Bush wants more troops in Iraq-How do the military leaders feel about this?

Question

Do they really want more troops as well? Shouldn't it be their decision,since they're the ones in combat and not the politicians?

Answer 1

"McCain and Lieberman talked to many of the same officers and senior NCOs I covered for Fox News during my most recent trip to Iraq. Not one of the soldiers, sailors, airmen, Guardsmen or Marines I interviewed told me that they wanted more U.S. boots on the ground. In fact, nearly all expressed just the opposite: 'We don't need more American troops, we need more Iraqi troops,' was a common refrain."
-- Fox News military analyst Oliver North, 1/5/07

The Iraq Study Group doesn't support it....neither does former cabinet member Colin Powell or Gen. Abazaid.

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who publicly declared in December that he does not support escalation, "is caustic in private about the proposed 'surge,'" Robert Novak reports. "Powell noted that the recent congressional delegation to Iraq headed by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) heard from combat officers that they wanted more troops. 'The colonels will always say they need more troops,' the retired general says. 'That's why we have generals.'" For their part, the highest-ranking U.S. generals are still opposed to escalation. The Washington Post reported on Friday that "deep divisions remain" between the White House and the Joint Chiefs of Staff "about whether a surge of up to 20,000 troops will turn around the deteriorating situation." A prime advocate of escalation, Gen. Jack Keane, reportedly told the president recently, "Don't you dare let Army and Marine Corps tell you they can't do it." Soon afterward, Newsweek reports, "Gen. Richard Cody, the vice chief of staff of the Army, called Keane in and gave him the actual figures on readiness, telling him: 'Look, here's the status of these brigades today. It's not doable.'"

Bush's plan for escalation in Iraq is incredibly unpopular with the American people. A recent CNN poll found that just 11 percent of Americans support sending more troops to Iraq. It's not much more popular in Congress. Conservative columnist Robert Novak reports "in pressing for a surge of 30,000 more troops, will have trouble finding support from more than 12 out of 49 Republican senators."

Answer 2

Our glorious leader should commission his daughters, Bub Bub and Gin Gin, to replace the generals in Iraq, who are not sorority girls and are not, as their friend Paris W. Hilton says, "hot."

There is a historical precedent for this move: Prince Alexander of Macedonia fought in his Daddy's wars when he was even younger than our glorious First Daughters. Later, as Alexander the Great, he went on to conquer what is today Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan.

With the blood of an Heirguard warrior flowing through their veins, Babs Baby and Vajenna (as they have been so fondly nicknamed by their Saudi Arabian boyfriends) are sure to establish cheap-labor colonies all over Allahland, bringing low-priced products to American consumers, who they feel are hot.

If these hard-drinking girl generals can't save us, only a miracle can. And that is exactly what we have--Virgin Mary Cheney, from the royal House of Halliburton, has just had an Immaculate Conception. The prophecy is fulfilled--Pat Robertson will tell you which one God told him it was. Judgment Day for the Democrats is near at hand.

Answer 3

He would not do it because he's a gutless swine. he's terrified of being called weak and a loser. it really is why he invaded contained in the first position. you spot, the Republicans were mad as hell at his dad for dropping the white homestead. they imagine the reason the first bush lost the election is that he appeared weak at the same time as he stopped short of toppling Saddam Hussein contained in the first Gulf warfare. Bush the 2d has dragged the total u . s . a . and far of something of the international into this quagmire for extremely own psychological causes deriving from his relationship such as his father and his favor to educate that he's not as weak as his father.

Answer 4

Most disagree,as do most Americans,but the PRES.insists that it will be done HIS way.When did we become a dictatorship? Isn't it ,"of the people,by the people,for the people"! Funny,we're sending troops to Iraq to install a government that will listen to the will of the people,WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

Answer 5

Some think it is a good idea, while others do not

it should be the military leaders and not politicians, and that is the main reason i no longer support bush. Bush was not allowing the military to do their job

Answer 6

Dumbya fired or reassigned the military leadership who will not support Escalate and Moonwalk. The message was made clear. I think the inner opinions among the brass would be mixed. I think the enlisted grunts who do the dying would be as one, if allowed to be candid, against the Dumbya plan.

Answer 7

I don't think Bush like the top general's opinion, which is why I think he canned them all. I believe the gererals told Bush that way things are going, the U.S. is in a lose lose situation, and Bush is in denial, so he cans the bearers of bad news, namely the top U.S.generals in Iraq.

Answer 8

Do you honestly believe that Bush gives a damn what the military leaders want? Has he ever accepted any advice from anyone?

Answer 9

Military does, what the King asks them to do. Whether stupid or not. There is no point in blaming the soldiers or the Knight or the commanders. It has been like this for melliniums.

Answer 10

Well Bush is kind of like a dictator in the sense that he doesn't care about what the rest of the nations opinion is on the war of terror. He likes to fancy himself as the commander of the United states army.