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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (192764)	1/12/2007 9:56:48 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793759

Yes, but even Harry Reid supported and called for troop increases. And it wasn't in 2004! Reid backs temporary increase in U.S. troops Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:24 PM ET By Lesley Wroughton WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said on Sunday he would support a short-term increase in U.S. troop numbers in Iraq being weighed by President George W. Bush if it is part of a broader withdrawal plan. Bush has been talking with experts about a new Iraq strategy and a short-term increase in American troops to help make Baghdad more secure is one idea that has been presented to him. "If it's for a surge, that is, for two or three months and it's part of a program to get us out of there as indicated by this time next year, then, sure, I'll go along with it," Reid, who will become the majority leader when Democrats take control of the Senate next month, told ABC's "This Week" program. But fellow Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, when told of Reid's comments, disagreed. "I respect Harry Reid on it, but that's not where I am," he said. "The generals who have testified before the Armed Services Committee think that we would add to being a crutch for the Iraqi civilian government in not making the right judgments and decisions. I think that is a persuasive case and is one that I support," Kennedy told Fox News Sunday. Bush plans to present his strategy in the new year but has said he would not be rushed into making a decision on a new course for Iraq. A bipartisan commission led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton suggested the United States start planning to pull back the troops it has in Iraq. But others, including Sen. John McCain of Arizona, have said more troops are needed at least in the short run to stabilize the country in order to give the political process a chance to work. A PLEA FOR MORE TROOPS Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashimi, a Sunni, said the United States should boost the size of its military presence in Baghdad where the worst violence is occurring. "Troops are insufficient to handle the security as required in Baghdad, and you could see clearly in fact the increasing influence of the militia in Baghdad which makes things rather very, very difficult to the innocent people. So what I need, yes, definitely, in fact, I need more troops, in fact, to be in Baghdad," he told CNN's Late Edition. Asked if that meant more U.S. troops, al-Hashimi added, "U.S. troops, yes, definitely." He said Iraqi troops "across the board, they are insufficient, incompetent, and many of them is corrupted." But former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell was not convinced that adding to the 135,000 currently in Iraq would quell the worsening security in Baghdad, where troop numbers were increased since June to stabilize the situation. "I am not persuaded that another surge of troops into Baghdad for the purposes of suppressing this communitarian violence, this civil war, will work," Powell told CBS "Face the Nation." He said the U.S. Army was already stretched thin. "If you surge now, you're going to keep troops who have already been kept there long even longer," he said. "And you're going to be bringing in troops from the United States who are going to be coming anyway but perhaps a little bit later." Democrats won control of the U.S. Congress in elections last month that they said illustrated a growing pessimism among Americans over the unpopular war. "The American people will not allow this war to go on as it has," said Reid. "It simply is a war that will not be won militarily. It can only be won politically." today.reuters.com

To: LindyBill who wrote (192764)	1/13/2007 1:27:15 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793759

Of course the troop surge is and should be NBD! But the Dems wanted the entire Iraq Study Group paper to be implemented, is what I heard their leadership say. Haven't heard a one of them say anything about this, however: From the article I posted" Another source is the Iraq Study Group itself (page 7): The Iraqi government should accelerate assuming responsibility for Iraqi security by increasing the number and quality of Iraqi Army brigades. While this process is under way, and to facilitate it, the United States should significantly increase the number of U.S. military personnel, including combat troops, imbedded in and supporting Iraqi Army units. As these actions proceed, U.S. combat forces could begin to move out of Iraq. The VERY dangerous part of the Dems and some Repubs "playing politics" is again, how the US is perceived in the world. Including our Military. There is American blood on their hands, and if they keep it up, there will be more! But then, again, IMO. What do I know?