Can we say "quagmire" yet?

[shoeless]

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, Rumsfeld dismissed suggestions that 146,000 U.S. troops in Iraq are engaged in a guerrilla war or bogged down in a Vietnam-like "quagmire."

"That doesn't make it anything like a guerrilla war or an organized resistance," Rumsfeld said.

US commander will not take blame for unrest

America's top commander in Iraq has warned Washington that he will not be "the fall guy" if violence in the country worsens, it emerged yesterday, as word leaked out that US generals are "outraged" by their lack of soldiers.

America's generals consider current troop strengths of 130,000 in Iraq inadequate, reported the columnist Robert Novak, a doyen of the old-school Right in Washington.

Gen John Abizaid, commander of Central Command, told his political masters earlier this week that he would ask for reinforcements if requested by the generals under him. His words overrode months of public assurances from the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and other civilian chiefs that more troops are not necessary.

[kruser79]

BS. The SecDef has been saying since the beginning that it is up to the commanders in the field. He's said time and again, that he will mobilize more troops if the field commanders say they need them. This smells like another case of a reporter talking to some Lt. or Cpt. in the field, and having them say they could use more soldiers for a particular checkpoint......."OMG! We don't have enough troops! It's a quagmire! The administration is dictating how to wage the war!"
One soldier on camera saying that he didn't have enough to eat got blown out of proportion to the point that the reporter said logistics lines were broken, this is no different.
Rubbish....

[shoeless]

Originally Posted by kruser79

BS. This smells like another case of a reporter talking to some Lt. or Cpt. in the field, and having them say they could use more soldiers for a particular checkpoint......."OMG! We don't have enough troops! It's a quagmire! The administration is dictating how to wage the war!"
Rubbish....

Keep that head buried firmly in the sand.

U.S. seeks more troops in Iraq

Dissatisfied with the performance of the new Iraqi security services in last week's fighting, U.S. military officials said Monday that they would recruit former top officers of Saddam Hussein's disbanded army and would seek thousands more American troops.

Sanchez confirmed that a battalion of the Iraqi army refused to fight in Fallujah last week. Some Iraqi police defected to Sadr's forces, according to Gen. John Abizaid, the U.S. commander in the Middle East.
Abizaid said he was asking the Pentagon to add "a strong, mobile combat-arms capability" of "two brigades' worth of combat power, if not more." That would amount to at least 10,000 troops.

[The_Federalist]

Gen John Abizaid, commander of Central Command, told his political masters earlier this week that he would ask for reinforcements if requested by the generals under him. His words overrode months of public assurances from the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and other civilian chiefs that more troops are not necessary.

This article is trash, quotes un-named sources from previous administrations, and lacks anything other than general supposition and meager claims.

Gen Abizad has said all along he would ask for more troops from his boss, if his subordinates if they thought they were needed. Just as Rumsfeld stated he would ask for more troops if his subordinates thought they were needed.

These men know that the commanders at brigade and batt level, or lower, are the ones who are fighting, and these are the people whose input will ultimately lead to a decision on more troops.

NOT like in Vietnam where the SecDef and CinC thought THEY knew best for the troops, our leaders are letting our troops decide what they need, and then supporting them with every means possible.

[mpwife1165th]

Shoeless

Your agenda is pretty clear from what you have posted. You do not appear to really want discussion... but you are very good with cutting and pasting. I'm sure your kindergarten teacher would be proud. Especially nice use of photos of dead or wounded soldiers - seems you are not above using them for your political agenda.

[BrianK]

Difficult for some people to set aside a political agenda & not spin or blow any new item out of proportion. Any self thinking person can easily see that adapting to change is what is taking place. Even adjustments need to be adjusted.

I'm surprised that those with an agenda haven't critisized Pres. Bush for not supplying the terrorists with uniforms so our troops could recognize who to shoot at. Could be next though.

[shoeless]

Give me a freakin' break! The agenda of 95% of the people on this board was immediately obvious to me. You guys have some right to talk about "agendas".

If you don't like the fact that I back up my points with facts (what you refer to as "cut and paste"), that's just too bad. I don't make baseless assertions, and I am going to document everything I say. Maybe some of you people should try it. It might even make you credible.