Soldiers Do Or Don't Want A Troop Surge In Iraq?

Many Soldiers Say Troop Surge a Bad Idea

http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle....D8M9VVQO0.html

(Gold9472: I'm posting two stories. One from today, and one from 12/21. The latter story appeared first, and was promoted HEAVILY throughout news outlets like MSNBC, CBS News, Fox News, and CNN down below. The latest and first story appears twice in a google search. Anybody see a problem with that? The latter story reminds me of that time Bush met with soldiers that followed a script.)

Dec 28, 12:32 PM (ET)
By WILL WEISSERT

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Many of the American soldiers trying to quell sectarian killings in Baghdad don't appear to be looking for reinforcements. They say the temporary surge in troop levels some people are calling for is a bad idea.

President Bush is considering increasing the number of troops in Iraq and embedding more U.S. advisers in Iraqi units. White House advisers have indicated Bush will announce his new plan for the war before his State of the Union address Jan. 23.

In dozens of interviews with soldiers of the Army's 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment as they patrolled the streets of eastern Baghdad, many said the Iraqi capital is embroiled in civil warfare between majority Shiite Muslims and Sunni Arabs that no number of American troops can stop.

Others insisted current troop levels are sufficient and said any increase in U.S. presence should focus on training Iraqi forces, not combat.

But their more troubling worry was that dispatching a new wave of soldiers would result in more U.S. casualties, and some questioned whether an increasingly muddled American mission in Baghdad is worth putting more lives on the line.

Spc. Don Roberts, who was stationed in Baghdad in 2004, said the situation had gotten worse because of increasing violence between Shiites and Sunnis.

"I don't know what could help at this point," said Roberts, 22, of Paonia, Colo. "What would more guys do? We can't pick sides. It's almost like we have to watch them kill each other, then ask questions."

Based in Fort Lewis, Wash., the battalion is part of the 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team of the 2nd Infantry Division. Deployed in June, its men were moved to Baghdad from Mosul in late November to relieve another Stryker battalion that had reached the end of its tour.

"Nothing's going to help. It's a religious war, and we're caught in the middle of it," said Sgt. Josh Keim, a native of Canton, Ohio, who is on his second tour in Iraq. "It's hard to be somewhere where there's no mission and we just drive around."

Capt. Matt James, commander of the battalion's Company B, was careful in how he described the unit's impact since arriving in Baghdad.

"The idea in calling us in was to make things better here, but it's very complicated and complex," he said.

But James said more troops in combat would likely not have the desired effect.

"The more guys we have training the Iraqi army the better," he said. "I would like to see a surge there."

During a recent interview, Lt. Gen. Nasier Abadi, deputy chief of staff for the Iraqi army, said that instead of sending more U.S. soldiers, Washington should focus on furnishing his men with better equipment.

"We are hoping 2007 will be the year of supplies," he said.

Some in the 5th Battalion don't think training will ever get the Iraqi forces up to American standards.

"They're never going to be as effective as us," said 1st Lt. Sean McCaffrey, 24, of Shelton, Conn. "They don't have enough training or equipment or expertise."

McCaffrey does support a temporary surge in troop numbers, however, arguing that flooding Baghdad with more soldiers could "crush enemy forces all over the city instead of just pushing them from one area to another."

Pfc. Richard Grieco said it's hard to see how daily missions in Baghdad make a difference.

"If there's a plan to sweep through Baghdad and clear it, (more troops) could make a difference," said the 19-year-old from Slidell, La. "But if we just dump troops in here like we've been doing, it's just going to make for more targets."

Sgt. James Simons, 24, of Tacoma, Wash., said Baghdad is so dangerous that U.S. forces spend much of their time in combat instead of training Iraqis.

"Baghdad is still like it was at the start of the war. We still have to knock out insurgents because things are too dangerous for us to train the Iraqis," he said.

Staff Sgt. Anthony Handly disagreed, saying Baghdad has made improvements many Americans aren't aware of.

"People think everything is so bad and so violent, but it's really not," said Handly, 30, of Bellingham, Wash. "A lot of people are getting jobs they didn't have before and they're doing it on their own. We just provide a stabilizing effect."

Staff Sgt. Lee Knapp, 28, of Mobile, Ala., also supported a temporary troop surge, saying it could keep morale up by reducing the need to extend units past the Army's standard tour of one year in Iraq.

