See other War, War, War Articles
Title: Obama Sends Over 13,000 Extra US Troops To Afghan War In Unannounced Move
Source:
www.msnbc.msn.com
URL Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33286292/ns/world_news-washington_post/
Published: Oct 13, 2009
Author: By Ann Scott Tyson
Post Date: 2009-10-13 06:45:03 by Mind_Virus
Keywords: None
Views: 580
Comments: 38
Support troops swell U.S. force in Afghanistan At least 13,000 deployments, including engineers and police, not announced By Ann Scott Tyson updated 12:21 a.m. ET, Tues., Oct . 13, 2009 President Obama announced in March that he would be sending 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. But in an unannounced move, the White House has also authorized — and the Pentagon is deploying — at least 13,000 troops beyond that number, according to defense officials. The additional troops are primarily support forces, including engineers, medical personnel, intelligence experts and military police. Their deployment has received little mention by officials at the Pentagon and the White House, who have spoken more publicly about the combat troops who have been sent to Afghanistan. The deployment of the support troops to Afghanistan brings the total increase approved by Obama to 34,000. The buildup has raised the number of U.S. troops deployed to the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan above the peak during the Iraq "surge" that President George W. Bush ordered, officials said. The deployment does not change the maximum number of service members expected to soon be in Afghanistan: 68,000, more than double the number there when Bush left office. Still, it suggests that a significant number of support troops, in addition to combat forces, would be needed to meet commanders' demands. It also underscores the growing strain on U.S. ground troops, raising practical questions about how the Army and Marine Corps would meet a request from Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan. Defense experts said the military usually requires that thousands of support troops deploy for each combat brigade of about 4,000. That, in turn, exacerbates the strain on the force, in part because support troops are some of the most heavily demanded in the military and are still needed in large numbers in Iraq. Challenges ahead "There are admittedly some challenges over the next 10 to 12 months as we are downsizing in Iraq, and therefore any schedule for increasing in Afghanistan might have to be more gradual," said Michael E. O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Pentagon and White House officials have not publicized significant deployments of support troops. For example, when Bush announced the Iraq surge, he spoke only of 20,000 combat troops and did not mention the approximately 8,000 support troops that would accompany them. When Gen. David H. Petraeus announced that the surge would end, he spoke only of the withdrawal of the combat units because he needed to retain many of the support troops in Iraq. On Afghanistan, White House and Pentagon spokesmen differed over exactly what the president has approved. Obama announced in a March 27 speech that he was approving 21,000 troops, and a White House spokesman said that the president did not approve any other increases before or after. Asked for more details on the troop authorizations, spokesman Tommy Vietor said the Pentagon was better suited to provide such "technical information." Defense officials, however, acknowledge that the request for 21,000 troops has led to the authorization of more forces. Authorized by Obama "The 21,000 are only combat forces, and when the combat forces go in, there are a certain amount of additional forces that are required," said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who signs the deployment orders, had military officials identify last spring the entire scope of the increase and agreed that he would consult with Obama again if the Pentagon sought to go above that, Whitman said. "Obama authorized the whole thing. The only thing you saw announced in a press release was the 21,000," said another defense official familiar with the troop-approval process. McChrystal's request, which the administration is considering, would be in addition to the troops Obama has approved. The request reportedly includes different options for adding troops for combat, training and support, with one option totaling about 40,000. The ability of the Army and Marine Corps to meet the request would depend on the type and number of troops McChrystal asked for, and when he wants them. A significant troop increase in Afghanistan early next year -- similar to the 2007 increase in Iraq -- would be difficult to sustain given the current size of the Army and Marine Corps and ongoing troop demands in Iraq, officials said. 17 brigades deployed The Army has 17 brigades deployed worldwide, including 11 in Iraq and five in Afghanistan, according to Pentagon data. The Marine Corps has one expeditionary brigade in Afghanistan. As of early this month, 65,000 U.S. troops were in Afghanistan and about 124,000 were in Iraq. At the height of the increase in Iraq, in late 2007 and early 2008, about 160,000 U.S. troops were in Iraq and 26,000 were in Afghanistan. Senior Army officials have made it clear that they want to avoid further wearying the force by imposing longer war zone tours or shortening time at home -- as happened during the Iraq troop increase when the Army extended one-year deployments to 15 months. "I would hope we don't get there," Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, told