Bush Told that only 9,000 troops available for the 'surge'

9000 troops? What's that size wise?
Think of Wembley Stadium seating 79,000 troops?
9000 troops is 1/8th of Wembley Stadium......
....when you think about it....that's a very small group of people (size wise)......
....and they're going to accomplish what against a whole entire country????
I'm not saying I'm for it or against it. I'm just saying.....Wow.

Someone has a big chip on their sholder. I personly don't rule the world nor would I want to. Lets stop throwing stones and get back to the discussion. Flaming members is a poor sport.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Missed_gear, yeah, but the total for all four branches is not even 1.5 million....Read the link I presented a couple of posts ago...

OK…using your numbers which excludes all the call-ups.

Less than 10% of the current available branch forces are engaged in Iraq. I will presume 30K on naval station which may push this number to 10%. (rounding up).

Again using numbers that do not incorporate call-ups.

Boots on the ground is a different point of view.

January 2007 is 132k…to my point January 2006 deployment was 155k.

There is no surge….and certainly no shortage.

mg

Originally posted by superpaul55
"We have 2 choices, send more troops and slaughter the insurgency or pull out and let them slaughter each other and let one side win.

Not very good choices, but that is what they are unfortunately and there is nothing you or I can do about it."

You have missed out the one big choice at the end of it.

The United States relasing its grip upon the planet and not invading any further sovereign states. To start answering to the United Nations and the International Courts of Law. To disband your concentration camp. To stop acting as international cowboys looting the worlds resources.

This requires a distinct change of attitute, not the rise or fall of troop levels. This requires you to stop ruling the world, something you are stubbornly unable to do.

Beautiful Dreamer

This is about the control of oil and other resources.

I guess its ok for the Chinese to practice shooting down satellites and exploiting poor countries for their oil because there "good communist" and the "evil americans" are out to promote democracy.

I hope when the revolution cometh that you so desire to Britian you learn to sing in tune the international, my twisted misguided utopian friend!



[edit on 1/18/07 by mel1962]

Total forces does not mean combat ready troops. Most of the military is support and not combat. Bush is seeking combat troops. Your numbers don't reflect that. The 9,000 number, of combat ready troops is acurate and was talked about in the news days ago.

Originally posted by marg6043

Originally posted by grover
I am sorry Marge but that simply is not correct. After the fall of the Soviet Union, during the tenure of Bush senior, the Republican leadership decided that in keeping with their rhetoric about fiscal responsiblity that without the threat of the Soviet Union, we could begin downsizing the military.

You know, I knew that, but as usual I went with the most talked about Clinton's fault:Lil:

Even my husband told me that it was not Clinton, now that I remember the early retirements was actually from the Bush senior administration and not Clinton.

Thanks.

The only reason I remember it was I was living in Maine at the time and there was a big uproar over the proposed (and eventual) closing of Loring air force base in Limestone Maine. It was supposed to be shut down in the first round of closings but it was fought tooth and nail because it was one of the few employers in a region that had never recovered from the great depression. Then there was the uproar after bush senior decided for political reasons to keep the Homestead air force base open to win back votes after him and his people blew their response after hurricane Andrew.

Your damned right I've a chip on my shoulder. A chip consisting of 100'000 dead Iraqi civillians, shreaded and maimed by steel splinters, insides torn out with projectiles, holding their mangled parents arm torn with bullets. All underneath the 50 starred flag of freedom. Your right I have a chip on my shoulder.

Did I say I supported the Chinese Military Space project? Did I say I supported communists and their attrocities? Do you think I have not realised there is oil in the Middle-East? You can support this violent madness. Your family aren't going to be carpet bombed.


[edit on 18-1-2007 by superpaul55]

Originally posted by Terapin
Total forces does not mean combat ready troops. Most of the military is support and not combat.

Exactly you got it right, terapin, when I told my ex marine husband that in the 20 thousand troops to be call for Bush surge it will be Marines my husband said that as right now is not enough Marines to fill the void that the surge will leave behind.

Because for one soldier that leaves somebody has to take his place.

We could discuss all the terrible things the British have done for centuries but there is little point. This thread is not about Bashing any country, it is about Bush and his request for troops. If you wish to rant then go to PTS. Please.

