Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

US to keep high force levels in Iraq indefinitely: officials

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 10:58 PM
Original message
US to keep high force levels in Iraq indefinitely: officials
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040503/pl_afp/iraq_us_troops&cid=1521&ncid=1473

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Faced with a mounting insurgency, the United States has decided to keep force levels in Iraq (news - web sites) at beefed up levels of about 135,000 for the forseeable future, senior defense officials said.


The Pentagon (news - web sites) moved last month to build up the force to deal with uprisings in the south and in Fallujah by extending the tours of 20,000 troops from the 1st Armored Division and the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment for at least three months.


Officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told AFP those troops will be replaced with fresh units at the end of their extended tours, but the overall force will be maintained at its current strength, which has hovered around 135,000 troops.


General John Abizaid, head of US Central Command, which includes Iraq, "has expressed his desire to keep things at current levels for a while," a senior defense official said.


"I don't think there is going to be a time limit associated with it," the official said.

more
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. "Beefed up".
Translation: no new troops,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. It is looking as we will need that darn
draft, (stop saying that) before November
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinanator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. and it will happen as a bipartisan effort before then
to take the issue off the table for the election and public debate.
bet your socks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dusty64 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
19. It better not!
I hope some Democrats in power are listening, cause if they enable the regime to reinstate the draft so our corporate/theocratic war machine can have some fresh fodder they are DONE as a political force in this Country. For once they'd better stand up to this insanity and be the opposition that the People expect them to be, if they do the extreme rightwing will be finished for a generation or more. Are they listening?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Stop that!
You're reading my mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. Do you think that the Guard may mutiny...
...our people are sitting ducks over there, 13 dead in three days, a 130 to 150 or more per month, another 1,200 dead by the end of the year. These are horrific numbers! It is time for change. No more Bush! Bring our troops home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. I have been thinking that some of them may have already mutinied
We would not hear about it for a while if it had happened. But common sense says the moral can't be too good over there about now. And starting to get hot again too.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
4. II think there will be a time limit on this quagmire.
Abizaid just doesn't know it yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
6. bushco wanted their everlasting 1984 war. they got it. just what the PNAC
ordered. military industrial complex receives infinite profits. non-stop outpouring of the US TREASURY into the pockets of poppy bush's company.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AussieInCA Donating Member (510 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
9. the story changes weekly
their planning is churning so fast it is getting rediculous. So many decisions being so wrong across the board it gets to the point where you cannot believe anything anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
10. Are we going to bring the troops home after Kerry's Inauguration?
Or are we going to repeat the mistakes of Vietnam?

We already lost this war!

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-03-04 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. THE NAM 1968 IRAQ-NAM 2004 (take your pick?)
 = VIET-NAM

Nguyen Ngoc Loan, whose execution of a Viet Cong prisoner on the streets of Saigon in 1968
became one of the most chilling images of the Vietnam War


=IRAQ-NAM

At most, the 372nd's alleged abuses of prisoners were "stupid, kid things - pranks," Terrie
England mother of Lynndie said,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wright Patman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 02:52 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. If Lynndie England
were stripped naked and the Arabs were masturbating into her mouth, would that still be a "stupid kid thing" and a "prank," Mrs. England?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
12. No time limit, huh?
That sounds more like, "we'll be there indefinitely, or maybe until we pump out our last barrel of black gold from these sands".

I think it might be a little sooner than that. I'm a senior accountant, and all I do is add and subtract $$$dollars all day long. I'm VERY interested in costs and all those things that bore other people.

Quick math: I just read on a thread that Lo And Behold Bush is going to go back to Congress to beg for some more money. It seems that there is never really enough for this little business opportunity. I think he's going to ask for another $70 billion.

That's ON TOP OF the $160 billion we've already spent there. My mind is spinning; it's hard to keep track of all the spending...

Friends, guess what will stop us before we have a chance to really get ensconced in that country?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
teryang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
13. What a pile of bull!
Iraqi security forces may not be ready to go until February. Biden has said repeatedly that experts in Iraq have told him it will take 3 to 5 years from now and huge additional resources that have not yet been identified or mobilized to train the Iraqi army and police forces.

Where are the "fresh troops" to replace the extended troops going to come from? This mystery still hasn't been explained in any detail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maggrwaggr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 12:50 AM
Response to Original message
14. that was the plan from the get-go. Permanent bases in Iraq
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/13/news-cooper.php

(snip)
Q: What do you believe the real reasons were for the war?

A: The neoconservatives needed to do more than just topple Saddam Hussein. They wanted to put in a government friendly to the U.S., and they wanted permanent basing in Iraq. There are several reasons why they wanted to do that. None of those reasons, of course, were presented to the American people or to Congress.
(snip)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 03:41 AM
Response to Original message
16. Surprise!
There was no exit plan because we never had any intention of leaving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. We will leave the cities and population centers
We will have a big troop draw down in July. We will leave a small force behind to guard our precious bases and oil infrastructure and W will care less if the rest of Iraq goes to hell. He has a reselection to win.

Then in the new year, will be back to take on Syria and Iran. Phase II of the PNAC wetdream.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NuttyFluffers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-04-04 07:22 AM
Response to Original message
17. Wheeeee! /(rides another roller coaster dip)
will the fun never end!! /sarcasm

well, eventually you can think of it this way, we will pull out. whether we pull out sooner than later is just a matter whether we want to have a crippled america or an outright bankrupt and broken america.

let's see how bright our society is, shall we?!


Wheeeee!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu May 09th 2024, 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC