Troop Surge To Be Announced Next Week?

Nick Gillespie | January 2, 2007

Via Drudge comes vaguely supported word from the BBC that President Bush is figuring on announcing a troop boost in Iraq.

The BBC was told by a senior administration source that the speech setting out changes in Mr Bush's Iraq policy is likely to come in the middle of next week.

Its central theme will be sacrifice.

The speech, the BBC has been told, involves increasing troop numbers.

More here.

Recall in mid-December that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada), along with other honchos in that deliberative body, signalled thumbs up to a "temporary" troop increase and maybe there you have it.

Comments

|1.2.07 @ 10:36AM|#

Harry Reid signalled thumbs up to a temporary increase in troops, maybe, as part of a withdrawal plan.

|1.2.07 @ 11:01AM|#

Wonderfuckingful.

grylliade|1.2.07 @ 11:01AM|#

This is disgusting. Has Bush even consulted with his generals on this subject? Because I'm pretty sure that they'd tell him that the idea that a surge in numbers isn't going to do fuck-all to help in Iraq. The United States military is depleted. As things stand, if something goes wrong somewhere in the world other than Iraq, we're screwed; we'll have no choice other than a draft, and it'll take some time to get those new soldiers up to speed. It is disgusting how much Bush has contributed to global instability with his reckless adventures in Iraq. And now he thinks that throwing more bodies at the situation will help? Is there nothing that this man can do to get impeached?

|1.2.07 @ 11:04AM|#

Don't be so rough on Harry, Nick. Ever since the War on Terror began, the Democrats have been rolling over for Bush, not just on the War in Iraq, but Terri Schiavo, Habeas Corpus, you name it. They've been letting Bush hang himself, and it's been working.

No, it hasn't been pretty, but at this point for the Democrats to attempt to "shut down" the war would be manna from heaven for Bush. Bush is desperate for a scapegoat and Reid is determined that the only scapegoat will be Bush himself. It's ugly but smart for the Democrats to let Bush prove that he doesn't know what he's doing.

|1.2.07 @ 11:22AM|#

Alan,

So the Democrats are basically saying "fuck the country" and doing what's best for their short-term success? That makes me feel a whole lot better.

|1.2.07 @ 11:22AM|#

Alan,
I disagree.
If the Dems can get us out ASAP, the electorate shall have forgotten Iraq by 2008.
And Bush has already done more than enough damage to Repubs.

|1.2.07 @ 11:23AM|#

It's ugly but smart for the Democrats to let Bush prove that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Unless, of course, he actually does know what he's doing.

|1.2.07 @ 11:27AM|#

"Unless, of course, he actually does know what he's doing."

If I were Nancy Pelosi, I'd take those odds.

:-|1.2.07 @ 12:46PM|#

If I were Nancy Pelosi, I'd take those odds.

You mean you're not?

|1.2.07 @ 12:48PM|#

Don't be so rough on Harry, Nick. Ever since the War on Terror began, the Democrats have been rolling over for Bush, not just on the War in Iraq, but Terri Schiavo, Habeas Corpus, you name it. They've been letting Bush hang himself, and it's been working.

So their uselessness as an opposition party (except in fighting off any change to Social Security, which is of course far more crucial than little things like rights) was just "stratergery"?

|1.2.07 @ 1:23PM|#

Its central theme will be sacrifice.

As in, "I screwed the pooch, so you'll have to make sacrifices..."

|1.2.07 @ 2:37PM|#

Sacrifices that don't include the tax cuts, of course. Can't have taxes in wartime.

|1.2.07 @ 3:09PM|#

I wonder if Bush had originally planned to follow the traditional path of stressing bipartisanship and shared sacrifice in the runup to the war, and was talked into the wedge issue/free lunch stance by Rove.

|1.2.07 @ 3:49PM|#

"It's ugly but smart for the Democrats to let Bush prove that he doesn't know what he's doing."

And Mikhail Gorbachev lurked for years, patiently awaiting his chance to dismantle the Soviet Union.

|1.3.07 @ 11:53AM|#

Looking back at recent history, I can't see any decision that the federal government has made which has turned out to be good in the long run. This seemingly continues the trend.