Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lurqer who wrote (42840)	4/16/2004 12:17:18 AM
From: lurqer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

File this in the "Well, Duh" folder. Rumsfeld Says He Underestimated Level of Violence in Iraq Bradley Graham Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld acknowledged yesterday that he had not expected the level of violence confronting U.S. forces in Iraq, but he stood by his decision to send fewer troops than some Army officials and lawmakers have argued were necessary to stabilize the country. His remarks came during a Pentagon news conference at which Rumsfeld announced a three-month extension in tours for about 20,000 troops, keeping combat strength in place to handle attacks by Sunni and Shiite insurgents that have led to record-high casualties for U.S. forces. Rumsfeld said the extensions would allow the total number of U.S. troops to remain about 135,000, superseding previous plans to reduce the level to about 115,000. Asked a broad question about whether he could identify any mistakes he made before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Rumsfeld focused instead on his expectations for Iraq after U.S. forces invaded a year ago. "If you had said to me a year ago, 'Describe the situation you'll be in today one year later,' I don't know many people who would have described it -- I would not have -- described it the way it happens to be today," he said. Elaborating later, Rumsfeld added: "I certainly would not have estimated that we would have had the number of individuals lost that we have had lost in the last week." Only halfway over, April already ranks as the deadliest month of the war for the United States, with 92 U.S. troops killed. In all, 685 U.S. service members have died since the beginning of military operations in Iraq, 491 of them as a result of hostile action, according to Pentagon figures. Pressed on whether, in retrospect, he should have sent more troops to Iraq months ago, Rumsfeld tossed the question to the officer at his side -- Marine Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs -- who defended the deployment as having achieved the right balance between too many and too few. Pace said the original plan to reduce the number of troops in Iraq this spring -- while rotating into the country an entirely fresh set of forces -- had been devised to be flexible. Anticipating some rise in violence ahead of the scheduled June 30 transfer of power in Iraq, U.S. commanders had arranged for incoming forces to overlap with outgoing ones, thereby achieving a temporary spike in the total number of troops in country. "That is part of the flexibility that we built into the replacement plan in the first place," Pace said. But whatever contingency plans were drawn up for potential trouble around this time, the fierceness and breadth of the attacks in recent days clearly caught Pentagon authorities off guard. "Everyone is, at this point, realizing that when everybody said this will be a period during which we will be tested a lot, this is what it meant," said a senior Rumsfeld aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be more candid. "How it would unfold, I don't think anyone knew." The troops that are being kept in Iraq had expected to return home this month or next after completing a year of duty. Another 16,000 soldiers slated to leave Iraq by May will still be allowed to go as fresh forces continue to arrive over the next few weeks under the original rotation plan, Rumsfeld said. If, after the 90-day extension ends, U.S. commanders want to continue the elevated troop level in Iraq, new forces will be sent from the United States or elsewhere, Rumsfeld said. Which troops would fill that gap have yet to be specified, Army officials said. "I think all of the options are on the table," Gen. George Casey, the Army's vice chief of staff, told reporters after Rumsfeld spoke. "They're sorting those out over the next couple of days here." Casey declined to offer an opinion about the adequacy of U.S. military preparations that preceded the current surge of violence. But he did address a question on whether the tour extensions would hurt troop morale. "Everybody's disappointed," he said. "Does it create morale problems? Depends on the strength of the unit." washingtonpost.com lurqer