Petraeus: Troop Buildup In Iraq Unlikely

Top General Addresses Burden On U.S. Ground Forces; Bush To Announce Shorter Tours

(CBS/AP)  America's war commander in Iraq told Congress Wednesday he is unlikely to endorse any fresh buildup of troops even if security in the country deteriorates, signaling that the limits of the U.S. military have been reached for now.

Gen. David Petraeus, closely questioned by lawmakers for a second day, described Iraq as a frail state still struggling to provide its own security. That volatile situation figured in his recommendation to President Bush that a gradual pullout of U.S. troops be halted this summer - a recommendation Bush is expected to embrace in a speech Thursday.

But Petraeus also spoke of the burden on U.S. ground forces, and Bush will address that, too. In his speech at 11:30 a.m. EDT, Bush will announce plans to cut the combat tours of active-duty soldiers from 15 months to 12 months. The reduced deployments will not apply - at least initially - to any soldiers currently serving in Iraq, unless conditions improve to the point that commanders believe some could go home early.

Petraeus said, "I am keenly aware of the strain" on the military, noting his own deployment since 2001. "And I can tell you that there is nothing that a commander feels more than, in fact, the losses that we have sustained over there."

His resistance to the idea of any renewed increase of troops for Iraq reflects - at least in part - the reality that the rotation pool of some 1.3 million soldiers and Marines has been exhausted. Army soldiers in particular have faced repeated tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, and senior officers warn that the service's "strategic reserve" is at an all-time low.

U.S. military officials say Petraeus is unlikely to recommend any further cuts until after provincial elections are held in October and that troop strength will not go below 130,000 by the end of the year - about where it was before the surge started, reported CBS News national security correspondent David Martin.

Meanwhile, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, says current troop commitments in Iraq make it impossible to send extra forces into Afghanistan.

Andrew Krepinevich, president of the independent Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, noted that Petraeus' promise to the House Armed Services Committee was a limited one. The four-star general is expected to resign his command position at the end of the year.

While Democratic contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton have promised voters they would start withdrawing troops if elected, Republican John McCain supported last year's troop increase and believes conditions on the ground should dictate force levels.

Still, Krepinevich said, it's easy to imagine that Army officials agreed to the 2007 buildup on the assumption that Petraeus would give troops a "breather" at some point. Every commander "rotates them out of the line every once in a while to get rested and refitted. Otherwise, you really do burn up the force," he said.

Petraeus wants the U.S. to complete, by the end of July, the withdrawal of the 20,000 troops that were sent to Iraq last year to deal with the violence there. Beyond that, the general proposed a 45-day evaluation period, to be followed by an indefinite period of assessment before he would recommend any further pullouts.

The plan leaves open the possibility that roughly 140,000 U.S. troops will be in Iraq when voters head to the polls this November and Bush leaves office next year.

"We think it makes sense to have some time, to let the dust settle, perhaps to do some adjustment of forces, re-evaluation," Petraeus told House members on Wednesday.

When asked by Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, whether he would call for another influx of U.S. troops if security conditions deteriorated during that 45-day window, Petraeus said that would be a last resort.

"That would be a pretty remote thought in my mind," he said.

Instead, the military would try to reallocate existing troops. It also would increase its reliance on Iraqi forces, including highly specialized army and police teams that have been improving in capability, he said.

As on Tuesday, Petraeus faced Democrats and even some Republicans who said they were skeptical Baghdad was doing all it could to calm sectarian violence.

Lacking the votes to order troops home, Democrats plan to push legislation this spring that would force the Iraqi government to spend its own surplus in oil revenues to rebuild the country, sparing U.S. dollars.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he would introduce legislation that would require the Iraqi government pay "for the cost of the security that we're providing them." Under his bill, the stipulation would be written into a legal agreement currently being negotiated with Baghdad on the U.S. military presence in Iraq, called a "status of forces agreement."

"The American people can't carry this load forever, so we're looking forward to a time when someone else can pick up some of it," said Rohrabacher, R-Calif.

Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador in Iraq, said some political progress has been made, but he acknowledged it was slow. Asked what would happen if U.S. troops were to leave in large numbers in the next six months, the ambassador said, "You would see a spiral down, and that would lead to expanded sectarian conflict, levels we have not seen before."

