Poll

Troop increase, Good or bad idea?

Good41%41% - 54
Bad58%58% - 77
Total: 131
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6600|132 and Bush

Feel free to comment.
I am reserving my comments to keep them separate from the opening post.


https://i13.tinypic.com/3yeemtf.jpg
“Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me,” the president said.

By Michael Abramowitz                                                         
and Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writers
President Bush appealed directly to the
American people last night to support a renewed
campaign to pacify Iraq, calling for an
additional 21,500 U.S. troops to help the beleaguered
Iraqi government regain control
of Baghdad while warning that he would not
support an “open-ended” U.S. commitment.
In a widely anticipated nationally televised
address, Bush stood in the library of
the White House and soberly said he had
pursued a flawed strategy and acknowledged
for the first time that he had not sent
enough troops to provide security for Iraqi
civilians. He described the situation in Iraq
as “unacceptable” to the American people
and to himself.
“Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely.
They have done everything we have asked
them to do,” he said in the 20-minute speech.
“Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility
rests with me.”
At a time when polls show most Americans
to be sharply critical of U.S. involvement
in Iraq and his party has lost control of
Congress, the speech was a chance for the
president to change course and convince a
skeptical public that the future of Iraq is still
worth fighting for. The speech was originally
scheduled for before Christmas but kept getting
delayed even as its major component —
a “surge” in U.S. forces — was leaked out
and was attacked by members of both parties
and questioned by his own generals.
Bush signaled last night that he is essentially
choosing to deepen U.S. involvement
in Iraq, calculating that improved tac-

https://i18.tinypic.com/43r7h54.jpg
U.S. Army Sgt. Michael Gavin trains an Iraqi police cadet in Anbar province. Bush’s plan is meant to speed up training of Iraq’s security forces.

https://i13.tinypic.com/48gyide.jpg

Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-11 00:13:53)

Xbone Stormsurgezz
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6393|The Gem Saloon
ill start it off....GOOD!!!!
SoC./Omega
Member
+122|6540|Omaha, Nebraska!
GOOD because, then we can get the job done and hopefully be out by November of this year, we win
11sog_raider
a gaurdian of life
+112|6458|behind my rifle
i feel its a good idea, buti think 20,000 isnt enough
GATOR591957
Member
+84|6626

SoC./Omega wrote:

GOOD because, then we can get the job done and hopefully be out by November of this year, we win
What makes you think this time will be different from the first two times troops were increased?

The strategy of this war needs to mimic the Afghanistan war.  Spec Ops dressed as locals fighting a non conventional war with non conventional tactics.
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+794|6684|United States of America

GATOR591957 wrote:

The strategy of this war needs to mimic the Afghanistan war.  Spec Ops dressed as locals fighting a non conventional war with non conventional tactics.
That's what I hope to. I support an increase in force and strategy revamping so we wouldn't be just giving more targets.
shadowkila
Member
+26|6409|Canada

11sog_raider wrote:

i feel its a good idea, buti think 20,000 isnt enough
Hey heres a great fucking idea, why don't you or someone in you family join and head over to Iraq.or whereverthefuck.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6404|North Carolina
Bad idea...  withdrawal is the answer.
Sentinel
Cheeseburger Connoisseur
+145|6657|Australia
By increasing it makes the white house look like they are trying to do something positive about the situation.

I dont think it will work much, unless the currently unreleased strategy is absolutely mindblowingly awesome.

Why not apply the new strategy to the existing forces? Unless the new strategy is based around the new deployment...

I dont know if its good or bad yet.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6528|Global Command

Turquoise wrote:

Bad idea...  withdrawal is the answer.
You'll have blood on your hands.
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|6767
Hard to say. Increasing the number of troops should increase security.

There is no guarantee that this will work if all they are doing to “Force Protection”

I am not a supporter of this war but whatever gets coalition troops home quicker and Iraq functioning sooner the better
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|6569|Portland, OR, USA

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Bad idea...  withdrawal is the answer.
You'll have blood on your hands.
what the hell?!

So you'd rather see another 20,000 kids go fight for nothing.. good call their chief, You'll have American kid blood on your hands.
DemonAlucard
Member
+2|6473|Laredo,Texas USA
meh....for those who say yes to increase should sign up and go over there.  hell....why not put the fucking draft and we will all go! how fun is that..hahaha if that happens i am sure all the republicans that have sons over 18+ yrs won't want them to go by force.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6404|North Carolina

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Bad idea...  withdrawal is the answer.
You'll have blood on your hands.
We already do...  might as well leave and give us a chance to wash our hands.
srog72
Member
+12|6755|Michigan
Bad........no mission..........we lost.....face it.....
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6600|132 and Bush

srog72 wrote:

Bad........no mission..........we lost.....face it.....
The troops have not lost a thing. The idea that you can force success upon someone is not possible. That is the problem. It's like trying to help the mentally challenged pass final exams.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
srog72
Member
+12|6755|Michigan
3019 dead and the troops didnt lose anything?
The Bartenders Son
Member
+42|6693|online
GOOOOOOOD!!!!!! GET THE JOB DONE AND COME HOME THE MORE HELP THE BETTER

IF YOU SAID NO!!!!!! !@#$!@#$!@ !@#$!@$#@ !@#$!@#$ YOU! for not supporting my men!!!!
smtt686
this is the best we can do?
+95|6630|USA

srog72 wrote:

3019 dead and the troops didnt lose anything?
Not bad considering the military looses about 1000 a year on average from accidents on and off the job and some other issues.

Sorry, but its just the way it is. 

In 1993 I was at an exercise in South Carolina and we lost 19 troops due to a lightning strike and a ship accident in the same day.  Never heard anyone complain then.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6528|Global Command

CommieChipmunk wrote:

ATG wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Bad idea...  withdrawal is the answer.
You'll have blood on your hands.
what the hell?!

So you'd rather see another 20,000 kids go fight for nothing.. good call their chief, You'll have American kid blood on your hands.
I'm willing to accept a little American blood on my hands.
To do nothing could mean millions of Iraqis blood on our hands, that would be worse.

smtt686 wrote:

srog72 wrote:

3019 dead and the troops didnt lose anything?
Not bad considering the military looses about 1000 a year on average from accidents on and off the job and some other issues.

Sorry, but its just the way it is. 

In 1993 I was at an exercise in South Carolina and we lost 19 troops due to a lightning strike and a ship accident in the same day.  Never heard anyone complain then.
excellent point

Last edited by ATG (2007-01-10 18:58:25)

jonsimon
Member
+224|6494
Illegitimate war = bad idea.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6528|Global Command

jonsimon wrote:

Illegitimate war = bad idea.
Okay, just for the record, defiine EXACTLY what made the war illegit.
TheEternalPessimist
Wibble
+412|6619|Mhz

I'm just glad the UK isn't planning on sending more troops, I'm not happy that my country has anyone involved in this fucking farce in the first place. Yeah I do blame Bush (Blair is a pussy bitch puppet who's far to eager to follow, I'll be glad when he's gone), and it's sad that people had to die coz he's decided to 'bring order to the world' whether they want it or not.

I don't honestly know if the US sending in more troops is a good thing or not, it's pretty much a lost cause anyway. Iraq is a different world to what we live in, trying to bring about a few hundred years worth of political progress in the space of months is just a rediculous notion.

Best outcome I can see is leave, let them have their civil wars and riots and in a few years and a lot more deaths they'll have their own balance of power established again, I wouldn't be supprised if another Saddam type ended up in power (lets face it he kept people in line).
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6600|132 and Bush

srog72 wrote:

3019 dead and the troops didnt lose anything?
If you need me to dumb it down more for you I can. Read the entire post.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6528|Global Command

TheEternalPessimist wrote:

I'm just glad the UK isn't planning on sending more troops, I'm not happy that my country has anyone involved in this fucking farce in the first place. Yeah I do blame Bush (Blair is a pussy bitch puppet who's far to eager to follow, I'll be glad when he's gone), and it's sad that people had to die coz he's decided to 'bring order to the world' whether they want it or not.

I don't honestly know if the US sending in more troops is a good thing or not, it's pretty much a lost cause anyway. Iraq is a different world to what we live in, trying to bring about a few hundred years worth of political progress in the space of months is just a rediculous notion.

Best outcome I can see is leave, let them have their civil wars and riots and in a few years and a lot more deaths they'll have their own balance of power established again, I wouldn't be supprised if another Saddam type ended up in power (lets face it he kept people in line).
Stop being so goddamned pessimistic.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard