It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Boosting troops in Iraq???

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Do we really need more troops in Iraq?

Reuters

If we are not losing the war on terror, why should we send more troops?




*Added in Url Tag

[edit on 2-12-2004 by TrickmastertricK]




posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by krt1967
If we are not losing the war on terror, why should we send more troops?

Really? You are confused or 'puzzled'? You do not think that there can be a use for more troops in iraq, without the entire war on terror being lost?



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 01:54 PM
link   
Why do people keep getting Iraq and the "War on Terror" confused?

There is absolutely no doubt that troop numbers in Iraq need to be increased.

As far as the W.O.T and OBL, Mr Bush is just not that concerned about him, remember?



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by krt1967
Do we really need more troops in Iraq?

Reutersl

If we are not losing the war on terror, why should we send more troops?


I believe the US announced the expansion plans to raise the level to 150,000 months ago, As I understand it, the purpose is to have safe elections in Iraq.


*Added in Url Tag

[edit on 2-12-2004 by TrickmastertricK]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Yes US is not only going to bring more troops to Iraq but also to afghanistan.

So they are going to need more money and resources to support our loves ones in these two countries.

I guess we own these two countries after all.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Yes US is not only going to bring more troops to Iraq but also to afghanistan.

So they are going to need more money and resources to support our loves ones in these two countries.



The elections are over in Afgamistan. One would think those surplus troops are now being moved to Iraq. If that is the case the cost is minimal.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:36 PM
link   
The US is planing a new ofensive in Afghanistan, they are having some problems with some elections and they got some threats this a link to the story.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by krt1967
If we are not losing the war on terror, why should we send more troops?

Really? You are confused or 'puzzled'? You do not think that there can be a use for more troops in iraq, without the entire war on terror being lost?


No. Our president says we are winning the war on terror. If we are winning, why send more troops?
II worry that this is what they want, so that America will be left unprotected. Maybe this is what they need in order to get a head start in war on our land.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 02:00 PM
link   
They need the additional troops in advance of the elections on January 30th. Takes time to train them. After the election, who knows? Maybe this is all a setup for a graceful exit (could be taken as sarcasm):


The administration has been quietly urged to consider a withdrawal of the more than 140,000 troops as a priority for the second Bush term. These advocates have included Defense Department officials and consultants who supported the war to topple the Saddam Hussein regime in 2003, but who have concluded that the U.S. military presence in Iraq has become counterproductive.


www.menewsline.com...



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 03:55 PM
link   
All be it it is for elections, I still do not feel that 1,500 troops is going to make the difference. They need More just to keep the Major cities stable, then we still have the rest of Iraq to worry about. I think that at this point in time, nothing but a major deployment, and not just US troops, would be able to tabalize Iraq, What we have now is clearly not working.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join