[mljohns00]

We should send them a bill for the cost of destroying their country.

[naucoming4u]

NO! NO! NO!

Don''t the Democrats understand...

...that Iraqi oil money (and war) was SPECIFICALLY for the long term wealthy retirement of Bush, Cheney, and their cohorts.

And to think the Democrats wanted the Iraqi oil money to be used for something meaningful... HAH! It is to laugh! (sarcasm)

[feelfree1]

This is really shameful.

Many of the very same Democrats that helped to make all of this possible for King George, Killary for example, are now jumping in and blaming the people of Iraq for *** up a perfectly good war, while also blaming them for the poor performance of the installed stooge "officials".

Disgusting.

On top of that, they are now asking "Well, why should we pay for it?"

Answer: Because your shameful incompetence has cost some 1 million Iraqi lives, destroyed their infrastructure, displaced 4+ million, and maimed, tortured, imprisoned, soddomized, and/or raped who knows how many.

Hence, you owe them a sincere apology, and a staggering reparations bill that we will also have to borrow from China.

Why some people view the Democrats as something to be hopeful about eludes me.

They are less than worthless.

[feelfree1]

Sen. Carl Levin.

What a clown.

Just another AIPAC stooge.

[feelfree1]

It will be interesting to hear what Adm. Mike Mullen has to say.

"Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an ***-kissing little chickenshit" and added, "I hate people like that"

That is pretty spot on if you ask me.

Sounds like Fallon might be a little brighter than the rest. We''ll see.

[feelfree1]

Thanks for all the pointless death and misery, General Betray US!

[bgwinnett]

The only reasons the violence slowed a bit post-"surge" was that Muqtada al-Sadr told his militia forces to stand down and the U.S. paid off Sunni insurgents not to attack U.S. troops. Now that the battles are being resumed, the violence spikes will continue to rise.

[fibonacci_]

What a concept!

[bgwinnett]

What after the Surge if that fails? Scorched Earth Policy any one? It worked for the Russians against Napoleon in 1812. They had to sacrifice Moscow though.

[feelfree1]

"Green Zone" attacked again today.

What a sad sick joke.

[ioweign]

AND HOW ABOUT IRAQ PAYING-SAY $10 Million, Each for EVERY AMERICAN SOLDIER KILLED BY THE TERRORISTS?

Posted by dumbshun at 05:32 AM : Apr 09, 2008


The Republican Party will pay this November too...

[bgwinnett]

Even the greatest army to ever walk the Earth, The German Army Circa 1941 got bogged down in too many war''s.Why did we think that it would be any different.

p.s Wars deplete wealth just ask the British about WW1.We''ll know soon too.

[georgew1956]

are we the people just excepting he''s a terrable president and lazy enough to just sit back and watch him destroy what we had in a matter of 8 yrs. vote please. and why is mcain talking like a lap puppy?

[perceptions5]

Gee whiz! Here goes the Democrats in our 110th Do Nothing Democrat Congress ...........pandering again.

If this Do Nothing Congress wants to really do something then pass legislation that fixes:

1. Social Security

2. Medicare

3. Get the USA on path to energy independence

4. Tort Reform

5. Health Care

NO! , instead their going to pander instead.

So really sad indeed.

[JJASMAN]

The Iraq oil money story is just another distraction from the Democrats and Republicans lawmakers. The U.S.A. will never see any of this money it is just more political talk from the Democrats, who are afraid to shut the war down and get out of Iraq. Both parties should be working on our American problems.

[bluestardad]

Just as the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939 was illegal and so was the Invasion of Iraq. Both were supported by lies and trumped up charges by the aggressor. Both the Leadership in Nazi Germany and the Leadership of the United States were and are guilty of War crimes for starting these wars. If there were true justice in the world the leadership that started the Iraq war would be tried for war crimes just as the Nazi leadership was!

[grim56z]

The American effort in the Middle East should be based in resolution. Iraq serves a purpose by selling oil to the United States at a reasonable price. George Bush has enmired the war by refusing to deal with Al Qada Afghanistan. That particular organization protects Bin Laden in Waziristan. Without making that move, there will always be a threat from that part of the world.

