Posted on 01/09/2007 12:27:58 PM PST by areafiftyone
WASHINGTON - A first wave of additional U.S. troops will go into Iraq before the end of the month under President Bush's new plan, a senior defense official said Tuesday.
Up to 20,000 troops will be put on alert and be prepared to deploy under the president's plan, but the increase in forces on the ground will be gradual, said the official, who requested anonymity because the plans have not yet been announced.
Moving first would be the 2nd Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division, which is in Kuwait and poised to deploy quickly into Iraq.
Is Teddy's head-vein 'sploding????
Anyone on the Senate floor tell him that he has no power to tell the President how many troops to deploy to or redeploy from Iraq?
Like I mentioned on another post, it's time for a ground version of Linebacker II. No holds barred, pull out all the stops and kill the insurgents and Al Sadr's boys by the hundreds or thousands.
They are cockroaches, one and all, and if you don't kill them before they have time to multiply exponentially, then you will never rid yourself of them.
Agree with you there.
Believe it or not, that is one of the charges against the Staff Sergeant who led the Haditha Marines, that he used nearly those exact same words.
And the truth is: they were a fairly good summation of the current Rules of Engagement.
It's criminal for us to tell our troops to give the enemy a free shot before they get to fire back.
Big mistake.
When they are done splattering al-Sadr and his filthy crew all over the dirt roads, they can head for the Iranian border, where they can proceed to mop up any Iranian units the Air Force and Navy have left standing.
If these additional troops are being sent to Iraq to drive around in their trucks and get blown up by roadside bombs, well, I'm against that.
But if these troops are being sent there with the express purpose of joining the other 130,000 troops in rooting out and totally destroying the enemy, regardless of where they're hiding, then I'm fully in support of the president.
What we do, we must do it quickly.
We must truly cut off the embattled cities. We must truly control ingress and egress. We must truly go house to house and clear it of all weapons. We must turn the cleared cities over to a truly competent Iraqi military to maintain control and prevent re-infestation.
If we do those things we can leave.
If we allow Iran and Syria to continue shipping arms into Iraq, then we will not succeed.
The key to cordon, clear, and control is stopping Iran.
Sigh. Weaponry is the strongest, most trusted currency in the ME.
We have the military means to send an extremely strong message to the Iranians on this subject.
The President's speech should threaten Iran and Syria. It should be hard, direct, and unequivocal.
82nd Airborne is our guys and gals....
BBC: US 'targets al-Qaeda' in Somalia ~ based on "credible intelligence" says Pentagon...
Okay - you dive in first...;-)
You're dreaming. 20,000 more troops aren't enough to make a significant difference; we need at least 100,000 more to pacify Iraq, win this thing quickly and then invade Iran. But here I go dreaming too; Bush will put another 200 American troops in the brig for 'war crimes' before he lifts his pc, assinine 'rules of engagement' and lets the dogs of war loose on the enemy. This whole 'surge in troop strength' thing is pure political grandstanding, nothing but a showcase that won't change a thing.
Dubious "opinion" polls, shaped by indoctrinating leftist media, is not the peoples will. The American people voted for Bush as their Commander in Chief and President.
First in Flight.
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.