That all depends on when or if this goes down. If we're lucky enough to have a stable Iraq soon (and I know that's a stretch by most), troop levels will be eased quite a bit. Then there's other factors...what sort of diplomatic dedication can we get from other countries. France actually seems to be fairly interested in not letting this happen. As long as the situation in NK, and our relations with Russia and China are smooth...I don't see any reason why we can deploy more people from SK and Europe... Also... The military has requested 90k more troops to permanent status. This of coarse will come with additional reserve requests. Being that increases in these numbers take relatively little money (in comparison to the actual weapons), it's not inconceivable that we'll be ready. It's really not something that we should be aiming for, though. And I say that admantly. I wish I had the faith AGS had in the Iranian government. If I could read their mind and see the truth, PERHAPS I wouldn't feel a need for anything. But I got to base it on what I do know....and the rest of the world does have simliar feelings (atleast according to their respective UN reps). -------------------------------------- I will feel a bit better when Russia is not threatened at the thought of missile defense units in Europe and Israel (when they're set to come). I feel we need to comfort them in some way.
You seem to me to be a very level headed guy Rick, can you really see that being the case? This 20k surge of turkeys is only the beginning, there will be many more being sent over there over the next 10 years.
TURKEYS, huh? So that's your newest derogatory label for our troops fighting to defend YOUR freedom? (Yes, you live in England, I see. But what affects us will affect you.)
true...however you ought to know AGS never has a bad word for the terrorists, only troops....some things never change.
They are Turkeys mate, that is how your hero Bush will think of them. He doesn't give a shit how many he sends out there into the disaster zone that he has created. He doesn't care how many die, they are just numbers to him. And also because of the way your hero has handled this BS "war on terror" it has affected the whole world and made it a far less safer place.
Prove it! Do you think that England is totally safe from terrorists? Do you think that nothing will ever happen to your or your country? How can you think that the President is the evil one!? HE created? Who bombed his own people with biological weapons? Who started building nuclear weapon facilities over there? Who gave his people acid baths on suspicion of the slightest disagreement? Who allowed terrorists to freely breed and move around in that country? Do you really think that war can happen without some sort of turmoil!? How can you even THINK that! What grounds do you have for saying this? You have an image of the President so evil and so stone-set in your mind that you will say ANYTHING you CAN, even without any remote basis for your accusations on any evidence or fact, then you blame it on the conservatives for being the "truly" ignorant people! How you have the GULL (or gall? not sure which one to use here) to say our Commander in Chief has no concern for our forces when you go and call them TURKEYS! WHAT PRINCIPLE ALLOWS YOU TO DO THAT AND BLAME OTHERS FOR YOUR OWN HYPOCRISY AND PERVERTED REASONINGS!? I will in no way deny that you are making me upset right now. You've succeeded in doing that, my fiend. LESS SAFE!? Are you so incredibly closed-minded that only what goes on in your perverted way of thinking is all that is real? What happened to even the liberals' common sense! Are you so ignorant that the whole world seems innocent and safe to you WITH the terrorists running free and rampant! How can you THINK that the world would be safer if we didn't go in to try and stop them? How can the world be safer with lesser security like before the war, without a risk of having them there? How can we have safety without threat! Answer me that! And how dare you call this war on terror "BS" - do you not believe this a threat? But you do, because you say the world is so much "less safe" now -- do you think we had NO reason to retaliate for what terrorists have done to us in the past!? No. We've had too much tolerance. The time for war should have come 15 years ago. Your pal Clinton let them assemble and ignored war threats from them, and look what happens. And now you're just pathetic. And don't you DARE neglect answering a single question I've asked here. AGS ignores questions.
Notice how he deflects his own faults over to Bush to absolve himself? Not unlike he absolves terrorists of their crimes and gives their credit to Bush and Blair. Sad, but just another case of AGS slipping and exposing his true self. He'd never insult the terrorists in Iraq. Never a bad word...
It's a hope. I'd say in most cases the Iraqii security force have taken on some of their responsibilities; although Baghdad is an odd challenge, in that it's rich of 'diversity' (if you wish to call it that). While most other areas have a monolithic tone to them, Baghdad is a bit harder to reduce violence in. Generally speaking, if it weren't for Baghdad, I'd have a general level of optimism. Months ago it was seven provinces (that required constant attention by US forces), now it's roughly three that are having problems. Being Baghdad is so symbolic, is really the key reason people look at this situation as dire. I don't see your view as true at this point in time. I don't see this as a evergrowing problem, which would require the perpetual growth of troops and dedication. Neither do I see the Dems holding out that long. Baghdad is primarily my only concern. I don't know how that will work-out. They must stop new bomb material from coming-in. The must disarm or get rid of the militias. Iraqii leaders must start using their huge wealth to get young Iraqiis working on their infrastructure (which they said they'll do), and they must make political gestures of unity. I don't think it's impossible for them to survive as a country. I sincerly think that it would be unwise to just leave...because the worst thing to do is come back a couple years from now in something regional. ---------- I wish the dems had the balls to be more prudent in giving Bush war authorities in the beginning. I wish the people that voted for the dems had the balls to stand-up before it all started...but they didn't. I tend to think their lack of boldness allowed for a situation to unfold. It is what it is, and I think it has to dealt with as practically as possible.
The era of colonial war has ended long time ago. All the colonial wars after WWII has proved that independent of a country's military strength, this type of war is just a losing proposition. England learned this lesson, French learned this lesson and the world hoped that USA has learned it's lesson after the Vietnam but it seems Bush was persistent to repeat the same mistake.
Hard points to argue, no one really knows for sure. Like the saying goes: "let's pray for peace and prepare for war."
reminder: without 9/11 I hardly doubt we would be in Iraq...then again, maybe so, but hindsight is 20/20....It would have all depended on whether or not the UN inspectors did their job and if the UN grew some nuggets about standing up to saddam...
This war will CHANGE HISTORY FOREVER. just like BRITISH, AMERICA SET FOR DECLINE. War needs lot of funding. Will hit HUGE deficit. BUSH is making HISTORY, by HAMMERING the LAST NAIL in the COFFIN. But for Mr.BUSH, his standard of living will be lot better than most Americans living now, and be born in the future. Look who don't have this kind of burden, CHINA. Europeans would like to think future is MULTI POLAR. Highly unlikely. China will dominate. Look at them now, in Africa, and South America. Europe will be like in the middle ages. Those who support the war have many reasons, because they support Israel interest. But they don't want to disclose it. But does it worth destroying American Children's future? Whose who are wealthy, country and patriotism, does not matter to them. Only the poor, who has no other country to go to, feel so patriotic.
What!?? Your post makes very little sense to me... What does China have to do with this??? And what do you mean by "Only the poor who have no other country to go to feel so patriotic" - I'm not poor and I love this country. I'm not WEALTHY, but I have some very wealthy friends/family who also love this country... and who have even served as soldiers.
There are no real major battles in Iraq going on. It's more peace keeping and policing than all out battles. It wouldn't surprise me if the troop surge into Iraq is less about Iraq and more about putting a large portion of our soilders right where the need to be to prepare for war with Iran if needed. We have troops on both sides of Iran already.
Bring on the TURKEYS. Redress your post please, I hate to see sheeple typing in bold type to me. Bush does not care what happens to the troops over there guy, they are just numbers to him as I have said before. And soon he will start on Iran, sending thousands more TURKEYS into the mix.
I didn't post that... That's it. You are officially retarded, ignorant, and arrogant. Case closed... (just another liberal!)
We also have a carrier group in the gulf...that equals about 30 ships from what I can remember, maybe more...