40,000? 20,000? Nobody's saying yet how many. Or where from. Or whether this is the hybrid plan that Thomas Ricks at the Washington Post wrote about three weeks ago in his "Go Big, Go Long, Go Home" piece. That hybrid would introduce more troops for a short period, then cut back but keep tens of thousands on hand for however long it took to train the Iraqi army to get its shit together.
Whatever the numbers and whatever the overall plan, Pentagon officials will meet with Mister Bush today to make their recommendations, according to the Los Angeles Times:
As President Bush weighs new policy options for Iraq, strong support has coalesced in the Pentagon behind a military plan to "double down" in the country with a substantial buildup in American troops, an increase in industrial aid and a major combat offensive against Muqtada Sadr, the radical Shiite leader impeding development of the Iraqi government.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff will present their assessment and recommendations to Bush at the Pentagon today. Military officials, including some advising the chiefs, have argued that an intensified effort may be the only way to get the counterinsurgency strategy right and provide a chance for victory.
The approach overlaps somewhat a course promoted by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz). But the Pentagon proposals add several features, including the confrontation with Sadr, a possible renewed offensive in the Sunni stronghold of Al Anbar province, a large Iraqi jobs program and a proposal for a long-term increase in the size of the military.
How far the Pentagon proposal will go toward satisfying Mister Bush's quitters-never-win mantra remains to be seen since he won't be telling us what his plans are until after the holidays.
Steve Gilliard takes a dim view:
Sadr has at least 60,000 men under arms, and I would bet could raise far more than that if he needed to, including several army units. So what is the plan, go into Sadr City and replay Stalingrad? Then fight off the Sunnis in Ramadi, who, will for no other reason than cussedness, attack our supply lines. So you will have the US trying to hunt down people in their homes, alleys they know like their hands, streets which have been presighted for years.
And to add to this madness, they're gonna be looking for Moqtada Sadr. In his home, in the neighborhood named for his family. How much you wanna bet they fail? ...
Same kind of thinking in play. Countries don't like leaders who cooperate with occupiers. They tend to kill or exile them. All this talk of shoving Sadr aside, which has been around the Green Zone for months, is pure idiocy. People always think they can replace an authentic leader with one of their liking. Iraqis already don't trust Hakim, because of that little torture thing in the Iranian POW camps, considering the vast majority were Shia. And now he's conspiring with Bush?
Whether the troops can be found to up the ante in Iraq and whether, if found, they can actually defeat al-Sadr in his own city without playing the Fallujah card is not something I'd want to "double-down" on even if we were just talking dollars instead of lives.
While the Pentagon makes its calculations, and American troops wonder which Christmas they'll be home, the Bush-Cheney attempts at juggling the Iraqi factions continue apace. About all that's missing these days is an invitation to Ahmad Chalabi for lunch at the White House. And, of course, a sane plan for getting out of Iraq.
--By by Meteor Blades, tleelange@hotmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment