McCain: Send 20,000 more troops to Iraq

[ECH1969]

Republican Sen. John McCain, a possible 2008 presidential candidate, said Friday the United States should send another 20,000 troops to Iraq.

A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, McCain said increasing U.S. forces would require expanding the standing Army and Marine Corps - a step the Bush administration has resisted. He also reiterated his opposition to a hasty U.S. withdrawal.

"If we leave ... the fighting will evolve into chaos there," McCain told reporters after speaking at an event for local Republican candidates.

"Another 20,000 troops in Iraq, but that means expanding the Army and the Marine Corps," he said.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/politics/15866440.htm

[grytpype]

1. Only 20k? We need another 300k.

Sending only 20k more troops would just be a waste of time.

These hawks who want to escalate the war just can't come to grips the the fact of how many troops would be needed to win, and the fact that we don't have them.

[coalition_unwilling]

10. "Would be needed to win" -- I'm not even sure I even know

any longer (if I ever did) exactly what "win" means.

20K troops could be achieved through bringing in more lower-class cannon fodder. Now to get to 200-300K, we'd actually have to draft children of privilege, unthinkable :sarcasm:

[lapfog_1]

18. At one point, right after the fall of Baghdad...

sending 400,000 troops in to peacefully maintain order and stop looting might have worked, along with telling the Iraqi army to stay in their barracks and secure any arms depots, we would be by shortly just as soon as there was a CPA installed with the current remaining Iraqi government and provide them with both pay and missions to perform. Coupled with an announcement that we would be leaving in exactly 18 months, and the various factions would have to meet and hammer out a new form of government and some sort of revenue sharing arrangement for Iraqi oil.

If we had done that, and showed respect for the Muslim faith, we might now be looked upon as the liberators of Iraq. Maybe. It wouldn't change the fact that thousands dies in the invasion, that the war was illegal, and that the reasons for the invasion were lies. But we might have left a more secular and more stable Iraq behind and gotten out with our military reputation intact. Now, just like after Vietnam, many in the world think we are a paper tiger again. Not at all like after the first Gulf war or the Bosnian police action.

[TheBaldyMan]

36. as well as not dismantling basic food distibution and a free health care

system on the grounds that it sounds a bit commie. Suddenly the poorest people couldn't get access to the most basic foodstuffs, and most of the Iraqi police & army was laid off.

The Bush neocon experiment caused a power vacuum as widespread hardship, life wasn't easy under Saddam then things got worse.

You know the saying about the best thing to do when you're in a hole ...

[nealmhughes]

45. While the entire Iraq Adventure has been horrid, in a realistic view,

a "normal" occupation with the troops kept and liberated from the hardcore Saadam Baathists would have been great. Now there are men who are broke, armed and angry.

They could have taken their wrath out on Saadam for his Kurdish massacres and desolation of the Shiites and Marsh Arabs instead of us and themselves...kept the electricity and clean water flowing and the schools open and the oil going at that...now we and they are in a bloody quagmire.

The neocon Ayn Rand fetish that might is right, that there is no "morality," only will of the strong and its corrolary of the invincible "free market" are at the root of this crap.

Rumsfield = Roark in this analysis!

They had rather blow the thing up than to have it exactly as THEY want it!

[leesa]

58. They never asked us to remove Saddam. They only asked us to lift

the sanctions. We would NEVER be viewed as liberators. Only as the illegal invaders we were.

[confludemocrat]

21. Excuse me, we NEED more troops? WTF for? Oh yeah, "to complete the mission

but what is that noble mission again? 300K more firepower and 300K more targets. Sounds like a recipe for success.

[uppityperson]

23. "Win"? What do you mean by "win"?

Win what? What does "winning" consist of? I am tired of "win" talk, without measurable goals.

[ShockediSay]

48. win a US election promising an un-winnable military victory

Right up to his death Gen Westmoreland thought we could have won in Viet Nam if only we'd pour the rest of the US into Viet Nam

Killer fool

[Jacobin]

30. uhm, 'win' by what?

Killing the 24 million Iraqis who want us to leave?

No thanks

[pokercat999]

52. There is no such thing as "winning", when

more of "them" are willing to die than we are willing to kill.

Imagine if they had invaded the US, it was Iraqi Humvees and trucks running up and down our roads, Iraqi troops kicking in your door and taking you away or your dad or your brother.....would you be making road side bombs? Would you EVER give up? Would you be willing to fight and die?

Welcome to Iraq!

[legin]

59. I think maybe the idea here

is to position himself as the candidate who 'will sort out Iraq by committing enough troops to the country', in the minds of the electorate.

As you say 300k is probably about right, but very unelectable.

It's selling the idea without getting into the really nasty details. A con basically.

[AlCzervik]

2. 20,000=20,000 targets.

[wakeme2008]

3. It's getting drafty in here

:grr:

[rail]

8. Yeah! Out of which magic pie hole are we supposed to pull 20k troops?

He's gonna drive 'em to Iraq on the Straight Talk Express.

[RamboLiberal]

26. McCain ought to hit up those Young Republican Groups

I thought it was asinine on Hardball College Tour when he dissed Tweety for daring to ask the young war supporters if they were going to join up!

Come on you Yellow Elephants your party is calling!

[KamaAina]

27. Someone please get up and close the war.

:hippie:

[Spinzonner]

4. Yeah, that'll do the trick

Can't possibly be any more insurgents or jihadists in the country to pick up the slack.

[BOSSHOG]

5. Do they manufacture body bags in Arizona?

"Evolve into chaos?" John, what the fuck is it now? I truly respect what did for your country in Vietnam but it is time to stop this fucking lunacy.

[leftchick]

6. well he just killed his 2008 chances

there are not too many warmongers left. Perhaps 25% of the population. He has lost his mind.

[Kolesar]

9. I had thought McCain was too old &had health problems precluding a run

Per your point, he may have just killed his prospects. Perhaps John McCain has only been "pretending" to be a presidential candidate.

[leftchick]

13. I agree he just may be

every time his name is mentioned on TV it is always preceded by 2008 presidential hopeful. The TV always seems to pick the candidates for us.

[ps1074]

7. So, McCain not runing in 2008?

His stance won't win many votes. Or he's counting on the short memory span of the american voter?

[NOLADEM]

11. McCain.....The Anti-Dean

He thinks he is a maverick, but he is a tool.

Another group of grieving parents and dead kids is no substitute for strategy.

Bush has failed. The US government is in its last throes.

[phantom power]

17. The "maverick" has been stumping for Jon Kyl big-time recently.

And there aint no more big a GOP tool than Jon Kyl.

Who is more the tool?
Who is more the tool?
The tool or the tool that stumps for the tool?

[mitchum]

12. Surely enough college republicans to make up those 20,000 troops

let them put their asses where their mouths are

[Az_lefty]

14. !

[Barrett808]

15. We have about 18,000 combat troops there now

Does he mean 20,000 combat troops, or just a few thousand, with rest playing support roles?

[madmax]

16. Send McCain!!! n/t

[BigDDem]

19. Sounds good to me

surely there are at least 20,000 College republicans.

[saltpoint]

20. What troops, Senator? I don't see any more. We're stretched way

thin as it is.

That guy you endorsed and avidly campaigned for doesn't seem to know much about war planning.

You can grab a headline or two calling for more troops, but there aren't any.

