'Half a million troops needed to bring Iraq under control'

[NNN0LHI]

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=436639

There was mounting criticism of Britain's response to the deteriorating security situation in Iraq in the wake of the ambush in Basra that killed three Royal Military Police.

Several leading defence experts called for more troops to be drafted in, and a groundswell of voices calling for the entire security operation to be put under the aegis of the UN was beginning to grow. snip

Former officer and defence expert Michael Yardley said these were not random attacks. "We were always going to see an extended guerrilla campaign against allied forces. We know that Saddam Hussein planned for this contingency - to resist unconventionally.

"It has been suggested that these are random attacks but they are more than that, although we can't be sure who is responsible - Jihadists, remnants of Saddam Hussein's intelligence or Fedayeen militia. You need at least half a million troops to police this country effectively, which we do not have. Either the intelligence assessment was deficient or George Bush and Tony Blair were willing to take an unacceptable degree of risk in this campaign."


more

[Jacobin]

1. Geeze...it didn't take Saddam that many to keep it under control

and keep the 'terrorists' out...

What's wrong with Smirk? and Rumfilled? Are they stupid, inefficient, blundering fools, or are they just ignorant incompetent fuckheads?

[Ilsa]

2. I'd go with "fuckheads".

Obscenities seem to describe them best, and they clearly deserve the harshest given their total disdain for justice, the Constitution, the environment, humanity, etc.

Although "stupid, inefficient, blundering fools," works well too.

[QuietStorm]

8. all of the above?

yep that sounds like a fair assessment to me, along with meglomanical, and psychopathic.

[iam]

33. All of the above.

man.

[aquart]

44. Be fair. George would love to do it Saddam's way.

You know, if they annoy you, torture and kill them.

If you aren't going to torture and kill them, you need an armed soldier cop every three feet.

Because they really don't want us around.

[tlcandie]

3. IF deaths continue at present rate.....IF

<snip>
Since 1 May, 135 US troops have been killed, 64 of them in combat, a rate of attrition which, if it continued at the present rate, would mean that Mr Bush would be presenting himself for re-election in November 2004 with a record of some 700 US troops dead since the war's declared end.
<snip>

[alcuno]

4. I'm not getting the whole combat/non-combat death thing.

There was an amazing report on Nightline last night about a female soldier who was suffering from dehydration and slipped into a coma. She wasn't expected to live, so they gave her a medical discharge; apparently this would have provided more money for her daughter. The woman came out of the coma and now the army refuses to ship her belongings back from Germany; said that she has to pay for them. She is left to sleep on a relative's couch now with no pay because she isn't in the army anymore. She's still having heart problems and was having difficulty getting into the VA hospital to be seen.

How much trauma are they expected to endure?

[OldCurmudgeon]

12. remember a month or so ago?

The soldier that was shot in the back of the head at close range with a pistol, while he stood in a Baghdad (video?) store?

It was reported as a "non-combat" death. Go figure.

"And here are today's casulty figures, from pentagon contractor Arthur Anderson..."

[NYC]

29. I saw that. Her name was Turner.

I can't believe how badly the army has treated her.

[NickDanger]

43. Over 1,000 wounded at Walter Reed

eom

[JPace]

5. Eventually the draft will return......

if bush remains resolute in us staying there
it will require more troops. As word gets out
at how awful the troops are being treated both
from within and without there are going to be
fewer young people volunteering. The draft
will be the only solution, but bush will wait
until after the election to drop the news on
us.

[Knurled99]

6. That's exactly when I transfer to

the university of Toronto...

[Dhalgren]

37. I just don't see how he can wait that long.

If you instituted the draft today, it would be a year, minimum, before the first draftees donned their bull's eye vests in Baghdad. So if the Emperor waits until Nov. '04, he's probably looking at Jan. '06 before the draft becomes even remotely effective in using up all the terra-ists' bullets.

[Trek234]

42. Maybe it has already started?

Recently Bush appointed a new director of the draft.

Perhaps things are already rolling behind the scenes?

[QuietStorm]

7. be drafted in

telling choice of words? And pre tell who would send the most the US or the UK since it does seem to be both that are in this.

I find at this point Bush's edicts to the International community LAUGHABLE.

"President Bush wants more countries to send troops to participate in the occupation of Iraq, but faces resistance to any new UN mandate without an expansion of the international body's political and economic role in Iraq."

Bush want's Huh? Well if perhaps he had taken into advisement some of the criticisms of the international community and the UN before Bush's and Blairs inner sanctum advisers decided to go in HALF COCKED, he might find he had more a sympathetic ear from the international community.

