Gates: Buildup Criticism "Emboldens" Enemy

Defense Secretary, Blair Support Bush War Plan; Congress Prepares For Opposition Resolution

(CBS/AP)  Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday an effort in Congress to pass a resolution opposing President Bush's troop buildup undercuts U.S. commanders in Iraq and "emboldens the enemy."

At the same time, he said the Pentagon is hoping to speed the deployment of five additional Army brigades to Baghdad to bolster security in the capital. They had been scheduled to arrive a brigade per month through May, each containing roughly 3,500 troops.

Outgoing British Prime Minister Tony Blair also said Friday he was optimistic about Mr. Bush's strategy but called Iraq a tremendous challenge.

"I've picked the plan that I think is most likely to succeed," Mr. Bush said in an Oval Office meeting with senior military advisers.

Gates' strong language, along with Mr. Bush's own forceful comments, underscored the high stakes in a congressional battle expected to start next week over proposals from both parties criticizing the president's war strategy.

At the White House on Friday, the president challenged lawmakers not to prematurely condemn his buildup, saying, "I'm the decision maker" on troop levels. Vice President Dick Cheney said earlier this week that the buildup would proceed even if a nonbinding resolution supported by some Republicans as well as Democrats wins Senate approval.

Mr. Bush spoke to reporters in the Oval Office after meeting with Gates and Lt. Gen. David Petraeus. Petraeus won Senate confirmation Friday to replace Gen. George Casey as the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Stepping up what has become a war of nerves with Iran, the White House also said Mr. Bush had authorized U.S. forces in Iraq to take whatever actions might be necessary to counter Iranian agents who are deemed a threat.

"It makes sense that if somebody's trying to harm our troops or stop us from achieving our goal or killing innocent citizens in Iraq, that we will stop them," Mr. Bush said. "It's an obligation we all have ... to protect our folks and achieve our goal."

Senate Democrats have set debate on one measure opposing the planned troop increase for early next week. The non-binding resolution passed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on a near party-line vote earlier this week.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said the vote will take place despite stiff administration lobbying and a filibuster threat from Senate Republicans, CBS News Radio correspondent Bob Fuss reports.

Democrats have readied several resolutions with different wording, and Reid says he is confident they will find a compromise that brings most Republicans on board.

At Gates's first Pentagon news conference since taking office on Dec. 18, he was asked his reaction to the debate in Congress over the effect of such a nonbinding resolution.

"It's pretty clear that a resolution that in effect says that the general going out to take command of the arena shouldn't have the resources he thinks he needs to be successful certainly emboldens the enemy and our adversaries," he said.

As controversial as it already is, the surge could be even larger than the 21,500 troops currently slated for Iraq, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin. Pentagon officials tell CBS News they are planning for the possibility Petraeus will ask for more.

That will also mean more troops beyond the 24,000 already in Afghanistan — where the Taliban is making a surge of its own, Martin reports. With troops buildups now going on in both Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army and Marines will be stretched as never before.

Speaking from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Blair offered strong support for Mr. Bush's new plan and said he believes the Iraqi prime minister can meet the benchmarks the United States has set.

He said of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki: "He's a man with the intent, and we've got to support him in having the capacity. That's what it's all about."

Many in Congress have accused al-Maliki of foot-dragging and have challenged his capability to quell the sectarian violence tearing apart his country.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and anti-war Democrat Rep. Jack Murtha met with al-Maliki in Baghdad on Friday.

"We come out of the meeting with a greater understanding of the others' point of view," Pelosi, D-Calif., said in brief remarks after the session.

Murtha, D-Pa., who chairs the Appropriations subcommittee for defense, will have a big say in future spending decisions on Iraq. A onetime hawk on military issues, Murtha for more than a year has been one the most outspoken war critics.

A key piece of Mr. Bush's new Iraq strategy is increasing reconstruction efforts, with the U.S. pledging an additional $1.2 billion. Also, Bush is expected to send Congress next month a Pentagon request for about $100 billion more for Iraq and Afghanistan.

While Congress has constitutional purse strings control over war spending, most lawmakers seem hesitant to support a cutoff of funds that might endanger troops now in Iraq.

Gates said there was "no blank check" to U.S. commanders in Iraq to receive an unlimited number of extra troops; instead, they submit requests for what they believe they need and those are reviewed closely by senior officials in the Pentagon, with final decisions left to Mr. Bush.

"What we have done, I hope, is created an environment in which the commanders feel open to requesting what they think they need and then we will evaluate it here in the department to see what's available and how much of that request we can satisfy," he said.

Asked about indications of potential opposition in the Senate to confirming Gen. George Casey as the next Army chief of staff, given the unsatisfactory progress in Iraq under his command, Gates said Casey was the professional military's first choice to succeed Gen. Peter Schoomaker as the chief of staff at Army headquarters in the Pentagon. Casey had been the vice chief of staff before Bush sent him to Baghdad in July 2004.

"I think he's eminently qualified," to head the Army, Gates said.

[jimibear]

""I think he's eminently qualified," to head the Army, Gates said. "

Yeah, like you'd know, buttmunch.

[jimibear]

I have no intention of ever listening to anything this assclown says on any Iraq war related matter, as within 3 sentences in his first interview, he said he was "no expert on Iraq" and "no expert on military matters".

Therefore he joins the long, long list of incompetent and unqualified boobs hired by this festering pustule of a president.

[txpatriot99]

I wanted to add a comment to this discussion, but RandalDS said it so well there is nothing more...
"incompetent ****king conducting of a war of choice emboldens the enemy far more then any America pointing out what a stupid ********n mistake it was in the first place."
Don't forget the intercepted internal Al Queda communication which described how beneficial it was for them to prolong the US involvement in Iraq. They are loving the Moron In Chief's mistakes and incompetence. It plays right into their hands.

[randalds]

Gates: Buildup Criticism "Emboldens" Enemy


Actually incompetent ****king conducting of a war of choice emboldens the enemy far more then any America pointing out what a stupid ********n mistake it was in the first place. The number one thing that "emboldens" our enemies is the knowledge that a complete mental midget and ****king as*shole like Bush is running it from our side. This war was the worst foreign policy decision in American history and one of the worst in human history. Nothing emboldens the enemy more then knowing they're fighting a moron. They're laughing at us right now and rightly so. I mean, they're fighting a joke, a clown and they know it. Bush is an embarrassment.

[j0hnwi11iams]

News flash:

Enemy emboldened by having family killed.

[j0hnwi11iams]

PNAC and the NEOCONS should ****.

Batting .000

[j0hnwi11iams]

Didn't take Cheney long to put the vulcan mind meld on Gates, did it? Idiots have had four stinking years to prove the Liberals wrong.

If you want to improve the morale of the troops, why don't you implement something that has a fair probability of their being able to escape with their lives?

Countless wise people before me have said that the way to eliminate war is to take the profit out of it. That is more true today than ever.

[firststate]

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." Gates and the entire administration continue to use the practices outlined in the quote above, but the quote is attributed to another national leader.

[inventagod]

Only Bu$h calls Iraq a 'War'.

Everyone else in the world calls it a shameless, premeditated oil-grab.

And the brutal wanna-be fascist PNAC administration stands ready to invade Iran.

SHAME.

[exusmcsgt]

david1737-

NP.

[david1737]

exusmcsgt

Sorry, my comment was in response to fubarby43.

[david1737]

exusmcsgt

Please stop pretending that it is just the "Libs" who support the troops but not the war in Iraq.

It is in fact, the vast majority of Americans that feel this way. Which means that you are in the minority.

[karlimhof]

hey, let's be patient with Gates, give him a little time... you know, Rumsfeld hasn't even finished packing. How can Gates say what he really feels. Maybe in another 2 years...?

[josephxmas]

When will the Bush team get it that the majority of us Americans have wisened up to their deceitful cries of "Wolf!" ? For those who haven't grown up, pray. Eyes, but can not see, and ears, but can not hear.

[browsercat]

Just another attempt to silence critics. Gates is a company man and will not deviate from the grand plan any more than toady Petraeus.

[firststate]

If by the enemy, Gates means the terrorists, not even bin-Laden-al-Forgotten managed to recruit and embolden as many terrorists and our clueless leader. He's managed to quintuple their numbers in less than 4 years. If he were to officially switch sides and become the terrorists' leader, I can imagine the reports, "suicide bomber leaves city - blows self up in desert - sustains minor injuries."

[exusmcsgt]

I believe that if most neocons were to have been asked four years ago what they thought of facilitating Iran's expansion into SE Iraq they would have replied "Hell no!".

Yet they supported (and continue to support) an American invasion that has done precisely that.

Iran could never make any inroads into Iraq when Hussein was in charge. The administration, in it's idealistic stupidity, chose to invade and topple the force that kept Iran from it's goal.

Iran must be laughing right up it's collective sleeve at this administration's blatant stupidity.

[johnshaft4]

Yo, any of idiots think that we are "AT WAR" are totally insane like YOUR Father, Fuhrer Bush. WE ARE NOT AT WAR, IDIOTS!!! WE invaded a country under the FALSE pretense of impending doom; WMD's imploding upon us in "the form of a mushroom cloud". Who in the hell is this ENEMY you speak of? (Look in the mirror, jerks.)

THE USA IS AN INVADING/OCCUPYING FORCE IN IRAQ.
How in the hell you would YOU react to an invading, plundering, pillaging, imperalistic force on YOUR turf, morons?

Jeez..."White man come...rape buffalo...kill women (Christian Soldiers)

[johnshaft4]

We should be giving the Iranians nukes to counter all of the 200+ Israeli nukes. Might lead to a little more empathy and tolerance over there...

[exusmcsgt]

"This country is at war. As a former marine, thank you for your service, how do you reconcile the libs " we support you but not what you are doing"?
This is ONE of the most hypocritical and disingenuous platforms of the libs."

American administrations are not infallible. History proves that time and time again.

Just because the administration decides to do something does not mean that it is entitled to automatic support.

If it errs, it is our duty to stand up and say so. Doing so does not mean tht we don't support our warriors, but rather, it means that we don't support the administration's wrongful use of them.

Frankly, this neocon mantra of "supporting our troops" means "supporting the administration" is getting very tiresome. THEY ARE NOT ONE IN THE SMAE THING and never will be.

Only simpletons are not capable of making the distinction.