U.S. General in Baghdad Wants Even More Troops

[cali]

The U.S. General in charge of security in Baghdad clearly doesn't think the planned addition of 17,000 troops in that city is enough. He's requesting more troops on top of that:

WASHINGTON — The U.S. general commanding the security crackdown in Baghdad said Friday that he has asked for reinforcements beyond the 17,000 U.S. combat troops already committed to the Iraqi capital as part of President Bush's emergency build-up.

Army Maj. Gen. Joseph Fil, commanding general of the 1st Cavalry Division based at Fort Hood, told a Pentagon news conference that he has requested additional forces to provide attack helicopters and combat engineers to bolster efforts to regain control of the capital city of 5 million.

Fil's request, if approved, could boost the U.S. buildup planned for Baghdad by more than 7,500 soldiers — or about a 44 percent increase.

"We have requested specific elements — in other words, additional attack helicopters and additional engineers," Fil said, adding that additional logistics troops also would be required.

The final number of reinforcements will be determined by the Pentagon —

<snip>

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/4560719.html

[tblue]

1. He means even more redeployments -- and that's just psycho

[cali]

2. It certainly is psycho and it reveals

that this guy doesn't believe the "surge" is going to work.

[CJCRANE]

3. How about - fill the city with troops

and move the general population somewhere else? Problem solved.

[ClintonTyree]

4. Millions of them are already refugees.......

fleeing to Syria and Jordon to escape the United States forced "democracy" and the death that comes from it. Ingrates! :sarcasm:

[Sherman A1]

5. Well this will be interesting....

Mr. Bush's administration has long said that the they depend upon the Generals on the ground to tell them what they need and they send it to them. Not that I think more troops is a good idea, but it does put our esteemed leader into a more difficult position...Does he support the troops (and their military leadership) or does he not? Hmmm....?

[TomClash]

6. HIstory repeats itself

'BEST' JUNGLE UNIT LANDS IN VIETNAM; Marines Also Among 7,000 Being Added to U.S. Forces

January 19, 1966, Wednesday
Page 3, 596 words

SAIGON, Jan. 18 - United States military officials announced today that an additional 7,000 combat troops were going ashore in South Vietnam, bringing the number of Americans fighting here to nearly 190,000.

[izzie]

7. As if the fighter in Iraq will just not go to ground if we did send them

I am a little old lady and can see that wars are not the same as they were and for the life of me I do not understand why all these 'smart' people can not see it. One only has to read a few history books to see people are most likely to change how they do things when they find it does not work. When the first Bush went after Saddam the 'battle cry' was that Iraq had the third largest army in the world and we beat it in a few weeks. Now any one in their right mind knew that army, if even that great, fads into the background once they saw a larger army coming at them. I am sure they will leave the city as soon as we get more people there and pop up some place else. Same as this time. This is not going to be a WW1 and WW2 style war. I would think we can see the large ground armies are a thing of the past. All of society changes when you take the power out of the head guy and people can get information on what is really going on. The 'little father' business is long gone in this world. We ran that to death in the 1800's and I was sure it was dead by the end of the 1900's any how. Time we had some new thinkers at West Point and WH for sure.