| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Troop Surge Already Under Way |
| 2007-01-10 |
| RTWT - written pre-speech President Bush's speech may be scheduled for tonight, but the troop surge in Iraq is already under way. ABC News has learned that the "surge" Bush is expected to announce in a prime time speech tonight has already begun. Ninety advance troops from the 82nd Airborne Division arrived in Baghdad Wednesday. An additional battalion of roughly 800 troops from the same division are expected to arrive in Baghdad Thursday. Eighty percent of the sectarian violence occurs within a 30-mile radius of Baghdad, so that is where most of the additional troops will be concentrated. It is the first small wave of troops in a new White House strategy that is expected to put more than 20,000 additional U.S. troops on the ground in Iraq and likely require new call-ups of the National Guard. The president is expected to deliver his announcement about the troop increase, a plan that has already met with stiff criticism from many members of Congress, in a speech tonight from the White House. The arrival of additional forces in Iraq comes a day after leading Democrats said they would back legislation that would block funding to pay for additional military forces. A spokeswoman for Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., who, Tuesday, urgently called for Congress to vote on — and reject — the proposed surge, told ABC News that the arrival of additional soldiers "underscores Sen. Kennedy's point that Congress must act immediately." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-N.M., also responded to the report, calling the troops' arrival "deeply disappointing." Reid has said that Americans don't want to see additional forces in Iraq, and that he has been considering plans offered by his congressional colleagues. Split Troops to Secure City Military commanders say there is more to this plan than boots on the ground — it's also how the troops will be used. The idea is for U.S. and Iraqi forces to become a more integral part of Baghdad neighborhoods such as Dora, which was secured in August 2006 only to see violence spike when U.S. forces left. Under the new plan, the city of Baghdad will be divided into nine separate sections at the request of Iraqis, who want one army and police battalion devoted to each section. The additional U.S. troops being sent to Baghdad will be divided among the nine sections of the city, nearly doubling U.S. combat power in the region. In a switch from the current course of action, these U.S. forces will be housed in the very neighborhoods they patrol. Military planners tell ABC News there will eventually be about 30 mini bases, called joint security stations, scattered around Baghdad, housing both U.S. and Iraqi troops. The plan also includes an emphasis on performance from the Iraqis. White House officials said they have put tremendous pressure on Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to crack down on Shiite militias, especially radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who is thought to be responsible for most of the sectarian violence. A senior White House official said that Maliki told the president, "I swear to God, I'm not going to let Sadr run this country." Maliki must also provide Iraqi troops on schedule and give Sunnis a larger role in the government. Tonight, the president is expected to say that he's made it clear to the prime minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended, that now is the time to act. The president is also expected to announce tonight the deployment of a second aircraft carrier — perhaps the USS Stennis — to the Persian Gulf, as part of a regularly scheduled deployment. Centcom Commander Gen. John Abizaid has requested a second carrier because of Iran and other threats in the region. The ship will leave next weekend on its regularly scheduled departure date, but will proceed to the Gulf instead of its original deployment to the Pacific. |
| Posted by:Frank G |
| #4 The most important part was getting rid of those silly no go zones. I noticed Joe, Party of 1 Was the only specific name he mentioned in that bipartisan committee for success crap. I guess we know which side loserman is on. Also, sounded like some bathists are going to be allowed back in. I don't know what's going on there, but I doubt al-Maliki was happy about it. Has anyone heard from congressman al-Ellison? Hope them dems tell him to STFU. Anybody hear Husseins rebutal? |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2007-01-10 23:12 |
| #3 "At some point we can say hey we tried but the suicidal bastards wanted to die, so tough shit, tough love good bye assholes have a happy SLO death." except most Iraqis dont want to die. Certainly most Kurds dont, and i think most Shiites dont want to. Theyve gone with Sadr cause we havent managed to protect them from the insurgents, and they dont any better but to give him a shot. If we fail you can blame the French and the Germans. You can blame the Iranians and the Syrians. You can blame State. You can blame the Dems. But dont blame the ordinary Iraqis, who were oppressed for years, who werent ready for freedom when we came, who got freedom along with a shitload of violence and chaos. And yeah, if we fail, dont begrudge them their entry visas. Let them come here, and let their presence be a rebuke to everyone who thought we were there only for own interests. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2007-01-10 22:48 |
| #2 I like the part(s) where he put Iran, Syria, and Donks on notice to stop providing support to the insurgency. I give the speech a 8.5 because he did not directly call Kennedy a "pussy". |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2007-01-10 22:45 |
| #1 Bush's speech [...] We will use America’s full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists – and a strategic threat to their survival. These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors – and they must step up their support for Iraq’s unity government. We endorse the Iraqi government’s call to finalize an International Compact that will bring new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform. And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region – to build support for Iraq, and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to the Middle East. [...] Jeebus, Why would you frame our effort or couch the situation that way? iow, set America up for a defeat if it pulls out because the Iraqi fail? [who the hell writes yhr prez's stuff XXXX] Hey, If Iraq melts down on it's own dime, so be it. You can't save a person or a country that wills a pyrrhic victory or slouches off into oblivion all by itself. It is not a defeat for America if that happens. If the Iraqis refuse life and a Nationhood, so be it. Afterall It's their lot one way or the other and their defeat or not...NOT ours. Heh, if they finally get it and pull it off, Best News in a long time. If the shit heads are thru and thru losers... [ then the State Dept will bring in a few million Iraqis 1st class, taking bets] At some point we can say hey we tried but the suicidal bastards wanted to die, so tough shit, tough love good bye assholes have a happy SLO death.. /CHEERFUL EH! |
| Posted by: RD 2007-01-10 22:36 |