Iraq Plan Seeks Up To 20,000 More Troops

CBS News Exclusive: Details On The Defense Secretary's Recommendations To President

(CBS/AP)  CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports Defense Secretary Robert Gates has recommended that President Bush order an immediate buildup of 10,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, with an option of doubling that to 20,000 by spring.

The plan is known as "Five Plus Two," sending five Army brigades into Baghdad plus two Marine battalions into western Iraq. Two of the Army brigades would go into Baghdad starting in January, with the other three on call.

A senior defense official told The Associated Press that parts of the CBS report were incorrect but declined to say which parts or to comment on any recommendations Gates might have made to Bush.

Meanwhile, one day after taking control of Congress, the new Democratic leaders sent a blunt message to the president Friday: his new strategy should focus on bringing U.S. forces home, rather than the "surge" in troops he's considering.

In a letter sent to Mr. Bush on Friday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged him to begin pulling troops out of Iraq in four to six months. They also asked the president to begin shifting the mission of U.S. forces there from combat to training and logistical support of the Iraqis.

The Democrats' criticism of a troop buildup was not new. But the letter underscored a new reality for Mr. Bush: With the new congressional leadership, his Iraq policy will be challenged at every turn by lawmakers.

"Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point for no strategic gain," Pelosi, D-Calif., and Reid, D-Nev., wrote a day after their party took control of Capitol Hill.

"We are well past the point of more troops for Iraq," they said.

But Martin reports that one of the plan's architects, retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, has said the insurgency can't be defeated without first protecting Iraqi citizens from violence.

"We have never had a strategy to defeat the insurgency," Keane says. "And if we had a strategy to defeat the insurgency, then the No. 1 military objective would have been protect and support the population. That is what this plan is all about."

There have been temporary buildups before to protect Iraqis going to the polls to vote, but this would be different. The new plan would need to last a year and a-half.

"What is different is you bring in a 24/7 force and they stay in those neighborhoods and they do not go back to their bases," Keane explains. "They stay in the neighborhoods and that force is U.S. and Iraqi."

Defense Secretary Gates made an unannounced visit Friday to the headquarters of the U.S. central command in Florida, which has overall control of the war in Iraq and where he is installing new commanders.

To Frederick Kagan, another architect of the plan, the change is long overdue.

"For too long, I think the administration has allowed military leadership that was clearly on the wrong track to continue driving in the wrong direction," Kagan says.

The president on Friday nominated Adm. William Fallon, described by people who have worked for him as "caustic," "arrogant" and an "SOB," to take over central command from Gen. John Abizaid. Lt. Gen. David Petraeus, perhaps the most controversial officer in the Army because of his "Type A" personality and what many view as his too-cozy relationship with the media, will replace Gen. George Casey as top American general in Iraq. Both men must be approved by the Senate.

Both Abizaid and Casey have expressed qualms in recent weeks about boosting U.S. forces in Iraq. Abizaid said an increase of 20,000 could not be sustained for long by the overburdened American military, and Casey said such a boost should be used only to advance U.S. strategic goals.

Author Rick Atkinson spent two months with Petraeus during the initial invasion of Iraq.

According to Atkinson, "He [Petraeus] said at one point, perhaps a week into the war, 'Tell me how this ends. Tell me how this ends.' Now, there's an ironic inflection when he says this, but it was the right question. It's the right question four years later."

[skyk-2009]

It is time to end this mess and end it now. We are doing serious harm to the ability of this nation to defend itself all in a effort to establish Fascist Policy provided by people who haven't been right about IRAQ, NOT ONCE. Our Military is streached to the breaking point by the Incompetence of a Blundering Fool who just doesn't seem to know how to tell the Truth about anything. The latest in the long line of Lies brought to the American People by Sir Lies Alot and the Fascist is we aren't Winning in Iraq but we're not losing. That's not possible folks and any Combat Vet will tell you that. IF we're not winning, with our Military and our weapons we are Damned well LOSING. Our Military can not win this thing and its time we accepted that fact. The Fascist and Mr. Bush lost it long ago when the Entire World became more afraid of them than they are of Bin Laden.

[jackntx]

The ongoing strategy in Iraq of training, equipping, and handing battle space to the Iraqi Army IS WORKING !!

Since no mainstream media source wants to tell us that we are indeed KILLING and CAPTURING the enemy, I compile the numbers myself.

The results show increasing success:
September = 659
October = 791
November = 860
December = 957

To date in January, at least 268 terrorists or insurgents have been dilled or captured. With that pace, at month's end, over 1100 will have been killed or captured.

Not to mention the tremendous increase of tips from Iraqi civilians that are enabling the military and police forces to conduct successful operations. During the summer of 2006, about 4,200 tips a month occurred. In October and November, the number of tips per month exceeded 7,200.

What I want to know is how do you liberals define victory?

[defirststate]

Bush's bumbling surge is "stay the course," plus, adding troops, adding casualties and adding cost with the same strategic goal, "win." The definition of "win" and the "reasons" for the war are the only things that have changed in this administration's prosecution of the war.

Someone should inform the driver of this bus that changing maps does not put us on a different road. Those honorable, courageous soldiers killed in the new way forward will, unfortunately be exactly as dead as those killed staying the course, freeing Iraq and any thing else they may choose to call it. The only thing changing will be the "just a number" death toll which will continue climbing. Am I the only one who wonders what good things one or more of these brave soldiers might have done in their lives if they hadn't been killed in this war of choice?

juhindson1 if only someone in the pentagon had the ballsto mention some of your points to the delusional decider. The 8 oz glass containing 50% of its capacity is neither half-full nor half-empty to him. It's 37 gallons in his world. Go figure.

[num2718]

I've read lost of comments here without noticing any that support Bush's policies. Is it possible that the 28% (or whatever) of Americans that support Bush can't read or can't write? Come on people, speak up!

[heetseeker]

exusmcsgt

Thanks for your post. The idea of involving the Arab League and moderate Arab states is a particularly interesting idea. I had not thought about that one before. The Arab League have been surprisingly quiet on any kind of stabilisation package for Iraq. Is it that they cannot get their act together? Or that the administration wants to keep them at arms length?

Your other points are sound. In the context they actually seem like no-brainers. I therefore struggle to understand why the administration cannot see the discipline, focus and structure they would bring to the disengagement process.

[jhindson1]

RATIONALE FOR STAYING THE COURSE
In reading the posts, it appears that there are many reasons offered for a troop increase and staying until the *job is done.*

1. The US must have victory. If *victory* is the forced stabilization of Iraq this will take 800K to a million troops staying in Iraq indefintely.
2. Iraq is not Vietnam. This is true it is worse than Vietnam. In Vietnam the US was on one side. In Iraq it is fighting three sides - Shia Sunii and Al Qaeda.
3. Leaving Iraq would be like leaving WWII. Iraq, unlike Germany was not invading the rest of the world. In fact it had learned its lesson after Kuwait.
4. We need to *sacrifice* to be free. Yes, but sacrificing more Treasure in Iraq is not improving our freedom.
5. To honor those that have died. see #1
6. Because conquering Iraq is a prequel to the second coming of Chris - refer to Pat Robertson, and God.
7. To defeat the terrorists. But the Iraq war is emboldening the terrorists, and increasing their numbers
8. To make America safer. See #7
9. Oil. Maybe, see #11
10. Spread Democracy. Democracy is earned through internal struggle and cannot be imposed - too many examples to mention.
11. Corporate greed and war profiteering. Possibly.
11. A PERFECT STORM of hubris, arrogance, incompetence, corporate greed and profiteering, and religious views. Maybe

The *new* strategy to be announced next week is DOA.

[ceekuei]

It should be obvious by now that Bush has little or no comprehension of what is reality. In the overall scheme of things, an increase of up to 20,000 soldiers will have little impact on the situation unless he has found a new meaning to "victory" that this additional troop level will help to achieve. However, knowing the incompetence of this man, we should not hold our breath. America under Bush is slowly but surely descending into a police state right before the eyes of the American people and the world. He has now given himself "powers" to open mails. Where will he stop! If nothing is done to curb his megalomaniac tendencies, future generations would ask why we allowed it to happen. Fear is Bush's weapon and the public, by and large buys it! If freedom can be so arbitrarily traded for fear by the fear mongers, America has lost, the terrorists have won. It is a shame and a tragedy that Bush has yet to be impeached and removed.

[exusmcsgt]

In addition to the aforementioned, I would make it clear to Israel that we will not tolerate a perpetuation of their holding the Palestinians prisoners in their own land. I would put Israel on notice that the 3 billion American dollars we hand over to them each year would be contingent on their effectively pursuing a peace agreement with the Palestinians assuring the Palestinians of their own sovereignty and then back it up.

[exusmcsgt]

heetseeker-

Were it mine to do, I would take the following steps:

First I would make it clear to the Iraqi government that the free ride is over. I would set out realistic yet firm dates for when they would be responsible for their own security sector by sector and hold them to it by telling them we would be withdrawing from those sectors on the specified dates. I would not make the timetable public so as to not complicate their task.

Secondly, I would address the U.N. with the decision to put the world on notice that our involvement would be ending in Iraq and that the Iraqi government would be required to assume responsibility for securing their own country and making peace with their different factions.

Thirdly, I would encourage the Arab league to get involved in helping the Iraqi government in meeting it's obligations. This would allow Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait and other moderate Arab countries help offset Syria's and Iran's designs on what form the country of Iraq will develop into.

Fourthly, I would augment the moderate Arab states with assistance in their mission of helping Iraq with military, diplomatic, and/or strategic support and retire from Iraq as specified in the timetable.

[klumppar]

Bush Fails by Ignoring Experience %u2014 Here He Goes Again

Bush sold the Iraq War by disregarding intelligence that said there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. He ignored the advice written by his own father that invading Iraq would be disastrous. He ignored the wisdom of the Germans and French. Everyone else was right, but he made the wrong decision nonetheless.