reporters last week before meeting with Obama to provide his advice. Still, Casey said he could not promise that Army units would not face extended tours. "Once you come off a 15-month [rotation requirement], you don't want to go right back on it," said Lt. Gen. James D. Thurman, the Army's operations chief. Army officials said that for planning purposes they are looking at various options for meeting the request for forces, including those that both maintain and break the Army's "red lines" requiring no more than 12 months deployed and no less than 12 months at home. To give soldiers more time at home, the goal would be to deploy first those units that have been home the longest. Other factors would affect the Army's ability to meet McChrystal's request. One variable involves the types of forces used, which differ between Afghanistan and Iraq. Stryker brigade in Afghanistan So far, the Army has tried to deploy mostly light and airborne infantry to Afghanistan because of the country's rural, mountainous terrain and the nature of the insurgency there. To maintain continuity, the Army seeks to keep deploying such units because of their experience in Afghanistan. In July, the Army deployed the first Stryker brigade to Afghanistan, to provide greater mobility and firepower to the force, and more may be sent. A significant troop increase, however, could require the Army to send mechanized and armored brigades to Afghanistan, although they would have to deploy with lighter vehicles. Recent growth in U.S. ground forces, ordered by Gates in 2007, has helped make the troop buildup in Afghanistan possible by permanently expanding the Army and Marine Corps. This summer, Gates ordered another temporary increase of 22,000 soldiers to fill out gaps in Army units created by the growing number of wounded and other "non-deployable" troops. Gates last month ordered to Afghanistan up to 3,000 support troops, and he could seek approval to send more to meet urgent needs. "I'm prepared to ask for the flexibility to send more enablers if we need to before the president makes a decision on -- on whether or not to send significant additional combat troops," he said, using the term "enablers" to refer to support troops as opposed to combat units. Casey and other senior Army officials said the Army will keep pursuing its goal of giving active-duty soldiers two years at home between year-long deployments by 2011. "An increase in dwell time is the single most important thing we can do to relieve stress on the force," said Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, the Army's vice chief of staff, using the military term for at-home rest.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Mind_Virus (#0)
Difficult to discern just what kind of a shell and pea game Obumski is running. One thing for certain, many of these people will find themselves temporarily detached to other units as replacements.
The Noble Peace Prize Administration is expediditing order and delivery of that Weapon of Mass Peace: The Bunker Buster The Twilight Zone Episode continues!!!!!! Plan B for Iran? U.S. Wants Bunker-Buster Fast Pentagon is speeding up delivery of a colossal bomb designed to destroy hidden weapons bunkers buried underground and shielded by 10,000 pounds of reinforced concrete AP Tuesday, October 13, 2009 Sept. 26: A facility under construction inside a mountain about 20 miles north of Qom, Iran, is most likely the location of the newly revealed uranium enrichment plant. (AP/GeoEye) WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon is speeding up delivery of a colossal bomb designed to destroy hidden weapons bunkers buried underground and shielded by 10,000 pounds of reinforced concrete. Call it Plan B for dealing with Iran, which recently revealed a long-suspected nuclear site deep inside a mountain near the holy city of Qom. The 15-ton behemoth -- called the "massive ordnance...
TRAITORS TO AMERICA AND BRAINWASHED IDIOTS SUPPORT AND DEFEND ISRAEL. TO HELL WITH ZIONISTS AND THIER AMERICAN FRONTS: AIPAC/PNAC/ADL/JPCA/NAACP/CFR/FEDERAL RESERVE/NWO/SPLC/JINSA/ACLU/FPI/CHRISTIAN ZIONISTS/AEI/FEDERAL MEDIA/HOLLYWOOD, et. al.
Fresh meat for the grinder. Will they ever learn?
Ted Kennedy Is Now Eligible To Vote In Chicago.
They never mention that the mercenaries are equal in number to the troops in uniform. This has been true throughout the Afghan occupation.
The Iranians should be placing more facilities deep underground under hospitals and major Islamic shrines.
True... A few days ago I did see a reference of 60,000 "support" civilians.
Until 0bama gave them the recent troop surge of 20K, the mercs outnumbered the troops there. They still might. With these new support troops, the mercs may now be outnumbered by soldiers.
What galls me is that the civilians send home the big checks, for "support" and the grunts do the bleeding and dying for a few hundred a month.
Ah, nothing like a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate sending out men with machine guns to kill other human beings.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
What may be telling with the new "support" troops is when we see a listing of the units sent, how many will be "medical and surgical" units. That is always the best barometer of intentions.
He's merely doing what he said he'd do during the campaign. What he didn't realize, hence the empty suit analogy, was even after a surge of more than 20k troop, many more thousands of troops will be requested by his generals on the ground. The war there can't be won, but we knew that for a very long time.
