+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,197

    Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    Breaking: Double the Troops in "Surge"
    President Bush and his new military chiefs have been saying for nearly a month that they would "surge" an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq, in a last, grand push to quell the violence in Baghdad and in Anbar Province. But a new study by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says the real troop increase could be as high as 48,000 -- more than double the number the President initially said.

    That's because the combat units that President Bush wants to send into hostile areas need to be backed up by support troops, "including personnel to staff headquarters, serve as military police, and provide communications, contracting, engineering, intelligence, medical, and other services," the CBO notes.

    Over the past few years , DoD’s practice has been to deploy a total of about 9,500 personnel per combat brigade to the Iraq theater, including about 4,000 combat troops and about 5,500 supporting troops.

    DoD has not yet indicated which support units will be deployed along with the added combat forces, or how many additional troops will be involved. Army and DoD officials have indicated that it will be both possible and desirable to deploy fewer additional support units than historical practice would indicate. CBO expects that, even if the additional brigades required fewer support units than historical practice suggests, those units would still represent a significant additional number of military personnel.

    To reflect some of the uncertainty about the number of support troops, CBO developed its estimates on the basis of two alternative assumptions. In one scenario, CBO assumed that additional support troops would be deployed in the same proportion to combat troops that currently exists in Iraq. That approach would require about 28,000 support troops in addition to the 20,000 combat troops—a total of 48,000. CBO also presents an alternative scenario that would include a smaller number of support personnel—about 3,000 per combat brigade—totaling about 15,000 support personnel and bringing the total additional forces to about 35,000.

    According to the study, the costs for the "surge" would also be dramatically different than the President has said. The White House estimated a troop escalation would require about $5.6 billion in additional funding for the rest of fiscal year 2007. Of that, about $3.2 billion was supposed to go to the Army and Marines for their escalated activity.

    But that figure appears to have been grossly underestimated. The CBO now believes "that costs would range from $9 billion to $13 billion for a four-month deployment and from $20 billion to $27 billion for a 12-month deployment." There's a more detailed analysis of the numbers on pages 3 and 4 of the study, which was sent to House Budget Chairman John Spratt today


    http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003239.html
    Originally posted by Americanadian
    Palin: Omit the "i" and you're left with "Pain".

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    And this is OK with you?

    More people at risk, more money spent than what your hero tells the american people on national television. And somehow you don't see him as the liar that he is?

    Lady Mod

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,123

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    We will be fighting in Iran by President's Day, maybe even Valentine's Day?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,548

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    Quote Originally Posted by sojustask
    And this is OK with you?

    More people at risk, more money spent than what your hero tells the american people on national television. And somehow you don't see him as the liar that he is?

    Lady Mod
    Guess I'm pretty slow lady mod but I just don't get it. I'm no bush lover, he's made alot of mistakes, but what has he lied about as apposed to just plain wrong about. The WMDs? I really think he and most of the world thought he had them. Even Saddam claimed to have them in the works. turned out to be wrong perhaps but did bush lie about it? What else. Did he say that saddam was behind 9/11? I never heard him say that. Everybody likes to post videos here, are there any showing dubya lying?
    The terminally stupid and certifiably insane.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    649

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    Quote Originally Posted by bogie
    Guess I'm pretty slow lady mod but I just don't get it. I'm no bush lover, he's made alot of mistakes, but what has he lied about as apposed to just plain wrong about. The WMDs? I really think he and most of the world thought he had them. Even Saddam claimed to have them in the works. turned out to be wrong perhaps but did bush lie about it? What else. Did he say that saddam was behind 9/11? I never heard him say that. Everybody likes to post videos here, are there any showing dubya lying?
    Theres actually been plenty of videos posted of Condi Rice saying that SH was linked to 911, and others saying the same thing. There was even one great video that showed Condi rice and the Secretary of Defense, saying Sadaam Hussien, 911, and acts of Terror, over and over again. They must have used those words 100 times in a speech. It was clearly done to link in the minds of America Iraq and 911. I know I thought Iraq had soemthing to do with 911 when we went to war with them.

    So yes, they did lie, they did create the illusion that Iraq was involved in 911 and yes they did lie about the WMD, they definately hand picked which inteligence they were going to use...and there's been video evidence of people admiting that as well.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,548

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    Quote Originally Posted by Independent Harry
    Theres actually been plenty of videos posted of Condi Rice saying that SH was linked to 911, and others saying the same thing. There was even one great video that showed Condi rice and the Secretary of Defense, saying Sadaam Hussien, 911, and acts of Terror, over and over again. They must have used those words 100 times in a speech. It was clearly done to link in the minds of America Iraq and 911. I know I thought Iraq had soemthing to do with 911 when we went to war with them.

    So yes, they did lie, they did create the illusion that Iraq was involved in 911 and yes they did lie about the WMD, they definately hand picked which inteligence they were going to use...and there's been video evidence of people admiting that as well.
    GUESS I MISSED EM.
    The terminally stupid and certifiably insane.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    Quote Originally Posted by bogie
    GUESS I MISSED EM.
    I guess so. So I looked up some sites where you can "educate" yourself. It's all verifiable when you do some digging.

    http://www.bushwatch.net/bushlies.htm#iraq

    http://www.bushwatch.com/bushlies.htm

    http://www.bushlies.net/

    http://www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/

    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20031013/corn

    VIDEOS:

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...06bushlies.htm

    http://thinkprogress.org/2006/10/22/...ay-the-course/

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm73wOuPL60



    Lady Mod
    Last edited by sojustask; 02-02-2007 at 07:20 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,197

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    I find amazing that the liberals are still wishing , oh so much , that us Regular Americans would just buy into their wet dream that Sadmo caused 9/11, all I see here is Ladymod trying to pass a load of Bush-hating websites off as proof and Richard Clark getting rich off liberal schmucks like her

    I WISH YOU PEOPLE WOULD STOP TRYING TO FABRICATE YOUR OWN FACTS
    Originally posted by Americanadian
    Palin: Omit the "i" and you're left with "Pain".

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,866

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    Quote Originally Posted by franKg
    I find amazing that the liberals are still wishing , oh so much , that us Regular Americans would just buy into their wet dream that Sadmo caused 9/11, all I see here is Ladymod trying to pass a load of Bush-hating websites off as proof and Richard Clark getting rich off liberal schmucks like her

    I WISH YOU PEOPLE WOULD STOP TRYING TO FABRICATE YOUR OWN FACTS
    Our fabrications can be proven. Can yours?


    We haven't bought into any wet dreams frankie, it would be nice if you would try reading what was written a couple of times and ask your kids to interpret it for you before showing your ignorance of the English language to respond to what isn't written.

    Read it again, dear, slowly this time. We aren't saying that Saddam was involved with 9/11, but there is ample evidence to show that Bush gang did make the connection and publicly.

    Hell Frankie, I've posted his state of the Union address for that year and he clearly made a connection between Saddam and Iraq and 9/11. It was enough after everything else to confirm in many minds that Saddam was connected and that war was justified before we were attacked again. The grand manipulater is what Bush will be known as.

    Have any doubts cupcake? Here is the transcript and video:
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030128-19.html

    Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.

    Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. (Applause.)
    Such fabrications Frankie, spoken from the man who represents and runs our country are a disgrace to all that is good here. And those who continue to believe and defend his lies are a danger to all of us "NORMAL" Americans.

    Now, tell the folks at the Whitehouse they fabricated a lie. You will at least get it right this time. :rolleyes:

    Lady Mod
    Last edited by sojustask; 02-02-2007 at 05:50 PM.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,123

    Re: Troop surge could be as high as 48,000

    Denial is franKie's middle name! If you say uh uh enough people just give up and get tired of it. That's why republicans got the boot in Nov. Now let's see if democrats learned anything from their playing stupid to the American public??

Similar Threads

  1. Obama's Troop Deployment
    By palger in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-05-2009, 01:38 PM
  2. Why The Troop Surge Will Fail!
    By Phinnly Slash Buster in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-29-2007, 11:33 PM
  3. Iraq troop surge
    By TheWorker in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-14-2007, 11:03 AM
  4. No Troop Commitments for Lebanon
    By sojustask in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-26-2006, 07:05 AM
  5. Military Men For or Against Troop Redeployment
    By tommy4887 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-22-2005, 08:31 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •