Why does Bush want to send more troops to Iraq?

Question

How can an increase of troops in areas plagued by sectarian violence solve the problem of sectarian hatred? Is the problem in Iraq even a military problem? Putting more troops in Iraq would put more American soldiers in the middle of sectarian violence and create more targets.

Answer 1

So he (the numb-brain that he is) can avoid actually doing ANYTHING about this unjust war he started. By sending more troops to Iraq, it guarantees this conflict will last longer and guarantees he will be out of the presidency before having to accept that he made an unwise decision by invading that country and pull out.

Sending more troops makes it look like he is trying to do something about this, but in all actuality all it does is prolong this war, kill more troops and civilians and allow him to not admit he is a FAILURE.

Answer 2

Because more troops (man power) could help in finding, fighting, and killing insurgents. We shouldve sent more troops a few years ago. We need to try and finish the job and we need to use more force and tacticts to help squash the majority of the insurgents. Of course, this will be for nothing if Iraqis do not stand up and do their part as well. We also need to some how get Iran to stop aiding the insurgents. More sanctions perhaps. This is a new direction. If you expected a new direction to be pack up and leave, then you are wrong. Even the Dems like that bag lady Pelosi said we should have more troops. She said that a while back but of course now she is saying no because as usual, the Dems want to be against anything Bush is for. The man cant win because since the start of this, people have been flip flopping and just continue to attack him, yet where are there answers or alternative strategies? They dont offer any. The democrats are proving to be good for nothing.

Answer 3

We're supporting a government run by Shiite terrorists. This was evident when Saddam's executioners chanted Muqtada! Muqtada! The Shiite government is willing to give western oil companies the right to extract oil and share the profits. I guess we need more troops to ensure this.

Answer 4

He wants to distract everyone with all of this Iraq stuff while he works some other deals for his own benefit and profits. Under the US government, citizens will never have 100% of the info 100% of the time, therefore they will never have complete truth and understanding. Without the pure truth we will never be able to resolve anything!

Answer 5

Surely more troops would mean more attack power,
wouldn't it? Nothing will cure the sectarian "hatred"
you speak of just as there's nothing Bush could ever
do now to cure your "hatred" and other liberal's
"hatred" of Bush and the Republicans. Now you
understand, eh? Did you know that Nancy Palosi
wanted Bush to send in more troops at one time (when
Bush was against it), but now that Bush is for it, she
comes out against it.? Hypocracy, hypocracy, hypocracy.

Answer 6

Because he wants to defy the Baker report, which advises an ordered pull-out. Baker is Bush senior's man, somebody Bush junior hates.
By defying the report, he hopes to be seen as 'strong', somebody who will finish the job his father couldn't.
More body bags have been ordered.

Answer 7

Our foothold is too tenuous. He needs more troops so he can hang on until 2008 when this becomes someone else's problem.

Answer 8

This is just stage one of the build-up to "redeploy" troops into Iran.

Answer 9

how do you stabilize an area when you dont know who's who? its useless us being over there..bush keeps saying only history will tell if this is the right thing to do or not, uh guess what, last year was history..we lost 3000 is history..history is yesterday and he "aint" learning from yesterday.

Answer 10

Because he refuses to recognize the lessons of Vietnam and he refuses to allow for this own fallibility.