Free Republic

<p>Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, said the White House would be committing "an error of historic proportions" if it doesn't accede to Gen. Stanley McChrystal's requests for tens of thousands of new troops in Afghanistan.</p> <p>Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, meanwhile, upped the ante from the other side of the partisan aisle, saying that it makes no sense to stay in Afghanistan but not grant Gen. McChrystal the forces he says are necessary.</p>

Breaking News Alert The New York Times Sun, September 20, 2009 -- 11:57 PM ET ----- The top military commander in Afghanistan warns in a classified assessment of the war there that he needs additional troops within the next year or else the conflict "will likely result in failure." The grim assessment is contained in a 66-page report that the commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, submitted to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Aug. 30, and which is now under review by President Obama and his top national security advisers.

WASHINGTON, Jan. 6 — President Bush’s new Iraq strategy calls for a rapid influx of forces that could add as many as 20,000 American combat troops to Baghdad, supplemented with a jobs program costing as much as $1 billion intended to employ Iraqis in projects including painting schools and cleaning streets, according to American officials who are piecing together the last parts of the initiative. The American officials said that Iraq’s prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, formally agreed in a long teleconference on Thursday with Mr. Bush to match the American troop increase, ... Nonetheless, even in outlining the plan,...

As Americans wonder when the troops will come home from Iraq, Republican White House hopeful John McCain is laying his first big bet of the 2008 campaign: demanding more soldiers for the war. The US entanglement in Iraq is already driving the run-up to the next presidential polls, and barring a miracle peace, or abrupt US retreat, looks certain to become an even more potent issue. Potential candidates are putting up trial balloons, as a committee of veteran Washington policymakers and a White House panel probe possible changes in US strategy as violence rages in the occupied country. At first...

Excellent interview with Frederick Kagan by Ray Suarez on the News Hour - Kagan on the need for more troops in Iraq: RAY SUAREZ: Well, how many more American troops would have to be on the ground in Iraq in order to leave behind a presence after an area's clear? FREDERICK KAGAN: It's very hard for an outsider to estimate exactly how many troops are necessary, but my best guess would be somewhere around 50,000 additional American troops would probably be necessary to pull this off properly. Kagan on the Price of Defeat in Iraq: I think it's very unfortunate...

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell advised President Bush before the Iraq war to send more troops to the country, but the administration did not follow his recommendation, Powell said in an interview broadcast Sunday. Critics accuse Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld of failing to send enough soldiers to secure the peace in Iraq after the invasion three years ago. Powell said he gave the advice to now retired Gen. Tommy Franks, who developed and executed the Iraq invasion plan, and Rumsfeld while the president was present. "I made the case to Gen. Franks and Secretary Rumsfeld before...

It's even worse than you think.FOR MONTHS, it has been obvious that the United States needs more forces in Iraq, and that the Army is not large enough to sustain even the current level of deployment in Iraq. The Pentagon, however, has consistently refused to face reality. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, abetted by the senior military leadership, has instead been playing a shell game with American troops. The decision some weeks ago to keep 135,000 soldiers in Iraq was described as an "increase," because the administration had been planning to send 20,000 of them home. The same Orwellian logic...