Saturday, March 17, 2007

YES! More Troops For Iraq

An F/A-18 Hornet approaches for landing on the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier after flight operations in this Thursday, March 20, 2003 file photo. The first Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired early Thursday against Iraqi targets Image Credit: AP Photo/FILE/Richard Vogel

YES! More Troops For Iraq

It is always confusing for a politically charged, micro-management focused, uninformed populous to rile against what a war power professional may recognize as the right thing to do at a time of conflict ... but, YES, more troops for Iraq.

General Petreaus was approved by unanimous vote by the Senate because it was the right thing to do - and now HE wants more troops because it IS the right thing to do.

The one thing that we have learned as it relates to task competency is that one leaves the decision making of each task to the trained professionals.

MAXINE has one question - When you have a pain in your jaw coming from a cracked tooth, which do you want to work on it ... Senator Kennedy, Senator Clinton ... Any Senator, or a trained and proven dentist with a going practice?

Give the General his request and let him run the war, thank you!

Excerpts from the Boston Globe -

General seeks another brigade in Iraq
By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff March 16, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The top US commander in Iraq has requested another Army brigade, in addition to five already on the way, as part of the controversial "surge" of American troops designed to clamp down on sectarian violence and insurgent groups, senior Pentagon officials said yesterday.

The appeal -- not yet made public -- by General David Petraeus for a combat aviation unit would involve between 2,500 and 3,000 more soldiers and dozens of transport helicopters and powerful gunships, said the Pentagon sources. That would bring the planned expansion of US forces to close to 30,000 troops.

News of the additional deployment comes about a week after President Bush announced that about 4,700 support troops will join the initial 21,500 he ordered in January. They are in addition to the estimated 130,000 troops already in Iraq.

"This is the next shoe to drop," said one senior Pentagon official closely involved in the war planning, who requested anonymity because of prohibitions against publicly discussing internal deliberations. "But you cannot put five combat brigades in there and not have more aviation guys, military police, and intelligence units."
"There is a problem in the way the administration reported the surge numbers to begin with," said Frederick W. Kagan , a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "When they initially reported the numbers they only reported the combat strength of the brigades, and they did not count support troops" and other personnel that the operation would need.

"Petraeus has now requested what many thought would be needed to begin with," Kagan said, "but it looks like another surge."

The plan for the aviation brigade is occurring as commanders express cautious optimism that US and Iraqi forces, working together, are quelling the violence in the city and building some much-needed good will among the population.
But news that Petraeus wants several thousand more troops is bound to further frustrate the Democratic majority in Congress, which is intent on pressuring President Bush to start bringing troops home within months.

For the second day yesterday, the Senate debated a resolution that would require President Bush to begin a phased withdrawal of US troops within 120 days.

The resolution failed to garner enough votes to pass, but Democratic leaders have pledged to use their power to force the White House's hand, including placing limitations on federal funds for the war.

Despite the congressional opposition, the number of US troops committed to Iraq has steadily grown since Bush decided to send the 21,500 troops, the equivalent of five Army brigades and two Marine Corps battalions.

The Congressional Budget Office predicted last month that the total "surge" could ultimately double in size and cost once all support troops are in place.
The new unit would bring to four the total number of aviation brigades in Iraq. The official said American commanders would have to reassess in a few months whether they want to keep the higher number; if so, they would have to identify another brigade to relieve one of them.

Military strategists consider the aviation unit an "enabler," meaning it will help the additional combat troops who are spearheading the new Baghdad security plan and operations to secure several cities in Anbar Province where Sunni insurgents and followers of Al Qaeda have gained a foothold.
" Any time you deploy more combat forces you need more support forces," said Michael O'Hanlon , a defense specialist at the Brookings Institution who compiles the Iraq Index. "You need some tactical mobility to get them out of trouble."

Read All>> (free subscription required)

More support forces to enable more troop forces, makes sense to MAXINE!


Anonymous said...

On March 17th, 2007, jordan says:

Only problem is, the "war" has no victory scenario. As such, the troops' (now in greater numbers) only achievable mission is to stay alive.

Kinda like Vietnam.

ecj said...

On March 17th, 2007, Edmund Jenks says:

In Viet Nam, there had been no elections (three in Iraq to form a government).

Viet Nam is not the scenario for comparison - this scenario should be compared to any world war.


Have our troops ever left Japan, Germany, heck - even Korea?

NO! - so this is not the measure ... if troops leave. The measure is are the people of Iraq able to pursue their freely elected lives in an atmosphere of relative safety and success.

Micro management will not work. Turning our back on a peoples who have violent and horrific tendencies will not work either.

For now, at least, there is a general who is having success at leading - Let HIM lead and give him the tools to lead.

Thanks for the comment.