December 20, 2006 8:17 AM
Bush: more losses in Iraq likely
n an uncommonly candid news conference, President Bush said an increase in American forces in Iraq is being considered and that 2007 would bring more U.S. losses.
He said "2006 was a difficult year for our troops and the Iraqi people. We began the year with optimism" but that faded as extremists fomented sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shiites."And over the course of the year they had success," the president acknowledged. "Their success hurt our efforts to help the Iraqis rebuild their country, it set back reconciliation, it kept Iraq's unity government and our coalition from establishing security and stability throughout the country."
Democrats are about to claim control of Congress and Americans are overwhelmingly unhappy about Bush's handling of the war, so the president is at a turning point as he searches for new approaches. Administration officials said Bush's remarks were intended to brace a war-weary nation for another tough year in Iraq.
Bush also said the U.S. needs a larger Army and more Marines.
Bush said for the first time that American forces were not winning in Iraq. He also said the military would be expanded to fight a long-term battle against terrorism.Bush did not say the U.S. was losing the war, which began in March 2003 and has cost the lives of nearly 3,000 troops. Instead, when asked during an interview with The Washington Post whether the war was being won, the president borrowed the phrasing of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Peter Pace.
"You know, I think an interesting construct that General Pace uses is, 'We're not winning, we're not losing.' There's been some very positive developments. And you take a step back and look at progress in Iraq, you say, well, it's amazing - constitutional democracy in the heart of the Middle East, which is a remarkable development in itself," he said.
December 20, 2006
8:36 AM
Ben writes:
Increase the presence of the military, on the Mexican border!
December 20, 2006
8:41 AM
just sayin' writes:
well he could start by getting his own kids to sign up. Maybe they are as big a chickenhawk as him
December 20, 2006
8:49 AM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:
We need a bigger military, but not in Iraq. We need to focus on training Iraqis and hitting the terrorists as the opportunities present themselves, but we should be limiting our exposure on routine patrols.
December 20, 2006
9:49 AM
Ben writes:
I have signed up.
December 20, 2006
10:30 AM
David (R) writes:
Bushes daughters should sign up for active duty. Then the rest of Congress should get their sorry-assed kids to enlist instead of running away from the duty that is termed "every citizen's responsibility" - I'm sick and tired of the elitist mentality that paves the way for spoil brats to live the high life while the "common folk" do the heavy work and fighting.
December 20, 2006
10:31 AM
history buff writes:
It looks like our international commitments are expanding and there is the potential that we might have to fight a number of brush wars at one time. Expanding the military seems compelled by circumstances. The $64,000 question is: how do we expand? More incentives or with conscription?
When the Democrats announced they would hold hearings concerning the adequacy of our forces and whether we should reinstitute the draft, the right wingers said the Democrats were grandstanding and trying to make Bush look bad. I guess reality overcomes spin on this issue.
December 20, 2006
11:42 AM
Steve writes:
Bush is only now making a half admission of the massive mistake he made on behalf of the under and middle class. He and the other elitists whith no skin in the fight, enjoying their self gifted tax breaks and corporate subsidies should take a hard look at themselves in the mirror before committing more of our blood and treasure on dubious (mis)adventures.
December 20, 2006
12:37 PM
Tbone writes:
Funny thing, John Kerry suggested the same thing - increasing the size of the military by about 40,000 troops, back in 2004 when he was running. Everyone on the right made fun of him and said that would "make us less safe". How would that make us less safe? And furthermore, when bush does it, it doesn't make us less safe? How can anyone support these people? What a bunch of flip-floppers.
December 20, 2006
2:14 PM
Hogar De Vuelta (العودة) writes:
The United States still has 2.6 million active, Guard, and Reserve soldiers at its disposal, which should be adequate to maintain 150,000 troops in Iraq.
This represents less than 1% of the population. In the Congress, there are 7 out of 535 with kids in the military. That is more than 1% of the that population. It is not a perfect statistical analogy, but I believe that it shows that Congress does very closely represent the country in terms of the number with kids in the military.
