Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus  The Pentagon:
General Abizaid the head of CENTCOM has rejected the idea of bringing in more troops, he said that policy would only be an incentive for the Iraqi's not to take up their own slack.
According to you it's unwinnable, General Abizaid disagrees, not to mention that reenlistment rates are high. |
The Pentagon's field commanders disagree. I have heard many times that what the majors, colonels, captians, and generals in iraq want is more troops. not to mention the prewar estimates that 450000 troops were needed. Also, our military doctrine requires a force of 10 to one to defeat guerllias, so we would need about 450000.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus We have lots of troops not serving in Iraq, I think there are something like 150,000 soldiers and marines in Iraq the troops are there if we need them: |
You're right, it isn't like anyone else who knows about the situation disagrees... o wait..
On top of that, to have 450,000 troop in Iraq, we would need apx 2 million to support the 3 month rotation our doctrine calls for. troops are only supposed to be in active combat for 3 months. After that it causes problems. Not to mention we would need the support to have more than 2 million troops rotating in and out of combat operations. And out support to troop ratio is like 7 to 1, so we would need a hell of a lot of guys to win the way we want to. And even if we did what we did now, one year instead of 3 month rotations, that is still hundreds of thousands of more men that people in the military want, independent sources say are needed, and active and retired generals say we need.
I do not know the reasons for Gen. Abizaid comments, but there is enormous amount of people saying the opposite of him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus Well then are you calling Thomas Jefferson a hypocrite and a coward? |
You logical capabilities are too much for me.