Best to leave the Chips off your sholder and at the door. It is the ATS way.

Originally posted by grover

The only reason I remember it was I was living in Maine at the time and there was a big uproar over the proposed (and eventual) closing of Loring air force base in Limestone Maine.

yes Clinton was blamed for most of the already listed for closing bases.

It was right after the first gulf war that the early retirement packages were put for the military.

I remember that I wanted my husband to go for it many others did, but he did his math and told me that it was suicide to take a the packages specially after having invested so many years in the services and give away retirement.

I am glad that he didn't listen to me

Originally posted by superpaul55
Your damned right I've a chip on my shoulder. A chip consisting of 100'000 dead Iraqi civillians, shreaded and maimed by steel splinters, insides torn out with projectiles, holding their mangled parents arm torn with bullets. All underneath the 50 starred flag of freedom. Your right I have a chip on my shoulder.

[edit on 18-1-2007 by superpaul55]

Superpaul

What are they to you, are they any less than the millions of Africans being killed Darfor? Man's cruelty knows no end! The Iraq's are not totally innocent many of the civilians are killed by their own fellow citizens. The American and British troops have killed a fraction of your 100,000. You should be made at the insurgents and terrorist more than the troops that are there just doing their job.



[edit on 1/18/07 by mel1962]

[edit on 1/18/07 by mel1962]

Originally posted by superpaul55
Would you like to provide me that list numbered from 1 to 8000 please? I was just wondering what targets your military expansion would cover that are not already covered?

I personally don't play the game of who killed less.

[edit on 18-1-2007 by superpaul55]

Well I can give you a list of both former Soviet nuclear targets, theres nowhere near 8000 as of now I believe, maybe around 1/4 that number. And we dont have 8000 nuclear weapons on ready to launch because of the START 2 signed in 1993. That number is now around 2000-2500 for both the US and Russia. Even though I dont think nuclear war with anyone is imminent and I doubt it will happen anytime soon, in our lifetimes anyhow.

US Nuclear Target Growth

I couldnt find anything for US targets in Russia, but I imagine it is much the same in quantity, as most targets are military(those that are priority anyhow)
Potential Soviet Nuclear Targets in the US

It doesnt matter if you dont play the game of who killed less, all countries are guilty of attrocities and crimes, past and present. Tell me one that doesn't, pot calling the kettle black anyone?






[edit on 1/18/2007 by ludaChris]

This isn't an attack on troops. Its an attack on American mindset. Go and purge yourself of the death you have financed. Go and watch the news. Its the Iranians fault, not mine. Its the Syrians fault, not mine. He is bad and I am good. He is bad. Allocate the blame. Allocate it.

I admitt I am incorrect then, only 2500 nucleur warheads exist. Could I request a list of only 2500 targets then? Numbered 1 to 2500. Each with a target.

What does nuclear targets have to do with the topic of this thread? Nothing, so, get back on topic. Please.

Originally posted by superpaul55
This isn't an attack on troops. Its an attack on American mindset. Go and purge yourself of the death you have financed. Go and watch the news. Its the Iranians fault, not mine. Its the Syrians fault, not mine. He is bad and I am good. He is bad. Allocate the blame. Allocate it.

Unfortunately SuperPaul the Americans must keep the supply of oil pumping to the world economy at any cost. I don't like it, neither do you, but we all have to go to work and make a living at the expense of others. Be thankful you were not born on the other side of this sad tragedy. I believe your heart is the right place, but your frustrated by your limitations to do anything about it. Except, try to change it, but don't let it consume you, look out for yourself and your family, no one else is going to just ask the people in Iraq and Darfor!

respectfully


[edit on 1/18/07 by mel1962]

Bush reminds me of hitler during his last months when he was ranting and raving and not listening to his generals. He is extremely paranoid and out of touch with reality just as hitler was. At this point it wouldn't surprise me if he started executing any generals that he thought weren't on the same page with himself. Two more years people, only 2 more years....

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
We should be marching anywhere from 10 to 15 million men at any given time. However, we are not.

That is true, if we are 300 million and the military is 2 million, that is like one person out of every 150 serves in the military. sheesh .. those arent good numbers.