It is a rather silly argument to say that all of them should have kids in the military. What about our educational needs, or our health needs, or our science needs? I would rather see a more balanced representation, than an unrealistic symbolism regarding an un popular military action.
http://www.hurricane2005.com/03/04/naples/d930340a.htm
http://www.npg.org/forum_series/manning_military.htm
December 20, 2006
2:27 PM
Truth writes:
Worst President of all time. He needs to go back to the International Community with hat in hand and apologize and admit he was completely wrong. We need an International Peacekeeping force to affect a change of government in Iraq. (ala Kosovo) Anyone who voted for Bush should stand up and kick themselves in the a**. Any Editors that endorsed Bush should resign or else agree to never endorse anyone again.
December 20, 2006
2:49 PM
for crying out loud writes:
Bush has blown it so big in this Iraq war! This is his war and has costs many lives. It didn't protect our freedom or even our oil. Iran and North Korea are such huge threats to our freedom and us. Bush continued to focus on his own "project" in Iraq while Iran and North Korea kept building. The world hates the U.S. more than ever. We have no support. Thanks to all those who supported Bush with his lies!
December 20, 2006
3:31 PM
David (R) writes:
Hogar -
I see where you're coming from on the numbers, but it is also interesting to note how many of those seven are grunts and how many are in the formal officer training areas that avoid general conflict. Still, serving is serving and it's fair in my opinion.
I think the general consensus, even among conservatives like me, is that the basis for our being there was incorrect information (at best) or outright deception (at worst), and many fine service people have paid the ultimate price because of it. I guess the frustration level is gaining ground.
December 20, 2006
4:25 PM
Holier Than Thou writes:
This gasoline isn't putting the fire out! Give me some more gasoline to throw on it!
Conservatives hang your drug-addled heads in shame. You voted for a liar, thief, murderer, idiot, and buffoon who is good for nothing but hanging or mopping the floor in a federal penitentiary.
Blame yourselves for the disaster.
December 20, 2006
4:57 PM
Anonymous writes:
Hey Holy .... just as an FYI, I know a ton of libs that voted for the guy too .... I think there's enough blame to go around, and blame doesn't fix anything right now .... how do we get this guy out of office before we're fighting in Korea, Iran, Russia, Brazil and Argentina, and a dozen other places that king george thinks our terrific service people ought to die?
December 21, 2006
3:22 AM
Impeach Impeach Impeach writes:
A better idea is for Bush to resign so we can really get a fresh perspective on the war. This admnistration is still in Denial. The reality is WE LOST before this began and we are sacrificing Americans for nothing.
Its time to cut losses. Not honor our Sacrifices with more sacrifices. Bush/Cheney is costing us more lives every day . Our military needs to be able to speak out and voice their real opinions. They know the real story and its not the rosy picture you hear from the WH.
Colin Powell is right. There is no reason to put more troops in when doing so has not improved the situation previously. This has already been tried.
December 21, 2006
7:38 AM
Anonymous writes:
The west is at war againsy Islam and more specifially Islamic fascism. We need to weed them out en masse. This of course means war. Better to have western powers putting it down on Muslims than Muslim radicals putting it down on Americans in the west. Plus, lets use up their oil first, before we get into ours. The apparent lack of solid direction and oversight on wasteful resource distribution, is frustrating.
December 22, 2006
9:59 AM
Anonymous writes:
Dude, soon as you spout the right wing marxist islamo fascist propoganda, you lose all credibility.
December 22, 2006
11:10 AM
Anonymous writes:
I get a chuckle out of every brainwashed, uneducated redneck that has been convinced that we are fighting a new form of facism.
December 23, 2006
6:58 PM
just explainin writes:
Dec.22 @11:10. You write one complete sentence and are bigoted, narrowminded and intolerant of another's views. So I guess your position makes you educated? Let me know where you went to school so I know where not to send my kids.
P.S. World Trade Center Bombing, September 11, 2001 in NYC, USS Cole. Bombing of the embassy in Africa. Maybe there is a connection here?
December 28, 2006
9:00 PM
Anonymous writes:
You obviously have no idea what fascism is
December 28, 2006
10:06 PM
Anonymous writes:
Man, without the J's there is nothing to laugh at. I mean, I come here to read sane people and to LMAO at the J's.
J's, were are you two? Still upset the gay marriage prop. did not pass?