[cosmicdot]

22. where's that vaudeville hook smiley when it's needed?

one thing about those who get way too much media time ...

their act gets old and tiring


no vaudeville hook?

well, this will have to do

[Rose Siding]

24. Hey Rocky, watch me pull a division out 'a my hat.

[AndyTiedye]

25. It's Getting Drafty

[bluestateguy]

28. The Freepers are offended

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1727131/posts

[Virginia Dare]

42. The freepers have gotten bored with Iraq...

they're focusing on the war with Mexico now....:crazy:

[Jacobin]

29. He didn't learn a forking thing in Viet Nam, did he?

[Gregorian]

31. STAY THE QUAGMIRE!

/peanut gallery

[hvn_nbr_2]

33. Good slogan. nt

[tblue37]

32. Frankly, I hope he keeps spouting this sort of nonsense.

A lot of Dems who don't pay attention to anything but media hype have bought into the bulls**t about both McCain and Powell, not realizing that their reputations are nothing but media creations, masks of decency to hide their opportunism and ethical emptiness. A lot of dumb Dems and Independents would vote for McCain in 2008 because they don't realize what he really is.

I hope he continues to show his true colors like this.

[Megahurtz]

34. Okay McCain, put on your gear and GO! n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

35. Will John be leading the charge?

I sure hope so.

[elehhhhna]

37. When's he going to offer to exchange himself for our "missing" soldier?

McCain LIKES torture, so why not?

[Ms. Clio]

38. send 200,000 more; it won't make any difference to the final outcome

[ima_sinnic]

39. so is it coming down to a showdown between those who want to

get out and those who think they can "win" if they just pour more bodies into the machine? If he's banking on the latter, he'll get about 15% of the vote, so GO FOR IT, DUMB@$$!! sheesh.

[LynnTheDem]

40. Sure. You go first, McCain. Seems you've forgotten what being

lied to war feels like.

[llmart]

41. You first, Johnny.....

or maybe you can find some Republican Congresspeople's children to sign up. No? I didn't think so.

[fob]

43. Welcome to John Kerry's position of 2004 when it could have

done some good. Are you also going to suggest mr mclame that maybe we should train some of the Iraqi troops here or in other US bases away from the turmoil, put them through the same training our guys get? Cause John also discussed that back when it mattered. And are there any other 2 to 3 year old pieces of John's advice you are planning on stealing?

mclame, fuck you.

[Ferret Annica]

44. No, just no way, exit Iraq, do it yesterday

as soon as possible is late as we never, ever, in anyway had any business going in in the first place.

[Zorra]

46. 20,000 troops: Send McCain to Iraq. n/t

[hedgehog]

47. Draft, hell! I feel a damn hurricane!

[Tight_rope]

49. YES...Start with Congress and the people in the White House, then

the Pentagon and dont forget SCOTUS. Please don't forget their families and the big oil companies CEO's , Halliburton (aw shit not them...they steal/charge too much)

[Occulus]

50. He forgot a 0 n/t

[jacksonian]

51. he's positioning

We should also learn the lesson from Vietnam that the Right will withdraw from the quagmire, then blame the whole thing on the Left not letting them go all out.

McCain is setting himself up for an "I told you so" when we pull out and things deteriorate even further. Not that he has a solution, mind you - we're way past the point of "more soldiers=better result" - only an "I told you so" for a future snazzy pres TV ad for the right-wing base.

I really don't see him ever being Pres, and I shudder to think if he was. The man is a shamless panderer as this very statement shows. 20,000 troops we don't have for the purpose of more fodder against the inevitable, just brilliant.

[olddad56]

53. Send McCain, nevermind, he wasn't very effective in Vietnam.

[goforit]

54. This guy has lost it!

[Lochloosa]

55. 20,000 would bring us to right around 1965 levels...

Vietnam War
Allied Troop Levels 1960-73

Allied Troop Levels - Vietnam, 1960 To 1973 Year American
1959 760
1960 900
1961 3205
1962 11300
1963 16300
1964 23300
1965 184300
1966 385300
1967 485600
1968 536100
1969 475200
1970 334600
1971 156800
1972 24200
1973 50

[wordpix]

56. here comes the draft to protect BigOil's profits

[leesa]

57. Yeah, that'll help. How incredibly stupid that would be!!