But dont be decieved, if the homeland was attacked there'd be many, many, many milita men with various guns of various kinds who are straight shots and willing to fight and die in defense of their country. These men number in the low millions too I bet.

So just consider the home infantry forces entirely "irregulars" .. hehe

Hi, Before i get going not every Brit hates American citizens. Speaker of the truth I enjoy your posts.

I was Involved in Operation Telic 1,3 and 7.

I Know Iraq VERY well and I my unit had to work closly with American units on some missions. 9,000, 21,000 or even 500,000 troops will not achieve what the US government wants to achieve! I will explain why...

The US army is not, in its current state, configured to the type of war it is waging. The US Army is still, to my amazment, geared for Cold war type of battlfields. I would feel very sorry for any nation including my own who tried to take on the USA with conventional battle tactics, but for Urban warfare the US lacks in all departmentments apart from technology.

1. Mentality.

The Regular US troops are very ignorant, I always heard them talking about ragheads! they cannot comprehend the fact that not every Muslim, person of middle eastern origin is not necessary a terrorist/insurgent. They operate a system of shoot first. They show disrespect to the citizens of Iraq (openly) and wonder why they are dispised. They also lack discipline. Even the Marines, SEAL's etc. show the above traits but also reinforce the above traits by their solid belief that they are superior to all men. This mentality is not necessarily the fault of the men it is mostly attributed to their training and the conduct of US officers who actually promote this type of behavior and what I call "Hooah mentality"

The wrong mentality in this kind of conflict is counterproductive as you loose the trust of the local populace and cause otherwise possibly coopertive civilians to take to arms. The Iraqi people as a whole do believe the US troops are there to kill them. in Britain even our regular army soldier is taught to respect the local population we are briefed on their beliefs and customs, we are told to win their hearts and minds. Apart from a few bad apples the majority of the the british army do this part of warfare very well. I was also trained to use the population as one of the most powerful weapons in my arsenal, tribal populations know exactly who is where and what they are doing and if they trust you they will give out better intelligence than our army intel can!

2. Strategy.

The US strategy of raiding houses, shooting upon suspicion, shock 'n' awe and treating every Iraqi as a possible enemy combatent etc. Is not working, it can not work. It is the tactics used by an Invading force and not a stabalising force. Saying that, the local populations opinion on US troops has reached a point of no return because of the above mentioned tactics. The British use a tactic used and proved in Northern Ireland. That is to not shoot until shot upon, to engage actively with the local population.

The stategy from the start of the war has meant US failure from the start, as I mentioned before Iraqi citizens view on the US army has gone past the point of no return, a change to less aggressive tactics will no longer work.


3. Equipment
The gear the US troops have as standard is 10 years ahead of the britsh army. It's just a shame it can't be used effectively. Luckily my unit doesn't use the SA80 A2 (Spit on floor)

The US has only 2 options and only one of them is viable,

The unviable option is to up the aggresivness of its strategy and actually go to war with the country of Iraq. This would mean the loss of UN/NATO assistance bacause it would be completly illegal and could well be the ultimate catylist for another world war.

The remaining option would mean pulling out of all US troops, after all they are hated by the people they are there to liberate/protect. Now I don't know what this scenario would do to Iraq, I do not imagine it will be pretty though!

Take care

[edit on 19/1/07 by Jimmy1880]

Excellent post Jimmy. Unfortunately bush will never pull out because of his pride. He has lost touch with the American people and completely disregarded what we have told him we wanted in our last election. He is a madman at this point and it is my firm belief that he will be in power when Armageddon starts.

The problem with our troops is that they see the Iraqi people killing their squad mates every day and frankly they don't trust the people. It's very hard to treat people with respect and dignity when as soon as you turn your back they shoot an rpg at you. We had the same problem in Vietnam. It's a catch 22. This entire fiasco is the fault of America for putting this lunatic in office. I can forgive people that voted for this guy the first time, but anyone that voted for bush's 2nd term is just as responsible for these problems as he is.

This country is lost with all the problems we have. I feel sorry for the youth because they are going to have to deal with Iraq, financial insolvency, illegal immigration takeover, loss of rights...and the list goes on. God help us all.