As it stands now who will send troops. As of yesterday it seemed those that considered sending troops were hedging if not backing out all together. Per tell will Russia oblige. France. How bout Saudi Arabia. India?

stay tuned.

[DoYouEverWonder]

9. Ah, excuse me but

there are only about 11 million people in the whole country. That's one soldier for every 22 Iraqis. This is in a country that was not in the grips of a civil when we invaded. How have we mananged to screw this one up so badly.

I guess the neocons where giving W a lot of bad advice.

[QuietStorm]

10. Oh well when you put it like that

than perhaps the US/UK pharlanx may need to increase the number of draftees because it does sorely look like they are slip sliding away and oblivion threatens global well being.

Yes I guess the neo cons and DoD hawks have exercised poor judgment without a showing of any really organization. That is what come from the anti-arab racism that motivates this crusade. Well that would be my guess. When one believes they are fighting cockeroaches I guess they figure they can be stamped out pretty quickly. On the other hand cokeroaches have outlived the dinosaurs and the breed plentifully. They also hide quite efficiently in small places. So much for the efficiency of JUDEO CHRISTIAN SUPERIORITY.

Perhaps we should up the count to a couple of million troops, but enough hyperbole! My guess is they need that many troops for a sustained long lived battle plan which might indicate they expect a high body count.

[DoYouEverWonder]

14. Seems they want a high body count

What better way to get rid of all those useless eaters, who are using up their resources.

I still don't understand why, they don't just promote contraceptives instead of guns, in order to control the population of this planet?

[QuietStorm]

23. but

the ME is actually accounts for the lowest oil consumers. the US is the largest of all with SoutheastAsia coming in second. So depopulating in the ME is not so much about oil, at least I don't think so.

[DoYouEverWonder]

28. Don't worry

if everything goes according to their plans, there will be plenty of US casualties too.

Heck they've already killed over 3000 US civilians.

[leesa]

25. You make more money selling guns.

[Liberalpolitico1]

11. Correction

The population of Iraq totals around 24 million deducting of course the number that we have killed and maimed.

[DoYouEverWonder]

16. Correction noted,

that's still 1 soldier for every 48 Iraqis. Still seems like overkill. Especially when you consider that sending a half million troops to Iraq will entirely deplete our armed forces.

We won't have enough troops who are ready to go anywhere else that we may really need them, like maybe North Korea?

[Eloriel]

13. I heard the other day

that typical police-type activity in a situation like this requires 1 soldier for every 10 Iraqis.

Eloriel

[NNN0LHI]

15. That would require 2.4 million soldiers. Yikes! n/t

[TacticalPeek]

17. Better privatize it then. Hmmm, 2.6 million jobs lost? n/t

[UpInArms]

19. so I have a question here

How many prison guards are assigned to a cellblock containing how many prisoners? (Just in the regular prison system)

Does this equate to something on that level??

What do they expect 500,000 armed personnel to be doing???

[NNN0LHI]

22. Apples and oranges

In prisons the guards have guns and the convicts don't. In Iraq everyone is armed, or assumed armed. The Iraqi's aren't in cell blocks where they are identified and accounted for regularly. The guards even know the bad ones from the really bad ones, and can be locked up tight with a flip of a switch in a prison. In Iraq everyone is a potential enemy, but complicating things even more are the friendlies intermixed among them who you don't want to hurt.

Some of the many variables in Iraq that would suggest a certain required number of troops are enemy strength if that can even be established? Available weaponry to the insurgents. Quality of the insurgents ability to improvise and improve with time their fighting abilities. There are many other factors too.

Don

[UpInArms]

31. well that made it much clearer

we are in so much shit - and there is no pony underneath :(

[KoKo]

24. I'm watching "Lion in the Desert" 80's movie about Mussolini's invasion of

Libya...Its a two reel video rented from Blockbuster. It's horrifying in it's portrayal of an invasion of Bedoin tribes by Mussolini's forces. Families gunned down, children watching in horror.....and the people fighting back with what little they had but using their knowledge of the terrain and skill and determination.

Why don't we ever learn. We aren't Hitler's Germany or Mussolini's Italy yet......but I start to see Blair/Bush as some pathetic reincarnation of these Empire builders and I don't understand how Blair in particular doesn't have advisers who remember what the Middle East and Algeria were to the Europeans. Even back to the Crusades FGS! Didn't these people have any history classes. Have they not even seen any movies if they can't read a book?