William Shirer's book, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", describes the blunder Hitler made by replacing orders from his generals with his own, thereby making things worse for Germany in World War II. In the Vietnam War, President Johnson repeatedly resorted to surges in U.S. troop levels, thereby in each case increasing the casualties on both sides. Bush renounced advice of the Baker-Hamilton report as unrealistic. Now he is replacing Generals with ones who will abide by his intent to ignore the vote of America's electorate, the advice of Congress, and the experiences of Hitler and Johnson. For the benefit of all, let's stop Bush, who clearly intends to stay this disastrous course. Is there any way without removing both Bush and Cheney from office? Cheney proposes expanding Bush's war by attacking Iran.

[heetseeker]

exusmcsgt

You have a military background. What are your thoughts on the best way forward? More resources into training of Iraqi's? Timetable for withdrawal? Milestones for our continued support? Redeployment to the periphery? Immediate withdrawal? Talking to the Iran & Syria?

[exusmcsgt]

grumpas-

I'll add that the NeoCon's knew they could never sell the plan to us based on the fact that they wanted permanent bases in the middle east so they came up with the WMD scenario.

72% of the people bought the NeoCon's BS then and 28% still do 4 years later.

[exusmcsgt]

grumpas-

Bubba's plan was to invade Iraq, install a wertern-friendy government and buils 4 permanent American bases from which to project American power. Congress pulled the plug on the money for the bases last October when they had to admit that stability in Iraq would never reach a level to allow for the bases' existance.

Now, it's all about Bubba's legacy.

[grumpas]

Everyone tends to conveniently forget several important details! The Iraqi people did not ask us to invade them! Let's face the cold hard facts, that is what we did is invade them for no logical reason! Bush invented reasons to start this war with Iraq! They have been proven time and time again to be lies! Iraq was not a threat to us militarily or any other way! Bush had a hard on for Saddam Hussein and took him out! Bush was told before the invasion it would be urban and religious warfare when Hussein was outsted! We as a nation have no pressing national interests in the area, Bush might but the country doesn't! So, the bottom line comes up! Why are we still there? Why are we even considering sending more troops to get killed for Bush's lies! They aren't being killed to protect this country from terrorist's! That's another one of Bush's many lies! It's time to force this "nut case" to admit it was a mistake and bring the troops home! There is nothing more to do in the country but make a worse mess than already exists! The only reason it has turned out to be a religious war! Bush turned it into one with his bravo (big mouth)! So, it's time to stop blaming Muslims for the mess and blame who is actually to blame...George W Bush!!!!!

[exusmcsgt]

yurpallid-

I have found that logic and reason are not effective in dealing with the gullible of this world who believe in religious fairy tales and the warm fuzzy it gives the subscribers. Good luck with your pleas, but in my experience, people who subscribe to "faith" have little use for facts.

[exusmcsgt]

heetseeker-

The three main ethnic groups in Iraq want three different things. After centuries of conflict they have to resolve their differences for any chance of success. Being a betting man, I am putting my money on the outcome that their ethnic hatred and religious intolerance for each other will not be resolved by a "surge".

[heetseeker]

sanityseeker

From one "seeker" to another, that is one of the most incisive posts I have read about the proposed "new way forward" on Iraq.

Sadly, our shared view is not the view of the administration. They seem to believe that they can still push for "victory." The dynamics of Iraq in terms of what is achievable has changed dramatically. Success in Iraq can only now be measured in degrees of failure. Our initial vision for a "flowering democracy" is dead in the water.

Perhaps, we might take a little time to find out what the Iraqi's want and work towards that vision instead. Now, that would be a novel idea wouldn't it?

[panhandlpete]

More troops now, more deaths and much more money. What happens if we are only deeper in #### at the end of summer? Why does it take YEARS to train Iraqi soldiers when ours get it done in weeks, then get sent over there without proper protective equipment? If this "PLAN" fails, what then?

Just how far has civilization advanced since the days of "the religious wars"? Sorry, I forgot this is a "religious war", at least for some!
Some state they have talked with "God". I guess he made the same mistakes the voters of this country did when they elected its leadership.

[sanityseeker]

As I read this release, "the surge" is rationalized to support our mission to "protect the Iraqi people from violence" as they struggle to establish a stable, central democratic Iraqi government representative of the various tribal and religious factions working peacefully and collaborately. It appears that the Iraqi people are the perpitrators as well as victims of this violence being fomented by religious and tribal loyalties.
It seems that the media has been presenting a sanitized, simplistic explanation of the reality in Iraq without exposing the very fragile coalition of the "central government" and the fortress reality of all the neighborhoods in Baghdad. "The surge" might temporarily reduce the violence between the various factions but then we expect to stabilize the country by training those same factions to become the Iraqi army.
We need get over our Muslim xenophobia, respect and understand the local cultures and their priorities and execute a "surge" of diplomatic efforts getting the surrounding Sunni and Shiite countries involved in helping with the stabilization. Right now I do not hear much difference between "the surge" and "staying to course".

[exusmcsgt]

ghareeb2-

After having had several exchanges with lieberman18, I can attest to the fact the demonstrates xenophobia and will not accept your invitation to educate himself.

He spews hatred and insult to any and all who attempt to illuminate him. Your efforts are wasted on this individual, sad to say.