NYT: "General Petraeus is expected to back a rapid five-brigade expansion...as quickly as possible"

[DeepModem Mom]

Military Analysis
A New Commander, in Step With the White House on Iraq
By MICHAEL R. GORDON
Published: January 6, 2007

WASHINGTON, Jan. 5 — The selection of Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus to serve as the senior American commander in Iraq signals an important turn in United States strategy.

As a supporter of increased forces in Iraq, General Petraeus is expected to back a rapid five-brigade expansion, in sharp contrast to his predecessor, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who has been openly skeptical that additional troops would help stabilize the country.

Having overseen the recent drafting of the military’s counterinsurgency manual, General Petraeus is also likely to change the American military operation in Baghdad. American forces can be expected to take up positions in neighborhoods throughout the capital instead of limiting themselves to conducting patrols from large, fortified bases in and around the city.

The overarching goal of the American military operation may be altered as well. Under General Casey, the principal focus has been on transferring security responsibilities to the Iraqi security forces, so American troops could gradually withdraw. Now, the emphasis will shift to protecting the Iraqi population from sectarian strife and insurgent attacks.

Since his appointment was disclosed Thursday, General Petraeus has not spoken publicly about his plans for Iraq. But the doctrine he has advocated suggests that he will want all five of the combat brigades slated to go to Iraq as quickly as possible instead of waiting for them to be phased in....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/06/world/middleeast/06petraeus.html?hp&ex=1168146000&en=689c1f2b896c5559&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[Erika]

1. Let's have George P, Nicole, and the W twins leading it n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. CiC please take point

"He won't do it Sarge."

Wait he is....

Sarge what now?

We follow...

Why?

Mostly out of curiousity, he's dumber than a butter bar.

Yep I can see it now

[Cooley Hurd]

3. Isn't going to take a while to pull 5 brigades...

...out of his ass?:shrug:

[illinoisprogressive]

4. this is why he was chosen. But, do we have them in the first place

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. We do

if you do some craetive map and extend troops in theater and speed up current deployments

This will break the back of the army even further

[Erika]

6. True. W can further extend the troops time in Iraq

or shorten their breaks here. What a guy. What a president. He sat out the Vietnam war doing political work in Alabama. The bastard.

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. Everyone I know that's in the military right now

has orders to deploy this month.

[jackbourassa]

7. If Bush has his way with this surge...

It would mean that the US will be stuck in Iraq for decades. We will shift the entire burden of administering the country to ourselves.

This will make the situation worse rather than better, since it will probably alienate the Shi'ite populations, clerics and politicians and turn them from our un-witting allies to our enemies. Thus, we will be responsible for administering a country, for a prolonged period, where 80% of the population is OPENLY HOSTILE to our efforts.

What Bush needs to understand, and clearly doesn't, is that the pie-in-the-sky ideas he and the neo-cons had about "changing the middle east" through military intervention is not working, and never has. The middle east has changed, but for the worse. Bush and the neo-cons had a very naive view of what Democracy would do. Because a country is "democratic" doesn't mean that they will become "Americanized." The populations of the middle east are clearly becoming more and more anti-American and anti-occupation. As a result, they elect leaders who reflect those sympathies. That will not change with an increase of 25,000 troops or even 100,000 troops. All we will accomplish is to further alienate the indigenous populations and put MORE US troops in the way of danger.

What we need in Iraq is a political solution. We need more discourse, not more bombs and soldiers.

[theHandpuppet]

8. Methinks Gen. Petreaus fancies himself Gen. Pretorius

Or is that Doctor Pretorius? http://www.horror-wood.com/pretorius.htm

[Canuckistanian]

13. Let's hope he's not a Captain Ramius

[Poiuyt]

14. No such luck. Pretorius's only vice was gin.

[Hubert Flottz]

19. General Betray-us?

Bush want's people he can totally dominate! Just like Hitler had to have.

[tom_paine]

9. Busheviks purge like Khruschev

I would say they purge like Stalin, but Casey wasn't sent to Gitmo, so far as I know.

Khruschev's purges of the Russian Army come to mind.

Buskevik = Bolshevik who practices predatory crony capitalism

[Toots]

10. It sounds to me like the blood lust is still intense in the Bush* Administration

There will be death and more death while Bush* and Cheney live the high life....

[DoYouEverWonder]

22. They will never have enough

and the only thing that matters is that they get to keep their Precious.

They are worse then drug addicts.

[alcibiades_mystery]

11. Ay yay yay

American forces can be expected to take up positions in neighborhoods throughout the capital instead of limiting themselves to conducting patrols from large, fortified bases in and around the city.

Get ready for 200+ KIA months, coming soon.

[annabanana]

17. (yes. . . . sigh.) More men = more blood. . . . . . n/t

[stray cat]

12. So far he seems to have been the most competent leader in Iraq

General Petraeus actually has done well working with Iraqis and not the goverment in Northern Iraq. I hope for all our sakes he can do a better job than anyone else this administration has appointed.

[Spazito]

20. Given General Petraeus did not succeed in his previous

responsibility, that of In June 2004, being charged with training the new Iraqi Army, a position he held for more than a year, I am curious why you feel he has done well.

From all accounts, the training of the new Iraqi army has gone very slowly with no concrete numbers given as to how many can take over from the US troops. Indeed, from reading this article, he, himself admits he was a failure given this:

"The overarching goal of the American military operation may be altered as well. Under General Casey, the principal focus has been on transferring security responsibilities to the Iraqi security forces, so American troops could gradually withdraw. Now, the emphasis will shift to protecting the Iraqi population from sectarian strife and insurgent attacks."

To me, this says the Iraqi forces are unable to do what General Petraeus was charged with training them to do and, instead, there will be more US troops needed instead.

I read failure yet you see it as a success.

[Adelante]

26. He's talking about Mosul

Early on. Mosul didn't blow up with the rest of Iraq, but did after Patraeus was pulled out. He did a very good job at that time.

[Spazito]

28. Ahhh, but his responsibilities went beyond Mosul from what I

understand to have been his "mission", that being the training of the Iraqi army which has failed miserably. I tend to judge one's success or failure based on the whole job not just one small part of it.

[Adelante]

30. Yes, I agree on that point

Nobody has been good at training the Iraqi army, the new one, that is. But the consultant trainers were the worst of all. It's amazing how this thing has been screwed up so incredibly badly with all the money going into it.

[Adelante]

31. Petraeus should have had Bremer's job

We wouldn't be half as deep in the shit probably.

[KittyWampus]

15. The Name Petraeus sounds ominously like an ancient Roman Commander from Imperial Rome

just a stray thought.

[kineneb]

24. Try: Publius Quintilius Varus

"Battle in the Teutoburg Forest (German Teutoburger Wald): the defeat of the Roman commander Publius Quintilius Varus against the Germanic tribesmen of the Cheruscian leader Arminius in 9 CE. Three legions were annihilated and Germania remained independent from Roman rule."

http://www.livius.org/te-tg/teutoburg/teutoburg01.htm

From whence came Augustus' "Give me back my legions" quote in "I, Claudius".

Medieval German lit/history geek mode: /off

[KittyWampus]

25. You're the kind of geek that I like. That is way cool! going †o read your link

[pwb]

16. buh wants a general he can threaten to fire.

someone close to retirement but not yet elligible. a general who is running scared.

[Azathoth]

18. So Bush fires a general who disagrees with him, and appoints a new one who tells him what he wants

to hear.

Go figure...

[teamster633]

23. Yup. Who have thunk it?

[MiniMe]

27. Well, he name sounds like "Betray Us"

so what do you expect?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. General George Armstrong Petraeus?

Is he gonna get them Injuns surrounded?