I had to take a break from it......I'm going back......It's like our invasion of Iraq. A resistence which fights a guerilla war against overwhelming power and sophistication of their invadors.

At one point in the movie the Bedoins dig holes in the sand outfoxing the Italians who are in trucks with guns who don't even see them until they are upon them. The bedoins wipe them out.....they know the terrain. It's a powerful movie, I hadn't seen it in years.

I didn't even remember that Mussolini invaded Libya to drive the Bedoins off their land. They met with unbelievable resistence from fighters who were defending their home...the tactics used against them are what we are using agains the Iraqi's.

Might be worth a rental......that and "Lawrence of Arabia" and "Khartom" for how a resistence can be sucessful in that part of the world....for those of us who don't have time to read all the books on the ME.......since this is where we will be for our long forseeable future.

I took a break because the similarity was too erie......it's like living in a movie.

[UpInArms]

32. thanks for the viewing suggestions

I'll put them on my list of movies to hunt down and watch.

[Jacobin]

20. I've heard 24 million, but your point remains

and yes. We'll have to in essence guard them individually since they don't want us in their fricking country.

[NickB79]

27. I thought the population of Iraq was higher

Something like 20 million?

On edit: sorry, didnt read the other posts that already said 20-24 million Iraqis, so ignore this question.

[Dhalgren]

38. Iraq had about 24mil before the invation.

The Imperials haven't killed off that many , have they?

[Paschall]

40. No, 23-25 million

You’re off by over 50%.

[dArKeR]

18. My European friends laughed before the murder began in Iraq

You're going to use only 180,000 troops to control 22,000,000 Iraqis? What a joke. In Algeria we needed 400,000 troops to control just 9 million and we lost 30,000 troops during the occuption. In ... the same.... In ... the same .... In ..... the same.....
(Might have the facts on Algeria wrong but they rattled off about 6 occuptions which I've forgotten.)

I felt stupid listening my friends because they rattled off all the history like it had happened to them yesterday.

1. It's not exactly my responsibility to know all this
2. It is Bush's responsibility to know this.
3. It is the American Whore Media to tell us this. Why didn't they tell us these FACTS OF HISTORY?

Fineman, Russert, Woodward... you dirty scum sucking maggots!
Kevin Sullivan: [e-mail]
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]

This should be an Independent Council assigned to investigate Bush Adm.!
Can We Talk? Its primary intellectual architects--Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith...
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030421&s=alterman

http://darker0darker.tripod.com/

[Raenelle]

34. I wonder if Whistle Ass is hiding the truth from us, or

whether he himself believes the neo-Cons and their fantasies about flowers and desert democracies and so much money that there would be enough left over to pay for Reconstruction.

[Nottingham]

21. Pretty Soon we will need the draft!

That will get people really going

[AndyTiedye]

30. It Won't Be Just A Little Draft, More Like a Tornado

If it takes half a million soldiers to occupy Iraq, they will need many millions to conquer
and occupy the rest of the ME, and they will have to be there forever,
or at least until we have sucked the last of our oil from under their sand.
PNAC's plans obviously depend on a draft.

I find it really disheartening to hear talk among Democrats in support of the draft.
If * gets this power he will abuse it to the max and then some, as he has with every
other. And he'll do it so fast that we may not have time to mount an effective oppostition.
Those of us who are way above draft age are not necessarily safe
either. They have authority to draft medical professionals already, and there
seems to be some provision that allows them to extend that to other professions
they deem critical, which could mean just about anything.

The bottom line is that they could militarize almost the whole fucking country
except children, geezers, and the well-connected.

Civil liberties? Constitutional rights? not any more. Once they draft you, they're gone!
Oh, and don't forget to fill out the pray-for-pResident-bush card that your
CO will be handing out.

Herr Shrub has no interest in reviving the civilian economy because he wants the
whole country and all of its resources focused on war. He is a megalomaniac
who wants to take over the world. How many troops would that take?

[Porkrind_Power]

41. it would be cool with me...

...if they drafted the bush twins first.

[bpilgrim]

26. we aint got'em... maybe we can send robots?

more...
http://bbs.globalfreepress.com/coppermine

peace

[SideshowScott]

35. Here comes the draft!

God i hope not though, but with world support dwindling to near nothing the only way the admistration can have any kind of exit strategy is with a draft..I for one will be looking for the GOP to throw the election to blame the dems for the draft..
But i hope im wrong

[Raenelle]

36. Another Vietnam flashback--mission creep.

n/t

[Robin Hood]

39. A half million in a country with 25 million pissed off people.

Do you really think that will make a difference. Just taht much more blood to spill.