[taotxzen]

More of the Same

Petraeus and Crocker refuse to tell us what our long term strategy is in Iraq, holding to the weak excuse that they can''t make predictions into the future. But they have no problem making scary predictions into the future about what will happen if we withdraw. When asked by Sen. John Warner whether Iraq was making us safer, Petraeus kept hedging and stated that it would ultimately be up to history. Not very comforting. And Petraeus and Crocker can''t tell us if political reconciliation, the whole point of the surge, is actually happening.

Two questions Petraeus and Crocker are never asked. What perecent of the incergency in Iraq does Al Qaeda represent? I have heard as low as 3 percent prior to the surge. And, who is the largest supporter of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Iran or Saudi Arabia?

[bgwinnett]

A WAR HAS TO BE FOUGHT TO WIN-NO PUZZING AROUND!
GET THE IDEA?

Posted by dumbshun at 07:15 AM : Apr 09, 2008

Decimating your Youth(the Brits lost a million young men),Gold reserves and thus losing your Global hegemony, to fight a War a was not "Puzzin around".

[rwassel]

Wait a second - I thought Iraqi oil was supposed to be paying for the war in the first place. You mean Bush and Cheney LIED to us? I''m shocked!

[rwassel]

perceptions5 - I''m pretty sure the Republicans were in power in Congress for 12 years and did nothing, and the Democrats have been in power a little over 1. So I think they deserve the same amount of time that your Repugs got.

If you needed a reason to vote Democratic this November, this is it.

[taotxzen]

Former NSA Director Picks Apart Petraeus, Crocker Propaganda

By: Logan Murphy


Former Director of the NSA retired Lt. General William Odom, who says that Petraeus & Crocker%u2019s testimony did little more than confirm what he has believed all along %u2014 that the situation in Iraq is actually worse than is being reported. Odom praised members of the Senate who finally pushed back hard against the Bush/McCain surge propaganda, but scorned the media for failing to report the realities in Iraq.

Odom:%u201DThe major media in this country have also, I think, failed to report a lot about what%u2019s going in Iraq. True, there have been drops in violence, but they didn%u2019t look at what the consequences of that were, and they didn%u2019t look at the politics of that. If they had looked at the politics they%u2019d see more fragmentation, a weaker government and a much more hopeless situation than a year ago.

[leftyintexas]

you must have been under sniper fire when you heard that

Posted by jamesm12341 at 07:50 AM : Apr 09, 2008

What would YOU know about sniper fire, you little coward? Have you gotten up the courage yet to attempt to NAME 3 GOOD THINGS YOUR LEADER DOOFUS HAS ACCOMPLISHED IN HIS SEVEN YEARS IN THE WHITE HOUSE? WE ARE WAITING!!

[bgwinnett]

taotxzen

Well said. It''s about time we had some lucid perspective on the situation for sheeple to digest.

[perceptions5]

Gee whiz! Here goes the Democrats in our 110th Do Nothing Democrat Congress ...........pandering again.

If this Do Nothing Congress wants to really do something then pass legislation that fixes:

1. Social Security

2. Medicare

3. Get the USA on path to energy independence

4. Tort Reform

5. Health Care

NO! , instead their going to pander instead.

So really sad indeed.

[taotxzen]

(cont)

Game over.

Every single argument that the Administration and their lapdogs like John McCain have made or are making break down after that answer. The Ambassdor to Iraq just admitted that Iraq is not the central front in the war on terror. He just admitted that the potential for Al Qaeda to gain a beachhead in Iraq should the United States withdraw is miniscule compared to the already-established beachhead along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. He admitted that the global fight against terror is currently misdirected.

Whether the military is lowering casualties in Iraq or not, or whether political reconciliation is occurring or not, or whether Prime Minister Maliki won in Basra or Muqtada al-Sadr did, none of this is germane given the new information we just received here. We invaded Iraq to attack a group that did not attack us on 9-11, and we are continuing in Iraq and continuing to ignore the group that did attack us. So our policy is being held captive to developments inside Iraq while the terrorist threat that was supposed to be the impetus for this war and occupation in the first place goes on literally unabated.

[taotxzen]

Biden Just Obliterated Every Administration Argument About Iraq

by dday

That was a very significant moment at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings with Amb. Ryan Crocker and Gen. David Petraeus. Joe Biden asked Amb. Crocker where it would be better for American national security interests to eliminate Al Qaeda in Iraq or Al Qaeda along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Crocker had nowhere to hide with that question

Crocker, in an impossible political position -- give the correct answer and humiliate the Bush administration; give the administration''s answer and look like a fool -- dodged as much as he could. Then Biden forced him down. Crocker: "I would therefore pick Al Qaeda on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border."

(cont)

[excoachken]

What a unique concept. Have an entity, loaded with Oil, pay for it''s own recovery! But, if we do that, we would probably have to give back the Oil rights to the Iraqi Government, instead of our good friends at Exxon-Mobil. Then, where would we get our Bush family income for the next 100 years. "No can do," we must look toward "OUR" future, says the Cowardly Cowboy. "W" never met a credit card that he didn''t like.

[dorlockt]

So the truth finally comes out....Dems care more about the money than about the lost lives in the military and 9/11. As long as we aren''t spending the money of all the grocery baggers in this country to help set a nation straight, the military can stay there indefinitely. Interesting priorities libs!

[bgwinnett]

What a unique concept. Have an entity, loaded with Oil, pay for it''''s own recovery! But, if we do that, we would probably have to give back the Oil rights to the Iraqi Government, instead of our good friends at Exxon-Mobil. Then, where would we get our Bush family income for the next 100 years. "No can do," we must look toward "OUR" future, says the Cowardly Cowboy. "W" never met a credit card that he didn''''t like.

Posted by exCoachKen at 08:05 AM : Apr 09, 2008

Cheney called Iraq "the biggest gas station the World"
Biggest pain in the asss nation for the US more like.

[dorlockt]

YOUR LEADER DOOFUS

Posted by leftyintexas at 07:57 AM : Apr 09, 2008

So I guess you really aren''t American after all.

[dorlockt]

Biggest pain in the asss nation for the US more like.

Posted by bgwinnett at 08:10 AM : Apr 09, 2008

Not really. That title goes to Mexico.

[bgwinnett]

Biggest pain in the asss nation for the US more like.

Posted by bgwinnett at 08:10 AM : Apr 09, 2008

Not really. That title goes to Mexico.

Posted by bigjer2008 at 08:14 AM : Apr 09, 2008

Buy logic then that makes Canada the biggest pain in the neck Nation LOL.

[gkc99]

"President Bush''s "only plan is to keep roughly 140,000 troops there until the next president becomes president, and hand off the problem to him or her." "


Is there anybody in the world who thinks this is not true?

Has Bushit ever indicated he had any intention whatsoever of withdrawing? The Neocon game plan is permanent occupation! And they don''t make that much of a secret. Too bad America''s "free press" spends more time on Brittany Spears.


And the Iraqis can at least buy their own flowers to throw at our feet.

Although some big donations from the private bank accounts of Bushit, Darth, Rummy, etc. would be in order.

[dorlockt]

It''s funny how the presidential candidates are allowed to ask Gen. Petraeus "tough questions", but when do the people get to start asking them the "tough questions?"

Ms. Clinton, how do you turn that southern accent on and off so well?
Mr. Hussein, what do you do when a "typical" white person just p*sses you off?

[dorlockt]

Buy logic then that makes Canada the biggest pain in the neck Nation LOL.

Posted by bgwinnett at 08:16 AM : Apr 09, 2008

In the land of the obese? I''d say Canada is just the other butt cheek. :)

[bgwinnett]

In the land of the obese? I''''d say Canada is just the other butt cheek. :)

Posted by bigjer2008 at 08:19 AM : Apr 09, 2008

Yeah, the butt cheek we don''t sit as much so we get less pain from it.

[swwils]

They are in the red,we are in the black.They should hand it over to us period is my thoughts 30 million isn''t a drop in the bucket compared to what we have lost in lives,much less spent cash wise.We shouldn''t even had to ask they should have just given it to us.

[brianbwb-2009]

Is is funny that I am the only one who wonders where Levin gets off telling Iraq how to spend it''s own money, Is Mr. Levin implying that our government now the government of Iraq, that we should pass laws that should be obeyed in another sovereign nation?

I posit that such legislation is technically illegal, it is also against international law. The best we can do is withdraw our troops, cut the finding, and leave the Iraqis with no choice but spend their own money.

Of course they should sue Bush personally for lying to cause the collapse of their country, and all the other crimes against humanity committed as a result of Bush''s lies, and I would support that 1,000%, but no way have we the right to dictate how the Iraqis should spend their own currency.

[sgtrds]

If Iraq is forced to pay with it''s own money then Bush and Cheney will only have the war contractors to rely on for kickbacks and their extra slice of this crime for their off-shore bank accounts.

Oh and Carl Levin would make an excellent VP.

[swwils]

We will not be leaving Iraq just because the President is changing.That is all smoke and mirror''s for votes and withdrawing will just be like Vietnam,the biggest mistake this country ever made.All the lives lost,money spent P.O.W.,M.I.A''s we would never recover from another Nam.As soon as we leave the Al-qaeda will be moving in and taking over ,there would be mass murder a genocide,we would have to turn around and go right back,because no other country cares until it is to late.

[antoniof123]

You gotta love right wing nuts like they get us in this mess then try to blame someone else. Oh wait the last time when they said blame they said it was everyones fault not just theirs.

Now let me see if I get this straight:

1) They had congress for 12 years of complete control.
2) They had the office of President for 6 of those years with complete control.
3) They even stacked the justice department for complete control.

Now they want to blame everyone because blaming the Democrats wasn''t working so instead of placing the blame on themselves they want us all to take the blame.

Keep dreaming neo cons it will be your worst nightmare in Novemembe when you are wondering why the people rejected you.

[brianbwb-2009]

"We shouldn''''t even had to ask they should have just given it to us." Posted by Swwils

Your point would be valid if the Iraqis had asked us to invade their country, but they did not.

Your position is akin to robbing someone, then asking them to pay you for robbing them.

[pastdue1]

Crocker said. "And it''ll be, like everything else in Iraq, a complex process."
He was explaining why we still pay to bring out Iraqi oil and why we still pay for everything that happens in Iraq. Then, why isn''t the Senate forcing Crocker to fully explain this "complex" process ~ down to the nitty gritty. We know the Senate is full of dufuses, but surely, one or two among that august group could grasp the complexity; a growing number of the American public grasp it. The Post by exCoachKen at 08:05 AM : Apr 09, 2008 is exactly what we, the people, understand.

[dinkydog1]

So the truth finally comes out....Dems care more about the money than about the lost lives in the military and 9/11. As long as we aren''''t spending the money of all the grocery baggers in this country to help set a nation straight, the military can stay there indefinitely. Interesting priorities libs!

............

How do you draw these conclusions. It seem very conservative to have Iraq to pay for there reconstruction rather than have us borrow the money from China. Are you too liberal to understand that?

[brianbwb-2009]

"Ms. Clinton, how do you turn that southern accent on and off so well?" Posted by bigjer200

She grew up with it, so it should be easy, as it is for anyone else to revert to the dialect of their upbringing, why do you have trouble understanding this?

"Mr. Hussein, what do you do when a "typical" white person just p*sses you off?" Posted by bigjer200

Saddam is dead, so whom are you addressing?

If it is Mr. Obama, first, show the common courtesy to address him as you would be if he were a "white" man, that is, if your parents raised you to have any sense of common courtesy.

He probably does what generations have done previously, silently call them every possible scatological insult he can think of, then resolve to keep a distance from them. What do you do?

[ioweign]

Gee whiz! Here goes the Democrats in our 110th Do Nothing Democrat Congress ...........pandering again.

If this Do Nothing Congress wants to really do something then pass legislation that fixes:

1. Social Security

2. Medicare

3. Get the USA on path to energy independence

4. Tort Reform

5. Health Care

NO! , instead their going to pander instead.

So really sad indeed.

Posted by perceptions5 at 07:28 AM : Apr 09, 2008

Pander to We the People !

At least it is not like the 104th United States Congress...

[abbe91]

Your point would be valid if the Iraqis had asked us to invade their country, but they did not.
Your position is akin to robbing someone, then asking them to pay you for robbing them.
Posted by brianbwb at 08:42 AM : Apr 09, 2008

Exactly ... also, don''t forget that the Iraq money needs to go to big oil ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iraqs-oil-the-spoils-of-war-516400.html

[blogthis1]

Why are we paying to rebuild Irag! It''s their country, they have the *** oil $$$$ They pay or we leave it like it is. At least give us afrwaking break on oil costs! What is wrong with our gov.? I do not want my money to pay for rebuilding there. Is everyone in Washington out of their minds!