If I recall correctly, McChrystal asked for boots on the ground. Anyone ever in the military knows full well that if you send "support" troops it stands to reason that "boots" will follow. Obumski has zero knowledge of the military, thus there is but one interest that wants thousands more boots in place. Israel.
Shows who's the boss in the US. The MIC.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" I read somewhere the ratio was 1 to 3? (one support person for every three grunts). That math comes out to an additional 40k-60k troops, which is McChrystal's number.
"Defence Secretary Robert Gates had said previously he would be sending more support troops or "enablers" to Afghanistan even as Obama weighs the best war strategy going forward, amid an appeal for tens of thousands of additional combat forces from the commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal.
President McChrystal. Dear Leader.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" We well might wake up one morning and it would be a fact.
Now the 13,000 has been "revised" to 15,000.
Which is why he waited till after he won his Nobel "Peace" Prize. In any case there's nothing to "win" in A-Stan. Even if there were 500,000 American troops, WHAT would "The Plan" be?? Let's pull these guys OUT ASAP. Then get out of Iraq. Saddam is dead. Let the Iraqs Nation Build their own hell-hole Enough is enough.
That's true. It would have ruined his record that got him the prize. The one where he held a couple of parties, watched football, had a few lunches and gave a couple of speeches. Exactly correct. "Ok men, go out there and shoot at random mountains! Let's get cracking!" Agreed.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Let's see, we lose a base because the military planners were using it as bait to kill insurgents. Now we're going to send 13,000 more people into harm's way, and for what? I wish someone could adequately explain to me our strategy on Afghanistan, and why we're even there in the first place.
Better to be hated for what you are, than loved for what you are not.
The left claims it's Bush's fault, and yes Obama is doing bad things, but McCain would have been worse. I'm sorry I can't give you a more sophisticated answer, but that's the level of political debate in America today.
I don't believe for a moment he's "running" anything; He's taking orders from his overlords - the NWO. If it were truly up to Zero, he'd have begun pulling out on 1-21-9 and arresting "domestic terrists." Our presence in both A-Stan and I-Rock remain merely the same smoke and mirrors its always been to divert attention from the hijacking of the American economy, redistribution of wealth, destruction of the dollar and national sovereignty.
In that sense I agree. Recall McChrystal asked for 40,000 combat boots. He is getting 15,000 "support" troops. With that in mind, I can foresee the 40,000 combat grunts going to Afghanistan. So far I have found units from Vermont and the Dakotas going the first of the year. One of them I believe is a medical unit.
Unreal. Any normal "statesman" would have been thoroughly embarrassed, but not the Community Organizer. Has anyone yet described the A-Stan actual mission other than "killing insurgents"? Hmmm...I just found it - it's "securing" the country on behalf of a fictional Afghani Gubmint Forces vs. the dreaded Taliban. IOW, BULL-SHIT.
He is getting 15,000 "support" troops. With that in mind, I can foresee the 40,000 combat grunts going to Afghanistan. Yes - I can also envision that 40k grunt eventually going to A-Stan, but it's totally political. The dims don't want to be seen as being blamed for and "losing" the A-Stan war as it might be used during the current election cycle as an issue. The only "mission" is in "securing" the country against Taliban forces - which as we know is impossible with the current RoE. So far I have found units from Vermont and the Dakotas going the first of the year. One of them I believe is a medical unit. Poor guys. IMO we either totally rout the enemy with overwhelming firepower and drop the idiotic RoE, OR pull out completely.
A) That's all this is, and B), they just don't give a crap about American cannon fodder.
Are they immune to the RoE crippling the US military?
Now that you mention it, it is quite galling.
Hmmm..."Bait." You are absolutely spot on. Sacrificed as an excuse to gin up support to escalate this No-Win war. And have you noticed WHO was looking good by making the requisition for addition troops? Of ALL people, Diane Feinstein. I wish someone could adequately explain to me our strategy on Afghanistan, and why we're even there in the first place. I just did a search: With respect to A-Stan and I-Rock I believe you're right... By now McLunatic would have 100,000 troops in A-Stan and 250,000 in I-Rock...and maybe even have already bombed I-Ran, Venezuela and North Korea.
What's sad is a poll done there early this year had over 55%-60% of the Afghan people are wanting the Taliban back in power. Retired Gen Myers was on a show last night and he said we will never change their tribal culture.
Are you kiddin'?? *spit* Retired Gen Myers was on a show last night and he said we will never change their tribal culture. He's right - of course not. That's why this so-called "mission" was doomed from Day One. These people shall remain primitive forever as will Africans.
