Secret Surge? Bush could double Iraq force by Christmas

Secret Surge? Bush could double Iraq force by Christmas

sfgate.com

The Bush administration is quietly on track to nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year, an analysis of Pentagon deployment orders showed Monday.

The little-noticed second surge, designed to reinforce U.S. troops in Iraq, is being executed by sending more combat brigades and extending tours of duty for troops already there.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 24-5-2007 by UM_Gazz]

Despite increasing pressure both publicly and politicaly (from both parties). The Army denies that there is a secret surge going on, but projections put the number of personel on the ground at a total of 28 brigades, 8 more than what was mention in the first surge. We are talking over 200000 combat troops on the ground, many who have had thier deployments extended 90 days already.

The surge did not work, and with the "safe" area of the Green Zone under what seems like daily attack, they may need the extra troops to just secure the capital let alone forrays into Anbar. Time to go another route

sfgate.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

He has no respect for the law or congress or the American people. When are people going to wake up to the fact that this man and his cabal are dangerous?

According to US spokesman all of this is pure speculation. So who do you believe the Hearst Corp or actual individuals who know what is going on.

He gave a very good explanation of what is happening they are probably counting only those arriving but not those leaving during the normal turn about period.

From the sourced link

Originally posted by shots
According to US spokesman all of this is pure speculation. So who do you believe the Hearst Corp or actual individuals who know what is going on.

Do you really want me to answer that question?

BTW, he calls it "speculation", he's not denying this.

I don't know if there is a so called second surge happening or not. What I do know is my brother is going back over in July and doesn't expect to come home for 2 years. Of course, part of that is re-training that the guard must go through. This time the guard is not getting mid-deployment leave which isn't right or even standard practice. My co-worker's son is in the Army and wasn't scheduled to deploy until 09 but it looks as though that may be moved up.

I will tell you in all honesty I wish all our troops were coming home now I'm filled with dread and trepidation for my brother.

If this is true it sure is going to anger alot of people that want us to lose this war! Just the talk of it is making some nervous.

Having something positive happen in Iraq will not be tolerated and must be stopped by any means necessary! (this is the symbol for sarcasm...right?)

Originally posted by RRconservative


Having something positive happen in Iraq will not be tolerated and must be stopped by any means necessary!

(this is the symbol for sarcasm...right?)

So, when do you, your son/daughter, grandson/granddaughter(I don't know you) ship out to do this "something positive" in Iraq? Just questioning why you aren't questioning?

Hey, come on. Nobody wants defeat in Iraq. We are RIGHT to question this. It it happens, it'll be like Nixon's secretive efforts (Google search terms, Linebacker 2, secret bombing of Cambodia) all over again, and itwill have a similar political effect here at home. It's good civics to be skeptical about this news item.

[edit on 22-5-2007 by Justin Oldham]

Originally posted by intrepid


BTW, he calls it "speculation", he's not denying this.

So do you want to play semantics? While you do not think he denied it I do. Now prove he did not mean what he said.

Justin you are forgetting that Republican supporters have been brainwashed into thinking that unless you tow the Bush admin line you are a defeatist.
Remember all the flak people coped when they first spoke out against the botched occupation of Iraq ?

The problem with the current surge other then the fact it is three or four years to late is the fact that the pressure is only gradually being applied to the enemy.The 2nd surge doesn't make a whole lot of sense if the troops were available they should have gone in as a part of the first so called troop surge .

The security situation has to improve drastically across Iraq and the enemy mustn't be given time to adapted his tactics to the increased in presence of US troops.

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by intrepid


BTW, he calls it "speculation", he's not denying this.

So do you want to play semantics? While you do not think he denied it I do. Now prove he did not mean what he said.

All ready done that shots. DID HE DENY IT? Maybe he's a smart one and doesn't want to be an Ollie North. But then again, he didn't do anything wrong either, right?

so they are increasing the no of combat troops 98,000. what about the support troops that will be deploying with them. generally it take about 3-5 soldiers to support a front line fighter the so called boots on the ground. if that is so the amount of soldiers in theater will be increased greatly. i wonder how the mighty pentegon is going to hide deploying that many soldiers. sooner or latter some one will rise the alarm and go wtf going on here

Originally posted by intrepid
All ready done that shots. DID HE DENY IT?

Yes in my mend he did when it said it was speculation. Now as I asked you earlier can you prove he was lying? I know I sure can not,.

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by intrepid
All ready done that shots. DID HE DENY IT?

Yes in my mend he did when it said it was speculation.

Yes, you will see what you want.

Now as I asked you earlier can you prove he was lying? I know I sure can not,.

Back at you dude, can PROVE he's telling the truth? Keep in mind this administrations record.

Originally posted by intrepid


Back at you dude, can PROVE he's telling the truth? Keep in mind this administrations record.

Just as I thought once again you want to play semantics. Well I am not going to do that you alleged/implied he was lying yet you cannot prove it. I rest my case and it was not a case of Molson or La Blatte either

I am probably going to get a warning for this but RR you are an ass. Nobody wants us to lose anything, conservative or liberal.

Sad reality is though we've lost already. We lost through poor planning and incompetence and a failure to pay attention to history and all that is besides the fact that we shouldn't be there in the first place.

The real question should be is how many more lives are lost before bush minor listens to the will of the American people? Unfortunately probably a lot more since he is one of those men who can never admit that they are wrong.

Recommended listening

This week's interview about the use of private contractors in Iraq including Blackwater
on WAMU's Diane Rehm show.

wamu.org...

A very informative interview.

With all the spin we are hearing from president Bush about Congress holding up support
for OUR TROOPS, the information covered in this interview definitely makes you wonder where
the money is really going to.

This is the Military Industrial Complex Eisenhower warned us about.







[edit on 23-5-2007 by FallenFromTheTree]

This administration needs taking out now.

I don't understand how in todays day and age this is allowed to happen.
Well i do but you know what I'm saying.

I have never felt so little respect , or had so little confidence in a political leader. I think this administration is willing to do anything to reach its goals.

God help us all.

I am in the uk and 3 of my friends got shipped off to Basra last Tuesday , the first surge i am led to believe is planned to be complete by june and that would be 162,500 American combat soldiers i think (correct me if i am wrong!). How many American combat solders plus support soldiers would there be if/when this second surge is complete?