"It could help alleviate some stress on the smaller units," he said. "It could help Baghdad, but things are already getting better."

Sgt. Justin Thompson, a San Antonio native, said he signed up for delayed enlistment before the Sept. 11 terror attacks, then was forced to go to a war he didn't agree with.

A troop surge is "not going to stop the hatred between Shia and Sunni," said Thompson, who is especially bitter because his 4-year contract was involuntarily extended in June. "This is a civil war, and we're just making things worse. We're losing. I'm not afraid to say it."

Soldiers tell Gates more troops needed in Iraq

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/....ap/index.html

POSTED: 1:33 p.m. EST, December 21, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the rest of the Bush administration may be undecided on whether to send more troops to Iraq. But several soldiers he met with at Camp Victory here on Thursday morning said extra forces would help.

"Sir I think we need to just keep doing what we're doing," Spc. Jason T. Green, with the 101st Military Intelligence Brigade Combat Team of the 1st Infantry Division, told Gates during a breakfast session with about 15 U.S. soldiers.

"I really think we need more troops here. With more presence on the ground, more troops might hold them off long enough to where we can get the Iraqi Army trained up."

The troops may be somewhat at odds with military commanders, who worry that rushing thousands more Americans to the battlefront could prompt Iraqis to slow their effort to take control of their country.

Those concerns are "clearly a consideration" in mapping out future strategy, Gates said. (Watch Gates seek an unfiltered view of the war from U.S. troops, Iraqis )

Just days into his new job as defense chief, Gates planned meetings in Baghdad with Iraqi government officials Thursday, after a day of talks with his military commanders on Wednesday.

His hour-long question-and-answer session with troops over scrambled eggs Thursday was largely spent gathering insights from those closest to the action.

When he asked them whether adding forces would help, he got a roomful of nods.

"More troops would help us integrate the Iraq Army into patrols more," said Pfc. Cassandra Wallace, from the 10th Mountain Division.

The soldiers also told him they think the Iraqi Army is getting better, but that it should be bigger and that many of the Iraqis are still not showing up for duty.

Gates, who later helicoptered to Balad Air Base west of Baghdad for a special operations briefing, did not tip his hand much to the soldiers, who were from the 1st Cavalry Division, the 1st Infantry Division and the 10th Mountain Division.

But he said U.S. logistics and support troops are likely to be in Iraq for a lot longer than the combat forces -- as efforts continue to stabilize the country. And saying Iran and Syria are playing a very negative role in the violence in Iraq, he emphasized that "figuring out the regional context is very important."

"We need to make damned sure that the neighbors understand that we're going to be here for a long time -- here being the Persian Gulf," said Gates.

The new defense chief is visiting Iraq with a high-level entourage to assess options for calming violence in the country as President Bush considers sending thousands more troops. Bush is expected to unveil his new policy next month.

"Secretary Gates is going to be an important voice in the Iraq strategy review that's under way," Bush told reporters at a White House news conference Wednesday.

After meeting with top U.S. generals at Camp Victory, Gates said Wednesday that he had only begun to determine how to reshape U.S. war policy. "We discussed the possibility of a surge and the potential for what it might accomplish," he told reporters.

Top U.S. commanders also have worried that even a short-term troop increase might bring only a temporary respite to the violence -- or none at all -- while creating shortages of fresh troops for future missions. (Watch how low military troop levels have become a concern )

One option would add five or more additional combat brigades, or roughly 20,000 troops, to the 140,000 already there.

Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq and one of several generals who met with Gates, said he supports boosting troop levels only when there is a specific purpose for their deployment.

"I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea, but what I want to see happen is when, if we do bring more American troops here, they help us progress to our strategic objectives," Casey told reporters during a news conference with Gates and military leaders.

Gen. John Abizaid, top U.S. commander in the Middle East, said the military is "looking at every possible thing that might influence the situation to make Baghdad in particular more secure."

In addition to a possible short-term troop increase aimed at bringing violence in Baghdad and Anbar province under control, Bush is considering removing U.S. combat forces and accelerating the training and equipping of Iraqi security forces. Military leaders are also considering an increase in the number of American advisers for Iraqi security forces.

Echoing Casey and other commanders, Bush said he would only agree to a temporary troop surge if an achievable mission could be defined.