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 ...
That's true...but *paul* needs the help if the rats get their way.
After watching the speech, I log on to my computer here and my soon to be former homepage Yahoo has this:
Bush Admits Mistakes in Iraq; 21,000 new troops to be deployed.
Iran and Syria must be confronted. It's the key to the whole region. Maybe this is the beginning of us finally doing something about that. It should have been done long ago.
Rudy is making a lot of sense on Fox News. I like his analytical talents, and ability to cut to the heart of matters. He is emphasizing accountability and performance, and consequences. Very good, very persuasive. He should have give the speech tonight, as it were. JMO.
Yeah... I only voted for the man twice, including against McCain my own senator in our primary in AZ.
So was the Battle of the Bulge...so was Task Force Smith...so was (insert military battle here)...successful wars are surrounded by bungled engagements.
Some of us understand that and know that it's not the short term media friendly goals that matter...it's the long term outcome that is important.
Those that don't get it...sound just like you.
What a wonderful tribute to your mother. She did a great job raising YOU, MamaB. Love, Maryxxx
I cannot believe that Matthews and Olbermann are now complaining that the President is trying to pick a fight with Iran by sending another carrier battle group to the Persian Gulf. And that they do not understand why he is talking about disrupting Iran helping the Shite insurgent groups.
That was their whole discussion last time I could stomach watching MSNBC.
bump for your observation:
We are also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence sharing — and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region."
I am not sure she should go there. Unless she stopped smoking in the past 6 years, it would the pot/kettle thing.
LOL............you nailed it!
The military will have to fund it out of hide which they will do. They have in the past and will in the future because they don't trust Congress. The President is authorized to send troops I believe it is for 90 days without having to go to Congress. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
Carter cancelled the B-1 Bomber but the AF didn't -- they kept it under wraps getting funding under various names and when Pres Reagan came into office the B-1 was funded again.
There is money that can be used that is already in the pipeline.
No. Just a D.
Hmmmmmm. My Grandson (Marine) was home for Christmas and went back last week. He's not scheduled to go to Iraq till next month. Looks like that may change.
I agree with you about Guiliani.
But he is not the President. And that's not opinion.
They bring up the Baker group like it is the Divine Word.
If they try to cut funds we should leave the troops there and ask American's to pay out of thier pockets. This would be political suicide for the rats so I don't think itll happen.
You're talking to a member of our proud military, I suggest you stand down...
So you say.
It's hard to believe that given your uneducated drivel here tonite.
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.