Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Here we go: Gates: 3,000 Extra Troops Could go to Afghanistan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:12 PM
Original message
Here we go: Gates: 3,000 Extra Troops Could go to Afghanistan
Source: AP

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama said he'd send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. But the actual number could be higher.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he asked the president for flexibility on the number in case military commanders in the field request additional medics or troops trained to detect improvised explosive devices.

Gates told a Senate committee Thursday that he got approval for the 30,000 troop deployment to be expanded by as much as 3,000 if necessary.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091203/ap_on_go_co/us_us_afghanistan_troops
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TornadoTN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. I've seen 34,000 as the number to begin with
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised should we send upwards of 40k initially.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
2. No surprise there...support troops and all that
Edited on Thu Dec-03-09 01:28 PM by Solly Mack
It was to be expected...even though it wasn't stated


I think the real number is going to be closer to 42K when all is said and done

I'm sorry you're being attacked for posting the information. I well remember the disgust/anger on DU when the Bush administration would say one thing one day about troop numbers and then spend the next few days "clarifying" (that's what they called it)...when they could have just said it the first time around.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. I was thinking 45-48K but that is me
the damn geography will need this. Most will be logistics troops... with a few more medical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Even then, they'll use contractors to send "more troops" than represented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
4. all the bu$hists need to go....now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
5. My goodness, we wouldn't want them to send in medics and EOD guys.
Even if they needed it--because, you know, then it won't be exactly 30,000. I think it's sad to be so vested in proving that your own party's President is a dishonest man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Why not include them in the numbers?
This is simply the first uptick in numbers, I expect more. It doesn't have anything to do with a desire to portray someone as dishonest. I am just bringing facts and information here as I find it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. I'm referring to your post as it's worded: "Here we go"...
Edited on Thu Dec-03-09 01:25 PM by TwilightGardener
implying, of course, that you are looking for expected evidence that the President will be dishonest because the total troop count might be more than anticipated. That's just very sad. If it's in the ballpark of what he announced, I'm OK with that--especially in sending support troops who perform life-saving duties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. It wasn't meant to be a reflection on Obama's honesty.
I did expect it, and I do expect more upticks to drip out as time goes on. It is the nature of selling a war. Ease the public into it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. Several points
Most combat brigades already have medics assigned to the units! So these look to be extra medical personnel.

EOD is a specialty and are usually attached to units that require their expertise, usually in the HQ elements.

And personally I don't believe Gates anyway, and it wouldn't be the first time that Congress was lied to.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. What difference does it make if they're usually attached to units, if there's
a need for more OF THEM specifically? My husband has deployed with only a handful of his squadron, and no one else in his specialty, along with him. You can believe or not believe Gates, but I'm not going to fall on the floor and throw conniptions over a relatively small number of needed support troops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
6. And so it begins


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
8. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
beyond cynical Donating Member (150 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. That would make sense since there are ten in rear with the gear and the beer...
Edited on Thu Dec-03-09 01:22 PM by beyond cynical
for every trigger puller.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arctic Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
12. Damn, that must have been in the fine print of O's speech.
Edited on Thu Dec-03-09 01:23 PM by Arctic Dave
I have a bad feeling this will be first "addendum".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
14. The sugar coating on that poisen pill is wearing off fast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChickMagic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 02:37 PM
Response to Original message
17. My nephew is at Camp Pendelton right now
getting infantry training and will deploy to Afghanistan
around Christmas. Funny thing about it, he's known that
for several weeks. I'm worried sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
18. gee, what a surprise
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
27inCali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-03-09 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
19. if we are going to do it, we should do it right
if there are going to be young people putting their lives at risk, then they should have all the support and numbers necessary period. Once you make a commitment to use force you use as overwhelming a force as possible and end it quickly, which what we all want -for it to end quickly!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC