US doesn't control roadways, borders, or key cities in Iraq

[Stocat]

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Central Command has informally asked Army planners for up to five more brigades - about 25,000 troops - to augment the American force of 138,000 soldiers and Marines now in Iraq, military officers and Pentagon officials said.

Some officers said any increase might well be lower, perhaps involving 10,000 troops that would be a mix of active-duty and National Guard units.

"For a period of time, we may need more people," said a senior officer familiar with the planning, noting the perilous security situation and the needs of Iraq's new interim government, which is to assume sovereignty a week from today. "It's clearly being driven by requirements in theater."

It is uncertain whether a formal request for more troops has been made by Gen. John P. Abizaid, head of Central Command, which is responsible for U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf region. Neither is it clear that discussions between Central Command and the Army have reached Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

Unstable Iraq

Even with 22,000 troops from other nations, primarily Britain, joining the American force, the U.S.-led coalition does not control Iraq's borders, has taken substantial casualties along roads and highways, and avoids key cities such as Fallujah.

<snip>

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/iraq/bal-te.troops23jun23,0,7220861.story?coll=bal-home-headlines

[enough]

1. Makes you wonder what the US DOES control in Iraq.

Everything except the country itself, I guess.

[struggle4progress]

4. We control THE OIL REVENUES.

[Fovea]

5. Such as they are

'ka-boom' Look there goes another rubber tree plant...

[bemildred]

2. Idle speculation for today:

All all those aircraft carrier groups heading for Iraq to:
1.) Cover a US withdrawal?
2.) Provide fresh air support?
3.) Shore things up until after November?

[teryang]

3. These proposals are only stop gap measures

<It is uncertain which active-duty units - if any - would be used to increase the U.S. force, since most of the Army's 10 active-duty divisions are now in Iraq or Afghanistan or resting up to head back. There was no immediate information on whether any more Marine units would be deployed. >

The numbers to fix this situation just don't exist.

The new operating mode is to make the war zone and the training base the same thing. Those stryker units will be ground up in no time.

[Jack Rabbit]

6. US sponsored surveys show over 80% of Iraqis oppose the occupation

So much for winning the hearts and minds.

It is also believed the up to half of Iraqi security forces side with the resistance.

I don't think another 25,000 troops will make a difference. I don't think ten times that will make a difference.

It's time to let Iraqis govern Iraq without Bush's "help".

[ilovenicepeople]

7. My Watch must be broken

Was there a TIME that Iraqis shouldn't of governed "THEIR OWN" country?While on the subject:It's time to let the USA govern USA without Bush's "help". (But thats just "MY" opinion.) HOWDY:hi:

[Jack Rabbit]

8. Welcome to DU

:hi:

I will agree with Bush on one point: that the Iraqi people can govern Iraq better than Saddam did. So why not give them the chance?

And I agree with you: The American people can govern the US better than a banana republic dictator.