Troop Surge To Climb 15%, Gates Sez

Team Infidel

Forum Spin Doctor
New York Daily News
February 3, 2007
By Richard Sisk, Daily News Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON - Several thousand more troops will be sent to Iraq on top of the 21,500 in combat brigades for President Bush's plan to take back Baghdad, top officials said yesterday.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said up to 4,200 additional troops could be needed, acknowledging that the increase would be bigger and cost more than Bush had predicted.
But Gates disputed a report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that the 21,500 combat troops would require backup from 15,000 to 28,000 support troops, such as military police, engineers, mechanics and drivers.
He also disagreed with the budget office estimate that the increase would cost double the $6 billion listed by Bush.
Gates said "there would be some additional support forces," and he put the number "at about 10 to 15% of the number that CBO [the budget office] cited," which would work out to 1,500 to 4,200 more.
In a separate briefing, national security adviser Stephen Hadley said the 21,500 figure would grow. When Bush listed 21,500 troops for the increase, "he was focusing on the combat elements," Hadley said, adding the Pentagon was working on "what additional support is necessary."
Hadley and Gates also took issue with several parts of a sobering National Intelligence Estimate report on Iraq from all the nation's spy agencies that said it could be 12 to 18 months before Iraqi security forces gain control.
The report also said that the Shiite-Sunni sectarian violence had surpassed the Al Qaeda threat and that several aspects of the conflict could be termed a "civil war."
In a preview of the President's budget, an administration official said next week Bush will ask Congress for $100 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan for fiscal 2007 and $145 billion for fiscal 2008.
--With News Wire Services
 
Well, we will find out soon enough.
All the Troop numbers and money used will be put out for all to see.
The sad part is those in Washington who many times do not know what is going on with the United States Military will many times say that some unforeseen action took place which caused their wrong numbers to be wrong, even though someone else had already put projections forth which were closer to the actual numbers used.

I remember when a 4 Star General was in my own opinion hung out to dry because he said more Troops would be needed for the job of the Iraq War, and those with little or no experience in such matters said General Shinseki was wrong.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top