. Aboud Gambar, a Shiite, will have two assistants, one from the police and one from the army, the military officers said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to reveal the information."
hmmmmmm.
Emerging details of a troop surge, expected to be confirmed by U.S. President George W. Bush's prime-time press conference Jan. 10, indicate some 16,000 extra U.S. troops will eventually reinforce Baghdad, with another 4,000 in Anbar province. This surge is almost certain to entail a shift in tactics consistent with the recently published Counterinsurgency Manual (FM 3-24). These tactics involve increased visibility for U.S. troops and will -- at least at the beginning -- entail higher casualties. But the surge is not fundamentally driven by military concerns; the choice to surge and the timing are largely politically motivated.
Some details of the surge are evident from looking at current troop deployments. The 2nd Brigade Combat Team (BCT) of the 82nd Airborne Division is now arriving in Kuwait to serve as a force in reserve. They will likely be the first additional unit surged north -- once again leaving U.S. forces in Iraq without a brigade-size reserve force. The U.S. Marine 5th and 7th Regimental Combat Teams (RCT) currently operating in Anbar are likely to be held over past their scheduled departure from Iraq in February. The U.S. Army 3rd Battalion, 509th Infantry Regiment (Airborne) has already moved into Anbar to reinforce the 5th RCT and conduct operations in the Al Karmah region, northeast of Al Fallujah. Many foreign fighters who escaped the dual assaults on Al Fallujah in 2004 sought refuge in Al Karmah.
http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=282757&selected=Analyses
Great blog. Thanks for the link. Things are going as Bush told us they would, way back in 2001. Hard work over a long time. Quiet successes.
Do you know what else I have heard all afternoon??
About the REPUBLICANS that aren't backing Bush's plan. I haven't heard the name of ONE that is...even though we know there are...Lieberman has NOT been mentioned.
BTW..Sam Brownback (R) POTUS candidate, 2008....does NOT approve of Bush's plan...but, guess where he is??? Not in Washington doing his job...no...he is in IRAQ...probably for photo-ops!!!
I love how he goes to IRAQ...to discount his own POTUS/CIC!!!!
grrrrrrrrrrr
This is probably the best thing I have read in the lead up to tonight's address.
Yes, but did you read further down where Maliki picked a Shite General to command the operation or do I misunderstand?
That's fine. A Shiite general going after a Shiite militia is fine... if he will do it. Give him a chance.
This seems to be the biggest buggaboo. Brit's panel was all over the Iraqi's not cooperating, not pulling their weight, not even showing up to hold cleared territory.
Panel basically says that this is Bush's "last chance". Meaning the Iraqi's last chance.
Wanna bet the sectarian and Iranian backed violence escalates and Iraqi forces are paid to stay home?
Regardless, I'll be back after supper. Thanks for the ping
I have heard that Sadr...and his cohorts are going to be major targets...and al-Maliki knows it!!
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.