As Churchill accurately observed when he was 24: Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities ... but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome. [The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pp. 248-50.]
Thanks for that quote - more true today that ever before in most countries, Iran being the very notable exception.
Now you know why Gandhi never won the Noble.
That's easy. Divert the public's attention while we implement our agenda
...but the influence of the religion [Islam] paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome. Good post TC... Winston Churchill knew all too well the truth about Islam and the lands it has invaded and savaged - its traits have remained unchanged since yesteryear, today, and for tomorrow. Note Churchill's reference to a "Christian" "modern Europe," and the "strong arms of science" - aka guns and armaments as deterents... Today as the secular humanists continue to criticize and attack Christianity - while kissing Muzzie azz - Europe finds itself at the precipice of a takeover by a militant Mohammedanism Churchill knew and feared. Ironically INVITED AND WELCOMED BY CHOICE. America would be well-advised to do what it can to avoid Europe's demographic fate and nightmare.
#2. To: Mind_Virus, Cynicom, *Israeli Espionage* (#0)
JUST ANNOUNCED:
#3. To: Mind_Virus (#0)
#4. To: Mind_Virus (#0)
#5. To: wbales (#2)
WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon is speeding up delivery of a colossal bomb designed to destroy hidden weapons bunkers buried underground and shielded by 10,000 pounds of reinforced concrete.
#6. To: TooConservative (#4)
They never mention that the mercenaries
#7. To: Cynicom (#6)
#8. To: TooConservative (#7)
With these new support troops, the mercs may now be outnumbered by soldiers.
#9. To: Mind_Virus (#0)
#10. To: TooConservative (#7)
#11. To: Cynicom, all (#1)
Difficult to discern just what kind of a shell and pea game Obumski is running.
#12. To: Jethro Tull (#11)
#13. To: Mind_Virus (#0)
#14. To: Cynicom (#12)
(Edited)
Anyone ever in the military knows full well that if you send "support" troops it stands to reason that "boots" will follow.
#15. To: Jethro Tull, All (#11)
#16. To: Cynicom (#15)
General Stanley McChrystal.
#17. To: tom007 (#16)
Dear Leader.
#18. To: Jethro Tull, All (#11)
#19. To: SonOfLiberty (#9)
Ah, nothing like a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate sending out men with machine guns to kill other human beings.
#20. To: Liberator (#19)
Which is why he waited till after he won his Nobel "Peace" Prize.
In any case there's nothing to "win" in A-Stan. Even if there were 500,000 American troops, WHAT would "The Plan" be??
Let's pull these guys OUT ASAP. Then get out of Iraq. Saddam is dead. Let the Iraqs Nation Build their own hell-hole Enough is enough.
#21. To: Mind_Virus (#0)
#22. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#21)
I wish someone could adequately explain to me our strategy on Afghanistan, and why we're even there in the first place.
#23. To: Cynicom (#1)
Difficult to discern just what kind of a shell and pea game Obumski is running.
#24. To: Liberator (#23)
I don't believe for a moment he's "running" anything;
#25. To: SonOfLiberty (#20)
...his [0bomba's] record that got him the prize. The one where he held a couple of parties, watched football, had a few lunches and gave a couple of speeches.
#26. To: Cynicom (#24)
Recall McChrystal asked for 40,000 combat boots.
#27. To: Flintlock (#3)
Fresh meat for the grinder. Will they ever learn?
#28. To: TooConservative (#4)
They never mention that the mercenaries are equal in number to the troops in uniform.
#29. To: Cynicom (#8)
What galls me is that the civilians send home the big checks, for "support" and the grunts do the bleeding and dying for a few hundred a month.
#30. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#21)
Let's see, we lose a base because the military planners were using it as bait to kill insurgents. Now we're going to send 13,000 more people into harm's way, and for what?
#31. To: Jethro Tull (#22)
The left claims it's Bush's fault, and yes Obama is doing bad things, but McCain would have been worse.
#32. To: Liberator (#25)
vs. the dreaded Taliban
#33. To: belmontconservative (#32)
What's sad is a poll done there early this year had over 55%-60% of the Afghan people are wanting the Taliban back in power.
#34. To: belmontconservative, Liberator (#32)
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.…A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
#35. To: TooConservative (#34)
#36. To: SonOfLiberty (#9)
Ah, nothing like a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate sending out men with machine guns to kill other human beings.
#37. To: TommyTheMadArtist (#21)
I wish someone could adequately explain to me our strategy on Afghanistan
#38. To: TooConservative, belmontconservative, Ferret Mike (#34)
Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities ...
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest